View forum thread

One thing that has to be weighed in is the fact the original population of players is gradually retiring, thus the quality of players (in terms of potential) in the game is dropping. We are not talking about 80-90+ players, think good mid-tier players and how many times people have complained these are as hard to come by as the top dogs on the market.

The only sources of replenishing those retirees are club resets and (supposedly) the academy. Resets just can't cut it for they are too few and too few of those players find their way on the market anyway.

Without the agents proposal we would be counting on the academy alone, but it will take much longer before it can have any impact on the game as it has to be coded in and then you'd have to wait several seasons more to nurture the players in it.

Now think how many teams will stall and decrease in quality as they fail to replace their retirees like for like. Some will, but since the overall number of players of that tier decreases, most will not.

It's up to each of us to judge if this is good, bad, or it doesn't matter. But in reality as far as the game as a whole is concerned, it is hugely detrimental as it drives managers away and furthers other issues.

Agents provide a natural solution to a gaping problem on top of everything else discussed. I don't think there is any issue with introducing them, the key is getting the balance right and adjusting whenever it is required.

Edit: oops I posted this in the wrong thread, Jija, please don't follow up here, let's have this conversation where it belongs instead!

loaning of player should be include

This all looks very good. It's a very nice balancing of "interesting and fair."

I may not be understanding everything but I'm not sure that throttling is required for auto-bids, especially if the priority favors older bids over newer.

Can anyone elaborate on the reasoning for throttling the auto-bids? Thanks.

I think many will agree with you in principle. The problem is that a loan system would probably increase the potential for cheating and abuse.

Something that has not been addressed yet is free transfers. I have 4 goalkeepers on my staff one is 26 years old that I tried to transfer for 250,000 credits I didn't receive an offer I wasn't too surprised but in a few days time his contract runs out and as I am not offering him a new contract he will be lost to the game.
This player in real life would be a free agent, he is allowed to ask for a signing on fee and negotiate is own contract something along these lines could be benificial to our game. Free transfers in general would in my view help to keep transfers in check.

I support that, make Free Agents a thing.

Maybe we can make free agents, youth who decline promotion, or youth who run out of contract without the manager giving a contract extension?

We need to balance the player population and I can only see this putting that balance out of sync.

Many people are getting frustrated at the diabolical situation of the transfer market. Many people now want player agents to be a thing. But perhaps we don`t need player agents. Yes it would be a good addition, and i would not oppose it, but wouldnt it be better if the youth academy was improved. Am i the only one who thinks the youth academy is extremely underpowered?

Maybe people would be able to rely on youth academies, if you were able to keep more then 8 players. If their are not enough adequate players then surely this is a brilliant solution. Think about it. When was the last time you have had to decline a good youth, because you already had 8 youth academy players?

Reducing the youth academy cap would, increase players on the transfer market, increase trust in the youth academy and increase the quality produced by youth academies.

The more youth players produced, the more quality the youth academy will produce. The more players on the transfer market, the more availability of certain wanted players. The more quality produced the more availability of quality players.

I think player agents is a good idea, dont get me wrong. But i think increasing the youth academy first is a better alternative. Then add player agents, because who doesn't like 2 free players a year?

I would still like to know what the plan is for the visibility of transfer markets to buying managers. I don't see it mentioned in the first post..

Will managers see all transfer markets every day ? Or will it be restricted as it is now..

If managers can put a player on the transfer market for just 3 days then, as my current best scouts currently takes, I think, 3 days to return with results (my lower rated scout takes 4 days, I think), a scout would need to be sent out the day before he is transfer listed to find a specific player. If, for example, you see a message on the transfer forum advertising a player you really want, some scouts won't be able to find him in time..

So what is the intention for viewing of markets and use of scouts under the proposed new system.?

Err... haven't you read the youth academy improvements thread?

Sellers to have the option of listing a player on all league markets, 50% of markets, or just the home market, The cost of the listing would be dependent both on the number of leagues listed in and on the player's selling price. In addition to that, if the player is sold then a sales tax would apply. A percentage of the final selling fee would be deducted. The exact percentage would again depend on the number of markets in which the player is liste
So its going to depend how a manager lists his players if your going to be able to see him or not.

So there is no maximum initial bid level?

So, say a player is listed at 500k, would a buyer be able to bid 10m straight away, visible for all to see, or would they be forced to raise it incrementally?

A high initial bid may serve as a strong deterrent. When bidding wars start they often seem to take on a life of their own, with people paying over the odds just to win.

No, i have not.......sorry about that

Edit: Btw if you dont know already, im in favour of the youth academy idea

I think bidders/potential bidders only see how many bidders have placed bids and what the current winning bid is.

Thanks for replying, but I am still missing something

1. As a buyer, currently, we can send scouts out to find players that we cannot see on other markets, will that feature still be available or removed?

2. Currently we see our own league's transfer market and one other each day.
What will we see under this new proposal ?
From your quote above, does this mean that players (that have been listed on all / 50% markets) from other transfer markets will or may be visible on our home market ?
Or, does it mean we can see/select all markets but will only actually be able to view and bid on those players that are available to us because they have been listed as availble to all / 50% of markets..
Or is there going to be just one global market but managers can see just the players available to them because they are listed on their home market/ all markets / 50% chance of those listed on 50% markets.

I was eluding to this.

Sorry have been off line for a while and i will have to go back over discussions to check this out.Have to go back to work shortly and if no one answers will look into it when i get home.

This has sparked a thought...if you're bidding on more than one player at a time, does the calculation of your spend versus your available funds work on the actual bids or your highest bids? If it's the former, then how will it work if your actual bids goes over your available funds? Which bids will get cancelled? Or do all of them get cancelled?

It would work on your max bid values.
Ron