Overview of 69th season

2019-05-17

We want to congratulate the champions of 69th season!

World league 1.1
1. wudiwen
2. Basketballers

U16 National teams
1. Lithuania. Managed by Mirza
2. China. Managed by zhuce
3. France. Managed by SpeedyFlox

U21 National teams
Final four: Lithuania, China, Argentina, USA
Gold and Bronze matches are due on 62nd day - do not miss them!

Also we would like to invite you to BasketPulse chat in Discord.
This chat was created by the community (HeyHoudini), and it seems to be a nice place to communicate: https://discord.gg/gyzz5Nk

Jobs done in 69th season

Few new design’s issues fixed
New responsibilities added for the Fair play committee (FPC) - reacting to various users’ complaints:
- Game members will be able to write a report about unfair behaviour of any user. This form may be filled from club’s description page.
- The Fair play committee members will be able to vote on these reports.
- Depending on the voting result, the system will automatically apply some punishment. The size of the fine will depend on how many times this user was punished by the FPC.
Tradable and nontradable players. This feature will work similarly as it used to work in the past trades’ system.
We suggested a sketch of the next big update (Drafts system). As our proposal got quite negative feedback, we decided to postpone it a bit
FPC members will be awarded with credits automatically each season
Based on FPC recommendations we will add additional spot in the committee for China federation (in total two spots) and reduce number of spots for United federation (in total one spot)
Following Argentina’s federation request the system of assigning special invitations has been changed. When a new user registers, he gets the best bot in his country. In some cases it can be a team in 8th division of international tournament. From now teams will be able to get a special invitation and go up a few divisions. For example, if there are bots in 6th division and there are no more active users in 7th division - users from 8th division will go up not to the 7th division but straight to the 6th division.
Fixed bug: users will be able to express their wishes for trades and this message will be displayed in the page of offering a new trade.

Plans for the 70th season

Continue working on the new game’s design
Implement updates related with too many talents in the game issue (the game will be updated in the end of 70th season)
- Players found by scouts will be a bit worse (-1 potential).
- Price of extending contracts will be reviewed (extending price in most cases should be similar to actual player’s price in the market)
- More players will retire, especially those who don't have teams
Review and update our proposal of the new Drafts system and present it for the community.

Tilbage til Hovedside

3.1 3.3 a-darius

Spillets nyheder: Overview of 69th season

-- 69 S 61 Dag

Overview of 69th season - winners, jobs and plans!

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

Draft = populist -- 69 S 61 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

skautus reikėjo mažint po draftų. o dabar būtų užtekę ir žaidėjų išėjimo į pencija. -- 69 S 62 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

dydziuss

Bet cia ka busiu anksciau istraukes su pvz 9 pot, tai nesumazes potencialas -1 iki 8? -- 69 S 62 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

HeyHoudini-bot

Tik naujiems traukimams, potencialai kris po 1 t.y. nebebus 10pot žaidėjo berods -- 69 S 62 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

dydziuss

Su 10 tik vardiniai liks ar visai nebus? -- 69 S 62 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

HeyHoudini-bot

10 tik vardiniai ir per draftus kai jie bus įgyvendinti kiek suprantu pats -- 69 S 62 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

Jei kita sez istrauksiu 8 pot zaideja kokia 20diena tai pabaigoj 7 liks jam? -- 69 S 62 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

HeyHoudini-bot

Implement updates related with too many talents in the game issue (the game will be updated in the end of 70th season)

Ką ištrauksi iki update'o, tą ir turėsi; Tik bus atnaujintas žaidimas, tada skautiniai bus prastesni -- 69 S 62 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

6.32 7.30

Why do we need to decrease scouts potential while we don't have an agreement about "drafts" system? -- 69 S 62 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

6.32 7.30

Also, we could stay at this scout system, but in drafts system we could create 11 pot ultratalents -- 69 S 62 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

6.32 7.30

Also also, I love this game as it is right now :D that's one of the reasons why I am so conservative -- 69 S 62 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

Stormtrooper

I also think that it's a big mistake not to match the scout system changes with draft system, because without draft system there will be a big gap between teams which joins the game at present time and teams who compete here for many seasons (already have some or even lots of highest potential plaayers scouted).
I think these changes also will result in salary rise for 10 pot players next season, which means that new clubs (playing game just few seasons will not be able to compete with financially stronger teams in the market). -- 69 S 62 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

evinelis

Parašysiu lietuviškai, nes tingiu sukt makaulę. Bet hebra, ar tikrai aš su savo skautiniu Rawa būčiau taip pigiai pratęsęs kontraktą iš anksto, jei jis nebūtų skautinis? Su skautiniais tikrai nėra viskas gerai -- 69 S 62 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

3.1 3.3 a-darius

This update is not about "future drafts" system but about fixing what is working bad right now.
The amount of super-talents in the game is insane and it has to be changed.
Suggestions to create players with potential 11 only shows that.

The gap between TOP teams and lower divisions is huge right now.
When we reduce super-talents amount in the game - franchise players will get bigger value. So teams who are ascending quickly will have at least one super-talent, not just some regular 10 potential player.

