UltimateEuropeForums.net

still think best change ue could make is contract section ,in a normal game there is no need for top teams to sell there best players and in the end they just get stock pilled in the reserves.
smaller teams then get board and move on as soon as a new game starts.


players could start on a 1 or 2 year contract with a section on actions to offer contract for a further year which can be used any time from turn 15 onward .
opens up great options as like when you talk to a player and get a response the player can either agree to extension or might turn it down due to not being played or just unhappy with team performance.

it then becomes the responsibility for the manager to sell that player stopping the stock pilling problem.

if a player wont sign contract extension and manager does not sell then at end of season player goes on list where contracts can then be offered much the same as end of season bids.

_________________
HISTORY

GAMES PLAYED..........X 10
LEAGUE TITLES.........X 6
OTHER PROMOTIONS..X 12
DOMESTIC CUP WINS X 6
EURO/UEFA /SUPPER CUP WINS X 4

When players are being bid for, instead of going to the highest bidder. Could the player's own decision have a bearing on where he went? I see clubs signing players who will never get a game only to be on the list the following week but for swap only. Would't it be better served if the player was to choose going to a club where he'd actually play? The bid would still have to be competitive enough to be accepted, otherwise we'd have players going for small amounts when there has been bette bids. Rather than highest bid, could just be a rough figure around max or just over.

Can't see how that's workable. UE would have to make a value judgement on every player and choose who that player goes to. That would mean that not only would they be required to have complete knowledge of every side's existing squad but they would also have to be able to second guess any formation changes that a manager might be planning.

_________________
Dinamo Tbilisi 122

Is there any real future in punitive SAs? I appreciate that your starting squad might be sprinkled with them but unless it was the very best players who were saddled with them, then those players would simply get bombed out.
Under what circumstances would you envisage a manager spending points to make his player disruptive?

_________________
Dinamo Tbilisi 122

I'm sure UE can have a quick look at their existing squad, and base the bid on the existing squad, not what it potentially could be, it's stockpiling, and these players going to lesser clubs could benefit a whole game. Great idea joe.

_________________
Bilbao 121

Will Inman stole a trophy from me.

I think so too. Far better than the current player hogging system.

Definitely not.
Imagine if you bid for a player and should get him but UE decide to hand him to a rival who has made a lesser bid. It's a recipe for uproar.
There must be a process based on logic or UE would be constantly accused of favouritism.
The way to prevent stockpiling is by making players put in transfer requests if they are not being used at an appropriate level of football and by making them lose stats via the confidence level.
.
.

_________________
Dinamo Tbilisi 122

Coding the game to put in transfer requests would be pretty hard id imagine. Surely the longevity of a game is more important than who put the highest bid in. If someone has 2 95+ 35 CBs, and gets a 93 35 off the TL, when someone with CBs not as good as 93 misses out, that doesn't benefit the game.

_________________
Bilbao 121

Will Inman stole a trophy from me.

I accept that it might take a bit of time to do the coding for those changes but once done, it's done for good. There then exists a process.
Asking UE to slog through every week is a non-starter. When Mick got lucky recently with players on the ROTW list, UE received over 40 bids on each player. Could they realistically be expected to trawl through that many sides each turn and make a value judgement only to be guaranteed complaints?

_________________
Dinamo Tbilisi 122

Your vision of a game where the weak get boosted to keep everyone interested is admirable. However, Ultimate Europe is a competition and not a socialist love-in.
There are winners and losers and if we try to make everyone a winner then the game is finished.

_________________
Dinamo Tbilisi 122

If the game can be coded to allow players to make transfer requests, then it can be coded to allow players to make decisions on where they want to go without having to check every squad before a decision is made. Regarding the bid, it would still have to be competitive enough to be accepted, like has already been said. A fee around the max value would suffice.

I know there are people who have worked hard to get an edge in the game by understanding working out values, and it could take many years to get to it. However players should not be getting to sold to clubs who are clearly going to be sold the next week because they already have 3 or 4 of the same quality of player in that same position, and because they've beaten someone to the bid by £300 haha. Or that their board have vetoed the deal because they bid £12 more than they'd actually allow. Like that would actually happen.

It's a dated process that doesn't benefit the game.

Players asking for transfers is also a good alternative though, if they aren't playing.

I agree with ronem. U 2 are talking bollox.

I retract my statement, Harry. The game is perfectly fine in all honesty. I was just looking for a seasoned member who knows the bidding process to get worried their little trick would be taken away, and bite

I agree with Ronem, one good thing amongst others about this game is how UE keep cash a valuable commodity and competition is high for advantages such as ROTW which makes our scouting tactics and strategies all the more important in order to get that top drawer hidden gem on the cheap.

Taking the financial competition out of it devalues the game and devalues the whole scouting process in general.

I don't see any value in changing things so it is similar to how Pure Fantasy Footballs operated as compared to UE, Pure Fantasy Football was actually really poor.

_________________
Getafe 117
Juventus 118
Macclesfield 120
Manchester City 121

Wario, you calm down eh.

I like the idea of VERS, would this be added at random or be bought with UE points?

I missed out on the 36/96 player this week as I went over. It can't have been by much but the existing rules mean that I lost out. That is fair.
Perhaps it is better if UE don't introduce new players then we don't have a dilemma.
There exists a system already in UE that lets players choose. If more than one side bids equal amounts for a player then the 'player' picks between them. I don't know how that works but I do know that it happens.

_________________
Dinamo Tbilisi 122

Yes, you're right. Don't introduce new players. Best way to run a business after all

The lengths people will go to for a ROTW player

Enjoy your Sunday, sir.

We try to make the game realistic, but there are some areas where playability and balance are the priority. An example is players willingness to move to a club and the wages he will get there.

Player wages are set up so all clubs have at least a chance of breaking even. So if Messi agrees to move to Patrick Thistle (in itself an extremely unrealistic stretch) he would probably take a 60/90% pay cut.

Because of this we want to avoid managers offering higher wages and contracts, and for players always to agree to move whichever ever club arranged to buy him.

Players do become unhappy and ask to leave, but it is rare. Maybe it should be less so?

_________________
The voice of Ultimate Europe...