highlights from 'transfers to/from protected clubs' thread

Rich@Leicester wrote:

Hi All,

I've been giving this alot of thought over the last couple of days, and I reckon i've got a decent set of ideas. It's very frustrating that we cant deal with protected clubs other than through the lottery that is the BID system.

Here are my ideas. This is for protected clubs only. Unmanaged clubs remain as is. Im sure some have been suggested before, so forgive me if im going over old ground.

SwapBid

1. Players at their real life clubs cannot be Swapped in.
2. 9999's cannot be swapped in
3. Players being swapped out must be at least '2 better' than the player being swapped in. ie. to get a 9595, you must swap in a 9795
4. Buycost plus 50% is the monetary cost of the player to be swapped out.
5. Resale value used in full.
6. No players over 32 can be swapped out
7. If swapping a player in that would then be at his real life club, ie. sending Torres back to Liverpool, then you get 150% of resale value as well, but player must still be '2 better'

i think that was it...discuss and dismiss at your leisure!

Going back to the proposals put by Rich, some are highly valid.

SWAP DEALS WITH PROTECTED / FAKE MANAGED CLUBS

The swapping of players is already well established within the 2 rating point margin i.e: 92/92 for 94/92 so that does not have to be altered.

How about:

Swapping a player from your club results in you also having to pay 75% of the buycost of your targeted player along with a mandatory signing on fee of X5 of the weekly wage of your current player that you are swapping out, this along with the cost of the player you are swapping out upto 94 level, after that if you want to swap in a player rated at 95 it should be at + 100% buycost, 97 + 125% the buycost and at 99 + 200% the buycost.

The buycost of any player swapped in will be reduced by 50% and will not raise above that unless the player has been at your club for 2 full seasons (48 turns) for swap purposes, no matter how he progresses in real life.

No player over the age of 33 to be swapped out.

The real life scenario is unjustifiable as with the 2 transfer windows players in real life are prone to moving on and you should not be penalised for capturing a real life player who may well move on within a few months.

I accept Martin's full and unreserved appology.

I think its good that its being debated cos at the moment its not a good system and is unhelpful. Any new proposed system should IMO not be too complex / complicated, sometimes keeping things as simple as possible is best. I get confused enough already by certain thigns in the game lol.

Also I would like to thank Martin for his input in all things related to the game and how it can be improved, even though he is quitting at the end of the season, its great he still put the time in to make suggestions etc

i think its great we are finally discussing this aspect of the game,

it needs addressing and the sooner we can all agree on something and put it to paul the sooner we can crack on with enjoying a fiercly competitive game again.

for me
the way it worked before for me was fine, you can swapbid with unmanaged and if a club is managed then you can try and prize away their key assets via permament bid, but its gonna cost you,

if you i tried to prize away one of your clubs prize assets would you sell for double buycost, no youd tell me to do one, x3 buycost maybe id get you thinking,maybe, so i dont think x3 is too steep.

So in theory we could propose to Paul that all the teams that were formally 'managed' by the likes of Linda Horwell and Geoff Fields,etc etc become managed by the new regime of Fake real life mangers.
Theyre were also a lot of managed clubs in the lower leagues too, so in the intersts of game depth i would like to see these teams managed again.

im sure tom and rich in league 2, dan and matt in league 1 would want to see teams with some actual proper players as theyre opponents too.

We then have the facility to swapbid with the vast number of unmanaged clubs and if so desire try and negotiate with the managed clubs.


Im pretty sure paul said that he can taylor make the fake managers be as clever or dumb as we like,

i agree with Stu, theres no point having us paying loads and loads of money for players and then that cash just sitting their in a fake mangers bank account doing nothing, but Paul says he can make them as active as we want them to be, so that shouldnt be a probelm.

keep the input coming guys its all good and so hopefully we can nail some thing that works

Dan@Sunderland wrote:

I think its good that its being debated cos at the moment its not a good system and is unhelpful. Any new proposed system should IMO not be too complex / complicated, sometimes keeping things as simple as possible is best. I get confused enough already by certain thigns in the game lol.

I agree with Dan, we should definitely keep it simple.

With the 'real fake managers', are we talking about putting these in place for all the current protected clubs? I hope not!

I would like to see the top clubs (ie Villa, Man City, Spurs, Liverpool) protected/real fake managers and the rest go to unmanaged.

As it stands at the moment, there are over 20 clubs in England protected (compared to 1 in Italy)

With one hand already tied behind the English club's backs with the current transfer restrictions, having only a handful of unmanaged teams left in England (all of which are piss poor), unless we pay way over the odds dealing with eachother, makes it almost impossible to come up with a deal as anything worth signing at foreign clubs has already been snapped up!

