Hi vfiens

I really like this game, but I think there are a few things that could be improved.

As a cartel chairman, I find it extremely difficult to strengthen my project with strong clubs. It's become almost impossible to convince teams with more than 80 strength to join my cartel, because the majority of managers are obsessed with the idea of joining.
Roman Legion
Viking Legion
or
Chacun Sa Chope

On top of that, many members leave the game or stop playing, which makes it very difficult to build a stable long-term project.

I also think that allowing cartels to create secondary cartels is a bad idea, because it simply allows them to accumulate the strongest teams.

When you look at the competition, you see that two cartels dominate the titles, not necessarily because they are the strongest, but mainly because the competition system always gives them priority in recruiting the best clubs.

That's why I think we need to :

reduce the number of members in cartels;

prevent secondary agreements from gaining access to Divisions 1, 2 and 3;

set up a system similar to that of clubs such as the reserve team, which only participates in the lower division.
I'm saying this for the good of the game and to make the competition more balanced and fairer for everyone.

I reassure you, you can remove the LV from the 3 named 😉
Good luck.

Sister agreements are a problem; episode 595.

So no!

Players are of course free to make their own choices, but the clubs you've mentioned are clubs that have worked hard to get to the top level!

You can't come along and want to destroy what they've built, and the image they've managed to give their clubs!

Players only want the best, so build one of the best and then you'll be saying something completely different!

Have a great evening!
Gweltaz

There's still such a thing as "to each his own"?

Ali_Cool: Salut les vfiens

J’aime beaucoup ce jeu, mais je pense qu’il y a plusieurs choses à améliorer.

En tant que président d’entente, j’ai énormément de difficultés à renforcer mon projet avec des clubs puissants. Il est devenu presque impossible de convaincre des équipes de plus de 80 de force de rejoindre mon entente, car la majorité des managers sont obsédés par l’idée de rejoindre
Legion Romaine
Legion viking
ou
Une Chope entre Pote

En plus de cela, beaucoup de membres quittent le jeu ou ar...

Strangely for me, that's what makes the game so charming...
Yes, there are 2-3 deals that stand out, dominate everything, and it's normal that they attract managers who want to win a title.
It's like in the IRL (as you often like to use the IRL example 😄). You see clubs like Real, Barça and Bayern (to name but a few) attract the best players, because they're the best clubs. And to keep up with them, other clubs like PSG, with the arrival of the Qataris of course 😉 have set up a solid long-term project to catch up...

I'm talking about the long term, because that's the key. When you're having trouble attracting staff, you have to work at the grassroots level. Work with the managers who are available (often a small core group). Work on the basics without rushing. And over the long term, the agreement grows and ends up attracting people.

Let me give you an example of our agreement. We had trouble recruiting, for many reasons... some real, some invented... We were under a bit of a "blockade", if I can put it that way. So we decided: "Let's not rely on new recruits, let's rely on what we've got. Let's train our beginners. Let's set up a project that will bear fruit in the long term".

Today, some of our members have become major managers, without ever leaving the agreement. And yet, at the start, they were small, new clubs, sometimes old but with no 'experience'. But we took care to guide them and support them. We told them: "By December 2025, we want you to be ready to help us. We even called this project "12/25", with a clearly defined plan...

I'm not saying it works every time. But this kind of thing can help you to grow, to play the leading roles, and then to start attracting.

For me, it's perfectly natural. The domination of these agreements is the fruit of their hard work, their policy, their organisation and their discipline. You can't ask for changes all the time just because some people are dominant. They dominate through their work and nothing else.
Good luck with your project 👍🏻

Ali_Cool: Salut les vfiens

J’aime beaucoup ce jeu, mais je pense qu’il y a plusieurs choses à améliorer.

