Hello,

There seems to be a bug in the CDF. In the CDF, it is possible to change a player's position (rather than learn a new position) for a loss of one potential point (but a bonus of two points in a given category).

For example: an MDC with a potential of 80 can learn the DFC position by moving up to 79 but with +2 in defence. Several apprenticeships can be carried out, in fact moving up to 75 in potential with a total of 10 bonus points elsewhere.

So far, so good, but the problem is that when you take a player out of the DFC, the player's lead is no longer based on his new potential (75) but on his previous potential (80). Basically, you can have body-built players with a huge lead because it's combined with points bonuses.

If you take a player out at around 19/20 years of age, you'll have a fairly huge advantage by learning all the positions at the CDF, with no quid pro quo.

There's undoubtedly something to be reviewed before this becomes the norm.

Have a good day,

Galy

I don't know if it's been checked, but what's the point of having a striker who, for example, has +2 in goalkeeping or +2 in defence and even if you make a reallocation he'll lose 4 or 5 points.
I don't know if there's a bug, but if there is, the impact seems almost non-existent.
Do you have an example of a player who would be, as you say, body-built?

It's true that a +2 keeper won't help. In reality, it's more a question of defence, attack or passing.

Yes, I can find example players

Z. Kartushov

But here the bug really seems to be that the points at the youngster's release (without the bonus points) don't seem to be calibrated for the new potential but for the original one. As a result, the players have quite a huge head start compared with similar players who have been released conventionally.

In comparison :

H. Zoundi

In fact, it's quite abusive, and it would be nice if this could be sorted out quickly before we have thousands of overcheated players...

M. Beslic
+14 for him, not bad, he's building a full team 🙃

I had taken out my MD just after the +2 arrived but just had the 2 supp side posts learned but if I had known I would have made 2 more.

it remains to be seen whether this is considered a fault, normal or otherwise

of course it's a flaw, the guy's +15 ahead, don't mess around ...

Then he has no stamina 😂😂
It's worthless 🤣🤣

Zeus: Après il n'a aucune endurance 😂😂
Ça vaut rien 🤣🤣

Yes, in my opinion it's coming out a bit early, so it's not getting enough out of it. But if it's released at 19/20, interest will grow.

Dissolution of Cercle and RTG to begin with^^

Hello, I'm going to respond as President of RTG (and former anti-cheat admin).

The first thing I'd like to say, as Galy pointed out, is that no loopholes have been exploited. Players just learn positions via the training centre, and that's it. Anyone can do that in their own cdf.

The second is that Aymeric changed the bonus points awarded for learning positions about halfway through the season. He went from +1 to +2. Why did he do this? Why? How? I don't know how. He didn't say. It would seem that he's already gone backwards a bit, since now only the first position learned would bring +2 (to be verified though).

The third, and most important point for me, is that as soon as Aymeric introduced position learning in the training centres, which I think was about a year and a half ago, players didn't lose any points when learning positions! I pointed this out right from the start, publicly, on the forum. No feedback. Then Aguado made another post a few months later, and there was no response. In the meantime, I've talked about it freely with people in my agreement, and with other people outside my agreement, who will recognise themselves and who can confirm what I've said if they wish.

I would therefore advise everyone to tone down their comments on the subject at hand. There is indeed a subject that deserves to be discussed if you wish. But there's no cheating, just people (including me) looking at cdf releases and drawing conclusions about the best options for making their own releases. All my releases for over a year have been done with 2 or 3 called stations. Anyone can do it. It doesn't use a bot, a programme or a vulnerability. Just an analysis of what exists on VF. If you want to take advantage of our analyses, RTG is recruiting.

Enjoy the game.

#forum?topic=166093&date=1725636656

To illustrate my point, here is the post, dated 6 September 2024, where I point out that there is no loss on learning posts in the cdf.

Thank you half,

I'd like to add that talking about "body-built" players is totally untrue.

At the same time, Aymeric has lowered the endu for 17 - 18 -19 year olds by 1 to 2 points compared to previous seasons.

He has also slightly reduced the number of points for late exits.
So, if there is a new meta, you should know that the level of the top players benefiting from this meta will hardly be at the level of players from previous seasons.

Have a nice day!

The information was passed on to A45 on 14/02/2026.
He has since made adjustments, knowing that he was asked whether this was a bug or a flaw.

As long as you communicate respectfully, I'll let you talk about the subject unless you want to do so in the community section.

The bug option is still valid, but has since been corrected.

Demi-cerveau: Bonjour, je vais apporter une réponse en tant que président de la RTG (et ancien admin anti-triche).

La première chose que je veux dire, comme le fait remarquer Galy, c'est que aucune faille n'a été exploitée. Les joueurs apprennent juste des postes via le centre de formation, et c'est tout. Tout le monde peut le faire dans son propre cdf.

