SoccerProject

I don't see any cry babies in this thread!?

I merely asked because I have no idea how much development is done to SP anymore. As you say, he has a family so maybe there simply isn't time for it. I think it would be nice to know because if there isn't realistically going to happen any changes, all the time put in these suggestions might be spent better at something else.

Anyway, thinking about my original suggestion I find, that there should probably be a monetary cost to retraining.

Simply because retraining would be used as an alternative to player purchase. This in return will mean that relative more money is going to be available for each transaction on the transfermarket, putting an upwards pressure on the transferprices.

This is not a problem wrt. the usual concerns about inflation (in fact this would likely reduce it because of higher player wages), but a concern about entry costs. I.e. it will be harder for new players to get a foothold on the transfermarket.

I'd consider that a bad thing as surely we all want SP to have a large volume.

So retraining should probably have an added cost - sort of like the courses for the staff, just more expensive.

Great idea.

It should also have a significant impact on the players morale to make it more fair in some way. Can't think of any way that a player could lose morale irl if he was required to change position, but who cares, implement it anyway.

There's only one downside, what are you going to do in this situation:

You've a CB and it's a very good player. All his skills are above 90, only his Play it out skill is 52. Then you say, Oh, why I shouldn't retrain him to a CM, because his playmaking skill probably 'll be much higher.

I don't think it's really fair so can't we say that you should retrain the player in his first month after he came out of the Youth Center?

SBroccoli wrote:...all the time put in these suggestions might be spent better at something else.

off-topic: generaly, the whole game is a 'waste' of time...

terry wrote:There's only one downside, what are you going to do in this situation:

You've a CB and it's a very good player. All his skills are above 90, only his Play it out skill is 52. Then you say, Oh, why I shouldn't retrain him to a CM, because his playmaking skill probably 'll be much higher.

I don't think it's really fair so can't we say that you should retrain the player in his first month after he came out of the Youth Center?

No, that would defeat the purpose IMO. Youth players can usually be sold more easily than older players.

But I don't understand what you're getting at here. If a CB has 90 of everything, why on earth would I retrain him?

If carried out like I imagined, the new values as a retrained player will differ somewhat from the default values. I.e. a small random factor. So you can't count on the core skills to be transferred directly. They should correspond somewhat, but there should be an element of chance in it.

The retrain IMO is mostly intended for the option to move a player from his default position to one where his skills fit better. For example I see a lot of forwards with good tackling skills. It would be worth a thought retraining a forward with good tackling skills, but mediocre shoting skills to a midfielder (or even a defender if we make the options a bit more open).

Yeah, but you say, if I understand everything, that the players unique skill will be reset when you retrain him. So if your CB has following skills:
Stamina 98 %
Speed 95 %
Ballcontrol 90 %
Passing 99 %
Shooting 97 %
Play it out 52 %
Strength 97 %
Heading 93 %
Tackling 92 %

Then it's a very good player, but his unique skill is very low so the manager can say now, oh, I retrain him because his unique-midfieldskill will probably be higher and he maybe has following skills:

Stamina 98 %
Speed 95 %
Ballcontrol 90 %
Heading 99 %
Shooting 97 %
Tackling 92 %
Strength 97 %
Passing 99 %
Playmaking 93 %

On this way it's very easy to improve the GR of a player, isn't it?
What do you think about this?

Yes, but it's a devined player allready

The whole idea is exactly to be able to use a player better in another position. But precisely how the new skills is calculated should be considered more closely. I haven't arrived at any specific idea.

You may have a point, but I don't see it rocking the general idea, though?

Although maybe that's just the good thing about your proposal. Good managers 'll improve their players to change their positions, bad managers wouldn't do that.
It absolutely doesn't rock the proposal. I really like it.

It's been a while on this suggest, Sjarel if you see this could you please give feedback? Would be a worthwhile update.

But than if any one gets youth of cf or cb,he will change him to cm and make good profit.

I like ur idea

Shreyansh wrote:But than if any one gets youth of cf or cb,he will change him to cm and make good profit.

If everyone does that, the market price of CMs will drop and it will stop being attractive.

See?

Great idea.

This is a feature that could be implemented so it could reduce inflation. Managers would spend money on retraining players and the money will get out of the game.

I think this is an excellent idea.

I would also say that both sljivovica's new skill train and cruxify's morale decrease idea's will benefit this suggestion.

I would actually expand the positions you can retrain a player to play in:-

SW<=>CB
LB<=>LM
RB<=>RM
CB<=>CM
LM<=>LF
RM<=>RF
CM<=>CF
RB <=> CB <=> LB
RM <=> CM <=> LM
RF <=> CF <=> LF

I have just added it so maybe a LM can change to be a RM - this won't gain you an advantage in the player improving, it could just help the balance of your squad. In real life most wingers can play on either side - Ronaldo, Ribery, J Cole...

I understand the point terry is making, but think thats perhaps what you'll be hoping for and what you'll be sacraficing the money + morale for