Currently we have three rules to fight this unpleasant habit:
- Team rank eligibility
- Playoff eligibility
- Penalty on Game shape for newly acquired players
Imo they work very well, but somewhat fail in D3 and lower divisions, especially the team rank eligibility.
Just look from my example.
My team
(52418) is world rank 13 112 and I'm playing in D1. I'm not eligible to buy a player with a salary over $122,025.
Compare that with
(49010) world rank 2 302 or
(36437) world rank 1292 playing in Italy D3. The "worst team" in that league (current table) has world rank 5 145.
All of those D3 teams in Italy are eligible to buy a player with 150k salary. I'm not.
I would argue that a 150k player dropping down from respectable to mediocre game shape (or from proficient down to average) would have far larger impact in D3 in Italy than in D1 in Macedonia.
Also consider this. In D1 there are 16 teams. In D3 in Italy there are 256 teams. So yes, the system works fine for 16 managers in D1, or 64 in D2, but not as good for 256 managers competing in D3.
So far I like the idea that a newly acquired player can be sold after staying 7 days in the team. It is simple and elegant.
P.S. There might be other solutions to this problem:
- Enthusiasm drop after new acquisition or
- Introducing new mechanic: team chemistry which affects team performance only when the newly acquired player is in the lineup.
I'm aware that implementation of new mechanic demands additional coding which is always the hardest thing to afford, but maybe it's worth having that in the to-do list. In Hattrick they have some player "skill" for agreeability.
Last edited by LynxBK at 10/22/2025 5:21:19 AM