Transfer Window - Season 39 + Season 40 - Two Experiments (LIVE)

[Aaron]

Hello all.

A while ago I had a thread up for the idea about an FFP system, see below for a quick copy and paste;

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Afternoon peeps.

So I am the type of person where random ideas come to me at the most random times. There I was yesterday filling in with my old and dusty pal Bruce at Exeter, and an idea just randomly went off in my head for some sort of new perk/idea that ties to Premium but doesn't tie to Premium.

*BEFORE YOU GO ANY FURTHER, READ IT ALL, DO NOT JUMP TO REPLY*

The idea ties into the ability to purchase extra transfer budget......

*OI, STOP IT, READ IT ALL, I JUST SAID TO READ IT ALL*

That isn't the main idea though..... you guys know me from previous posts about perks that turn VFL from interesting to a "pay-to-win" system. I'm not interested in something like that either where a guy can come on here, drop £20 and buy all the players he wants, there needs to be a con to that pro.

Just like with premium now, where a player has the choice of what club they go to, if they become difficult, sure, they can't be snaked, but at the same time, the rule where the manager has to give them 4 games goes away, it needs to be some sort of form of negative aspect to it like that.... So, where am I going with my budget idea?

An FFP system (Financial Fair Play for those that are too young). In football now, we all know of and understand FFP to a certain degree. What if THAT was the negative pullback of buying budget? Let me explain further....

A team buys a round amount, lets say £20m budget..... With that £20m budget the club therefore needs to ensure it either finishes in the Top 12 of the table, or earns X amount from European football.... A target system. If that target system isn't reached by the end of the season, you can implement financial fines on the club for the next season, points deductions, etc etc.

Now I know what you're thinking "Who will care about club restrictions, people will do a season, step, and not care", that is where I need your brilliant thinking. I could easily go and say "Well, if a target isn't met by FFP, it results in X games out for the manager in terms of a suspension if he steps down", but the people I've relayed that idea to already seem to think that's overly harsh. What do you think? Is there a way that we can turn this genius idea and add another element of realism into a reality? Let me know.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So I sat back, read all your comments and opinions on this and concluded that I want to give 2 things a go in terms of an experiment. The below two posts will outline what we'll be trying this season, and also in the first season of FIFA 20. I'm open to be slaughtered, but also open for constructive criticism.

 

[Aaron]

Season 39
The FFP Experiment

The purpose of this is to add another avenue to increase the potential prize pot of the VFL World Series idea in FIFA 20. People have asked for something like this before, and with a few tweaks, I'm now prepared to debut the potential of an idea where clubs can increase their budget, but also at a deterrent.

The idea here is simple, budget increases for small cash sums, but at a cost in terms of goals and objectives for your club during the season. For example, a club in the Prem can purchase an extra 10m, but with that, are then setting the objective up of a top half finish, if they fail to, they face transfer restrictions as a club the following season, potential transfer embargos, and at the worst case, even potential expulsion from European competitions.

This therefore makes the user have a choice. Have more budget and thus more pressure to do better in the season. Or have no extra budget, do it the traditional way, and thus have no pressure on you at all for where you have to finish. A relatively simple concept.

In this there are also caps.

League One + League Two maximum allowance to purchase - £10m

All other LT maximum allowances to purchase - £15m

All HT maximum allowances to purchase - £20m

FFP Packages:

£5m extra budget - £3.00

Objective Attached - Reach the 2nd round of your domestic cup OR finish in the top 14 of your league.

Objective Failure - £5m budget fine in Season 40.


£10m extra budget - £5.00

Objective Attached - Reach the 3rd round of your domestic cup OR finish in the top half of your division

Objective Failure - £5m budget fine in Season 40 + One Transfer Window embargo


£15m extra budget - £6.00

Objective Attached - Finish 8th or Higher in your division.

Objective Failure - £10m budget fine in Season 40 + One Transfer Window embargo


£20m extra budget - £7.50

Objective Attached - Qualify for Europe

Objective Failure - £10m budget fine in Season 40 + Two Transfer Window embargo



Any questions on those, I'll answer. But as you can see, the idea to counteract P2W with some sort of negative punishment is key here.​

 

[Aaron]

Season 40
The Premium Release Clause Experiment

After the FFP experiment concludes and we collect feedback, we'll then be doing a release clause idea that some of you pointed to wanting in Season 40.

This will essentially mean that Premium players will have automatic release clauses during the Transfer Window PROVIDED by IMPARTIAL REDS based on current season performance (if mid-window) or past season performance (if pre-season window).

