Assistant Manager -How to manipulate his offers

[Tactician]

@Tactician
So basically i must find a FT which takes hours or even days in the desired position only to have a slightly chance of getting something from AM? That doesn t seem to be worth doing.

Yes, you need a fast trainer to lure another fast trainer from the daily list (take into consideration that there are two types of lists as said in a post after this one). For sure someone will not get a fast trainer as a daily player if the player that he was suggested to be replaced is not a fast trainer (it is not random). The base position is a must if it is for a daily player while the recommended daily player's position is based on the position opposing the opponent's chosen strong player's position.

The bad is that a user would likely want a 18-19 y.o old fast trainer when his current one for say a position is reaching near the end of his time for use as a main squad player, but then he will not get an 18-19 y.o offer based on him but something closer to his old age. So, someone who would want a fast training player for replacing an ageing player playing in a particular position will have first to find a relatively low quality 18-19 y.o fast trainer for that same position from elsewhere like auctions or youth player.

One of the only good side of this system is that if you have a young, fast training player but who performed poorly (a flop), then the offered player as a suggestion of being an improvement over him is an option to consider (provided that you got an offer based on him). This is how I got my 7-star ST. I had a fast training but poorly performing 18 y.o 5-star ST in my team, and on a day in that same season I got offered an 18 y.o 7-star ST with PK special ability, and I bought him and the newly bought player turned out to be a good performer. But if your bought fast training 18 y.o player is performing well, then why buy another for a high price? Basically, this system offers the user to buy players that he might not need to buy at all except in certain special cases. This is just another system in this game that is nearly fully based on Nordeus' gain rather than in consideration of the needs of the user or what can help him.

[Tactician]

BTW, there are two different types of daily list - one is a daily recommendation list whereby an offer is suggested based on an opposing player from an opposing team to be faced on that same day and another is a daily player that is based on the weaker positions in your team. Take into consideration that those two do not function the same way. The first one is likely to be based a weak position in your team versus the strongest position in the opponents team and the offer will expire after the specific match starts while the other is based on players you have in your squad and usually targets the weak areas and will expire after about 1 day, that is about 1 hour before next offer will show.

[Der_Ryan_M]

Yes, you need a fast trainer to lure another fast trainer from the daily list (take into consideration that there are two types of lists as said in a post after this one). For sure someone will not get a fast trainer as a daily player if the player that he was suggested to be replaced is not a fast trainer (it is not random). The base position is a must if it is for a daily player while the recommended daily player's position is based on the position opposing the opponent's chosen strong player's position.

The fast trainer thing is not correct, it is absolutely randomness whether your recommended player is a fast trainer, no matter who you have set as your other player.



As an example today I got a DC recommendation for my 20 year old ex youth player, who has good value and is a fast trainer. The recommended player however is very bad value and should be a slow trainer. A good player of 99% should have over 60M value and I have a MC 19 yo and 17% worse with the same value.

[Tactician]

The fast trainer thing is not correct, it is absolutely randomness whether your recommended player is a fast trainer, no matter who you have set as your other player.



As an example today I got a DC recommendation for my 20 year old ex youth player, who has good value and is a fast trainer. The recommended player however is very bad value and should be a slow trainer. A good player of 99% should have over 60M value and I have a MC 19 yo and 17% worse with the same value.

How can you say it is 'not correct' and based on randomness from what you showed above? You based your conclusion only on one case where you compared the value of the 6-star player to the value of a 5-star 19 y.o player and a vaguely estimated expected value (60M); you did not even buy the player to test to see if he is near the same level of speed of progress as the player he was recommended to replace. What values (with respect to what level) you are making reference to when saying this player is a slow trainer? Wage value also must be considered. The ratio of the market value to the wage value is a better indication of the speed of progress a player has before he is bought. The DC/DMC and MC has no relation as such. Is or was the 20. y.o DC like the MC? You need to buy the DC/DMC and compare his speed of progress to the 20 y.o DC when that same DC was 19 y.o and had around the same % quality in the attributes that were trained (the average should be in the same star-level), then repeat this procedure for atleast another (different) case, and post all the results if your aim it to prove that what I posted was 'not correct'.

