Emnet: Suggestions

players' salaries increased? I suppose you're joking... maybe staff's salaries should be lower!

There is no need to lower the staff salaries.
All the employees are really earning their salaries, you just have to know how to manage them.

Obviously there is no financial point in getting a top skill staff with low or medium level facility. Lots of managers still seems to disregard that.

I agree with the second part of your answer, that's because I decided to have only certain type of staff (actually no teachers and managers at all) and increase only some facilities...
Anyway the difference between staff and players salaries is really bad balanced - it's not like in the reality. Almost everyday I can read about this "bug"

Only there are 2 things that are not considered:
1. is that the players at their current ratings are not really good players. Actually all the current players are pretty bad players, relative to their max values.
And as players get better with their skills they will also have much much higher salaries.

2. no employee in real life has as big impact on any area of the team as they do in here.

27 players earn daily 180688
9 staff's members earn daily 211166

the custodian earn only 136, physicians together earn less than 2200 - so you can see that 7 of them earn more than 27 players

I understand what you're writing, let's see the situation in 5 or 6 seasons...

Suggestion to PPM
Think and make something with match importance and player energy !!!

At this moment it's really NOT-good

- At this moment one and only tactic that is important is how to save energy.
- For me it looks like this - at second half of the season - the best team is the one with most "go out and don't run" games.
- This is silly and it's absolutely NOT-realistic and there is no charm in that.
- And National Teams - so the tactic for World Cup will be how to save more energy - that's really ONLY tactic for NT. Imagine that NT manager only have to think how NOT to put his best players into team.
- Not to mention how many options for frauds this system is opening.

So really - think something or just quit with match importance - something like this does not exist. I don't know what match importance represents ???

To me, the match importance is how your coach prepares your team for each game. And Seasonal energy includes mental as well as physical health.

Set it on Low and the coach is going to laugh with the players and make fun of the other team while watching film of their previous games. Play on Normal and you'll get the usual coach-speak like 'Any team can win on any given Sunday, boys.' type stuff. Set it on High and he's going to scream and shout at the players that they MUST WIN AT ALL COSTS!

Play too many on High and eventually the players will tune out the coach because that's all he does is yell about how important every game is. When it's obvious that not every game is important.

Play on Low a lot and the players will really like their coach because he's not going ape on everyone. He's the typical Players Coach. When he tells his team that this next game is important, then they will believe it and really go for it for the coach.

That's how I see things

Great view - but
- We have here energy that can not be restored during the season.
- Energy is something that is renewable - and normal thing to save and restore energy is to rest player - not to "laugh" with players or to send them to field with words "go out and don't run" ...

All in all - I like your view - and some time ago I was suggesting something like motivation points.

I want to say - that something must be changed because this system depends to much on game importance (and player energy in long run) and too little on match tactic. So, having good contacts are more important than having good tactic.

A better move would be for PPM to use an energy type importance like Hockeyarena does, where the higher importance games decrease the motivation of the team.

A few seasons ago someone had mentioned on the forums about a way to replenish the energy of a player by resting them. ie. for every game they don't play, they gain back a bit of energy. It doesn't have to be a lot, as you don't want players who play often to end the season on 100, but yeah, you get the point.

Would make the game MUCH better, as would mean we as managers could actually manage the team lineups in order to balance youth, veterans with energy... very much like a real team does.

I fully endorse this idea.

Resting players should mean a player gaining seasonal energy back, but base it off what a player has lost to date...

Formula could be as follows:-

S.E.L. = Seasonal Energy loss
G.P. = Games played
E.G. = Energy Gained.

(S.E.L. ÷ G.P.) ÷ 1/2 = E.G.

So, for example, if Player A plays 10 games on normal intensity, then sits out game 11, they will earn .250 energy back.

(S.E.L. ÷ G.P.) ÷ 1/2 = E.G.
(5 ÷ 10) ÷ 1/2 = .250

Just a thought!!

Oh, and I'll expand on this further if someone else picks up the baton!

Yep, that's what i'm thinking, something along those lines. The gain should never be huge, but should be enough to warrant making managers "think" about how they use their players.

I agree with Emerald and trueblue55.
This as is now is really just about save the energy save the energy, and even more so in hockey.
I mean it should at least be possible for a player to play about 30ish games with average on normal to high intensity without loosing any of his abbilities.
While at the current system player who played 30 games in the season with normal to high intensity has considerably weaker performance at the end of the season.

I think it is obvious that current model isn't the best - so it should be on of task for PPM to figure some other model.

And again for NT - it's unbelievable that manager can not play whole qualification round and World Cup with best players. I am sure that in real life not even one manager think that he can exhaust players in NT matches - that's absurd.

Interesting idea. Allowing the 1-game-resting-player to recover half the seasonal energy he spends in a typical match that he plays.