A couple of thoughts.........

[John Grant]

1. THE DISINCENTIVE TO TRY TO WIN

Maybe some thought should be put into the apparent disincentive to try during a season. For example , your team is in "Div 1 " as I have heard it called and for whatever reason your team is sitting 6th -8th halfway through the season with no realistic possibility of winning the League , your also out of CL and Cup. If you continue to try to win then you may get to 5th position and go up a level and be punished 20% of your total team level just the same as if you win the League. It is far too common for people in this situation to say oh well , cant win a trophy so lets tank it for the season finish 9th or lower , stay here and not lose the 20%.
Would it not be a good idea that only the top 4 lose 20% and 5-8 only lose 10% for the next season ? It might encourage a few more managers to keep trying for longer rather than opt out of a season.

2. KEEPING PLAYERS FOR LONGER

There seems to be a problem with the player progression in this game where the prize recruit is an 18 yo player ( because he learns faster ) at the expense of older players ( even 22 -23 is considered old because of the learning curve). It would be better in my opinion that an older player maintains the skill level for longer and is still able to learn reasonably quickly until maybe age 28 and then starts to decrease at an ever increasing rate per year. It would also be good if the 18 -21 yo players didnt learn quite as quickly , balance it out and encourage managers to hold onto players longer. In real life no team that hasnt got a player over 21 ever won an open League yet here that is all you see , teams with average age of around 19-20 winning everything. Also in real life a footballers prime is usually considered to be between 23/24 and 28/29 so wouldnt it be better for the game all round if that could be replicated.

Just a couple of thoughts...............

[Altiplano]

I like the anti tanking idea.
But player progression is dictated by the need for Nordeus to make money. The sooner we replace players the more tokens we spend. We can always buy tokens to convert to rest packs to prolong the usefulness of an "aging" player. Same difference to Nordeus. So I can't see them changing the system without an increase in cost to us.

[texhorn60]

Agree with both of you. A player is done by 25 to 26.

[nikolgiorgos]

Would it not be a good idea that only the top 4 lose 20% and 5-8 only lose 10% for the next season ? It might encourage a few more managers to keep trying for longer rather than opt out of a season.

well, I would say that this is good idea but not gonna help much.
First, I believe that a good, active and ambitious manager it's hard to fail in 1-4 placing
(exception the top server levels or if playing with some friends, active managers).

The old times, tanking wasn't an issue (and at that time there wasn't the Super League motivation).

Better search the root of evil :
asso top 100 and the new auctions system where you need at least 100-120 tokens to build a new team

[Doors FC]

no1.some players have lower % but better managers and finish 1-4.why punish them with -20% over better overall % teams placed 5-8?

no2.said something like it myself check this out.
https://forum.topeleven.com/suggesti...-few-more.html

[John Grant]

I like the anti tanking idea.
But player progression is dictated by the need for Nordeus to make money. The sooner we replace players the more tokens we spend. We can always buy tokens to convert to rest packs to prolong the usefulness of an "aging" player. Same difference to Nordeus. So I can't see them changing the system without an increase in cost to us.

It was just a thought I had. I have a player who I got from my Academy and became a favourite of mine so I have kept him on and he is now 26. Thing is its just not cost effective to keep him and probably hasent been for maybe 2-3 seasons but I persist because he is a favourite. I could probably train 3 definitely 2, 18yo to 120% for the same cost as this 1 guy so its starting to hurt a bit.
As for Nordeus needing us to turn over players fequently , well thats 1 business approach but there are other approaches. I was reading a few fairwell threads and something that appeared reasonably frequently was the dislike of not being able to keep older players longer as a reaon , among others , as to why long term managers are leaving the game. Now I may be a little on the cautious side but I have always preferred the guarantee of a bird in the hand over the possibility of 2 in the bush. In short you shouldnt diminish your bread and butter to maybe get some honey. Short term cash grab v long term stable income , its sad if that is the case.