The only thing that can be said from the above pictures you showed is that the MC might be a faster trainer than the DC (provided that ratio of value/wage is higher too, which cannot be verified from the pictures above). Keep into consideration that there are very fast trainers and those usually have the highest training factor (market value to wage ratio). Your 20 y.o DC might not be one (not all token-bought youth academy players are very fast trainers), but still is a fast trainer (if what you said about him about his speed of progress is correct) and the same is expected for the 19 y.o DC/DMC that was recommended as an improvement over him unless something has been changed recently.

I can understand your point with the value comparison thing but go read from that post (https://forum.topeleven.com/tutorial...tml#post640043) and further on from that post in that same thread (https://forum.topeleven.com/tutorial...ainers-92.html). I bought some of those players, made tests and posted about them there.

[Der_Ryan_M]

How can you say it is 'not correct' and based on randomness from what you showed above? You based your conclusion only on one case where you compared the value of the 6-star player to the value of a 5-star 19 y.o player and a vaguely estimated expected value (60M); you did not even buy the player to test to see if he is near the same level of speed of progress as the player he was recommended to replace. What values (with respect to what level) you are making reference to when saying this player is a slow trainer? Wage value also must be considered. The ratio of the market value to the wage value is a better indication of the speed of progress a player has before he is bought. The DC/DMC and MC has no relation as such. Is or was the 20. y.o DC like the MC? You need to buy the DC/DMC and compare his speed of progress to the 20 y.o DC when that same DC was 19 y.o and had around the same % quality in the attributes that were trained (the average should be in the same star-level), then repeat this procedure for atleast another (different) case, and post all the results if your aim it to prove that what I posted was 'not correct'.

The only thing that can be said from the above pictures you showed is that the MC might be a faster trainer than the DC (provided that ratio of value/wage is higher too, which cannot be verified from the pictures above). Keep into consideration that there are very fast trainers and those usually have the highest training factor (market value to wage ratio). Your 20 y.o DC might not be one (not all token-bought youth academy players are very fast trainers), but still is a fast trainer (if what you said about him about his speed of progress is correct) and the same is expected for the 19 y.o DC/DMC that was recommended as an improvement over him unless something has been changed recently.

I can understand your point with the value comparison thing but go read from that post (https://forum.topeleven.com/tutorial...tml#post640043) and further on from that post in that same thread (https://forum.topeleven.com/tutorial...ainers-92.html). I bought some of those players, made tests and posted about them there.

Wow you know less about the game than I was thinking. Sorry, then I will explain a bit further to you.
The pictures above are values from Level 13. If you didn't know, the youth player who cost Token always is a faster trainer. With every year the player gets older, his market value decreases slightly, yet as DC Tackaert is 1 year older but also 25% worse in quality, he has, compared to the recommended player, only a slight less value, which is still reasonably higher than other 20 yo slow trainers of that quality. If I was to show you all of that, it would take me many pictures and I didn't want to put so much work into disproving your made-up theory without you backing it up here so far.

Also I have value tables for fast trainers (18 yo) for every level between 1 and 69. For a level 13 player of the highest quality 99% in auctions the maximum value is around 67M. If you take into consideration that the offered player posesses the maximum quality, however is one year older, it should be slightly below, around 63M.
With 52.1M it is very obvious that this player cannot be a fast trainer.

One more information - wage also is completely irrelevant for determining a fast trainer. Wage always increases with quality increase, when buying a player. (So if you train, obviously not unless you then renew the contract)
So if you know the market values of players, you don't need information on wage.

PS: Your tests in that other thread are not representative, as you didn't show the skills of the player (GK) or in the first post also didn't show if the player you put in was a fast trainer or not as well. Also no comparison values to 1st class FT.

[Tactician]

@Tactician
So basically i must find a FT which takes hours or even days in the desired position only to have a slightly chance of getting something from AM? That doesn t seem to be worth doing.

