This is my first area for improvement, which proves that it's never too late ^^
Well, as far as I'm concerned, it's obvious that the points gained from a cup win or IE ranking, etc. have no place in the "clubs of the season" ranking, everything is distorted.
Even if there is a scoring system at the end of the season, these points should simply be added to the overall total for the club in question.
Otherwise, this ranking, which no longer serves any purpose, should be withdrawn. Some clubs start with a 40-point lead, and that's no fun at all for those who are behind and don't have any titles....
Thank you

I think that points should be awarded for the current season rather than the following one. The manager who wins all the cups is legitimately the best club of the season, which makes sense in my opinion

+1 drosko

Drosko: C'est mon premier sujet d'amélioration, comme quoi il n'est jamais trop tard^^
Bon, pour moi il est évident que les pts acquis lors d'une victoire de coupe ou de classement IE, etc n'ont rien à faire dans le classement "clubs de la saison", tout est faussé.
Même si une moulinette existe en fin de saison, il faudrait juste intégrer ces pts au total général de pts du club en question.
Sinon, retirer ce classement qui ne sert plus à rien. Certains clubs démarrent avec 40pts d'avance, c'es

You can't say that a cup or league win has nothing to do with the level of your season!
But where I agree with you is that it's not normal for it to be carried over to the following season (for the championships) whereas for the cups it's in real time..

And what I don't think is normal is that each time, it's points only for the winner and nothing for the others, and that effectively creates gaps that are too hard to fill.
But if, for example, a championship win is worth 30 points, the 2nd could get 25, the 3rd 20, the 4th 15 etc., that wouldn't be an injustice.

The same goes for cups: the finalist and those eliminated in previous rounds should also get points, not just the winner.

In short, what distorts things:

1. it's not giving points for titles, because that's perfectly logical (you could even say that the opposite wouldn't be logical), but it's that these points are badly distributed
   and 2) that these points should be shifted in time and carried over to season n+1

The subject was raised in the last audio.
There's a real desire to reward ONLY the winner, not the 2nd, 3rd, etc. It's the winner who has won, not the others.
It's the winner who has won, not the others.

The general opinion was the opposite (which I also agree with), but Aymeric confirmed his position live, during the audio. So it's a real desire. He must have his arguments, but I think I've forgotten them.

In any case, according to Aymeric, only the winner should be rewarded. And a few days later, the draft system appeared, rewarding the 16th in D1 :D

As far as I'm concerned, a club that wins the League Cup, the VFFA, the LdC, the D1 championship or the D1 VF Master is already logically at or near the top of the table and is going to occupy the best places in this ranking without any bonuses.
Myforsans, your thinking is logical, but the season's ranking must also remain fair. The biggest clubs collect the most points and win the competitions. The next season, they're ranked even higher. So what's the point of this ranking? We might as well do away with all the other competitors and create a ranking of competition winners.
Solution :
Keep the season's club rankings readable and create another ranking that takes all these competitions into account?
Or simply rename the 'season club' ranking to 'points ranking' and do away with this season ranking?
It's just nonsense to see clubs that shone the previous season at the top of this ranking: change of season-->counters reset to 0.
It's great to see a little line on the prize list when you manage to claim a place in the top 10. Now it's reserved for the winners of the previous season's competitions. That's great!

Magpie: Le sujet avait été évoqué lors du dernier audio.
C'est une réelle volonté de ne récompenser QUE le vainqueur, et non le 2e, 3e, etc.
C'est le vainqueur qui a gagné, pas les autres.

L'avis général était pourtant inverse (j'y souscris aussi), mais Aymeric a conforté sa position en live, pendant l'audio. Donc c'est une réelle volonté. Il doit avoir ses arguments, mais je les ai oubliés je pense.

En tout cas, seul le premier doit être récompensé selon Aymeric. Et quelques jours a

Hello Magpie,
Honestly, I don't mind that only the first person to win is rewarded... it stimulates the competition ^^
It's the way the points are deducted that worries me.