I like the idea of x2 the tv plus the player when dealing with protected/real fake managers as long as this only applies to handful of the top clubs.

Also, I was wondering, how would it work if a permanent bid and a swap deal were both offered in the same turn for the same player? Who would get priority? The manager offering the highest signing on fee? The highest transfer fee?

Jamie@Watford wrote:

I would like to see the top clubs (ie Villa, Man City, Spurs, Liverpool) protected/real fake managers and the rest go to unmanaged.

not enough depth ja,

i know you havent experianced the joys of league one and two yet but i can assure you theres some real shite in there

Surely some of these teams need to become active to add competion through the entire game.

Right lets be honest alll those in England have one eye on Carlton Cole when were thinking swapbid / perm bid.

So lets use him as the Example.

i dont think you can compare Italy,Spain or Germany with England because our trading restrictions are what they are (which we do enjoy),if you cant sign one player on the continent its not like their isnt the entire world to find another.

it means a player such as Carlton Cole carrys a massive premium

His buycost i believe is 4m.

right, so i ask any English manager you have Carlton Cole in first 11, settled,supurb understanding and scoring.

ill give you 8m for him .....no, thought not....

ok ill give you 12m ????? , chewing it maybe,maybe but i doubt youd sell.

Im not asking for it too be impossible to sign players off these clubs but just not so it is a get out of jail free cos i havent got the ability to do a deal else where.




i

Agree with Will here, making too many clubs unmanaged would result in too many players being available. I prefer it when you have to chase hard for a player as there aren't millions of alternatives out there.

Don't get me wrong, having a ridiculous amount of protected clubs who don't do any deals, isn't the way to go, but we have to be careful to find a happy medium.


The 2xbuycost thing will only work if players buycosts are realistic. For example you find me a manager on here that wouldn't snap you're hand off for Carlton Cole at £8m, like Will says.

right, let's settle this.

When I was suggesting a 3 x Buycost. I was inferring that that was the value applied to the player being Swapped in. Not funds that were additional to player being swapped out.

Phil, Dan, Will, oh hang on..everyone..is right. it needs to be simple. (dont you come anywhere near the 'simple plan' Stu, let us get a nice sensible plan in place..then you can complicate it for us! lol )

The swap bid premise should still apply. It's not 2 x buycost plus any random player of the same rating.

let run a scenario, and lets use Carlton Cole, and any old crapper from anywhere...Ryan Babel lets say...the figures i'll use for Babel are made up, as I dont know his true re-sale value, but just for example


worked example.

Carlton Cole 9795 (at Wednesday I think) - Buycost £4,000,000

Ryan Babel 9797 (from Death Valley) - Resale value £6,000,000


As Carlton Cole is at a protected club, his Buycost in the deal is 3 x it's normal level making it £12,000,000. The swap process then goes through as normal ergo..

In this scenario Cole would cost Tom £6,000,000 + Ryan Babel.



this is as simple as humanly possible..and fair.

there should be 3 additiona rules, and as Phil says..

1. Players PTCR should be the same or higher than the player coming in.
2. Real Fake Managers to be active in replacing.
3. No player over the age of 30 can be swapped to a 'Real Fake' Manager club.

How simple do you want it..that looks very fair to me.

oh. and I still think if you're sending a player to his real life club...then you should get a bonus of some sort. Maybe 2 x Resale Value.

ie.

Tom wants to buy erm...Albert Riera from Liverpool who has a buycost of lets say...£5,000,000 and swap Babel to Liverpool

Riera is valued in the deal at 3 x £5m = £15m
Babel is valued at £6m but as he's headed for real life club Tom gets £12m for him, therefore Tom would pay £3m & Babel for Riera

(i really really like this idea)

Rich, not to shoot you idea down but i believe this game has been running perfectly for 19 seasons without the transfer system being changed. when you,me,will,tom,dan all joined we all scouted for a bargin, got a player cheap then reviewed through the roof. that is how the game is and should stay. yes there are far to many clubs protected. so we should leave the clubs im the premiership, but if they get relageted they go to unmanged yes there might be a scrap for players but then paul just puts the best deal through, simple as that.
going to ur example rich. everyone knows carlton coles should be valued at like 12mil anyways. so if he had his actual value it would be.

carlton cole 12 x 3 = 36
which would cost tom 30mil + babel, which is messed up and players values at managed clubs would rocket coz then if for some reason tom paid that. he would want something similar or most likely better if someone wanted to buy him. no-one would bother trying to buy him.

so we should just reduce the amo

Phil not to shoot down your pefectly eloquent response, but after 19 years of a well run game, Paul had to 'split' the game..to accomodate those of us on the forum. apparently.