I have to make a correction to what I said as Ryan experienced something different to me as discussed in this thread. Based on his posts, even a fast trainer might not fish out another fast trainer from the daily player offer. I cannot say for sure on what it is based, but Ryan said that it is random. If it is random, then even a non-fast trainer should be able to fish out a fast trainer. Better you make your own tests if ever you are interested in getting fast trainers from the daily player offer. The age relation (need 18 or 19 y.o to fish out 18 y.o players) is still valid.

Another thing is that someone else said that those players have always been good peformers. I can say that this is wrong because out of the 4 players that I bought from the daily player offer, only 1 player was a good performer and the remaining 3 of them were poor to average despite having good enough visual % quality compared to the % quality of opponents or opposing players faced.

[Der_Ryan_M]

I have to make a correction to what I said as Ryan experienced something different to me as discussed in this thread. Based on his posts, even a fast trainer might not fish out another fast trainer from the daily player offer. I cannot say for sure on what it is based, but Ryan said that it is random. If it is random, then even a non-fast trainer should be able to fish out a fast trainer. Better you make your own tests if ever you are interested in getting fast trainers from the daily player offer. The age relation (need 18 or 19 y.o to fish out 18 y.o players) is still valid.

Another thing is that someone else said that those players have always been good peformers. I can say that this is wrong because out of the 4 players that I bought from the daily player offer, only 1 player was a good performer and the remaining 3 of them were poor to average despite having good enough visual % quality compared to the % quality of opponents or opposing players faced.

Age I can confirm and also the performer thing, I also had some below average performers from these recommendations. My current recommended GK is such a noob. The one before was quite good... I couldn't find out yet how to tell if someone is a good performer before you play him for a while.

Maybe the value thing was different before, when you tested it back then. I can't remember when I started playing around with this feature... Also from your screens in the other thread, I could see that your level, where you tested it, is also quite high and its a bit harder to tell fast trainers from market values as everything is closer.

[khris]

Age I can confirm and also the performer thing, I also had some below average performers from these recommendations. My current recommended GK is such a noob. The one before was quite good... I couldn't find out yet how to tell if someone is a good performer before you play him for a while.

Maybe the value thing was different before, when you tested it back then. I can't remember when I started playing around with this feature... Also from your screens in the other thread, I could see that your level, where you tested it, is also quite high and its a bit harder to tell fast trainers from market values as everything is closer.

" I couldn't find out yet how to tell if someone is a good performer before you play him for a while" you can not, because this depend on your own team configuration.
I when I say -you can't buy 11 players that scored 40 goals each one with their previous club and expect the same performance once they r in your club, because the game assign contributive roles in order to create realistic teams. So 1-2 Key players highly contributive inside the team is the most common option, the 2nd is when between 3-4 earn the goals/assists you need, but all is a simplification that the simulator does assigning a limited number of contributive positive/negative roles in order to create realism.

[Der_Ryan_M]

" I couldn't find out yet how to tell if someone is a good performer before you play him for a while" you can not, because this depend on your own team configuration.
I when I say -you can't buy 11 players that scored 40 goals each one with their previous club and expect the same performance once they r in your club, because the game assign contributive roles in order to create realistic teams. So 1-2 Key players highly contributive inside the team is the most common option, the 2nd is when between 3-4 earn the goals/assists you need, but all is a simplification that the simulator does assigning a limited number of contributive positive/negative roles in order to create realism.

Yes I know your theory Khris and partly agree with it also. I think that the game gives certain players certain roles for a game and at the end I don't care who scores the goals or who has a good rating. Also we know some positions like AML/AMR the game prefers to give key performances. I more care about the teams performance as a whole and I think every player contributes to that, no matter which rating he got ingame. And also I think that an individual player doesn't make a lot of a difference. Few games ago my 156% AMC top scorer was injured, I brought on 74% striker and he scored 3 goals. So my team wasn't suffering a lot from this injury as the game decided other players would step up this game and my team was still intended to win.

[jarharnamme]

my best ever assistant recommend. 2* 3token with wall special ability(x50).
then i just train him with highlighted skill & have his grey skill at 1% for months.
no need to upsell using many accounts like top100 did