Great idea, maybe we could do it this way:

Friendly matches: 1 point for all matches (given the level of difficulty) 3 points is far too many

Championship matches: We change nothing victory according to the club index

Champions League qualification: +5 points
EL qualification: +3 points

Victory in the Champions League (group stage and knockout match) Double points... Given the level of difficulty, this is normal

Champions League

Qualification in 32ie : 5pts
Qualification in 16i: 10pts
Qualification in 8ie : 15pts
Qualification in 1/4: 20pts
Semi-final qualifier: 25pts
Finalist: 30pts
Winner: 40pts

The inequality is that currently only the winner takes points. We are talking about the Club of the Season, which rewards a club's sporting achievements... We must not overlook those who achieve great performances even if they do not win the tournament

iMcCarthy77: Super idée on pourrait éventuellement procéder comme ça :

Match amicaux : 1 point pour tout les matchs ( vu le niveau de difficulté ) 3 points c'est beaucoup trop

Match de championnat : On change rien victoire selon l'indice club

Qualification en ligue des Champions : +5 points
Qualification en EL : +3 points

Victoire en Ligue des Champions ( Phase de groupe et match couperet ) Points doublés..Vu le niveau de difficulté c'est normal

Ligue des Champions

Qualification en 32ie :

That's not going to help the level 1s, who are going to take even longer to get their level 2s...

Blagoje Vidinic: Ça ne va pas arranger les niveaux 1 qui vont mettre encore plus de temps à obtenir leur niveau 2...

If you want to get on the wagon and be level 7 too...look at the 500 missing points..

Blagoje Vidinic: Ça ne va pas arranger les niveaux 1 qui vont mettre encore plus de temps à obtenir leur niveau 2...

And if he wins all his friendlies for 10,000/365 = 27.4 years he could become a legend!
It'll be well deserved 😅

Blagoje Vidinic: Ça ne va pas arranger les niveaux 1 qui vont mettre encore plus de temps à obtenir leur niveau 2...

The vfifa ranking should simply be decoupled from the points obtained for the levels.
Why not base the points earned for levels on the opponent's ng?

+1 especially as this topic comes from my friend drosko 😀

I think that to solve the problem, the championship title rewards should be handed out the day after the last championship match (as the endowments and cups are done). That way, the points will be counted for the current season and not for the following season.

Otherwise, it must be recognised that it is illogical for a competition won last season to be counted against this season's competition ranking.

The seasons all end on D-1 before the end of the season, so the rewards (points + money) should be given on D-1 so that the points are taken from the current season's ranking.

The real issue should be the reform of points altogether.

Today, it is a horror beyond description for clubs that are just starting to move up. The ultra-capitalist cliché pyramid system clearly doesn't encourage newcomers to continue, because whatever happens they'll never catch up with their counterparts who started the game before them

sora02: Le vrai sujet devrait être celui d'une réforme des points tout court.

C'est aujourd'hui une horreur sans nom pour les clubs qui commencent de grimper en niveau. Le systeme pyramidale façon cliché ultra capitaliste n'incite clairement pas aux nouveaux de continuer puisque quoiqu'il arrive ils ne rattraperont jamais leurs homologues qui ont commencés le jeu avant eux

After that, there's not really much point in catching up on the high points, apart from taking part in the Legend's Cup, but that's something that can only be achieved through longevity, so all you have to do is follow the example of those who are taking part: play VF again in 10 years' time.

Apart from that, once you've reached level 10, it's just for you, it doesn't earn you anything.

Galywat: Après il n'y a pas vraiment de grand intérêt à rattraper les hauts points, à part pour participer à la Legend's Cup, mais bon son accession s'acquiert juste via la longévité, donc il te suffit de faire comme ceux qui y participent : jouer encore à VF dans 10 ans.

A part pour ça, une fois le niveau 10 atteint, c'est juste pour toi, ça ne rapporte rien.

I don't agree, level 10 is interesting, you can do training courses to optimise your staffs. Useful when you want to take advantage of all possible factors to have the best possible team.

What's more, this system puts a huge brake on newcomers, as well as those who benefited from the old system but are still in the anti-chamber and won't be able to catch up with the "legends" for another decade or so.

Finally, you mention level 10, but there's a huge advantage between level 1 and level 7 in increasing your infrastructure, and that alone means that it takes 18 months at 100 pts/season to get it, which is far, far too long. And 100 pts/season is for beginners who have superb teams. For the vast majority, you can multiply that figure by 2.

It's not normal. Nothing is done to make it easier for new players to join, and as you can see, the turnover rate on VF is low.

sora02: Je ne suis pas d'accord, le niveau 10 a de l'intérêt, tu peux faire des stages pour optimiser tes staffs. Utile quand tu veux bénéficier de tous les facteurs possibles pour avoir la meilleur équipe possible.

De plus, ce sytème bride énormement les nouveaux, mais aussi ceux qui ont bénéficié de l'ancien système mais qui reste dans l'anti chambre et qui ne pourront rattraper les "légendes" avant une dizaine d'année.