En tant que président d’entente, j’ai énormément de difficultés à renforcer mon projet avec des clubs puissants. Il est devenu presque impossible de convaincre des équipes de plus de 80 de force de rejoindre mon entente, car la majorité des managers sont obsédés par l’idée de rejoindre
Legion Romaine
Legion viking
ou
Une Chope entre Pote

En plus de cela, beaucoup de membres quittent le jeu ou ar...

It's not in 2 months that you'll be able to convince your 80 friends to join your agreement. When you launch an agreement project on this game, you really need to get your neurons firing to manage it and be patient.

I feel sorry for you, especially as I don't think many people will join your agreement, and not because they want to join the CP or the LR.
I'll leave it to you, maybe you'll find the answer. If I tell you, I'll get a fine.

Secondly, some agreements prefer to die with their mouths open because they have the weight of their history rather than create a new project or merge. Some associations in this game are 80 or 100 seasons old, and they're vegetating in D3, and it's not the fault of the ones you mention.

The CP had to watch other BV, LR, LV etc dominate before getting there. It didn't just happen.
LR is the only team that has managed to dominate over the long term. Well done to them.

Another thing is that people prefer to create alliances when it's already hard to beat CP or LR, or when there are less than 3000 active members and half of them don't want to play in an alliance.
So instead of creating a new thing that doesn't stand up, join another more solid project, that seems logical to me. You scatter your forces and then come crying.

Then it's still possible to create something, see the L7C project. We'll have to see over time, but apparently it's possible, but it's a project that's been prepared at length and thought through, and it's attracting people little by little. But it's a union of long-standing managers who have talked to each other and come to an agreement instead of launching it alone or with two people and recruiting level 1s.

Then there's RTG who managed to convince 10 SV to join at once, so it's possible.

It's been 140 seasons since the duel agreements have existed in this way. It's not up to the best to become less good, it's up to the least good to become better.

"that there are less than 3,000 active players, half of whom don't want to play in an agreement".

Maybe make it compulsory for every manager to join an agreement, even if it means not playing a match at the start. That would already be more user-friendly and could be interesting later on.

Compulsory to join a league too.

It seems so logical, but hey :)

I've come to my senses and I've been president for 14 seasons now, but a long time ago I was also president of 5 dx family agreements with 30 members.
If you can't find members, all you have to do is help the younger levels to build up with advice and certainly not money.
The nwo is 14 seasons old, we were maintained in d2 for the first time last season, and we're gradually moving up the level. some friends joined me along the way, and some I didn't even know.
I put together the no agreements in my league and my agreement grew like that.
The role of president is to be present for your members. help them a max good courage me the lr the chope the lv I would add the fyms the afus and the rtg they are the high levels of the agreements and if one day I arrive at this level I will have quite simply succeeded my agreement but it is useless to jealous them they put time before being at this level quite simply forced and work

In my opinion, if you don't manage to bring your project to fruition, it's because you're paying too much VAT. You absolutely must take advantage of tax exemption.
😜😅

Ali_Cool: Salut les vfiens

J’aime beaucoup ce jeu, mais je pense qu’il y a plusieurs choses à améliorer.

En tant que président d’entente, j’ai énormément de difficultés à renforcer mon projet avec des clubs puissants. Il est devenu presque impossible de convaincre des équipes de plus de 80 de force de rejoindre mon entente, car la majorité des managers sont obsédés par l’idée de rejoindre
Legion Romaine
Legion viking
ou
Une Chope entre Pote

En plus de cela, beaucoup de membres quittent le jeu ou ar...

Ali, I've been following your peregrinations for some time now and I've always noticed the same thing: you're trying to put the cart before the horse.

I think you find it hard to commit yourself to a long-term project because that would force you to be patient, and I don't think, in my humble opinion, that you're made of iron.

Good luck nonetheless, and don't forget that Rome (and its legion) wasn't built in a day.

I'm a bit surprised by what I'm reading. Might as well chalk it up to ignorance. 🫪

They should be abolished, to avoid "arrangements".