I understand that many of you have different opinion but regarding this question we will not change our decision. We needed to do this update many seasons ago and I still blame myself that I listened to the community by making current scouts' system "super-talents shopping center" :)

If someone missed the discussion about Drafts system it is here:

https://www.basketpulse.com/en/Press-read-11239082.htm -- 69 S 62 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

8.74 打酱油的国王

Magic Reform. -- 69 S 62 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

When joining the discord group, be sure to type your Federation in the Verification section. -- 69 S 62 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

Magic design! -- 69 S 62 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

A-darius, you said number of "super talent" players in the game is insane , BUT are they really all lebrons? well for the past 3 seasons i see same players (with 10pot) in the market or people trying to trade them too because their inner potential are trash. Just because it is 10pot player it doesnt make him lebron -- 69 S 62 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

Very strange change, feeling limited to some clubs (like this season's international 2.2 championship) -- 69 S 62 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

High potential players are more scarce. No problem. The key is, how can players in the 6-8 potential level play a greater role and make their signing salary look more worthwhile -- 69 S 62 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

The skills of a 14 year old seem very unreasonable. As a basketball player, at the beginning, they are in poor health and have almost no skills. I believe that no club would like to hire such a player -- 69 S 62 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

Maybe the high potential will make them popular, but for some players of medium potential, they will be killed directly -- 69 S 62 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

In this way, if a 14-year-old player has more than 20% of the potential of his individual skills, then 6 potential, his initial skills will be 3,7 potential, his initial skills will be 4,8 potential, his initial skills will be 5,9 potential, his initial skills will be 6, so there is no need to pursue high potential players, 1-2 high potential is enough. -- 69 S 62 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

also if you check the contract extension prices you should also check minimum salary for players. Doesnt make sense when the 1pot 20% health 250vk 33y price is the same as the 6-7pot 250vk 90% 27y health. I remember times when I could buy 200vk for 100eur, im not saying this is how it suppose to be, but health,potential, age, maybe some skill factor should considered in the price. -- 69 S 62 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

6.32 7.30

I like this argument: denomative player will have higher worth when scouted players won't reach 10. Scouted players -1 pot has only 1 problem: who picked a lot of talents in the seasons before changes will have an advantage. But that's not strong argument.

Still I have a hope that draft system won't reach the sun.

I don't agree about the gap between. This gap is not so big as you told because every team in every division could pick the same level scout player.

There is no problem to get a promotion to the higher league by spending 1-3 seasons until you reach 3rd wl. This league means that you are top200 manager of this game. I think there is no gap if you have a good chance to reach this level. I think there is a really good chance to reach 2wl if you are beter than other competetives.

1wl are for top managers. They have the best knowledge they spent a lot of time they have the best expierence. Only 32 top managers. There is no space for dummies, that's for the best managers. Most of us won't reach this level and that's not a problem. You can call it gap, but I call it: the difference of knowledge and work. -- 69 S 62 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

Does this mean that the administrators are deliberately trying to lower the level of players in the Supreme League? -- 69 S 62 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

benislovas

The problem is that we will see enourmous investments into scouts next season. And it will create another gap for next 10-15 seasons. It will not affect the game right away, but the difference between new promoting and old WL1-2 clubs will be even bigger in 7-8 seasons when all the talents will be ready to play. And market of loaned players will change drastically also. -- 69 S 62 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

GOD神

Dear GM，
About the Drafts system,I have some questions.
A player is good or bad not depend on his RT,it depends on
the skill and combination of position and height.And different managers has different skill training mode.
So that:
1.How to make sure the high RT players in the Drafts system are needed by managers?
2.How big is the size of the draft pool?
3.Can you join more young talents in the Drafts? -- 69 S 62 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

benislovas

And your argument for draft system is that there are too many good players in the game. But with draft system you will create at least 192 players suitable for WL1-2 each season. Number of good players will be huge anyway.
First step, even it looks small, could be that players from inactive teams does not make free market. Close inactive teams more frequently, delete players from that teams. -- 69 S 62 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

6.32 7.30

I think he is example of market problems:

https://www.basketpulse.com/en/Zaidejas-aprasymasSavas-1728715_O_Cheng.htm

His skills are:
10910
61067
10107
576
10

Some time ago, before he reached free market, he had all skills 11, now he have 10.

His minimum price is 20k. When he had 11 skills then he was suitable and also good player for 2wl for this price.

Now he could be good player for 3rd - 4th leagues or even bench warmer in 2wl. But nobody picks him because his real price probably is under his minimum wage.

And why are so bad if there is a lot of similiar strenght players? Then the winner are the best manager because we all have similiar players. -- 69 S 62 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

3.1 3.1 ekstrasensas

Kam tas komitetas reikalingas? Cyteriu cia ir taip nera. -- 69 S 62 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

RaZeev

I agree with benislovas. Eliminating 10pots now will only lead to a scouting frenzy next season and lead to inequality in the game from season 80-95, when 10pots and strong 9pots from now will be grown up.
Not letting players from closed teams go to the limited market or deleting them altogether would be a good solution to reduce the number of scouting talents.
Another would be to cut the amount of scouted supertalents by, for example:
1) not allowing more than 2 scoutings per day
2) limiting the number of 9 and 10 pots one team can get in a single season
3) eliminating scouting filters, making scouting more unattractive: either just one (like age or position for example) or all of them

But killing the option to get 10s will just manifest the dominance of teams that have great talents now and/or will get them next season. The measures benis or I propose should reduce the number too, but in a less drastic and game-changing manner. -- 69 S 62 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

Stormtrooper

I totally agree on benislovas opinion about the gap, that't what I wanted to say with my previous topic, maybe my words wasn't so accurate.