La seconde, c'est que Aymeric a retouché les points bonus attribués via l'apprentissage des postes à mi-saison, environ. Il est passé de +1 à +2. Pourqu...

Personally, I'm not targeting anyone, but in my opinion Aymeric didn't plan this when he introduced the feature. Afterwards, if it is, well, it'll just become the norm, and the advantage is considerable (all the more so with the bonus points and the comfort of all the positions learned). I only saw it a few days ago.

I'm just thinking that it goes against the grain of the latest changes, but even without it, if you compare a player of the same potential with and without this mechanism, there's no difference between the two players, whereas the player who has learned all the positions should, at best, be a little further ahead than a 'classic' junior.

Thank you Socrate for your feedback. You've confirmed that Aymeric has gone back a bit, thank you. After that, if that wasn't what he wanted from the start, he shouldn't have hesitated to read my message of 6 September 2024, and to reply or adjust it at that point. Or when Aguado raised the subject again in December 2024, I think.

If it's been corrected a little, that's good.

Now, what you mention in your post of 2024 should also be corrected.

Present, I talked about it with you Demi when the "+2" were changed... I even asked an admin in a "ps:" PM if he was aware of the CdF change... I didn't get any feedback (logical at the time of the PM)... anyway...

The concern about learning the position has been there for a while, yes... but then, the fact that it's being abused outrageously isn't a bug, it's a concern about ethics for my taste... but if it becomes the norm, well, "Fire!

Sora, I looked this morning at a "normal" 82pot 18-year-old player, who will have 178pts at the end of training without endu, taking into account the pts to be taken and those of the exit... in comparison, an 18-year-old with 4 position apprenticeships, therefore pot78, will have 183 without endu... I don't think I made a mistake in the calculation... my apologies if that's the case...

Then, so as not to put everything on the RTG (because I wasn't aiming for agreement), there's also V. Ramonzadeh ... there must be others... and above all, I think there will be more and more ^^

That's all from me, take care ++!

It's definitely a bug, you get the points for the position changes + an output based on the old potential to get +15Ng ahead.
Was the point of learning the positions in the cdf to have your cake and eat it too? No.
I don't understand how anyone can think that's normal and say it's fair.

Abused these players, well done to those who found the trick.
We'll have to see if it's really fixed or if we all have to get involved 😅

Lebaygue: Dissolution du Cercle et de la RTG pour commencer^^

I think it's the bare minimum, yes 🫣😂

After RTG can have 200 boosted players, they'll still stay behind. Bloody communists 🤣❤️

Sorry, I'm out 😘

To my great displeasure, I've noticed that the players mentioned in this topic have had their progress manually retouched by someone who clearly doesn't know how VF's training centre releases work.

Because you can't fix a bug by doing it unfairly, I'm at the disposal of the administrators or Aymeric if they wish to make a "fair" readjustment to these players, i.e. a readjustment in line with all training centre releases since September 2024. I look forward to hearing from them.

After regressing all the players who were ahead of their progress status (negating the benefit of months of game time optimisation), I'm no longer surprised by anything. 🦊

It's funny how some bugs can be fixed, while others (savage regression of 25-26 years or more) have remained without any real response (or action) :)

I've had a look at the examples of players mentioned.
The advantage doesn't seem obvious to me. Some of them give the impression of having more of an edge, but you have to ask yourself in relation to what, whether it's with a lower NG or their original NG. And those who give examples of players, have they checked with the owner to see what the original potential was?

For example, the player who is cited first as a so-called bodybuilder: F. Staudecker
He'll never be a top player !!!! or else I don't know how to add things up :) :) :)

myforsans: J'ai un peu regardé les exemples de joueurs cités.
L'avantage ne me semble pas flagrant. Bon certains donnent l'impression d'avoir plus d'avance mais il faut se demander par rapport à quoi, si c'est avec une NG amoindrie ou leur NG d'origine. Or dans ceux qui citent des exemples de joueurs, ont-il vérifié auprès du propriétaire quel était le potentiel d'origine

Par exemple celui là qui est cité en premier comme joueur soi-disant bodybuildé : F. Staudecker
Ce ...

Ah well, it's not worth much now.

myforsans: J'ai un peu regardé les exemples de joueurs cités.
L'avantage ne me semble pas flagrant. Bon certains donnent l'impression d'avoir plus d'avance mais il faut se demander par rapport à quoi, si c'est avec une NG amoindrie ou leur NG d'origine. Or dans ceux qui citent des exemples de joueurs, ont-il vérifié auprès du propriétaire quel était le potentiel d'origine

Par exemple celui là qui est cité en premier comme joueur soi-disant bodybuildé : F. Staudecker
Ce ...