[John Grant]

well, I would say that this is good idea but not gonna help much.
First, I believe that a good, active and ambitious manager it's hard to fail in 1-4 placing
(exception the top server levels or if playing with some friends, active managers).

The old times, tanking wasn't an issue (and at that time there wasn't the Super League motivation).

Better search the root of evil :
asso top 100 and the new auctions system where you need at least 100-120 tokens to build a new team

I dont know if I am good , depends on how you measure it I guess , but I win a few Leagues here and there. My teams are usually a permanent fixture in the top 4 , I am active every day and reasonably ambitious for my level. This season however 1 of my teams finds itself in the position already where it cant win the title ( baring something outrageous happening) and would probably be lucky to reach top 4. Its my fault the team is in this position due to my experimenting with different things on this team. However the fact remains it is where it is so for the first time I have the question before me - do I push on and hope for a top 4 spot which would mean a serious rebuild and retool for the team , quite costly , or do I just push the eject button on the season and fall away into the bottom 6 ( which would actually mean more experimentation and not tanking as such) which may result in my very average team finishing 7th or 8th and getting slugged 20% , a 20% it cant really afford to lose without a total rebuild next season ( if I have the coin to do it).

Hence my thought for teams finishing 5-8. Anyway it was just a thought.............

[texhorn60]

If I can't finish in top four, I would tank. Why not? Now I have never faced that situation, yet, but I would rather rebuild at the lower level then higher.
My feeling is only top four advance or everyone from 5 to 8 lose only 10 but I am sure that is a programming nightmare. I have won every league. Okay I am Real Madrid, pay for a good team, but I am one of two level eight teams in a level nine champions league, which is my punishment for spending money. To be honest, Nordeus does all it can to discourage spending too much money even fast trainers slow down if you want to create a eight or nine-star player.

[nikolgiorgos]

I dont know if I am good , depends on how you measure it I guess , but I win a few Leagues here and there. My teams are usually a permanent fixture in the top 4 , I am active every day and reasonably ambitious for my level.

ok, that's what I 'm talking about

This season however 1 of my teams finds itself in the position already where it cant win the title ( baring something outrageous happening) and would probably be lucky to reach top 4.

hey mate, hold on.
You can't do all the times the right thing if you 're coaching more than 2-3 teams at the same time.
I 'm talking about the common manager who has 1 or 2 teams.
I remember my max was 3 active teams in a season but at that time I could play the old versions in three browsers at the same time.

[John Grant]

hey mate, hold on.
You can't do all the times the right thing if you 're coaching more than 2-3 teams at the same time.
I 'm talking about the common manager who has 1 or 2 teams.
I remember my max was 3 active teams in a season but at that time I could play the old versions in three browsers at the same time.

Your right. I have 5 teams to manage ( simply so I can control my Asso without having to rely on other people showing up) which does allow me the luxury of really pushing 2 teams for the treble , 2 teams for League and a lucky cup maybe and 1 team just totally for experimentation. It is hard to find the time to effectively manage all 5 teams ( lets not forget the time consumption of watching 150 videos every day as well ) which is why I have 3 levels of teams as I outlined earlier. In time as I find reliable people to fill my Asso - which is in Gold1 for the third season - then I will drop down to maybe 2-3 teams which will be easier to manage time wise.
I also took on 5 teams to fast track my experience as a manager so I have effectively managed nearly 70 seasons in 1 year but it must be said that realistically you dont learn much more than the basics until maybe season 10 and when your Asso moves up into at least Gold 2.

Now this team I am using as my example in earlier posts is my experimental team so its no big deal for me really. What it has done is made me ask the questions in earlier posts because for the first time the questions are in front of me. I am against outright tanking as an option simply because it will teach me nothing and as I have mentioned in other threads I think it is a waste of my time ( for those that tank and like to tank - no offense intended ). I will probably keep experimenting for the rest of the season and finish where I finish and if that means losing 20% for next season then so be it.