Radical but effective ^^

Radio: Ali, cela fait quelque temps que je suis tes pérégrinations et je remarque toujours la même chose: tu cherches à mettre la charrue avant les bœufs.

Je pense que tu as du mal à t'investir sur un projet à long terme car cela te forcerait à être patient, et je ne crois pas, à mon humble avis, que tu sois forgé de ce fer.

Bon courage néanmoins, et n'oublie pas que Rome (et sa légion) ne s'est pas faite en un jour.

It's not a question of patience or haste.
The real problem is the huge gap between the old, established agreements and the small structures that are simply trying to exist.

My subject is a simple one: finding a solution to what has become excessive domination.
You only have to look at the figures and the rankings, and you always find the same names.

image](https://i.imgur.com/zQrV7mM.jpeg)

Ali_Cool: Ce n’est pas une question de patience ou de précipitation.
Le vrai problème, ce sont les énormes écarts entre les anciennes ententes déjà installées et les petites structures qui essaient simplement d’exister.

Mon sujet est pourtant simple : trouver une solution à une domination devenue excessive.
Il suffit de regarder les chiffres et les classements, on retrouve toujours les mêmes noms.

The two agreements you mention have been in existence for 19 and 20 years respectively, while yours is only 2 months old.

Be patient.

Maybe in 2050 your agreement will dominate the rankings. We hope so.

P.Rodrigues: Faudrait les supprimer, ça évitera les "arrangements"

What's not to like 🫣😄

Deck: Les deux ententes que tu cites on respectivement 19 et 20ans d'existence, la tienne a 2 mois.

Patience.

Peut-être qu'en 2050 ton entente dominera le classement. On te le souhaite.

All I'm asking for is a rethink of the cartel system.
Today, it has become extremely difficult for new agreements to attract good managers and build a competitive project.

Ali_Cool: Ce que je demande simplement, c’est une réflexion sur le système des ententes.
Aujourd’hui, il est devenu extrêmement difficile pour les nouvelles ententes d’attirer de bons managers et de construire un projet compétitif.

You may also need to think about the relevance of your project.

For a very long time, creating an agreement was excessively expensive, and as a result, new agreements were very rare. Then all of a sudden, the price of creating an agreement went up to 5 million. And dozens of new agreements were created.

Except that they were created in an overall context of a drop in the number of managers in the game. This decline means that all the existing agreements are losing managers and are looking for other motivated managers to replace them. In these conditions, setting up a project is bound to be extremely complicated, and in my opinion makes little sense, because it's easy to join existing, established and solid agreements, and take on responsibilities if that's what you want.

What you say sums up perfectly what I'm trying to explain: the gradual loss of managers makes renewal very difficult, especially for new agreements that have to face up to unbalanced competition from structures that are already well established.

This creates a clear disadvantage for new projects, despite their motivation and efforts.
👍

Demi-cerveau: Il y a peut être également une réflexion à mener, de ton côté, sur la pertinence de ton projet.

Pendant très longtemps, créer une entente était excessivement cher, et de ce fait les créations d'ententes étaient très rares. Puis subitement, le prix de la création des ententes est passé à 5 millions. Et de nouvelles ententes se sont créées par dizaines.

Sauf qu'elles se sont créées dans un contexte global de baisse du nombre de managers sur le jeu. Cette baisse, elle implique que toutes les e...

What you say sums up perfectly what I'm trying to explain: the gradual loss of managers makes renewal very difficult, especially for new agreements that have to face up to unbalanced competition from structures that are already well established.

This puts new projects at an obvious disadvantage, despite their motivation and efforts.

make 50 multi you will have your members and they will all be devoted to you

Wait a minute, because I've read 4 times now that big cartels have an advantage...