For some positions, the gain was +2NG

Remember that the 18/19/20 year olds were modified several more times between the middle of last season and this season, and have a relatively low level, 88-89NG for 12-14 endu for the best of the best potential players (83/84) at 22-23 years old.

This small marginal gain, usable by absolutely everyone, made it possible to obtain a 90NG-91NG for the same stamina.

This made them less effective players (for the best) than the best current 23-year-olds (who have a 2.5-4NG difference with 25-year-olds).

In short, this is far from the body-built abuse we were told it would be.

So instead of rebalancing to the norm, we're throwing players in the bin despite 1266373 upstream notifications.

What's more, we often hear Aymeric say that he wants to balance out the trained youngsters and the blind players, but that's no longer the case, as the mature blind players, thanks to their stamina, are putting the trained youngsters to shame.

And I'm not even going to mention the comparison with the ancient 28-year-olds supplied to the returnees.

Yes, it's true that these constant changes make it impossible to plan training.
It's a bit of a shame that most of the new features (in this case, the position apprenticeships) are thrown in without being tested beforehand, because obviously some clever little bastards slip through the cracks and then there are regulations that come out of nowhere, sometimes followed by counter-regulations.

Nowadays, no one can say with certainty that it's a good deal to release a player at 17, 18 or 19, and whether it's better at the start of the season or at the end, because today's truth is not the same as yesterday's, and certainly not tomorrow's either.

Magpie: C'est marrant comme certains bugs peuvent être réparés, alors que d'autres (régression sauvages de 25-26 ans ou plus) sont restés sans réelle réponse (ou action) :)

Yes, that's true. Everyone understood that it would never be repaired for those who were victims, but it would still be nice to know what the cause was?
In any case, the result must not have been what was intended, because it hasn't happened since.

myforsans: Oui c'est vrai. Tout le monde a compris que ce ne serait jamais réparé pour ceux qui en ont été victimes mais ce serait quand même bien de savoir quelle était la cause ?
En tout cas le résulta obtenu ne devait pas être le but recherché puisque depuis cela ne s'est plus reproduit.

We're not technically safe from it happening again next night, without warning ^^`.

I like stories on vf, it's never boring, maybe that's why I'm still here.

Popcorn

Rull43: Après la RTG peuvent avoir 200 joueurs boostés, ils resteront quand même derrière. Saloperie de communistes 🤣❤️

Pardon je sors 😘

We'd much rather be behind the others 👀

Hello
There was a bug with the job training via the CDF. Thanks to those who reported it.
We're going to restore all the players affected, but it's going to take a little time.

aymeric45: Bonjour
Il y avait bien un bug avec l'apprentissage de poste via le CDF. Merci à ceux qui l'ont signalé.
On va corriger le niveau de l'ensemble des joueurs affectés, mais ça va prendre un peu de temps.

This announcement deserves a little explanation, Aymeric. When did the bug occur? Which players are affected?

Let's say you go back to September 2024, as you told me in mp.

That means that if you have a player in your squad who came out of a cdf between September 2024 and today, and you've bought him, he's potentially affected. These players must be between the ages of 17 and 31 or 32 at the most ....

I'd also like to tell the community that I've proposed another solution to Aymeric, which concerns players released since his last modification. I'm awaiting his feedback on this proposal.

Finally, I'd like to thank you for reporting the bug on 6 September 2024, in a message on the forum and a PM I think (but I'd be hard pressed to say for sure). I was the first, so there's no need to check. Unfortunately, you didn't bother at the time. And here we are today.

1 and a half years to worry about it
If we really have to go back that far, we'll all be in an ehpad!

Honestly, if the players were that strong, the VF community would have been crying for a long time.
There's no need to go back 2 years, we just need to bring the last players who were affected by the +2 change up to a decent level so that no-one feels cheated.

sora02: Honnêtement si les joueurs étaient si fort, ça ferait longtemps que la communauté VF aurait pleuré.
Pas besoin de remonter à 2 ans en arrière, il est juste nécessaire de remettre à un niveau correct les derniers joueurs qui ont été impactés par la modif du +2 pour que personne ne se sentent lésé

Thank you for your time. It's common sense.

It reminds me of the time when Aymeric suddenly discovered that for at least 3 or 4 years, you could accumulate training sessions before buying young players ...

Otherwise, I propose that all the players who benefited from extra training at the time should be stripped of their training. Unfortunately, they're all retired now. Then all we have to do is strip of all their titles all the clubs that would have accumulated training sessions to train young players at the time.

And I also propose sanctioning managers 😊

It's up to the admins to make the changes.

There are always charitable souls to find players (I'm willing to help if needed) after the admi will have to work hard behind.

sora02: Le gain était, pour certains postes de +2NG

Rappel que les 18/19/20 ans ont encore été modifié plusieurs fois entre le milieu de saison dernière, et cette saison , et ont un niveau relativement faible, 88-89NG pour 12-14 endu pour les meilleurs des meilleurs potentiels du jeu (83/84) à 22-23 ans

Ce petit gain marginal, utilisable par absolument tous le monde, permettait d’obtenir un 90NG-91NG pour la même endurance.

