Spaudos konferencija
7.57
Mainai/Žaidėjų skolinimas:
Komanda pateikė mainų pasiūlymą
--
(Versti)
(Versti EN)
+0
Dėl įvykusių mainų pradėjo žaisti naujoje komandoje
--
71 sez.
1 d.
--
(Versti)
(Versti EN)
+0
Dėl įvykusių mainų pradėjo žaisti naujoje komandoje
--
71 sez.
1 d.
--
(Versti)
(Versti EN)
+0
Dėl įvykusių mainų pradėjo žaisti naujoje komandoje
--
71 sez.
1 d.
--
(Versti)
(Versti EN)
+0
Dėl įvykusių mainų pradėjo žaisti naujoje komandoje
--
71 sez.
1 d.
--
(Versti)
(Versti EN)
+0
Mainų pasiūlymas priimtas
--
71 sez.
1 d.
--
(Versti)
(Versti EN)
+0
Mainų dalyvio žinutė He needs a wingman, I need a big. Dye and Merasty have similar a salary and RT.
--
71 sez.
1 d.
--
(Versti)
(Versti EN)
+0
"Sąžiningo žaidimo" komiteto sprendimu mainai buvo anuliuoti
--
71 sez.
3 d.
--
(Versti)
(Versti EN)
+0
Sąžiningo žaidimo komitetas nusprendė, kad šie mainai yra nesąžiningi ir komandos yra įspėjamos.
--
71 sez.
3 d.
--
(Versti)
(Versti EN)
+0
I do not understand whit is wrong with this trade. This reversal is disruptive to my team.
--
71 sez.
3 d.
--
(Versti)
(Versti EN)
+2
Merasty is better than Dye and two youth talents, 8 and 7 potentials, were added to make it unfair
--
71 sez.
3 d.
--
(Versti)
(Versti EN)
+4
I had already made up my mind that I wasn't going to go through another long slog of a season. That trade made my team somewhat viable. Without it, this season will be another grind.
--
71 sez.
4 d.
--
(Versti)
(Versti EN)
+1
Start this off by once again clarifying that I am not in the FPC.
Upon first seeing this trade it looked to me a potentially a fair trade by looking a rate alone, however once you see that Merasy, a center, trained very well, is much better than Dye (poorly trained) and on top of that two youth players were thrown in, I can see the logic that this trade was reverted.
Valerie, a long time player, could have done quite a few things different over her long tenure playing, often she would have very good teams capable of moving up but for whatever reason she valued having 1,000,000 to 2,000,000 euros in her team account. Had she really wanted to, she could have added pieces from the arket that would have kept her from having a slog of a season, but she went the path of going as cheap as she could. With this money she had saved, she would rarely invest in scouts, also likely a poor choice. With that all being said, she was a great contributor to the USA, a spectacular tactician, and she will be missed.
Furthermore this trade, the impact on managers is one more reason of the many other reasons I have stated that trade restrictions need to be tighter (though appears to fall on deaf ears). Besides a preventitve way to reduce the possible impact of fake teams, a benefit to members of the FPC because then trades would be much easier to analyze increasing consistency, it would also help stop this type of thing happening.
Before the FPC, all trades had certain restrictions for all set forth, if the trade met these restrictions 99% of the time the trade was allowed. Trade restrictions were much tighter back then, but yet people were happy and many trades were being conducted. Now managers make trades that meet restrictions (legitimate teams that are not trying to cheat) and their trades get reverted causing frusturation and at times, people quitting the game. I believe it would be better for the game and managers to have less possible trade options that allows such lopsided trades.
I have a level 10 trade restrcition and I still say I would rather the restrictions go back to pre-fpc days with all members having the same trade restrictions, no difference between different levels. This would not be fair to those that invested in the new trade system (I didn't, I got level 10 due to Hall of Fame status).
These loose restrictions can cause more issues that what they are worth. -- 71 sez. 4 d.
Upon first seeing this trade it looked to me a potentially a fair trade by looking a rate alone, however once you see that Merasy, a center, trained very well, is much better than Dye (poorly trained) and on top of that two youth players were thrown in, I can see the logic that this trade was reverted.
Valerie, a long time player, could have done quite a few things different over her long tenure playing, often she would have very good teams capable of moving up but for whatever reason she valued having 1,000,000 to 2,000,000 euros in her team account. Had she really wanted to, she could have added pieces from the arket that would have kept her from having a slog of a season, but she went the path of going as cheap as she could. With this money she had saved, she would rarely invest in scouts, also likely a poor choice. With that all being said, she was a great contributor to the USA, a spectacular tactician, and she will be missed.
Furthermore this trade, the impact on managers is one more reason of the many other reasons I have stated that trade restrictions need to be tighter (though appears to fall on deaf ears). Besides a preventitve way to reduce the possible impact of fake teams, a benefit to members of the FPC because then trades would be much easier to analyze increasing consistency, it would also help stop this type of thing happening.
Before the FPC, all trades had certain restrictions for all set forth, if the trade met these restrictions 99% of the time the trade was allowed. Trade restrictions were much tighter back then, but yet people were happy and many trades were being conducted. Now managers make trades that meet restrictions (legitimate teams that are not trying to cheat) and their trades get reverted causing frusturation and at times, people quitting the game. I believe it would be better for the game and managers to have less possible trade options that allows such lopsided trades.
I have a level 10 trade restrcition and I still say I would rather the restrictions go back to pre-fpc days with all members having the same trade restrictions, no difference between different levels. This would not be fair to those that invested in the new trade system (I didn't, I got level 10 due to Hall of Fame status).
These loose restrictions can cause more issues that what they are worth. -- 71 sez. 4 d.
--
(Versti)
(Versti EN)
+5
Again, more fuel for a mathematical solution. This game is all about numbers, why haven't we implemented it?
--
71 sez.
5 d.
--
(Versti)
(Versti EN)
+2