Содржина: Suggestions

You mean like an enemies option

I would rather say Spam teams

Why don't you enable to special tags in replies to status updates?

Yes, please.

I would like to show my complete dissatisfaction with the change that is coming.
the international leagues will all be united as in hockey.
this is a big step backwards and not evolution.
inequality will reign even further in the game, where we can see in hockey for the few vacancies for the teams of countries that do not have a large amount of good teams. the difference is increasing.
and the worst part is knowing that the development team does not care about the opinion of its customers to know if they are doing something proactive to them
changing priorities are never done while things are going well are forever changed.
so if you want a game grow, listen to the community and do vote with a very simple tool, the poll to respond with all deadlines for voting.
sorry for the rant but I can not remain silent and see a game I like to play become a "Spanish league" where the winner is already known without the ball rolling.

beg your pardon, but how can you say something like that? The current system gives countries in South America and Rest of the World an unfair advantage because they can qualify a high number of teams for international competitions even if their leagues are weak. Unified international competitions will bring more fairness and equality rather than what you say. I don't understand the logic behind your claims.

The idea is that nowadays you will regularly have 8 teams playing international competitions and if we change the system for exactly the same that we have in hockey we would only have 4 or maybe 6 at most.

That would leave less room for the strong-but-not-that-much teams (should I call them emerging or developing teams?) to compete with the top teams of each country.

I believe ragnabolg is afraid we come to the same strength distribution plot that we have in hockey in Brazil, where two teams almost monopolyze the league with two strong runner-ups and the bundle of other teams really far below. Almost every season all the international cup slots end up with those 4.

We shall not forget that sometimes unfair advantage is nothing more than a way to balance strengths, a way to treat different teams - or nations - in different ways (just as much and as long as they are not equally endowed). Please notice I am not stating I always believe that this idea must be applied; as a matter of fact, one should be very careful when using the concept to avoid overprotection.

where did this change get announced?

it wasn't. it was just mentioned on a Brazilian forum that this is being considered.

Can it be "unconsidered"?

Here's a good way to keep leagues strong and give PM more revenue. If team in a top division loses its owner, why not let PM put it up for sale, instead of rendering the team inactive.

This accomplishes 2 things. The top league immediately gains an active manager, which keeps the game far more interesting. No one really likes to play "team noname."

The second thing of course would be to give the game some badly needed revenue. Im sure a lot of people would pay 200 credits if they could get themselves on a division 1 club. Smaller prices could be offered for defunct clubs in lower divisions.

Finally I write this in mind it has no effect on the level playing field concept for pro and non pro teams. The club had all ready existed, the only change is the manager.

Dislike, doesn't encourage loyalty..... Perhaps a better option is to have more promotion spots so noname/manager less get demoted instead of staying up for another long season

Disagree with you. As a strong division 1 club owner the most disheartening thing for me is to see a perfectly good franchise go to waste. There's nothing more boring for top division teams to play "team noname" and win 10-0.

Another aspect is that new members entering countries like the Czech Republic and Slovakia are so far behind in the game they may not be able to reach the top division in their clubs lifetime.

So why not sell the franchise or auction it off to the highest bidder? If PM gets a bid of 500 credits for a division 1 franchise, it helps the whole game become stronger.

interesting point of view, but, wouldn't U agree that a rookie manager will screw it up big time in a top league? damn, in Romania we have 500 exp managers that are still in the 4th division and only by making wrong moves on the market or in training. what can a rookie do with a 200 team, when he does not know anything about the game? in the end, that franchise will become a "no name" by poor training or bad financial and gaming decisions, 'cause all the other teams will top him in one, or maybe two seasons.
And what will PPM do with the second or third league team's managers that want to bid 4 the first league place, and, probably, can't do it as their teams will go no name. it will become a boring bidding game with forever changing leagues.
what if some rich prick has enough money to "buy" his place from a good manager, offering him a good amount of credits to get the teams closed? heck, if someone offers me 5.000 credits in advance I'll close my team for him
in the end, I have to say that i disagree with your idea, but hope that PPM will find a way to "clean" the no name teams every season, and promote the teams that deserve. will be a big step forward.

You make some very good points. I think some restrictions could be put in the bidding process. Things like managers with at least one season experience can apply. For me if some rich guy bids 5000 credits for a club all the better for the game and PM. Quite frankly there are a lot of no name clubs and there will be many more opportunities, especially in places like the Czech Republic to get in and jump divisions.

Finally what I find really sad is to see a team that was built up for 10 seasons go totally down the drain. Hurts any top league when a club like this just suddenly disappears.