Asunto: Questions & Answers

I know there would be complaints, big complaints.
Take this example: 2 teams that have 3M per week for example, one is simply not able to log on every day, instead he logs on about once or twice per week, and other manager is able to log on every week.

Setting fixed amount in that case owuld be criticaly unfair to the manager who is simply not able to log on every day.
Why? because if you make bonus small enough to not make a big difference on that low level of sponsor money than the bigger clubs wont even think about it and it will not produce any effect. And if you make it bigger, so that even bigger or medium sized clubs have a good reason to log in every day that amount will make a HUGE difference in the example I gave, and manager who logs in every day will at the end of the season gain probably more than 30 or 40 or even more percent than the one who is simply not able to log in every day. And that is not fair, for clubs in similar positions to get souch a huge difference only because one can log in every day, and other one isnt.

That's my point - I know people would complain. It started to be routine.

PPM can't please every manager, every time they do an update. This current system seems the fairest method for all.

Yes this is scale change - and it should be announced as:
We (PPM) think that we should change your current sponsor deals because the gap is not correct and we would like to make bigger gap between teams - so we will give additional 7% to everyone. So if gap was 500mil per season from today it will be 535mil.

Actually this is scale change of sponsor deals - if that was the plan - then o.k. - but I think that's not good for the game.

There is more other things that should be corrected in economic system - as you mentioned - salaries for example and so on.

Even if they changed it to a fixed amount it would not solve 'the gap' or narrow it down significantly.
It's a problem with the whole economy, they started fixing it with free agents, then with the new league rewards system and what they should probably do next is raise the player salaries.

Even though I don't really like the 'login everyday and get advantage' method to bring in more daily visitors (the pop-up annoys me too) it's still just 1%.

If anything, they should decrease those horribly unrealistic large staff salaries.

staff salaries are the same 4 all managers, I don't see problem in that

I disagree. If they decrease the staff salaries they would make the gap between bigger and smaller clubs even greater.

oh, i was gonna ask about your football team, but nvm i'm not interested in hockey anymore.. i remember we used to play in the same league I.1 during the 1st 5 seasons in hockey.

I'd be for a slight decrease in staff salaries and an important increase in players salaries...

STaff should remain the same salries in my opinion. Because mid skilled staff has low salaries and nice influence on mid level objects.

Wjhile best staff has huge salaries and that is ok, because they have huge impact on high level objects.

Therefore if a manager has low or medium level objects and buys high level staff that is extremely bad managerial decision and its his own fault. Because high level staff doesant have high level impact on low or medium level objects.

And about players...whta do oyu have in mind? Something like dynamic salaries?
So that player asks for a really high salary only if he is playing in high league? Or dynamic in sense that for example top 10 or 15% of all the players by CV has exponentialy higher salaries and that is dynamicaly changed each season as plarsy CV progress? SO that player with CV 1200 today has (just for an example) 1M salary, and next season if he is not among top players in PPM anymore, he than has 350k salary?

Excellent post, ivan

Staff salaries are fine the way they are. Sure they're too high, but that's a good thing. It forces me to have to manage my expenses.

That's something we don't have to worry about with the players. I love your idea for increasing their salaries.

Thank you.

i really dont know why people have complaints on this log-in bonus,this is great idea and should be even more,1% is too small,rich must be richer-everything else is wrong.I have 13.7 mil. per week from sponsors,and im not complaining,more than happy with it, and before this log-in bonus i had 1.077.000.000 and now its just 1.153.000.000 less from sponsors this year comparing with top teams.This gap must be bigger,so i think that 5% bonus per log in would be fair.Its obvious that financial system of the game favorise lower-league-not rich teams and teams in relegation zones and this must end before its too late.

i want to invite one friend to play. i play in lowest league. and we have lots of teamnonames. is it possible that my friend could join my league?