This leaves us in unchartered water. in 19 years, there havent been 20-30 'protected clubs' in the UK, so saying "it aint broke, dont fix it" is a bit of a redundant argument.

It wasnt broken, it was 'fixed' anyway...and now we need to find away of making it viable again.

this all relies on accurate transfer valuations.

Would you prefer we put in 2 x transfer vals, and we take 2 weeks off for Paul to sort transfer valuations?. That would be ok for me.

I would be broken hearted though if it went through as 2 x val and nothing was done to protect the selling clubs. Imagine how smug Will would look if he'd just managed to Swap an overrated Hugo Viana (resale value £8m), for Carlton Cole (2 x 4m = £8m) and it hadnt cost him a bean.

The whole point of the idea was to make it very very very hard to obtain a player from a protected club, but not an absolute impossible lottery.

I think your way opens up an awful lot of scope for the unrealistically BAD deal for the selling club.

If you want Carlton Cole that badly...you stump up £30m, there's plenty of big boys that would. The financial gap between the have's and the have-not's is closing all the time..

Dan (have not), was only just outbid by Tom (have+) for Baptista at £24m.

I've just paid out £11m for a full back, Will's just paid £20m odd for Valencia...the gap is closing...just not closed.

If we're being real..as a league 2 club, currently I should not even be dreaming of competing with the likes of Arsenal, for a player like Carlton Cole...but you're one of the big boys...and you have the cash (probably), so if you want him...you'll have to pay above the going rate. Thats what happens in real life, and that is what should happen here.

This is where I agree with Martin (see, it does happen now and again). The idea of them being protected, was to do exactly that. PROTECT the club from being raped and pillaged like every other unamanged club. So, if you want a player from a protected club, you should pay an extautionate fee, and the 'fake real manager' should then have access to those funds to bid for whichever players they want..and it should not be restrcited to the transfer list.

Rememeber how we used to get bids from Portsmouth or somebody...when was the last time you had an offer for one of your players that wasnt from a forum based manager?

I understand your point about rocketing valuations at managed clubs, but that is happening now even more so, because the pool of talent available has been expenentially reduced, purely because there are god knows how many players that are just unavailable due to being protected.

It's a simple law of macro-economics. The less product there is, the more demand there is, the higher the price goes.

I rest my case.

My personal opinion from down here in Death Valley is:

1. All current 'protected' clubs get a new 'fake' manager.
2. The only way to deal with them for their players is OPENBID.
3. Swapbidding remains the same for all unmanged teams as before.
4. 'Fake' managers a lot more active than the previous incumbants were.

Simples.

oh and,

5. Ryan Babel is going nowhere.

Personally I do think all current protected clubs need fake managers (yes, even clubs like Pompey in League 2) and swapbidding shouldn't be allowed at all with protected/fake managed clubs.

We would just end up with the reverse problem we have at the minute. All these teams would have very low team understanding due to a lot of changes and as a result not be as competitive.

Sorry, but would be very disappointed if any of these were implemented. A lot of my enjoyment is finding bargains, or underrated players at unmanaged clubs and going against other managers for players (Jamie@Watford a lot of the time, strangely!). This would be taken out completely as all managers would have the option to go after your Carlton Coles, Yossi Benayouns, Albert Rieras etc...

Basically there aren't enough forum managers in our game now for the pool of players to be saturated. Meaning there will always be players available if you don't get your number one target. Basically would make the game a lot easier, and the top flight will eventually end up with all the forum managers being in the top flight and all the other leagues becoming uninteresting and useless.

Personally like the restrictions in England, and we if we open up all clubs to swapbidding it will make it far too easy to build a decent squad and deals between forum managers would become a thing of the past.

Foreign clubs in the game have free reign on players all round the world, which in my eyes makes playing the game a lot easier as you can always find a player to fill a gap, whether you have heard of him or not. Just look in the Brazilian leagues for any position needed...
As a result, is it a coincidence that the German, Spanish and Italian leagues are dominated by forum managed clubs? Top2 in Germany, top 2 in Spain, top 5 in Italy?

Anyway, happy with how it was before, but now why can't we just have 'real fake' managers instead of Linda, Ray, Geoff etc..? but more active in the market.

Phil@Arsenal wrote:

the thing is Will, your not only making the players at the protected clubs/fake managers expensive your making the Whole market more messed up then it already is...

the problem with openbid for 'protected/real-fake' managed sides..is that currently the AI doesnt allow the cash raised by the BID, to be used by the manager.