Also I must agree with vuvvu opinion, that old players with bad health should cost less that young talents. And this could improve the game as a-darius wants - that more tems would have like 10-12 players in substitution instead of 7-8. Because now it makes no sense to buy bad healt player when you can buy young talent at the same RT and price level. -- 69 S 62 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

Stormtrooper

Talking about cutting the players from inactive teams is bad offer. It makes no sense, because we'll have some cheating situations when new clubs will be created, the high bids will be made on oponent team players and these clubs will be deleted.

I totally agree with Razev, that scouting number per day must be limited.
The idea to limit high potential scouted players per season also seems to be interesting, because it wouldn't ruing game balance so much, but it will not solve frenzy scouting next season. -- 69 S 62 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

RaZeev

Also the amount of extensions per team per season could be reduced from 3 to 2 players, this would make scouting a good bit less attractive too as you wouldn't ve able to hold as many players very cheap. -- 69 S 62 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

2.2 2.1 Kipras_Justas

Totally agree with benislovas, RaZeev and Stormtrooper. -- 69 S 62 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

Frankebasta-bot

If you limit extensions, I need at least a 15 seasons timeframe. I have planned my team for many years in the future! -- 69 S 62 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

7.56 swechias

Delete players? IF team have NT players? -- 69 S 62 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

reducing extensions will benefit the rich teams, so I don't think that is what people would want. Rich teams would place high bids on players forcing leaving less rich teams no choice but to let quality talents go.

I do agree with RaZeev in most of what he stated except eliminating all players of closed teams. As it is this situation is policed as closed teams players do not train, nor gain experience for the time that they are on the closed team, so most end up far from reaching their best possible quality.

I like the idea of eliminating filters, it gives more variety which is what the hope was when different inner potentials were started and forces managers to become more creative in their use of players/tactics.

I like the idea of limiting the 9' and 10's per season and the number of souts that can be used per day. -- 69 S 62 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

Benis has some very good points as well. -- 69 S 62 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

After thinking some, yes, eliminating players from closed teams might be the way to go to reduce the number of players. -- 69 S 62 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

And I strongly agree that if the steps above were to be taken, that older players would need to have the minimum bids dropped. They can still be effective players, but their minimum required prices make them to high for WL3 and WL4 teams. -- 69 S 62 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

evinelis

I like Razeev thoights, only disagree with point to eliminate filters. Just remember why it was included in this game. There was complaints for bad potentials for players (PG with big man's potentials, or C without athleticism and with too great offense). Also I think maybe there should be more expensive (much more) posibility to delete information of sciuted player, in that way there will be not so atractive scouting player couple times per day -- 69 S 62 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

bloomis

You could add a stipulation too; players on closed teams are deleted (only if they have played 1 full season with that team) otherwise they go to market. That would prevent someone from creating an account and bidding high on a player and then closing the account. -- 69 S 62 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

*too high for WL3 and WL4 teams.

Also as far as addressing extensions and extensions being the same as market prices, market prices sometimes are inflated due to the minimums, if some of these players had lower minimums, their salaries would be lower.

Raising the cost of extensions benefits who? It really benefits rich teams again, because poor teams will not be able to extend leaving the players on the market.

It seems that we are making things to restrict rich teams because of their wealth, then on the otherhand do things that actually benefit them and possibly hurt the lower, less rich teams as well, maybe even more. -- 69 S 62 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

Also the same as what Benis stated, we are attempting to reduce the amount of quality players, but the draft just will add them back in? -- 69 S 62 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

8.48 nacho_uni10

A poor team that makes a good young team with own players will be heavily punished that way.. he won't be able to keep all their own talents and will need to compete in the market with rich teams, so once again rich teams will have the uphand to bring good prospects from weak teams. -- 69 S 62 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

Stormtrooper

After reading all comments, I am comming back to my first reply - I am pretty sure that scout system corrections must be made together with draft system. Otherwise as The Couch said - we'll again run around and around, without any strategic changes, but with big disbalance of the existing game flow after each update. -- 69 S 62 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

Another thought, the game does not have a fixed number of teams. If the game has an increase in the number of people that play, where will they get players if we delete them all? If the game has potential growth in mind, then I would suggest that there are extra players available in the chance that we have more teams starting the game than leaving the game. Maybe? -- 69 S 62 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

Deleting players would just makes it harder for new teams to field teams if the game realized a lot of growth in players, that and the high minimums for old players with poor health. -- 69 S 62 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

GOD神

When a thing is rare, it becomes precious.Reduce the number of scouts producing players will lead to higher market player prices,Many non-rich managers will go bankrupt or downgrade.
Scouting players is very interesting，I don't want to see the scout system weakened or even disappeared. -- 69 S 63 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

Y 6 a-darius

First of all, it is really nice to see such activity in discussions.