Enfin, tu évoques le niveau 10, mais il y a un énorme intérêt

Yeah, well, I wouldn't recommend internships in all cases. The gain is minimal compared to the investment. Especially as, now, you can just recruit a high-potential player 3 seasons before he retires and convert him, so you don't have to worry about internships and you can use the player in your team until he retires.

Today, the main step is level 7, but with 1000 points, you can do it in two or two and a half years without too much trouble. (Faster if you want by optimising your game)

VF is a long-term management game, so it's not something that shocks me.

Galywat: Ouais, bon les stages, je te les conseille pas dans tous les cas. Le gain est minime en comparaison de l'investissement. D'autant que, maintenant, tu peux juste recruter un fort potentiel, 3 saisons avant sa retraite et le convertir, ça t'évite les coups de stage et tu peux utiliser le joueur dans ton équipe éventuellement en attendant sa retraite.

Aujourd'hui la principale étape est le niveau 7 effectivement mais 1000 points, en deux ans - deux ans et demi tu peux le faire sans trop de pr

I think that when my club blows out its two candles 🕯️🕯️ it will be lv7 ... but the staff if I make a conversion it will not be stuck 80?

I seem to have read (but this needs to be confirmed) that there is no longer a limit: as long as the player has been with the club for 3 seasons, potential = level.

Now, even if I'm wrong, to be honest the difference between a staff of 80 and 90 is really anecdotal. Unless you've got millions to spend because you don't know what to do with them, it's not worth doing training courses.

Galywat: Ouais, bon les stages, je te les conseille pas dans tous les cas. Le gain est minime en comparaison de l'investissement. D'autant que, maintenant, tu peux juste recruter un fort potentiel, 3 saisons avant sa retraite et le convertir, ça t'évite les coups de stage et tu peux utiliser le joueur dans ton équipe éventuellement en attendant sa retraite.

Aujourd'hui la principale étape est le niveau 7 effectivement mais 1000 points, en deux ans - deux ans et demi tu peux le faire sans trop de pr

So when you want to be among the best, even marginal gains count. But that's not the point.

I'm always surprised that it's level 10s who haven't had the same restrictions as newcomers who can say "VF is a long-term management game".

First of all, VF is a management game, not necessarily one where you have to wait 3 years to enjoy 90% of the game.

I played 5 years between 2009 and 2014 and it was easy to get to level 10. Even more so than back then, there was no point in levelling up, except to be able to give more IE points to your opponents.

Nowadays, levels have a real purpose and they're restricted to the max. The pyramid system doesn't work. It generates more frustration than it solves. Gaining important or semi-important points for small clubs is unattainable.

The system is ultra elitist. The best clubs get bonus points and get to play the biggest clubs and continue to grow, while the smallest clubs play each other and fight to get 1-2 pts/day. There are no half measures. The gap is exponential, and few of the newcomers have the courage to say to themselves that the end of the tunnel, if there is one, is worth it.

Moreover, I'm not even mentioning the minimal interest of these friendly matches, most of which are against inactive teams. It's inactive and lame, but it's a must. It's rubbish.

it takes an average of 2 to 3 years to finally gain access to the stable financial resources that will allow a club to say to itself that it might be able to start competing with the others, and that's too long.

And here I'm only talking about the point, the number of things that a new club now has to deal with to get ahead in the game compared with its predecessors... Well, that's not the point, but the number of players left in the game in the medium term should be a concern.

I'm criticising the system here. But I could suggest a solution to the infrastructure points system.

Why be restricted by points, when a "high achievement" system via league, cup or IE victories, or even access to certain competitions, would allow new players to have objectives for certain seasons other than through sponsors, and would allow versatility in the way the club is managed. These high points would unlock access to certain infrastructures.

I'm putting this down here, it's not very detailed, but it would be much more interactive than inactive farm work, which brings absolutely NOTHING, and even less fun for new players.

the thing is, contrary to what you think, the older players have also faced restrictions and have had to take their time to progress. Maybe a little less so at certain times, but overall, it has always taken several years to be financially stable, to have all the infrastructure at level 10, etc...
whether they started in 2006, 2015 or 2020.

and if A45 has added restrictions, it's probably because it believes that the game should be played over the long term.

Barring major financial assistance, no one had a level 10 CDF in 6 months, and it always took time to build it.

