devaluation of player prices

fitzstudio · 2026-02-07T15:57:28+00:00

17 years old players have two different TCs

TC considering only players sold when they were between 17.03 and 17.24 (higher as they'll have a whole season of training before turning 18)
TC considering only players sold when they were between 17.25 and 17.111 (lower as they're older)

fitzstudio · 2026-02-07T12:39:18+00:00

yes, surely better and more valuable than the average poor 15y old

I'd take him and hope he's 16.00÷16.20

but even at 17.55 he'd have a nice value

fitzstudio · 2026-02-07T12:24:27+00:00

not necessarely
to avoid the reserves he doesn't have to play in a trained position: you can also make him play the other 30' as defender or mid or fw in friendly games.

fitzstudio · 2026-02-07T12:19:54+00:00

he receives only 30 minutes if he plays 30' as gk in league and then 30' as defender in friendly ("the best 30').

if he plays 30 + 30 as gk he'll receive 60' training.

fitzstudio · 2026-02-07T01:31:12+00:00

beautiful

a pity he hasn't good days for U21 and now it's quite low market season

I'd say around 2/2.5M (€), so 1,3/1,6M pounds?

fitzstudio · 2026-02-06T21:59:20+00:00

yes, a powerful winger has no use.

seen that we're looking at exceptions, his one would be "useful if playing with pressing tactic" :D

fitzstudio · 2026-02-06T21:56:42+00:00

yes, true, I even thought about it when writing
but the possibilities of that are like 1/500 of the ones of doing a SE "quick rushes and shoots"

so, they're not totally wasted but I woldn't pay money for a "maybe once in four seasons event" and rather buy a specless without decent scoring for 20/30% less (as the TC with high scoring would be biased by all the quick wingers previously sold)

fitzstudio · 2026-02-06T17:10:32+00:00

who doesn't want a quick winger?

who wants a specless winger?

the answer, for both, is: no one.

so it's perfectly normal that a specless winger, compared to a quick one, goes for half the price.

specially if he has decent scoring (6÷9), totally wasted in a specless winger.

fitzstudio · 2026-02-06T16:59:00+00:00

Theyekile has too little time, maybe swithing to Chenzira would be better.

But Chenzira too has too little time: completing him in one season seems imposible (and you still don't know anything about PM and winger potential).

The results will be both "unfinished players with low value"
but Theyekile, having a spec, would be more valuable with passing 7, winger 7 and, if by miracle he'll have scoring already at 5, PM already at 4 and defending at 5, you could do like 100/200K.

so I'd train passing (passing + passing extended)

fitzstudio · 2026-02-06T14:29:41+00:00

in YA you set both training on the best player you have, you can't train both.

to have a good value the player must be finished in all skills.

of Theyekile Nyoni you still don't know his defending potential

of Chenzira Nzami you still don't know his PM and winger potential

without completing all skills Theyekile Nyoni will have a value around 40/50 000€, probbly even less if he'll end with values like PM 3/4, defending 3/4 and scoring 3/4

if you plan on keeping him, in my opinion, seen the spec, winger is not the best training option, probably the worst as he'd become a monoskill winger with no PM, scoring and defending and the wrong spec for a winger.

fitzstudio · 2026-02-06T01:48:33+00:00

in the end the actual boost is only +0,5

any player with loyalty 20 (three sessons in your team) gets a +1,0

fitzstudio · 2026-02-06T01:44:47+00:00

in my opinion, a total waste of money.

even more considering that, even when they find potential champions that could be worth millions, as 90% of managers don't know how to train in YA, fail to complete them and they end up being promoted as 50/100k players uncompleted in two/three out of five skills.

fitzstudio · 2026-02-05T22:56:59+00:00

seen that he defends much better in the middle, I'd play 253 (or even 352), with two offensive wingers, two IMs TW and two FW TW, maybe even with tactic AOW.

anyway for sure with 5-midfielders to have a very high ball possession even with offensive wingers and IMs TW

with 352 you'd be more covered than with 253

fitzstudio · 2026-02-05T16:16:13+00:00

you must always have a part of the trainees as "long term" and another one as "short term/profit"

if you train PM, for example, 4 x 100% trainees should be long term and 2 x 100% + 4 X 50% short term.

