Hello community,

Have I got the latest changes to the game right?

• The big players nicknamed the NG99s have been experiencing a rapid and violent decline since last season. OK, that's tough, but we've been waiting for the end of this generation for a long time now.

• Alignment between the youngsters that can be found between U17 tournaments, scouting and detection, the best +80s, between 81 and 84. Thank you for this alignment.

• There will be some tweaks to the youngsters that I'm not listing, but with a clear goal, at best the player's potential will correspond to his NG. Nickel no problem.

• But here's a "new" (I'm only discovering it now) generation of vfstore players, with reallocation points, with a few clicks and a bit of cash, here are some nice 87-90 NG babies.

Personally, this last point obtained against cash, in a few minutes against players trained during 6 to 8 seasons to obtain a lower NG from 3 to 6 points, that me ... (I can't find the right verb).

Aymeric, I completely understand that you want to make money, that's normal, and you're therefore completely free to do what you want with your game, and so my message has no importance in that case.

On the other hand, the gap between paid and free has probably never been so wide, and that's just me, I can still stand a capricious mdm, 90 insipid minutes (others can't, the number of VF stops in the last 2 seasons is frightening), but waiting 15 seasons for the 99NG to disappear, to be replaced by NG90 vfstore, no, sincerely, for me... I'm not interested.

Example of players:
S. Blanco or Nicolò Barella

Have a good season.
Rull

That says it all. 👏

As I said in the other thread, money is money. In the past, VF stood out from other virtual games because you didn't have to pay to enjoy yourself. Here, the enjoyment of free players is taking more and more of a hit because of the size of the VFstore. I think the long-term calculation is wrong. We have just over 4,000 players (a very small number!) with a very large number of inactive players and fake clubs... There's a famous warning out there and it's not new.

I had already warned you several weeks ago in a previous post.

And here we are. Training and patience mean that the players don't perform as well as those in the store.

I'm not against a store, which saves time like many management games. On the other hand, it's a shame that the best young players in the game can't match up to the best players in the store.

There are a number of solutions that would allow young players to be more equal using aymeric's principles, particularly the one where potential = NG.
However, the one that stands out the most is that of increasing the potential accessible by various means other than university promotions (detection, Rj, u17, or even by winning trophies or events...).

sora02: J’avais déjà alerté il y a plusieurs semaine sur un précédent post.

En effet on y est. La formation et la patience font que les joueurs sont moins performant que ceux du store.

Je ne suis pas contre un store, qui permet de gagner du temps comme de nombreux jeux de gestion. Par contre c’est dommage que les meilleurs jeunes du jeu ne puisse désormais atteindre celui des bon joueurs store.

Plusieurs solutions pour permettre aux jeunes d’être plus égaux avec les principes d’aymeric, notamment ...

Yes exactly, I agree 100% that we should pay to skip the 6-8 seasons of training.
It's the difference that I don't like.
We all remember your post, I hadn't understood or anticipated that point.

I'll let you buy the youngsters from the Store with 6 stamina and 30 regression.

For me, the gap between the training and these players is equivalent to 10 minutes of match time.

It's not the abysmal gap you describe.

Mouais... Après on peut payer pour avoir la meilleure équipe du jeu et plainchant du mdm du coup parce qu'on n'a pas gagné le championnat, la LDC et les classements à la con con qui tout le monde foutons alors qu'on a contribué à ce qu'Aymeric roule en Tesla... au final qui sont les plus idiots?

aloisio: Je vous laisse acheter les jeunes du Store avec 6 d’endurance et régression 30.

Pour moi l’écart entre la formation et ces joueurs équivaut à 10 min de match.

Ce n’est pas l’écart abyssal que tu décris

Our 25/26 of 210 points are out of reach for the new generation of 17/19 year olds.

The blind players will be at 205 and are accessible at a very high stamina compared to young people their age.
A player goes out at 20% of his NG whatever happens, except that a blind player with 85potential goes out at 23/24 with 17 endu 85 NG.
It's impossible to compete with the current module, which compiles training gains/potential/centre exit points.

sora02: Nos 25/26 de 210 points sont inaccessibles pour la nouvelle génération 17/19 ans.