Today, you can compete very well as long as you have this CDF, you don't need to be level 10 to do that. I'm not writing this because I'm a level 10 myself, but because VF has always been a game where you can anticipate your club's trajectory over the year and which rewards good management over the long term. It's a bit of a departure from today's games, but that's what I think gives it its charm.

And, once again, these levels are virtually irrelevant after level 7 (you actually earn a bit more from events, but that's all).

The ultra-conservative responses only half surprise me, especially coming from guys who don't understand what the game has become for recent clubs.

What used to be the restrictions on climbing the ladder? Money, money and only money. Full stop. That's no longer the case.

Generating money was possible in countless ways if the guy wanted to try his hand at the game. AR was less restricted, frees were accessible, etc etc. I'm not going to go into the ways and means box and say that it was better before, but we can see that the current 'point' and 'index' system doesn't work.

Today, to go up it is more restricted. That's a fact. Wrongly or rightly on certain issues linked to abuses, my faith perhaps.

However, talking to me about "rewarding good management" on the farm of inactive index 1 or 2 clubs for 2 years makes me smile. And that doesn't add any charm.

There are plenty of other ways to make the game interactive for newcomers.

sora02: Les réponses ultra conservatrices ne m'étonnent qu'a moitié, surtout venant de mecs qui ne comprennent pas ce que le jeu est devenu pour les clubs récents.

Quelles étaient les restrictions auparavant pour grimper? L'argent, l'argent et uniquement l'argent. Point. Aujourd'hui ce n'est plus le cas.

Générer de l'argent était possible avec un nombre incalculable de manières si le mec souhaitait se buter au jeu. L'AR était moins bridé, les libres étaient accessibles, etc etc. Je ne vai

We should be able to earn points according to the level of the opponent for progression ... up to rank 10 (perhaps with a maximum limit per season) but that only his index counts for the rankings that could allow people like Sora or myself to hang up the wagon without disturbing the top club who make trouble between them at the top of the pyramid ...

Farming points against level 1 and 2 teams isn't going to get you a level 10 CDF either. It's just an added prerequisite.

Pierabou: le truc c'est que contrairement a ce que tu crois, les anciens ont aussi fait face à des restrictions et ont du prendre leur temps pour progresser. peut être un peu moins a certaines périodes, mais globalement, il a toujours fallu plusieurs années pour être stabe financièrement, avoir toutes les infras au niveau 10, etc...
qu'ils aient démarrer en 2006, en 2015 ou en 2020.

j'édit, car j'avais loupé un passage. c'est également mon second compte. et je suis surpris que tu trouves que c'

I don't agree with your view at all.

At the moment, I've been playing for 13 years and I'm not yet level 10 by choice. I've preferred to train for 95% of my time in the game, and it's only been 3 seasons since I chose to play a little competitively.

Before, it was a lot easier to go up a level.

You'd play against a level 10 player who'd score 10 points in the basket and in the championship, the points were doubled if I'm not mistaken.

Then, when a friend stopped playing, he was free to give a player to each club of his choice and put the money back into the cartel. There was no cap on the financial support from the cartel and it was not taxed. You could start your cdf immediately and often, your agreement would help you finance it and you would pay it back over time.

I spend a lot of time helping newcomers, guiding them and I can confirm that today, at least 1 in 3 stops because there's no point in playing at the beginning, you don't know how to do anything apart from playing against inactive players.

It would be interesting to talk about this during the audio session on Thursday evening.
Prepare your arguments, as renewal/additions to the community are vital for VF, it seems to me.
The MdJ's opinion would be very interesting, and why not add to the discussion with elements that he may have missed, or innovative ideas?

Galywat: Ce n'est pas farm des points contre des équipes niveaux 1 et 2 qui va te donner un CDF niveau 10 non plus. C'est juste un prérequis ajouté.

I don't think it's very honest to caricature what I'm saying in terms of what I consider to be extremely frustrating.

i'm still waiting for a definition of "fun" and proof of "good management" for farming inactives in order to unlock game features.

The current system doesn't work and needs to be radically overhauled because it generates huge inequality and frustration.

sora02: Je ne crois pas que caricaturer mes propos par rapport a ce que je considère comme frustrant au possible soit très honnête.

j'attends toujours la définition du "fun" et de la preuve d'une "bonne gestion" a farm des inactifs pour avoir le droit de débloquer des features du jeu.

Le système actuel ne fonctionne pas et nécessite une réforme de fond puisqu'il génère d'immense inégalité et une frustration assez importante.

