suggestion

[Maximepatau]

aggression should be set on each individual not the whole team

[Daimon]

it would make things much easier. interesting idea, but i guess it would be complicate to implement.

[voyna]

It's a nice idea.

I'll second that.

[Maximepatau]

it makes sense to me as in real life a manager would expect different levels of aggression from different players

[zandyy]

I don’t get the idea.

If you mean that by setting individual aggression, the risk of losing aggressive players to cards is reduced, then your suggestion is to make the game easier and aggressive players more valuable. This would change the whole pricing system and most good teams would lose value dramatically.

If you mean that overall aggression and therefore risk of losing players to cards stays the same, but you can set individual values, or parts of the ‘collective’ blame distributed among players, then you are suggesting a feature that is nothing but statistics.

Also in essence it doesn’t make sense. In real life, do managers assign individual levels of aggression? It’s like telling an aggressive player not to be aggressive and telling non-aggressive player to be more aggressive. It’s the same as suggesting to be able to change, or ‘train’ aggression, which has indeed been suggested many times before, mostly by managers with aggressive players who want them to become more valuable overnight.

[Maximepatau]

its call controled aggression some people need to control it more then others it is something extremly relivant look at players like roy keane or patrick viera what is not realistic is players having more yellow cards then games theyve played

[Maximepatau]

Plus players with low aggression will still be worth more as the higher u put the aggression the better linerating u will get so the advantage stays
what[/img]

[zandyy]

I understand now. So your suggestion is to be able to reduce the aggression level of players, which is synonymous to increasing the value of aggressive players or being able to train them to be less aggressive. Let me guess – you have too many aggressive players? This isn’t a suggestion for improvement, it’s an expression of frustration at how long it takes to build a good team.

[Maximepatau]

to be honest i just want less red cards
the player should not make the cut in the first place as no one wants a player likely to get sent of every game

[zandyy]

Take this advice:
In SP, there’s a clear choice between buying aggressive players and then playing with low aggression, or buying non-aggressive players and playing with high aggression. Make your choice – don’t play aggressive players AND high aggression – and everything will be alright.

[Maximepatau]

thanks for advice i will try to get players with low agg im in for a long and hard road im in h division now but hope to one day be in a (mission impossible?)

[cruxify]

It's not really hard just time consuming. If you know when to buy and how to limit yourself it doesn't take too long at all, really does depend on your original first team players' aggression and how many additions you have to make.

[gorillaunit]

I agree. I know it's much more complicated but we can reduce the possibility of our favorite player from getting yellow cards or even red