After I read your proposals I decided to change a bit the plans:
1. it will be possible to get only ONE 9-10 potential player in 70th season or afterwards.
2. Possibility to get 9-10 potential player in season 71 and afterwards will be significantly reduced. Also the required amount for guaranteed pick will be significantly increased.

I want to comment few of your worries.
-Scouting will not disappear.
Scouting was probably the most fun part of the game even when there was no guaranteed picks at all, and supertalents’ amount in the game was strictly limited. By reducing amount of supertalents in the game, we will also have smaller RT in lower leagues (with time). So it will be easier to give decent playing time for franchise players.

-Players’ price or amount in the market can drastically change even without any updates at all. For example, when China’s community joined the game, prices went UP significantly (because we got new 500 users in a few days). This can happen anytime because we plan to spend some time in the near future to attract new players. Good managers should be ready to change their strategy according to the situation.

-Possibility to extend contracts cheaper makes rich teams even richer and increase the gap... Teams in lower divisions don`t have many talents and they can always choose (try to save it or trade for the players who can help winning their league). TOP level teams do not have possibility to choose - they need TOP level talents at this level.
Rich teams have many TOP level talents and they save a lot for salaries this way. This is the reason why we have so many teams that have millions.
Ability to extend one supertalent in lower divisions will not help them when this team reaches the first league and has to fight against teams that have full team of supertalents who play quite cheaply. On the other hand if the price of extending is similar to market’s - more players will be there. So when new team comes to the first league it will have more options to hire players in the market.
Even in the current system there were some seasons when the extending price was similar to the market’s price, I am not sure at what exact moment that changed... But if owners almost always choose to extend - that means that extending price is not correct and it has to be fixed.

New teams that come to the first division has to be 10 times better than veterans if they want to stay in the league. And we are trying to reduce this gap:
1. by lowering financial gap between the first teams in leagues and the last teams (look at season overview news of the last few seasons)
2. by increasing the value of franchise player (with this update)
3. by making bigger selection in the market (we need to make sure that extending price is similar to market’s price)
4. by giving possibility to get the required player in Drafts (unknown future)

About the Drafts system:
I can`t comment right now. I need to review our proposal, to review users’ opinions and to see how can we make it better. When I have the new proposal I will share it with you!

About the minimum price:
It is a good idea to change the price accordingly health. I will review this and make update if it is possible. But overall we don`t need to increase RT in lower leagues. The goal should be the opposite.

Probably the retirement should be reviewed too. If player is not needed it has to retire at some point.. First of all, it is really nice to see such activity in discussions.

After I read your proposals I decided to change a bit the plans:
it will be possible to get only ONE 9-10 potential player in 70th season or afterwards.
Possibility to get 9-10 potential player in season 71 and afterwards will be significantly reduced. Also the required amount for guaranteed pick will be significantly increased.

I want to comment few of your worries.
Scouting will not disappear. Scouting was probably the most fun part of the game even when there was no guaranteed picks at all, and supertalents’ amount in the game was strictly limited. By reducing amount of supertalents in the game, we will also have smaller RT in lower leagues (with time). So it will be easier to give decent playing time for franchise players.
Players’ price or amount in the market can drastically change even without any updates at all. For example, when China’s community joined the game, prices went UP significantly (because we got new 500 users in a few days). This can happen anytime because we plan to spend some time in the near future to attract new players. Good managers should be ready to change their strategy according to the situation.
Possibility to extend contracts cheaper makes rich teams even richer and increase the gap... Teams in lower divisions don`t have many talents and they can always choose (try to save it or trade for the players who can help winning their league). TOP level teams do not have possibility to choose - they need TOP level talents at this level.
Rich teams have many TOP level talents and they save a lot for salaries this way. This is the reason why we have so many teams that have millions.
Ability to extend one supertalent in lower divisions will not help them when this team reaches the first league and has to fight against teams that have full team of supertalents who play quite cheaply. On the other hand if the price of extending is similar to market’s - more players will be there. So when new team comes to the first league it will have more options to hire players in the market.
Even in the current system there were some seasons when the extending price was similar to the market’s price, I am not sure at what exact moment that changed... But if owners almost always choose to extend - that means that extending price is not correct and it has to be fixed.

New teams that come to the first division has to be 10 times better than veterans if they want to stay in the league. And we are trying to reduce this gap:
1. by lowering financial gap between the first teams in leagues and the last teams (look at season overview news of the last few seasons)
2. by increasing the value of franchise player (with this update)
3. by making bigger selection in the market (we need to make sure that extending price is similar to market’s price)
4. by giving possibility to get the required player in Drafts (unknown future)

About the Drafts system:
I can`t comment right now. I need to review our proposal, to review users’ opinions and to see how can we make it better. When I have the new proposal I will share it with you!

About the minimum price:
It is a good idea to change the price accordingly. I will review this and make update if it is possible. But overall we don`t need to increase RT in lower leagues. The goal should be the opposite.