So say I had Premium and scored 1 goal and 2 assists in 19 games in S39, my release clause would probably be around £5m in the S40 pre-window. This is a system we're looking at to stop managers REALLY taking the piss with buying and selling players. Not for everyone, but it makes a dent.

That's pretty much that there in a nut shell.​

 

[Aaron]

Again, open to questions, concerns, and insults.

 

[Ziatti 7]

The clause in itself is a banging idea tbf, stops both snaking for budget and over pricing there for gives the incentive to pay it an not be deterred by the manager himself

 

[Ziatti 7]

I think in terms of the budgets ECT you do essentially need to put a legal requirement of another season on just so people see it through, but then with that does there budget still get allocated at eos meaning the budget only lasts that season or will it stay there?

 

[Aaron]

I think in terms of the budgets ECT you do essentially need to put a legal requirement of another season on just so people see it through, but then with that does there budget still get allocated at eos meaning the budget only lasts that season or will it stay there?

I think it's dependent on the success of it in 39.

If for example nobody goes for it in this season's TW's, or people do go for it and say it's awful, then we don't need to worry about developing it further. If it works out and people see it as a success in S40, we can add in those clauses.

 

[SinisteR l 38 l]

I think both are decent idea's,
But just as Ziatti said,
buying transferbudget should also mean you have to stay on for another season.
Cause lets say, Frankie buys the 10€ package and either before first games starts or after the first weekend he bottles, then the drag back will have to deal with that deal.
or he actually finish season fails both requirements and goes like, time to step in GW so the next manager will have the consequenses.

 

[Jrnks]

Well thought out and I wouldn't change a thing personally.

 

[CPearce x]

I wouldn’t change it personally, but owell.

I’ll support whatever happens, but I just think there’s no need to change/complicate things IMO.

 

[Scrufff x]

Think the release clauses are a good idea, could help players that want out and away from stubborn managers, don’t think buying more budget is a great idea as some may think it becomes pay to win

 

[Moley]

As stated previously if a manager is purchasing budget they need to sign an agreement to remain on for the following season as manager. Unfair if they are able to just purcahse budget, lose the plot and then run away for someone else to clean up the mess. Also upon the potential of all this. I can see it increasing the already inflated prices that some managers charge, especially in the pre season window.
If LR provides the ability to see value from the previous season, which I believe it did previously. We should reintroduce the maximum sale fee of double a players value into the pre season window. Will stop such large amounts of money being required by managers in the first place. Upon that, I'd personally say this shouldn't be used for players who were contracted last season. To combat all these managers who just sign F/A's to sell them we should introduce a maximum sale fee for members signed past the Contract Drop. I'd say in the ballpark of £5,000,000 - £10,000,000.

Second Option on the ability to purchase releases, as I am sure you can predicte I am against such a thing. Unfair on some managers and just provides players with more power. Seem plenty of situations where the players seem to have too much as it is. If you do confirm this as introduced. For a member to use a release. They must have purchased their Premium before the season begins. Will revent all the rats just buying it to jump ship. Or the title chasing whore's from thinking well the title is over here after one loss, buying a release and shafting a manager over going forward.

 

[I Bale I 9]

As stated previously if a manager is purchasing budget they need to sign an agreement to remain on for the following season as manager.

Might be a dumb question but what if the manager bottles in a team the person bought a budget and just left/bottled mid season if the new manager decides to stay next season he will have whatever amount the previous manager put in place incase he fails so like 5mill, the new manager will he have that 5extra mill next season that he saved or will it get removed cuz of previous managers expectations being failed by the new one?

 

[IGallagher4I]

Again, open to questions, concerns, and insults.

Season 40
The Premium Release Clause Experiment

After the FFP experiment concludes and we collect feedback, we'll then be doing a release clause idea that some of you pointed to wanting in Season 40.

This will essentially mean that Premium players will have automatic release clauses during the Transfer Window PROVIDED by IMPARTIAL REDS based on current season performance (if mid-window) or past season performance (if pre-season window).

So say I had Premium and scored 1 goal and 2 assists in 19 games in S39, my release clause would probably be around £5m in the S40 pre-window. This is a system we're looking at to stop managers REALLY taking the piss with buying and selling players. Not for everyone, but it makes a dent.

That's pretty much that there in a nut shell.​

Hello all.

A while ago I had a thread up for the idea about an FFP system, see below for a quick copy and paste;

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Afternoon peeps.