We all started with £5m or whatever the divisions standard is.

one of two things need to happen. Either 'Pro-swaps' as I have detailed earlier. (you could also limit the amount of PRO-SWAP dealings each manager can use per season...my suggestion would be ONE PER YEAR)

This is aimed at making "protected/real-fake" talented sides. Not basically a bloody holding pool for forum managers to pick off the talent when they like. Enforcing the swapping of a player of the same PTCR, but lifting the targeted players buycost by an agreed amount, means that the selling side does not suffere drastically.


The alternative to this is the 'as you were' system. Open bidding to be at least 2 x buycost...but..get the AI to search for the same type of player with the same PTCR the second that player is lost. THIS CANNOT BE LIMITED TO BUYING REPLACEMENT FROM THE TRANSFER LIST!!!

You will end up with Wednesday selling Carlton Cole for XXXXX and buying fucking Paul Dickov from the transfer list. Players of a suitable standard to replace some one of Carlton Coles quality are not generally listed on the transfer list.

The selling club's AI needs to be given free roam license to scout and offer at Will. Ie. If they Lose a 9795 midfielder with 110 TS.. then that club should then find the closest thing available to the player they lost, and make an offer.

As long as the scouting networks of these clubs are improved...because, as im sure hundreds of us would testify...if I see another fucking scout report for Rooney, Crespo, Arshavin, Defoe or Lampard...im going to go crazy.

Phil@Arsenal wrote:

i also refuse to pay x3 a players value.. + a player for a player, and i rich refuses to settle with x2.....

this is exactly the point Phil. If a limit is set high enough that makes you think...I'm not paying that... then its the right one isnt it????

you shouldnt be able to pick off talent at will to sit in your reserves and sell chuffin hot-dogs!. To buy from a 'protected/real-fake" you're going to have to REALLY want the player if that PROSWAP (Trademarked, available for sale to hemsoft for 1 x seasonticket season 2010-2011) system is brought in.

Please can I make this clear. I am not proposing scrapping SWAPBID...

Just a thought but the only way a swapping system could work, in my eyes, with a fake managed club is that the fake manager should have the final say.

So you can put an offer of a swap in, like the ones Rich suggests, but it might not be accepted if the manager feels he can't do without that player. Final decision should go to the manager in possesion.

Rather than PROSWAP or any equivilant, I suppose what I would like is an adjustment in the current OPENBID system.

The system exists currently where you can put any type of offer in, money, player, money+player etc., but the way it disappoints to me is that you are forever waiting for the deal to go through if it ever does. My suggestion is, if Paul can implement it, that the real/fake managers think about your offer and then come back to you, with either an acceptance, a counter offer, a refusal or just any kind of feedback on your offer. For example, they might want more money, a player in exchange, a better player than you have offered, or just not want to let the player go whatever the price if he is a favourite of that manager.

Basically just how we do things on here.

Wouldn't it be better to have to barter with these managers than have set guidelines that all managers must live by.

Weren't we saying how good it would be if certain fake managers brought their own traits with them?

Jamie@Watford wrote:

Tom@Charlton-Bayern wrote:

Jamie@Watford wrote:

The only problem with this is that it could take forever to conclude a deal and use up so many dealings! Could prove very frustrating!

Surely would take less time than the current OPENBID system though?

I had to wait weeks and weeks for three to be accepted, with the most frustrating thing being the lack of feedback. I assumed the bids weren't big enough, but they went through eventually after about 12 weeks?

Wouldn't take this long surely?

I agree Tom, the Openbid system needs reviewing.

I like your idea about only being able to get players from protected/fake manager clubs by using the open bid system.

But think it needs to be much more clear - say 3x the transfer value, therefore you must really really want them.

So if you put a bid of 12million in for Carlton Cole, you get him the following turn, no waiting around. If 2 or more clubs put in an offer it goes with the current priorities which are already inplace. So if you want to throw even more cash to get the player, just to be safe, rather than a bigger transfer fee, you do a big sign on fee, like how it already happens.

Then the fake manager uses his transfer fee collected to improve the side how he sees fit.

Fake managers for all protected clubs - then carry on as normal.

All players are available, just those at protected clubs, you have to pay a fortune, which will put a lot of people off, therefore not wrecking TU. But if you really want some1 you still have that option!

i really like tom's idea. It's better than my swap idea. If we can just get some answers on bids we make rather than hoping against hope that we get an answer one day...

Jay, in this circumstances it shouldnt be cut and dried as 3 x TV gets the player...the selling club should be able to reject anything they like. Like we do here.

But imagine how much better your life would be if on bidding £12m for Carlton Cole..

Wednesday came back on your text turn saying..

"£12m bid rejected. Not for sale for less than £18m"

or

£12m bid rejected. Will acept deal worth £18m including replacement centre forward of 95/95 rating"

thats the solution...

over to Paul.

i have picked out the highlights from the original topic to save trawling and make easier reading