Probably the retirement should be reviewed too. If player is not needed it has to retire at some point.. -- 69 S 63 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

2.2 2.1 Kipras_Justas

Which of these changes will be putten in the game next season? -- 69 S 63 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

2.2 2.1 Kipras_Justas

*will be put -- 69 S 63 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

Stormtrooper

I don't want to questionate the mentioned ideas to reach the goal, but what I am really angry about is that there is never long time strategic updates. It's always easier to restrict something without long time planning.
Last season it was trade restrictions; now scouting restrictions; what will be next?
And the most fun part of this is that today is last day of the season and such a hude changes will effect already starting tomorrow. Maybe it's not such a big impact for teams which plays here for many seasons, but for teams like me, playing here just several seasons and just starting to develope youht system it's a hude impact. I think most of players are playing this game not for tommorow, but if updates is continuing comming this way I am not surprised that 1st league teams are closing up.
When you make strategic plans for 5-10-15 seasons and get such changes every season it makes no sense to plan anything.

And I still think that any changes in scouting system before planned draft system will be not as much effective as expected. -- 69 S 63 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

Will be putten tas gers. As pahmielns geriau spyk london -- 69 S 63 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

Populist news updates -- 69 S 63 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

2.2 2.1 Kipras_Justas

Dar kart skaitydamas pamaciau kokia nesamone parasiau :D -- 69 S 63 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

what a garbage update, Devs that have just no clue on what the hell are they doing.

first of all, timing - updates that will significantly affect decisions made tommorow, yet are presented... today? - wake the fuck up, what nonsense is this? Tell me, is there a bunch of clubs have just run out of money and are affiliating this to not lose out to the clubs with reasonable money management? - well, it definitely feels like this, especially with the plans of limiting # of top players that can be brought from the scouts per season...

secondly, dont't spread nonsense about lower-WL teams being less competitive when it comes to scouting. a few seasons ago my basketball school was third best in the whole game, I was playing in WL3, and managed to stay there even in spite of all the investments made in scouting... dunno about others, but I call it "planning ahead". with this update, Devs are trying to decrease the discrepancies that are there not because of existing system, but rather individuals that do (and don't do) any financial planning. well, guess what, when You step up in WL, You have to find the ways of building Your roster in more efficient manner; this update is just tolerating low-quality management and ruining the previous efforts that other users have built for years (literally).

thirdly, messing around with automatic extensions - tell me, just wtf? just wtf? - smartases, that's why there is a limit in terms of how many extensions can be given per season - because.these.are.financially.efficient.
Didn't You promote a few seasons ago that these extensions are here so that teams would be more interested in upbringing their talents!? and now what - some teams have done this and are experiencing benefits, some have completely ignored this and are as inefficient as it gets. Whose problem is that?! - for fk sake, can we support managers that actually think ahead, or wtf is wrong here?!?

it feels like we are promoting stupidity here with these updates. guess what, sherlocks, there is a reason some teams (and their managers) are in upper-echalone of leagues, and some never go higher than WL4. -- 69 S 63 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

+15

3.1 3.3 a-darius

Actually the easiest way would be - to do nothing. We always try to find a way to update the game and impact as few teams as possible.
But the real situation is that whatever we do, it affects some users.
And sometimes telling in advance only makes things worse (for example, if we let users next season scout many 9-10 potential players)
I am always waiting for suggestions and sometimes you help me to choose a better course (for example, this time).

treideris:
Very few users draw few 9-10 potential players in one season. Usually this is when using credits or having HUGE luck. So I don`t think that this will make such a big impact for users. -- 69 S 63 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

HeyHoudini-bot

Excluding explicit language from

treideris speech - I agree with him.

Careful planning and adjustments of finances is what makes huge difference between stable WL1-2 from teams that struggle to stay in WL3-5. People plan ahead a lot and have plans for 3-5 or even more seasons ahead.

Extensions are part of it. It makes scouted players cheaper. It benefits not only WL1-2 clubs but it is more beneficial to lower WL clubs as it helps to keep the talent cheaper than letting him go to market where WL1-2 club can easily outbid WL3-4 team for it.

That's the whole idea from extensions - keeping own talent cheaper.

Personally I avoid trades of my scouted players because I love the process of growing them and adding into my team. That is what keeps me entertained about this game, the process of it. Extensions help me to do this process. Financially it helps me not to lose money. If players' extension becomes more expensive, I might need to lower my team's talent pool while playing with 7-8 guys rather than having 9-11 of them.

My recommendation would be fixing more broken parts of the game before moving on something like scouting/draft updates as it would give way more time to discuss and understand what could be golden middle -- 69 S 63 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

HeyHoudini-bot

We want to inform about changes in our plans for updating scouts system:

1. it will be possible to get only ONE 9-10 potential player per season - from 70th season and afterwards.

2. Chances to get 9-10 potential player will be significantly reduced starting with 71st season and afterwards. Also the required amount for guaranteed pick will be significantly increased.

