Feedback: Planned changes for employees

Provide your feedback about the blog post here.
https://www.virtualmanager.com/blog/1108-planned-changes-for-employees

Have you got the link mate removed it by accident without even reading it

Derby Boyz FC wrote:

Have you got the link mate removed it by accident without even reading it

https://www.virtualmanager.com/blog/1108-planned-changes-for-employees

Thanks for that. Forgot it after creating this first, then the blog post.

I consider it a positive step in the right direction, but it will have to be truly randomized, as what previously used to be a search for 20-20-20 could quickly become a hunt for 20-19-19. Maybe cap total stats at a certain number? Or even more training importance placed on lesser known traits

I don’t think the problem is having a “best” trainer. I think the problem lies in how they are found.
Suggestion:

Maybe a selection of trainers could be offered to a club each week. (similar to sponsors) and the quality of these trainers could depend on several factors:

1) How many players a team had
2) The level of league they were playing in
3) The level of training facilities
4) And possibly past success’s.

This would be similar to real life where a top coach would seek out a top club!

e.g A coach with 19 or 20 in youth training would be looking for a team with a division1 youth team. A coach with 19 or 20 Outfield training would look for a club with the main team in Division 1.
Maybe a 20 xx 20 trainer would need a team with both youth and adult team in the top division and a top 100 vifa rank and world class facility?

So if your youth team was playing in division 4 then the quality of youth trainer you could attract, would be less than a team in the top division. When their contract expired they might not want to re-negotiate if the team had dropped down a division.

This gives an element of realism and allows different strategies within the game.

Currently if a manager is lucky, he gets a 20 xx 20 trainer with basic training ground which is not only unrealistic but also preventing a top team from finding the right trainer.

This is my opinion for what it is worth.

Ipswich Town Allstars wrote:

I don’t think the problem is having a “best” trainer. I think the problem lies in how they are found.
Suggestion:

Maybe a selection of trainers could be offered to a club each week. (similar to sponsors) and the quality of these trainers could depend on several factors:

1) How many players a team had
2) The level of league they were playing in
3) The level of training facilities
4) And possibly past success’s.

This would be similar to real life where a top coach would seek out a top club!

e.g A coach with 19 or 20 in youth training would be looking for a team with a division1 youth team. A coach with 19 or 20 Outfield training would look for a club with the main team in Division 1.
Maybe a 20 xx 20 trainer would need a team with both youth and adult team in the top division and a top 100 vifa rank and world class facility?

So if your youth team was playing in division 4 then the quality of youth trainer you could attract, would be less than a team in the top division. When their contract expired they might not want to re-negotiate if the team had dropped down a division.

This gives an element of realism and allows different strategies within the game.

Currently if a manager is lucky, he gets a 20 xx 20 trainer with basic training ground which is not only unrealistic but also preventing a top team from finding the right trainer.

This is my opinion for what it is worth.

I don't think this solution is the best one as that will just create an even bigger gap between a small club and a big club.

For the realisticness sure it would be a good option, but Vman doesn't strike me as the most realistic type of manager game considering there is 4-5 matches played a day for the senior team.
The only benefit small teams will have from this is the overpriced sales they'll get for new talents for training with a bad trainer.
Also it doesn't make it much viable for the managers that likes to just train talents from the buttom and selling them a few years later.

So as much as this option make the game more realistic, it also removes some playstyle in this game, which I would consider being bad for the game

Personally not a fan but it is what it is - Would much prefer is finding these 20x20 trainers was easier i.e if they were more common or if not the idea of being able to train your trainers is far more appealing.

I.e - spend credits on trainers to train whatever attribute you want +1 but it takes them out of action for 2-3 days and then as the attribute gets higher it costs more per upgrade and is unable to use that trainer while he is 'training'

Just to clarify I feel there are a lot of trainers that get 'overlooked' because they don't have that perfect 20x20 or 19x19 while still having very good stats elsewhere. Being able to train trainers would make them useable and was also mean more 20x20 trainers in the future in a very attainable way

FC Deluga wrote:

Ipswich Town Allstars wrote:

I don’t think the problem is having a “best” trainer. I think the problem lies in how they are found.
Suggestion:

Maybe a selection of trainers could be offered to a club each week. (similar to sponsors) and the quality of these trainers could depend on several factors:

1) How many players a team had
2) The level of league they were playing in
3) The level of training facilities
4) And possibly past success’s.

This would be similar to real life where a top coach would seek out a top club!

e.g A coach with 19 or 20 in youth training would be looking for a team with a division1 youth team. A coach with 19 or 20 Outfield training would look for a club with the main team in Division 1.
Maybe a 20 xx 20 trainer would need a team with both youth and adult team in the top division and a top 100 vifa rank and world class facility?

So if your youth team was playing in division 4 then the quality of youth trainer you could attract, would be less than a team in the top division. When their contract expired they might not want to re-negotiate if the team had dropped down a division.

This gives an element of realism and allows different strategies within the game.

Currently if a manager is lucky, he gets a 20 xx 20 trainer with basic training ground which is not only unrealistic but also preventing a top team from finding the right trainer.

This is my opinion for what it is worth.

I don't think this solution is the best one as that will just create an even bigger gap between a small club and a big club.

For the realisticness sure it would be a good option, but Vman doesn't strike me as the most realistic type of manager game considering there is 4-5 matches played a day for the senior team.
The only benefit small teams will have from this is the overpriced sales they'll get for new talents for training with a bad trainer.
Also it doesn't make it much viable for the managers that likes to just train talents from the buttom and selling them a few years later.

So as much as this option make the game more realistic, it also removes some playstyle in this game, which I would consider being bad for the game

Teams would still be able to focus on training youth players and not focus on a main team. Youth trainer should just coach youths and outfield just the adults. In many ways this would benefit those teams more than the current system