So I am the type of person where random ideas come to me at the most random times. There I was yesterday filling in with my old and dusty pal Bruce at Exeter, and an idea just randomly went off in my head for some sort of new perk/idea that ties to Premium but doesn't tie to Premium.

*BEFORE YOU GO ANY FURTHER, READ IT ALL, DO NOT JUMP TO REPLY*

The idea ties into the ability to purchase extra transfer budget......

*OI, STOP IT, READ IT ALL, I JUST SAID TO READ IT ALL*

That isn't the main idea though..... you guys know me from previous posts about perks that turn VFL from interesting to a "pay-to-win" system. I'm not interested in something like that either where a guy can come on here, drop £20 and buy all the players he wants, there needs to be a con to that pro.

Just like with premium now, where a player has the choice of what club they go to, if they become difficult, sure, they can't be snaked, but at the same time, the rule where the manager has to give them 4 games goes away, it needs to be some sort of form of negative aspect to it like that.... So, where am I going with my budget idea?

An FFP system (Financial Fair Play for those that are too young). In football now, we all know of and understand FFP to a certain degree. What if THAT was the negative pullback of buying budget? Let me explain further....

A team buys a round amount, lets say £20m budget..... With that £20m budget the club therefore needs to ensure it either finishes in the Top 12 of the table, or earns X amount from European football.... A target system. If that target system isn't reached by the end of the season, you can implement financial fines on the club for the next season, points deductions, etc etc.

Now I know what you're thinking "Who will care about club restrictions, people will do a season, step, and not care", that is where I need your brilliant thinking. I could easily go and say "Well, if a target isn't met by FFP, it results in X games out for the manager in terms of a suspension if he steps down", but the people I've relayed that idea to already seem to think that's overly harsh. What do you think? Is there a way that we can turn this genius idea and add another element of realism into a reality? Let me know.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So I sat back, read all your comments and opinions on this and concluded that I want to give 2 things a go in terms of an experiment. The below two posts will outline what we'll be trying this season, and also in the first season of FIFA 20. I'm open to be slaughtered, but also open for constructive criticism.

This sounds like a great idea making VFL more fair and realistic so people don't go out in LT leagues and spend 20 mill on CB's

 

[Jrnks]

As stated previously if a manager is purchasing budget they need to sign an agreement to remain on for the following season as manager. Unfair if they are able to just purcahse budget, lose the plot and then run away for someone else to clean up the mess.

The new manager will know about it before taking over surely, meaning it'll be harder for him to find a replacement and he will have the games ban if he does step down.

I don't think buying budget (and not meeting targets) should make you stay on the extra season. If someone is planning on having a one season team, I doubt they'll be putting money into something they're just going to give away anyway.

 

[SymBeh]

We should reintroduce the maximum sale fee of double a players value into the pre season window.

Pleaasseee, people are asking absurd amounts for each players.. got quoted 15m yesterday for a person who can only make enough games to be a backup.. like come on

 

[iiLewisR]

Honestly I think it's a great idea mate, makes the site a lot more realistic bringing in the FFP sort of idea. People may disagree and think that it will cause people to 'pay-to-win' in the sense that they will buy top players to ensure they finish within their targets and therefore will not receive any of the mentioned consequences, however there is no harm in trying it for a season. If the idea doesn't work then hey ho you just have to move on and try and think of a new idea that will bring the site even closer to the real game. Fingers crossed it goes well

 

[Primo Berto]

A concern here. For LT, with max budget able to be purchased £15m, that means to get all the budget an LT manager will have to spend £3.50 and £5, for a total of £8.50. Effectively paying £1 more than HT managers but getting £5m budget less (if 20m is £7.50)

May I suggest something like a scale that will still end with your goal of 20m budget being £7.50?

5m budget = £3
10m budget = £4.5
15m budget = £6
20m budget = £7.5

Maybe you don’t want flat increments for the increase of price, but it makes sense in a situation where you’re exchanging currency for virtual currency. The exchange rate shouldn’t randomly fluctuate depending on how much you’re exchanging. Just my thoughts

 

[SinisteR l 38 l]

A concern here. For LT, with max budget able to be purchased £15m, that means to get all the budget an LT manager will have to spend £3.50 and £5, for a total of £8.50. Effectively paying £1 more than HT managers but getting £5m budget less (if 20m is £7.50)

i expect you can only buy 1 a season (so have to choose one of those 3 choices)

 

[Primo Berto]

i expect you can only buy 1 a season (so have to choose one of those 3 choices)

There’s no £15m option though