I love the 1st one, makes everyone equal on level of 9-10pot players.
2nd one is a bit skeptical - why decrease odds when team can scout only one 9-10pot? Increasing guaranteed amount (like double it from current one and add 15-30% of each guaranteed) should do fine in my opinion -- 69 S 63 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

我觉得要增加和改善游戏体验，而不是天天让大家被这些脑残的改动玩的团团转，每次回坑我都在想：我是在玩游戏，还是被耍
玩个游戏真累 -- 69 S 63 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

could you find any clues the why many good team managers left the game？because we have more talents than we needed？ -- 69 S 63 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

could you please make some updates attracting us other than disgusting -- 69 S 63 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

I second Houdini's statement on 1 and 2 -- 69 S 63 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

https://www.basketpulse.com/en/Klubas-aprasymas-38522.htmn I tire of statements about managers leaving the game and you assume it is always the game. The reason managers leave is a multitude of reasons beyond the game, some just get bored, some decided to spend their time doing other things, some have life events that get in the way. Too assume it is the game in all of these events is ignorance, and to state that is short sighted. People leave people come, many managers that leave return with other names. In the end, none of us will play forever and that has nothing to do with the game. -- 69 S 63 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

But rich clubs are rich because they play good and plan better than others. And now, when they managed to do that, we suddenly decide that they are too good and we have to take from them and give to the poor ones? Is it really how healthy economics work? -- 69 S 63 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

Though your comment is true, that no managers have left the game because there were too many talents. -- 69 S 63 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

抽苗子是这个游戏的一大乐趣。1赛季1个高潜苗，还很可能是个垃圾，真不知道这样限制的意义何在。
说苗子太多了，根本就不是游戏的核心问题，甚至就是个伪命题。谁抽到个好苗子不开心？大部分是10潜垃圾好吗。现在连苗子也不让抽了，选秀系统还影子都没有，这不是降低游戏体验是什么？ -- 69 S 63 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

TheWizardKs-bot

Those drafts better damn well be good. Because this is a terrible way to nerf your game. -- 69 S 63 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

I prefer scouting to drafts for sure, since it gives you the opportunity to groom your player somewhat. -- 69 S 63 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

1.1 5.15 Alphan

Players with good careers should have an option to become a coach after retiring, preferably with an option to start his coaching career that he is retired from... -- 69 S 63 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

Gincele

galite kas nors trumpai paaiškinti apie ką čia rašoma? kiek skaitau, verčiuosi bet vis tiek nepagaunu kampo -- 69 S 63 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

RaZeev

Maybe we could really talk about compromises to what Darius' last offer was:

- max. 2 instead of 1 9/10pots per Season, and starting S72, so there is time to prepare for all teams to the new system. Teams that have very much money on there hand can then still spend it on scouts.
- don't decrease the likelihood of 9s and 10s - decreasing it might just hurt the small teams more that don't have the money to spend extremely much on talents
- increase the sum needed for a guaranteed player - from season 71: I am on board with that. putting it to 150% of the current sum would sound reasonable for me.

Furthermore it could be thought of decreasing the likelihood of 9s and 10s only for WL2 and WL1 teams, as they are the ones that have extremely much money available to spend on scouting anyhow. For the rest of the leagues keep the chances as they are, as there aren't extremely many 9s and 10s found by WL3 clubs and lower anyhow. -- 69 S 63 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

gedunex

another diabolical update.
the owner is just clueless,you can not build a game on the pile of shit and through it more. it stinks more and more.
instead of fixing the game, especially problems which are old and build some solid fundament and branch it from there, he choose diabolical updates and acting like a victim after that.
why we need this update? who wants it? no one? do game need it? no. go and fix damn bugs and glitches, fix the damn game design.
the game is loading sometimes half old design half new one, i choosed lithuanian language and still many pages shows me in english, text showing on other text, i can't remove names from notebook or from traded players page so on and so on.
on the other note, it is so hard to get a player you want from scouts, practically it takes around 1 year to find good player(not even great), it just BAD and he want to even make it even WORST, how clueless you have to be to do that? more and more this game becoming like a chore to play, more and more grind, and that is why people are leaving. -- 69 S 63 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

Nesuprantu irgi tokiu perestroiku. Cia kaip buvo irgi vienas geras internetinis zaidimas thecrims bet taip pradejo kist kazkokius kosminius updeitus kad net nebesuvokiama kam to visko reikia. Taip ir cia kazkaip bando susikt geriausia visu laiku menedzeri kuri zaidziu jau virs 10 metu -- 69 S 63 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

As far as decreasing the likelihood of 9's and 10's for WL2 and WL1 teams, it is a big myth that WL1 teams have tons of money to float on scouts, sure WL1 and WL2 teams get more money, but they spend far more as well on player, coaches, and sectors. Sectors was already changed because of this myth. Many WL1 teams barely make it by and do little scouting because they have to put all they have into talents. -- 69 S 63 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

*into salaries (players and coaches) and sectors. -- 69 S 63 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

How about we flip this constant conversation on WL1 teams and WL2 teams having so much money to "why do WL1 teams and WL2 teams have to spend so much money on salaries and sectors?" can we put in place things that lowers the extreme salaries and sectors that we must now pay? It makes no sense, but is essentially the same logic of trying to take away more of the income. More income does not mean more money to scout. More income means more money to spend on players. There are many teams below WL1 and WL2 that save more money per season than WL1 or WL2 teams unless that WL1/WL2 team is tanking. -- 69 S 63 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

not counting game money purchased, many WL1 and WL2 teams lose large amounts of money, much more than a WL3 or below team could imagine.

