Subject: Suggestions

lol why are you even in the suggestion thread if you cant manage to hear suggestions? It would really be a bad decision if this is the final version of the soccer imo..

Check To do list. They are working on Game engine improvements

It was said for 453 times on almost all soccer forums, 3 times in soccer news, it is even displayed in To do list that soccer game engine will be improved.

No, i'm suggesting constantly complaining doesn't change anything. Have you contacted Tuttle or Vlady directly and offered them suggestions on what might improve the game?

I have an idea
Now we have two coaches in the team, whom are training players (10 or 40) equally.
But in real life you cant train 40 players so effective how 10 players (like in school - 10 student classes are more effective than 30 students)
My idea is that if a team has players over limit, their coaching effectivenes should drop.
Sorry for my english

Your student quality like you said is determined by the pleyer qualities, so the dont all train the same.

plyer qualitty doesnt matter.
I was talking about coaches work load.
If coaches are training more players their efficiency should be lower than training less players

Ups my bad. I guess i didnt read the suggestion so well.

I've been thinking about how to improve the cup tournaments... at the moment, lower seeded teams get a bit of a raw deal. They should be encouraged more to play so that there are more of the upsets that tend to occur in reality.

Here are a few suggestions that could make this happen:

1. When working out sponsorship money take into account how far teams progressed in cup competitions (this may already be done), but to then give lower seeded teams a greater increase relative to those seeded higher than them, particularly if they manage to knock out a significantly higher seeded team, as you would expect to happen.

2. Rather than picking matches every round so that the top half of the teams will always be playing the lower half of the teams, in the first round select the layout for the entire tournament - the top teams could be separated to increase the chance of them going through, and to reduce bots as far as possible, but then all subsequent matches would be set up with the winner of match 1 playing the winner of match 2, 3 playing 4 etc.,
hypothetically:
1 v 5 --> 1
v --> 1
2 v 6 --> 2
3 v 7 --> 3
v --> 3
4 v 8 --> 4

obviously, the order of matches would be random, so that it could also end up as
1 v 8 --> 1
v --> 1
4 v 5 --> 4
3 v 7 --> 3
v --> 2
2 v 6 --> 2

this would give the potential for the top two teams to play each other in the 2nd round, but also for lower seeded teams to progress much further (which when coupled with my other idea, would give them a significant opportunity for fairly good money.

I think these ideas together would make playing on high in the cup much more attractive to lower seeds, making it more interesting for all involved - do better teams decide to play high so as to ensure progression or save it for the league?

This has become longer than expected so I'll stop their, maybe to return to it later

I have an Idea. when your Facilities are high level, it takes a lot of time to improve them. my idea is to add a function of hiring more employees for decrease the time of improving the facility. I will hire more employees = I need to pay more money. so in my idea I need to pay more money for decrease the time of building.

In real life, if you want to build something fast you need more employees. more employees = less time to build = more money to pay, because I need to pay wages for the employees.

What do you think about it?

but the staff you hire are not construction workers.... Now if you had another facility for construction crews... well then you might be onto something.

That would be unfair for teams, who have already used (long) time building facilities.

On the one hand you are right, but on the other hand, you need to pay a lot of more money for use it. so it will be fair.

Then it really should be _A LOT_ of money...