It's not that it's fun or not, but by playing every day you'll gradually build up your points. If you don't manage your club properly, you won't have the resources to pay for this CDF.

You can't say that the current system doesn't work: it does, but it requires patience. The only difference with the old system is that you can't skip stages as much as you used to when you could build up the CDF quickly with the help of subsidies.

Of course you're talking about the advantages of yesteryear (even if the freedoms are starting to date quite a bit), but today a new club receives more substantial financial aid in return, players and infrastructure cost less than they did in the old days and if you know of any agreements from old acquaintances, the first few weeks are exempt from tax on the financial aid. A CDF in 6 months has never been the norm. I'm not convinced it's taking any longer than it used to.

As a returning player, I'd like to say that I agree with Sora that it's quite frustrating at first to have to type in inactive to go up.

For a returning player who knows the game and has the motivation to play the competition later, which is my case, it's not really a problem because I know the patience it takes... But for neophytes who are new to the game, it can quickly become repulsive, yes...

VF has always been special for newcomers, but as I said, it's also necessary to attract and retain them to make the game even more interesting.

At the time, as you pointed out, Sora was all about the money, so it wasn't much fun either, and there was no incentive to play the game and manage your club if you had some knowledge and a good understanding, just as it's necessary not to do too much so as not to put off newcomers, which is a bit the case here with matches that aren't at all interesting to follow in order to reach interesting levels.

Perhaps making a distinction between VF points and VF index points, by giving VF points for all matches, even losing ones, would encourage me to play matches against active players instead, and giving VF index points for wins/draws/defeats for a real ranking (over the season, over the last 3, whatever) would be more logical?

After that, it's a question of finding the right balance, which isn't easy...

Galywat: Ce n'est pas que c'est fun ou pas, en jouant tous les jours tu vas monter tes points progressivement. En gérant mal ton club, tu n'auras pas les ressources pour te payer ce CDF.

Tu ne peux pas dire que le système actuel ne fonctionne pas : il fonctionne mais requiert de la patience. La seule différence avec avant, c'est que tu ne peux pas autant griller les étapes qu'à une certaine époque quand avec des aides tu pouvais monter vite ce CDF.

Tu parles certes d'avantages d'antan (même si

I don't understand why you're talking to me about financial arguments that I'm not bringing up for the heart of the matter. I was just pointing out that before, you didn't have any prerequisites to enjoy 100% of the game, you just had to have money and that money was much more accessible in different ways.

Nowadays, whether you have money or not, you have to wait until you've earned 1,000 points (500 wins in a row against index 2s), so you might as well say it's 2 years for the most efficient.

It's a totally frustrating and time-consuming artificial restriction for... Nothing. It's not interactive, you don't learn anything after 3 games, it's not proof of good management or effective development.

In fact, it's really funny that it's always the same profile of managers who come and say that it's normal: those who haven't had to endure this totally unequal system.

Buying, selling, interacting with managers, training, finding players, that's interactive.

Playing 5-6-700 matches against inactive players JUST to unlock important content is not. And that's just for this feature, I'm not even talking about the rest.

This is the last time I'll answer you, I don't understand those who defend a position body and soul out of posture, because they tell themselves that others must be struggling as much as they are. Knowing that this is factually untrue.

Sora, in 2018, I was already no longer scratching the 10 points per friendly won. But I'm quite happy to have gone just before the levels to increase the infras, which seems a bit long to me. I like the principle, but not the length.
Waiting until level 7 to do all the infrastructure seems like a long time, especially when you see how unprofitable the TV channel is, for example, and that it's therefore useless at the first levels. Maybe level 5 would be more appropriate. A45 thinks that level 7 would be better for his game.

As Tom says, it took a long time even then, and we know that you need patience with this game. Saying that the old-timers don't understand and thinking that we're not interested in what's going on for the newcomers is probably just as much of a caricature as what you're criticising Galy for.
The Chosen One is an agreement that helps newcomers to develop. We're generally aware of the difficulty.

If the issue is the value of playing friendlies, then that's another problem for which there are solutions. For that matter, is it better to play 3 opponents with indexes of 3 and only beat one, 1 out of 2 vs index2 or 3 inactive? These are also choices you have to make.

As far as finances are concerned, as Galy says, you have help. For the time being, I didn't benefit from anything at all in 2018 and the agreement donations were already bridled.
Despite everything, the agreements are useful for advising on choices, loaning players, etc. There are still solutions even if nothing is perfect and nothing will ever satisfy everyone.

