Содржина: Suggestions

Actually Vlady post that on his home page.

yeah you are right.and i was wondering why can't i find it on forum

LOL I smell BS!

I believe a more accurate reason would be "because we can encourage more people to spend money on credits this way".

who knows money is important figure

but it could be demanding because it includes data from 2 previous seasons.but i don't know.i am not programmer

Here's the thing.

If it's an issue with the database, then scrap the idea altogether and do it when there are better servers.

If that is just the excuse, then hell, if they want to encourage people to upgrade to PRO, give them a better reason to... this would be a HUGE factor in upgrades to pro.

I do marketing, strategy and copyright for online businesses for a living, developing strategies for upgrades is part of what I do... and based on all i've learned over the years, the best way to get new pro people would be to sweeten the deal with better features.

I know this suggestions is mentioned every season, so i'm going to yet again, suggest it.

I believe all Divisions Winners should get equal prizes. This way, winner of division 1 in Oceania gets the same prize money as winner of Div 1 in canada and winner of div 1 in Croatia.

Why you ask?

Because PPM offers credit tournaments, where we can all play each other. It's unfair to some off us if other teams are getting higher prize money for winning at exactly the same position as us. We could enter credit tournys and he has the advantage... credit tournys that for the record we PAY for.

Just found out that winner in Canada (i believe) get almost $2mil more than me... yet we both finished 1st in Div 1.

What does credit tournies have to do with anything? Just curious if you can elaborate there.

Thanks for asking

This guy made $2mil more than me approx. This is cash he can put into building his team faster, new players, better facilities.

It's extra cash he can use to improve his team.

If he and I play in a credit tourny together, using our credits that we paid for, he has the potential to be advantaged, because he had extra cash to spend on his team. Gives him a potential edge in a tourny.

Now, in soccer this is season 1, so still time to control the edge, but look at hockey... we're 5 seasons in and teams who won big leagues with extra prize money are, for the most part, well advantaged over their lesser league counterparts. At least, from my initial research anyway.

Gottcha. So you were using CTs as an example not as a cause for why he got more cash. Thanks for elaborating.

Yes, as an example of why i believe it's unfair to give unbalanced prizes for equivalent winning positions.

I don't think that differences in prize money are the source for advantage of teams that are winning big leagues. Most of them seem to be heavy traders and prize money differences are nothing compared to amounts of money they're working with on the market.

Agreed, but the prize money DOES give an advantage.

If its not an advantage, then all leagues should receive equivalent amounts for prize money.

This would then be an advantage for teams from smaller leagues. It's easier to build OTR (sponsor money) in less competitive leagues.

I don't get it. Is the problem that teams in leagues with tougher competition get more money than teams in less competitive leagues? Why is that a problem?
Look at what's happening in brasilian league 1. There are a few teams beating the sh** out of everyone else. Compare the leading team with the one on position 8, huge difference. It's like playing nonames there. You have to factor in the other teams's strengh to calculate prize money and sponorship offer. Otherwise a strong team in a weak first division would have to much of an advantage compared to teams in a slovak or chech league, for example.