Grant Hill had a father that had a very good message to Grant - it isn't what you make, it is what you save. With salaries as they are in WL1, if you want to stay in WL1, you can't really save. If you are okay to be on the bubble, you can save some, if you are okay demoting, you can save a lot. However when you demote with a lot and you have to rebuild, the money disappears very quickly. -- 69 S 63 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

Before getting to WL1, I had never paid for games money, but in order to stay, sometimes you must and many teams do. Does that happen in lower WL's? The answer is no. Because they are not forced to spend the levels that we have to spend in order to stay.

Today the managers of the game are far more knowledgeable than at anytime since I started playing, it takes mostly strategic planning to get to the top. Because managers are far more aware and knowledgeable of course it becomes more difficult to move up. I don't think the game should be then flipped to hurt those that have and do strategically plan. These managers have invested time and energy to educate themselves and a large part of what makes the game what it is. They should not then have new rules that punish them.

Point being in the end. I want to dispell the myth of top teams having so much money - it is false. What is true is they have a big income and they have a large payroll, sometimes much larger than their income. -- 69 S 63 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

Frankebasta-bot

I play this game because I like to play my homegrown players.
The latest proposals are: increase salaries for my own players, and forcing down my trhoat a new player (or 2?) every season by the draft.

I planned my team for the next 15 seasons.
I manage my money carefully.
And then, Almight Admin arrives and destroys everything.
Like Godzilla in SimCity -- 69 S 63 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

+10

Haha godzilla. Very old game we played in 2000-2001. -- 69 S 63 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

priority should be your own homegrown players , not drafts with random skills guys . -- 69 S 63 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

I use to be married to a wife that always had these home projects she wanted done. All of these projects were good, but were never quite finished before another project got started, so the house always almost looked good. Let's not be that house/ex-wife. Put the effort towards tightening loose ends.

The only suggestion I can get behind is limiting the number of 10 potential players to one per season. -- 69 S 63 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

None of us at the top were given anything, no advantage, we battled through the ranks to get to the top. There were no discussions of figuring out ways to flip the game on its head to make it easier on us as we rose up in WL's. It is kind of a turnoff to hear those ideas now in" how we can make it tough for top leagues and easier for lower leagues." -- 69 S 63 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

Stormtrooper

I totally agree on RaZeev thoughts!

a-darius wrote:
Lithuania 1.1 2.2 a-darius -- 18:47
Actually the easiest way would be - to do nothing. We always try to find a way to update the game and impact as few teams as possible.

.....

Very few users draw few 9-10 potential players in one season. Usually this is when using credits or having HUGE luck. So I don`t think that this will make such a big impact for users. -- (Versti) (Versti EN)

Comment:
Really? Tryng to affect few clubs? Than why not making just 1 scouting effort per day or not drastically increasing the 2nd, 3rd and every next scouting with pregressive taxes? This would affect up to 5% of teams in the game.

The selected and presented method now affects more than 95% of teams in the game.

Is the truth somewhere beyond..? -- 70 S 1 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

3.1 3.3 a-darius

Really? 95% of teams in the game draw few 9-10 potential players in one season? -- 70 S 1 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

Stormtrooper

95% of teams doesn't use few scoutings per day, while 5% might use it.

And I beleave you totally lost your prospect of this update, as there was no structural plannig of it.

a-darius wrote:
Lithuania 1.1 2.2 a-darius -- 05-18
The amount of super-talents in the game is insane and it has to be changed.
Suggestions to create players with potential 11 only shows that.
a-darius wrote:
Lithuania 1.1 2.2 a-darius -- 18:47
Very few users draw few 9-10 potential players in one season. Usually this is when using credits or having HUGE luck. So I don`t think that this will make such a big impact for users. -- (Versti) (Versti EN) -- 70 S 1 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

3.1 3.3 a-darius

So, how 95% of users will be effected after this update?

"it will be possible to get only ONE 9-10 potential player in season" -- 70 S 1 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

Stormtrooper

ok, maybe I was wrong about that, sorry. But it affect that "luck draw", anyway maybe you are right about it. -- 70 S 1 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

kavalafc

Happy to see that something is changing with the current "buying talents" with credits system. Also with the discord forum effort. Expecting also that something will change with the unreasonable bought promotions to upper WL. -- 70 S 1 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

6.8 8.46 mantvis

Na kol toki nereikšmingi autnaujinimai bus, tai nebeperku premium. -- 70 S 1 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

How can I upgrade my trading level? My manager level has been improved, I remember the news before, it was said that the promotion of manager level can increase one level of trade level -- 70 S 3 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

