75Likes
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
As above.Originally Posted by thon
As above.
I totally agree with July Fourth, a real friendly game must have mutual agreement. I think this is a priority requirement, and something that one inexperient user was waiting for...
Appreciate the 3 hour interval changes between matches. At least my first team players got to have another 5% more condition.
Just hope that the timing won't be during my sleeping hours.
Play to Win!!
3 hour interval between matches => superb decision that will be apprecieted by anyone.
About friendlies, a limit is not necessary, it would be better if only the challenger can loose condition and players injured and it dont affect the opponent, no lost of condition, no injured players...
This is how i see it.
Currently playing level 8 (season 8)
The league:
1st place level 1,2,3,4,5,6,7
The Champions league:
1st place level 2,3,4,5,6 - 2nd place level 7
The cup:
1/4 final level 3
3 hour interval between matches => superb decision that will be appreciated.
a limit to friendlies also good idea .....
nice work but African managers need to be given more tokens for free
I totally agree! Let us take Friendlies as a kind of training - opponent who "has invited" me to the match would lose condition, helth and would gain gain skills, but my "invited" team would lose or gain nothing. Sorry, I do not care about skill's gain from friendlies - thank you, not!
Now, I am managing "Baník Smečno" the nineth season. During them, my team was forced to play more than 50 "friendly" matches, and I forced other teams more than 10 times (I felt sorry for wasting opponent's team condition, but I just wanted to try a new squad, changes in team etc.). In no ocasion, in no match, we (me and opposing manager) were managing both teams on-line. The one who forced that match was ALWAYS the only one who was managing the team.
I do not know Nordeus statistics, so please tell us what is the ratio in numbers of matches managed on-line by forcing manager only : both managers : forced manager only. My secret tip for this ratio is 99 : 1 : 0 (which means, out of 100 matches, no team is managed only by team which was "forced" to play the "friendly" match; 1 match covers two teams leaded by their managers on-line; and in 99 "friendly" matches only manager which forced to play this match is present on-line).
My experience is the argument for playing friendly matches with real consequences for the team of manager who scheduled it, and with no consequences (neither possitive or negative) for the team which is forced to play this match.
I have a suggestion:
When someone invite me to friendly match, just make a copy of my team and let the challenger play with this complete copy of my team with all consequences for the challenger. After the match just erase copy of my team and send me a report of results like nowadays. My team will be fully preserved and I will know how good or bad is performance of my team against the opponent. There is no need for limits of friendlies - because of consequences for challenger, the players of challenger's team will lose their energy/condition, some of them will be injured sometimes what are natural limits.
Thank you very much for your kind attention,
Francesko
Hi all, just joined forum to say thanks for proposed changes
3 hour interval between matches = brilliant
Friendlies maybe just impose a time limit instead(like when changing home fixtures) so you can't arrange one less than 24 hours from current time, this should give plenty of time for players to cancel and probably be easier to implement?
great idea but mutual agreement between both teams is must as well
Agree with July Fourth, should be handshake or mutual agreement
no injuries
there mustn't be any kind of injuries in friendlies.
