Press conference
1.1
Trade/Lending players:
Team made a trade offer
--
(Translate)
(Translate EN)
+0
Started to play in a new team after a trade
--
102 S
24 d.
--
(Translate)
(Translate EN)
+0
Started to play in a new team after a trade
--
102 S
24 d.
--
(Translate)
(Translate EN)
+0
Started to play in a new team after a trade
--
102 S
24 d.
--
(Translate)
(Translate EN)
+0
Started to play in a new team after a trade
--
102 S
24 d.
--
(Translate)
(Translate EN)
+0
1.1
This trade was reported as unfair. However, the Fair play committee decided that this trade is fair.
--
102 S
25 d.
--
(Translate)
(Translate EN)
+0
How the Fair Play Committee members voted:
- volunteers voted "Revert and punish": 0
- volunteers voted "Revert": 0
- volunteers voted "Fair": 9
These reasons were chosen by the volunteers during voting:
-- 102 S 25 d.
- volunteers voted "Revert and punish": 0
- volunteers voted "Revert": 0
- volunteers voted "Fair": 9
These reasons were chosen by the volunteers during voting:
-- 102 S 25 d.
--
(Translate)
(Translate EN)
+0
1.1
Salary drop. Trade is not useful. Such potential youth will never play in wl1
--
103 S
3 d.
--
(Translate)
(Translate EN)
+2
With all due respect, who are You to judge whether or not these youngsters will ever be eligable for WL1 level? Do You know information about their skills or inners?:)
On top of this, my lithuanian colleague has short-sighted vision, as he believes that either youngsters acquired should be solely for WL1 future usage or they are automatically "useless". What happens, if one gathers a few 7-8 pots, which are later on turned into 9 pot?
I understand that someone is trying to point fingers left n right, without really digging into details (although "7-8 hours were spent" on this analysis), but such claims automatically drag down the quality of other research materials, which actually DO identify scatchy trade mechanics between some teams. I can assure anyone that is looking on this specific example - both of the acquired ASSETS will have positive contribution to my teams long-term prospects.
And so that anyone does not go crazy - as of this specific moment, I am looking to move 2 defense-specialists, and for either of them multiple 7pots or 1 8pot would be reasonable return. Irrespective of the fact that there is no 8pot with predicted RT of 430, nowhere near to the top guy that I am looking to move.:)
Hope it makes sense,
Cheers -- 103 S 3 d.
On top of this, my lithuanian colleague has short-sighted vision, as he believes that either youngsters acquired should be solely for WL1 future usage or they are automatically "useless". What happens, if one gathers a few 7-8 pots, which are later on turned into 9 pot?
I understand that someone is trying to point fingers left n right, without really digging into details (although "7-8 hours were spent" on this analysis), but such claims automatically drag down the quality of other research materials, which actually DO identify scatchy trade mechanics between some teams. I can assure anyone that is looking on this specific example - both of the acquired ASSETS will have positive contribution to my teams long-term prospects.
And so that anyone does not go crazy - as of this specific moment, I am looking to move 2 defense-specialists, and for either of them multiple 7pots or 1 8pot would be reasonable return. Irrespective of the fact that there is no 8pot with predicted RT of 430, nowhere near to the top guy that I am looking to move.:)
Hope it makes sense,
Cheers -- 103 S 3 d.
--
(Translate)
(Translate EN)
+8