Well, it's just that you're talking about inequality where none exists on this subject. Doing a CDF (level 10) in a year has never been the norm. It was almost never done without millions of dollars of help.

If you look at the positive side, it also allows you to build a team that's at least a little competitive in the intermediate divisions, which wasn't the case before the infrastructure was built up. It's not as if you had 0 access to the game before this level 10 CDF. It can be frustrating for older players who have to go through this evolutionary phase all over again, but hey, it's a personal decision.

Otherwise, yes, I'm defending a position based on the slow evolution of things, as has always been the case with VF, also because I like this game for this slow aspect, a bit anachronistic admittedly, but which sets it apart from other games. I understand that it can be frustrating for a young club, especially if they're not used to this type of game. I'm going to sound like an old fart - which I may already be :p - but it's undoubtedly generational.

Incidentally, that doesn't mean I'm against adapting the points system. But I don't see how we should make the cdf level 10, since that's what it's all about, the rest being fairly anecdotal, any more accessible.

to get back to the subject.
I support the idea of showing the points won in the league, as in the cup, in the season in which they were won.
Otherwise, the rankings are no longer at all representative of what happens during that same season and therefore become illegitimate.

Sora's thoughts deserve to be studied ..
Maybe today some managers will discuss it with A45 during the audio (unfortunately there's no chance I'll be there, so I'll do the best I can with the time difference I'm currently experiencing)
But where I agree with him is the fact that level 1 is interesting, even very interesting, even lucrative, even pay to win when you put the CB because a level 1 can easily put €500 on the game and fill his account to the tune of 1.5 billion.
Level 2 up to 6 is actually a dead period where there's not a lot of use, but once you're level 7 you'll be interested in the CDF again. Then again a dead period or played inactive or even the competition LDC championships, IE cups by playing big coeffs. The level is no longer useful. I just passed level 9 two days ago I would have stayed level it was the same.
And to have level 19+ for access to the legend remains a beautiful utopia

Galywat: Bah, c'est juste que tu parles d'inégalité là où elle n'existe pas sur ce sujet. Faire un CDF (niveau 10) en un an n'a jamais été une norme. Ça ne se faisait quasiment jamais sans se faire aider à coup de millions.

A la rigueur, la limite actuelle en fait une gestion dirigiste, ce qu'on peut déplorer ou pas, si tu vois le côté positif, ça permet aussi en parallèle de monter une équipe un minimum compétitif, dans les divisions intermédiaires, ce qui était assez peu le cas avant

I share this analysis.

Making the game more interesting for newcomers doesn't necessarily mean speeding up their progression: it means offering them more interesting matches than having to play against inactive players.

i've been back for a season now, and 99% of my VF points come from wins against inactive players. It's a shame and not really motivating.

That's why I'd be in favour of making a complete distinction between a club's level and its VFFA index, so that these two parameters are no longer calculated on the same basis.

On the one hand, the VFFA index could be calculated on the basis of wins/draws/defeats and the importance of matches + cup/league wins, as is currently the case.

On the other hand, the VF points earned to increase the club's level (and not its index, therefore) would be the same regardless of the matches played, with a minimum of 1 point even in the event of defeat. The number of points awarded is debatable (different number of points earned depending on the opponent's level? Depending on the result of the match? Depending on the importance of the match?), but at least it would make me want to play even against opponents who are a bit stronger, but more active, rather than farmer inactive to excess.

it goes back a bit to the original point, whether or not to count cups and championships won when calculating points.

But maybe that's a point that deserves another thread, because it's not quite the same thing...

Or we could simply do away with the points system as a prerequisite for infrastructure and other things to get 100% access to the game.

And replace them with prerequisites along the lines of sponsors, which would allow everyone to focus their progression on what they want

Example: Winning a championship
Passing a cup round
Reach the Champions League or the VFFA
Buy players
Having so many players trained at the club
Have a star player
Etc etc etc etc.

Depending on the prerequisites, it might take time, since that's what worries the older players, but there would be much more interest than farming out inactivity. And young managers would have club management choices to make other than waiting.

We could even go further and define certain titles to reach the status of legend, which today is defined solely by longevity.

• Winning the LDC
• Winning the Vfmasters

This would give clubs that started the game later than others a real chance to access the same content as their predecessors.

Very interesting!

is it possible to move the discussion on the development of young clubs to another topic?
because Drosko's basic topic has been completely cannibalised here.

we don't have the possibility to move a topic : sorry

i was only talking about messages, not the whole topic.