Hey,
I’m pretty sure most of us have come across unreliable and dishonest managers while trying to buy or sell players. I’m currently having problems with a seller who agreed to a direct transfer price, but now refuses to transfer the player. I once bought a player from a manager who advertised on the forum a player has no maxed skills, which turned out to be false. There’s a variety of annoying tricks, and I understand why they don’t count as cheating, but something still has to be done I think.
I suggest an Ebay-style grading of buyers and sellers. Right after a transaction is complete, the buyer and seller can grade each other using a 5 star scale. Grading is enabled only after a transaction is complete. This way, other managers have a future warning in case the manager has a reliability problem.
Cheers,
Zandyy
Reliability scale
Moderators: Moderator, Programmer
What about methods where a player isn't actually transferred to you? Like when you're just used to up the price of a player? And if you write something bad about an owner, won't he write something bad about you?
I don't think there's any way to make the quick transfer system fair, short of some kind of drastic change. People who negotiate in good faith will get burned sometimes regardless, and people who stupidly just try to win a player by, you know... bidding on him... are going to get burned more. It's an inherently unfair system.
Anyway, I think that if you negotiate backdoor deals with another player, that you should assume all the risks thereof. It should stay risky. It's part of the game. It's not supposed to be like EBay IMO.
I don't think there's any way to make the quick transfer system fair, short of some kind of drastic change. People who negotiate in good faith will get burned sometimes regardless, and people who stupidly just try to win a player by, you know... bidding on him... are going to get burned more. It's an inherently unfair system.
Anyway, I think that if you negotiate backdoor deals with another player, that you should assume all the risks thereof. It should stay risky. It's part of the game. It's not supposed to be like EBay IMO.
At one brief point in the past, America...
At one brief point in the future, the world?
Paul,
I agree it is and should remain riskier to negotiate direct transfers than just wait and fight bidding wars for days, but I think a reliability scale is a fair aiding tool for managers who do want to negotiate.
As for what you said about a player receiving a bad mark and giving you one in return: in time, the really unreliable ones will have accumulated pretty bad marks, which will show on their average. Us that suffer will get a few bad marks from the cheaters, but that should not affect our average that much: I must have bought or sold 15 players each season for the five seasons I’m here, and so far had problems with 4 managers. However, I'm sure other managers had problems with those four too. Again – just like on Ebay, you get some reviews that are unjustified, but it’s the average that should give an indication.
I agree it is and should remain riskier to negotiate direct transfers than just wait and fight bidding wars for days, but I think a reliability scale is a fair aiding tool for managers who do want to negotiate.
As for what you said about a player receiving a bad mark and giving you one in return: in time, the really unreliable ones will have accumulated pretty bad marks, which will show on their average. Us that suffer will get a few bad marks from the cheaters, but that should not affect our average that much: I must have bought or sold 15 players each season for the five seasons I’m here, and so far had problems with 4 managers. However, I'm sure other managers had problems with those four too. Again – just like on Ebay, you get some reviews that are unjustified, but it’s the average that should give an indication.