6.5 6.10 eshas

Nustokit su tais mainais zaist ir padarykit kazka pastebimo, del dizaino jau N sezonu tobulinat bet kai pakeitet i pulsa tai nieko ir nematau. Esu siules a.z. kad pridetumet bent lenta su klubo trofelais, o ne tik svarbiausius ir paskutinius du sezonus. Su tais mainais uzsiciklinot tarsi tai kazkas reiksmingo butu buve. Mainais beveik nesinaudoju, o kai paskaitai atnaujinimus apie jos tai kazkaip su realiu krepsiniu prasilenke tie komitetai ir pan. -- 70 S 5 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

jo, baisu su tvarka, lentelė ant lentelės. -- 70 S 5 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

Y 2 Mirza

Ypatingai patogu, jei reikia šio sezono statistiką pasitikrinti :D

http://talpix.lt/u/Pt877VL -- 70 S 5 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

2.2 2.2 darys

Ką Jūs vyrai kalbat??? Aš pasibaisėjęs :o DRAAAAFTAI yra tai ko reikia šiam žaidimui ir taškas. :DDD -- 70 S 5 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

7.56 swechias

o kada cia reikejo draftinti? turbut praleidau jau xD -- 70 S 5 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

Jo kada? -- 70 S 5 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

2.2 2.2 darys

Jo kada? -- 70 S 5 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

Ale rimtai, as kazko neikertu, ar kaip? Sake, kad duos nuo sio sezono tik viena scountini 9-10 pot. O garantuotas dar imanomas si sezona? Kam nesunku paaiskinkite. Buvau uzsiemes, tai ne viska suziurejau. -- 70 S 5 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

aciu kad kazkas atsake. -- 70 S 6 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

HeyHoudini-bot

Prašom -- 70 S 6 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

paaiskinti sunku? nebuvau online.... -- 70 S 6 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

au au au -- 70 S 6 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

3.1 3.3 a-darius

Garantuoti šaukimai nedingo.

Draftų atnaujinimas atidėtas, kai turėsime daugiau žinių pranešime. -- 70 S 6 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

3) eliminating scouting filters, making scouting more unattractive: either just one (like age or position for example) or all of them

This point of Razeev (allthought I understand Evinelis argument) I think is interesting, this days we found all similar trainings, is all studied and its seems that we all use the same schematic model to train players, eliminating filters could lead to a welcome diversity players. -- 70 S 6 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

Yes Ariel I had liked that idea for that reason as well, adds a strategic wrinkle possibly as well. Reducing the number of times you can scout per day would also be good. -- 70 S 6 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

evinelis

Hmmm... This upgrade wouldn't change engine. So it will be the same way to train players, only one thing could will change, that it would be harder to get player with good/perfect potentials of skills for his position. I think it is not so good for this game, because rich teams will have more chance to get perfect player by scouts. But draft system could change it, if it will be equal for all teams as it could be. I am talking about finance page, team with lowest finance rank should have highest rating in draft and so on (over all season). Of course there should be some protecting issues of cheating and trying to tanking the game, like RT difference or something same of this issue -- 70 S 7 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

Rich teams are teams that save money by being careful about spending or reduce amount on spending on players so that they can save. Why do some continuously attack “rich teams”. Is it the assumption that WL1 teams make more? Well they also spend far more. There are plenty d teams in lower leagues making more money per week than some WL1 and WL2 teams. Why shouldn’t frugal teams be able to invest more in scouts? By the way, my team is far from frugal. I am losing quite a bit per week and will not be able to invest 500 in scouts this season. -- 70 S 7 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

I don’t cry about spending so much, every team has a choi, spend to win, or save for the future. Quit bringing up the idea of limiting “rich” teams . Some of these rich teams are in WL5. -- 70 S 7 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

High income does not mean rich!!! Rich is a label determined by what you save!!!! Where in this earth do we penalize a working class man that was frugal with his money to save and then we tell this man, “sorry you a saved so you can’t spend it.” ? -- 70 S 7 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

Easiest fix is reduce the number of times someone can scout per day to one time and keep all else the same. -- 70 S 7 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

And after discussions with others about eliminating filters, I think that could be a bad idea as well. -- 70 S 7 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

It would hurt the appeal of scouting which scouting needs to have, otherwise managers will not invest in it. -- 70 S 7 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

Wilt100

Removing filters to increase variety in strategy sounds fun until you scout a playmaking center (didn't get that pleasure yet, but there are at least three US youngsters like that). Not sure what'd be the best here, I am good with a lot more expensive extensions, also good with scouting cap and a cap of 9-10s a season also makes sense. Though, I am not sure if the likelihood to pull 9-10pot should be significantly decreased - in the mean time, teams would invest a lot less into scouts creating a lack of quality players some 10 seasons from now as it is currently with coaches. -- 70 S 7 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

Max of 1 9 or 10 per season would be good too. -- 70 S 7 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

Vis skjulte svar: 120

If you have the 1 max 9-10 potential per season, the you likely wouldn’t need a cap on the number of times a team could scout per day. -- 70 S 7 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

Yes, a cap on 9-10 potential per season is a mandatory -- 70 S 7 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

is a must -- 70 S 7 Dag

-- (Oversæt) (Oversæt EN)

Overview of 69th season

Quickguide

Rapportér denne indlæg