If the CP (or the LR or anywhere else) take it easy for one season, without working on our training, our tactics, our ethics, our relationships, our results ... in one season, we're already at the bottom of the league table. And in 2 seasons, all the members have left and we're closing up shop.
Our current place in the top 10 is not the result of 20 years of existence. It's the result of working hard every day to rebuild, motivate the lads, make up for the departures and advise the clubs!
Especially as we don't have 50 clubs in CP1. We're still running with a small group of 20 active members, so even if it were true that everyone dreamed of joining us (which isn't the case), we wouldn't be recruiting any more. Because to play 100 IEs, 15 clubs are enough.

So ... yeah, sorry for being all over the game. 😅

Misha: Attends parce que ça fait 4 fois que je lis que les grosses ententes sont avantagées …

Si à la CP (ou à la LR ou ailleurs), on se repose une saison, sans travailler notre formation, nos tactiques, notre éthique, notre relationnel, nos résultats … dans une saison, on est déjà au fond du classement. Et dans 2 saisons tous les membres sont partis et on ferme la boutique.
Notre place actuelle dans le top 10 n’est pas le résultat de 20 ans d’existence. C’est le résultat de se tailler chaque jour ...

I have nothing to add to your message.
I was in the process of preparing a message and your message corresponds to my thoughts.

If CP and LR have been at the top of the rankings for several seasons, it's not because they've been there for so many years, but because of their day-to-day work.
It's 'easy' to have a good season, but it's much more complicated to stay at the top and remain attractive over the long term.

estac: Je n'ai rien à ajouter à ton message.
J'étais entrain de préparer un message et ton message correspond à ma pensée.

Si la CP et la LR sont en haut du classement depuis plusieurs saisons, ce n'est pas grace à leurs nombreuses années d'existence mais grace à leur travail au quotidien.
C'est "facile" de faire une bonne saison mais c'est beaucoup plus compliqué de rester au top et attractif sur la longueur.

Exactly.
For me, for several seasons now, the difference has been that you always have between 15 and 25 highly motivated and invested clubs.
A lot of agreements could be at your level but the investment is clearly not the same for you and the other agreements.
This is just my opinion

I'd like to take the liberty of confirming what Misha and Estac have said, to be able to try and compete with them, as we've been trying to do for several seasons now, has required a lot of investment in terms of recruitment, tactical mastery and the training of young clubs, and that's starting to pay off given the latest rankings, but without that it would have been impossible and if we didn't do any more of that, if we didn't try to motivate ourselves or improve, we'd fall down the rankings.

Misha: Attends parce que ça fait 4 fois que je lis que les grosses ententes sont avantagées …

Si à la CP (ou à la LR ou ailleurs), on se repose une saison, sans travailler notre formation, nos tactiques, notre éthique, notre relationnel, nos résultats … dans une saison, on est déjà au fond du classement. Et dans 2 saisons tous les membres sont partis et on ferme la boutique.
Notre place actuelle dans le top 10 n’est pas le résultat de 20 ans d’existence. C’est le résultat de se tailler chaque jour ...

I agree with you my misha

Clearly, at the time when I was LV, in order to try and maintain the standing of the agreement and compete at least a little with you and LR, a lot of time was invested on vf and discord.
Today I think that CP and LR do indeed stand out in terms of investment and even if other cartels also manage to do well, I also think that CP and LR have a superior knowledge and understanding of the game, and they manage to pass on this knowledge well, hence their longevity and their very good ratio.

Personally, I think that reintroducing the agreement titles in each division could motivate a lot of agreements.

(awards)

dudziak: perso je crois que remettre les titres ententes dans chaque division pourrai remotiver beaucoup d entente

Create a separate topic in the appropriate area of the forum. It's a good idea that doesn't cost much.

dudziak: perso je crois que remettre les titres ententes dans chaque division pourrai remotiver beaucoup d entente

I haven't spoken for a while, but my friend Dud's phrase deserves an Oscar and a set-up by Aymeric our enlightened guide 😎
Dud president <3

Enjoy the game everyone. Take care, that's the most important thing.