Faisant d’eux des joueurs… moins performant (pour les meilleurs) que les m...

Consider yourselves lucky, for other acronyms the penalty would undoubtedly have been more violent.
I don't mind a random exit without knowing, then when you see that several players from the same agreement all have the same problem it means that the information has been passed on internally .....
Do you want to know the penalty for an unreported big?

Assuming that all the players who benefited from this can really be identified, I see a profound injustice in this 'announced cut', which is simply due to the fact that many of these players are now at clubs that bought the 'boosted' player (certainly at a high price).

So in the end, the club that will be penalised will be the innocent buyer, who will end up with a player no longer worth the price he paid, while the 'manipulative' seller will keep the fruits of his sale.

So if the players concerned are really identifiable, it's not a question of cutting down on the players but of imposing a heavy fine on the seller, and in this case the 'profiteering' clubs are identifiable because the name of the training club associated with the player is assumed.

Because as it stands, I see a plan on the horizon that risks being seriously unfair by hitting the innocent and sparing the guilty.

And again the mina rambling with his old refrain 😂
Still inclined to comment without having read or understood anything 🤣🤣
...bug not reported... the gentleman above tells you that it was reported in 2024, and other times... needs a drawing with?
As for the acronym that's bothering you, there's what, 2 players, 3 players? Oh dear. And again, I thought I read that it was following a conversation with Demi who didn't hesitate to explain the principle. Having just pointed it out.

🤙

"Because now, as announced, I see on the horizon a reduction that risks being seriously unfair by hitting the innocent and sparing the truly guilty".

At fault for what, Einstein? Taking players out of training centres and teaching them positions? I've done it, others have done it, and I've explained how it works to certain people who ask me about it or with whom I discuss player training. As mentioned above, I've even said so on the forum. And if you're interested, I'm going to look up Aguado's contribution, which says the same thing.

At the end of the day it's not a mistake to understand how a new feature introduced by Aymeric works. Or maybe I'm missing something.

It's quite funny to see that half of the people involved don't know what it's about, or the proportions it can take.

The reality is that this is a game, and everyone wants to be the best. There are several methods:

-those who cheat by manipulating the source code, follow my lead 👀

• Then there are those who look at the little updates Aymeric makes frequently, and have fun calculating what makes it possible to be at the top.

In any game we'd talk about 'meta' to designate these changes that allow the people who put in the most effort to always be at the top.

At the moment, there are several ways of accessing the very best, apart from the 99NGs, but the gap between these players is immense:

• purchases by 28-year-olds 20-30 points higher than current youngsters, among those returning to the game

• buying the best 17/18/19 year-olds, who are in a catastrophic state (195 points all told, while 300 points still exist!)

• buy the 205-10 points that aymeric spots on new clubs and reallocate them (€€€€€)

• access to the best players in the store (200-205 points)

For the last 2 years IRL, Aymeric has done nothing but lower the level of young players that managers take the time to train. In fact, he did it again yesterday, with the 18-year-olds coming out even weaker than before.

I imagine that some people will be moved by this? Well, no.
But the 17/18/19 year olds of today will have the same gap as the 23/24 year olds with the 99 year olds of 30+.

A lot of managers are looking forward to seeing these 99s leave the game to enjoy something more balanced. But they may soon be disappointed.

In short, all that to say that witch-hunting managers who pay attention to every little change is absolutely ridiculous. Especially when these small optimisations don't jeopardise the fairness of the game over several years, as is the case with the current 99s at the end of the generation.

Aymeric, if you're reading this, making micro-changes is very much to be appreciated. We're looking for variables other than just clicking on "launch a collective training session" on a high-potential player to train a youngster.

Thank you, Aymeric!

Demi-cerveau: "Parce que là, tel que c'est annoncé, je vois poindre à l'horizon un rabotage qui risque d'être gravement injuste en frappant les innocents et en épargnant les vrais fautifs."

Fautifs de quoi Einstein ? D'avoir sorti les joueurs des centres de formation en leur ayant appris des postes ? Je l'ai fait, d'autres l'ont fait, et j'ai expliqué comment ça marchait à certaines personnes qui me posaient la question ou avec lesquelles j'échangeais sur la formation de joueurs. Comme vu plus haut, je l'...

It's still crazy that it's half a brain that's explaining this to us 😁😁😁 (humour of course)
Learning the positions in the cdf is something I've never ventured into personally, even with 3 mog in the cdf I preferred to see what it would be like not to play 2 mog (the 3rd is dunn junior 2) and in the end I realised that he progressed even less than a player who plays well of course.