Les joueurs stores seront à 205 et sont accessibles à une endurance très haute comparé aux jeunes de leur âge.
Un joueur sort à 20% de sa NG quoiqu’il qu’il arrive, sauf qu’un joueur store a 85potentiel, sort à 23/24 ans avec 17 endu 85 NG.
C’est pas possible de concurrencer sur le module actuel qui compile gain en entraînements/potentiel/points de sortie de centre

I'm not talking about our players, as I know they're hard to compete with at this stage.
I'm talking about the so-called "abyssal" gap between blinds and normals. In your calculations I know exactly what the real gap is between a blind and a well-trained normal (because there are tons of poorly-trained ones).

aloisio: Je ne te parle pas de nos joueurs, je sais qu’ils sont à ce stade difficiles à concurrencer
Je te parle de l’écart dit « abyssal » entre les stores et les normaux. Dans tes calculs que je sais au cordeau quel est le réel écart entre un store et un normal bien formé (parce que des mal formés y’en a et des tonnes)

A top 84 J1 will be 196-200 depending on the curve (22/24). The big coefficients are still in negative gain compared with the theoretical gain....

An 86-88 accessible to the blind is at 205-9 depending on the bonus points.

sora02: Un top 84 J1 sera à 196-200 en fonction de la courbe (22/24). Les gros coefs se retrouvent encore en gain négatif par rapport au gain théorique….

Un 86-88 accessible au store est à 205-9 en fonction des points bonus

So the abysmal gap is 2 of NG at best, 7.5 at worst.
Possible regression to 33 on the one hand against 30 systematically on the other.
Frankly, it's not negligible, but it's not abysmal.

aloisio: Je ne te parle pas de nos joueurs, je sais qu’ils sont à ce stade difficiles à concurrencer
Je te parle de l’écart dit « abyssal » entre les stores et les normaux. Dans tes calculs que je sais au cordeau quel est le réel écart entre un store et un normal bien formé (parce que des mal formés y’en a et des tonnes)

I don't think I used the term abyssal or any synonym for that matter.
There's a difference between such and such a gap and abyssal.

I'm a bit puzzled by a 6-point gap between players at 84, in a context of a few minutes, and 7 seasons of training (more than a year). I'm not just talking about the gap in the equation.

Rull43: Je ne crois pas avoir utiliser le terme abyssal ni un synonyme d'ailleurs.
Y a une différence entre écart ou tel écart et abyssal.

6pts d'écart sur des joueurs à 84, ds un contexte de quelques minutes contre 7 saisons de formations (plus d'une année), perso cela me titille un peu. Je ne mets pas que l'écart ds l'équation.

Yes, I thought I read that term, but I didn't.
Mea culpa

And regression is certainly 30 years old,... but there will always be new players. So 23 or 30, they'll still be there as they are.

aloisio: Donc l’écart abyssal est de 2 de NG au mieux, 7,5 au pire.
Régression possible à 33 d’une part contre 30 systématiquement d’autre part
Franchement c’est certes non négligeable mais pas abyssal.

You're forgetting:

• the VF cost of a blind player is significantly lower than that of a top 84 j1
• the training time and injury risk of the young player
• the regression can be the same.
• the fact that the blind player is ready straight away.

If the top-level blind player were at the level of the top players, this wouldn't be an issue.

And 200 is by shooting to death to death to death. I think we'll be more like 196

Rull43: Et la régression a 30 ans certes,... mais il y aura tjs les nouveaux joueurs en continu. Donc 23 ou 30, ils seront tjs là en l'état.

Yes, except that this player's IRR is much lower when you take into account the ratio between purchase, use and resale.
Let's also talk about affinities, which mean that you'll have a short season before really benefiting from them

Then the philosophical question is:

Is it abnormal for a paying player to have a slight advantage over a "free" player? At what point is the difference unjustified from our general point of view?

PS: I never buy VF Store directly -> but I have sometimes bought them from players when needed.

The worst thing is this type of player:

M. Joshi
E. Suleiman

Who will exceed 215 points without forcing it just with the reallocation
They are at least 15-20 points ahead of the players who were very hard to train (for 5-7 seasons...).

The balance seemed right. Solid blind players, used everywhere.
I haven't seen anyone complain about the blind in recent years.
All the potential >83 were bought.

The blind players were also used to supplement the large numbers formed.

Now I have to admit, even though I use the store myself, that I think it's a shame that players bought at 23/24 are really better than players trained over 6-7 seasons.

You want to win? Buy from the store.

It's a shame, you can really feel that a lot of clubs are attached to their pixel and the players they play with and have trained since they were 17. It's a shame to overshadow the essence of the game, which has been part of VF since the very beginning.