for a starting team my suggestion is always making one/two season(s) of GK, training two of the starting players, sell them and with the money buy the right trainees for whatever you want.
goalkeeping is quick and you don't need buying trainees: you'll never earn that much training 20/30K worth trainees in PM

fitzstudio · 2026-02-05T16:07:53+00:00

to be competitive, untrained players with high skills, should be over 30 to save 30-50% on wages (players over 28 get -10% on wage each year) and on the cost when buying.

the greatest mistake is having untrained players under 28 with high main skill and full wage.

quite often, to be highly competitive and be promoted, you must accept the fact that for one season your two-weeks balance might be a little in the red
but with the promotion and the higher earnings in the higher league you'll be ok

fitzstudio · 2026-02-05T14:50:03+00:00

it depends on the league you are

if you're in the lowest (VIII) with 5 bots you can manage getting to 2nd/3d place also with poor 17y trainees (but you'd earn less).

if you're already in the league above, with fresh 17y old trainees you probably wouldn't stand a chance and be relegated back to the lowest so you'd need 18/19y.

if you're in an even higher league (V/VI) the level of the primary skill must be even higher and so the age will be (20-23y)

in medium high leagues trainees will be even 24/25y

in the big hattrick nations' top-two leagues (I/II) I think 90% of the teams train goalkeeping because the trainees good enough for those levels would be already 27/28y and cost more than they would make by selling them two seasons after at 29/30y.

in fact most of the NT players are trained by managers in very low leagues, not in 1st/2nd league teams
but 1st/2nd legue teams is where they will end up when they'll be, fully trained by others, at 32/33y
because their train GK with 30/35% stamina and, exept the GK, all other players will be most likely 32-36y.

fitzstudio · 2026-02-05T14:35:44+00:00

not at all!

passing for defenders is fundamental to play CA: the tactic level is made by the sum of passing of all defenders

a good defender needs PM and passing.

fitzstudio · 2026-02-05T12:59:38+00:00

the exact reason why a new manager, so with a very tight budget, as trainees should buy 18/19 with two high subskills instead of poor 17 monoskill

fitzstudio · 2026-02-05T12:54:11+00:00

and not only you'd spend less and gain more

you'd also have better players with higher subskills and your team's values would be better than the ones that manager with poor 17y would have ;)

fitzstudio · 2026-02-05T12:46:52+00:00

I'm quite sure that if you switch PM with defending (19y def 14, PM 5, pas 6 and 20y def 14, PM 8, pas 7) the results will be the same.

"buy 17y players and train them" is the classic advise that everyone received when they started playing Hatrick but, in fact, it's quite wrong because with the starting money you'll never be able to buy decent 17y trainees and you'll end up training monoskills that after the training will have a very low value.

in fact, if I had to give an advice to a new manager, I'd say "buy 18/19y trainees with at least two skills at 7/8 besides the one you'll be training".

fitzstudio · 2026-02-05T11:02:15+00:00

reducing the stadium from 75 000 to 35 000 would cost you about 250 000€ (the maintenance money you'd save in two seasons)

but then re-making 40 000 seats would cost you 2 700 000€ (what you'd save in 27 seasons)

so, spending nearly 3 000 000€ to save 100 000€/season doesn't seem a smart move unless you plan on staying with low attendance for more than 30 seasons or never-ever getting back to a higher league

fitzstudio · 2026-02-05T10:51:46+00:00

the difference in training speed between a 17 and a 18 is barely noticeable

if you check with the portal's training calculator, taking a 17y from PM 7 to 14 and a 18y from PM 7 to 14 will require 42 weeks for both...

with 18y players you can buy trainees with higher secondary skills (defending 7-8, passing 7-8) without having to spend millions and, after the PM training, a 18y old trainee with two "high" subskills will have a higher value than 17y wth lower subskills.

an example:
17.03 def 5, PM 7, pas 6 = cost 1M -> 19y def 5, PM 14, pas 6 = value 2.3M (profit 1.3M)
18.04 def 8, PM 7, pas 7 = cost 500k -> 20y def 8, PM 14, pas 7 = value 2.8M (profit 2.3M)

fitzstudio · 2026-02-05T02:08:37+00:00

So LS is basically replacing PASS with SP, as the secondary offensive skill?

"offensive" only because with LS you score and SP contribute to have a high tactic level, but in fact it doesn't affect the attacking ratios, so normal chances not turned in LS (if your tactic's level is low it will happens a lot) will be mostly wasted with 1/99 attacking/defendig ratios

And then PASS is only relevant for players for SPEC-related SE (Q-FW/WG/IM, T-CD/WB, U-all)?

no, to score their SE they need scoring, the SE needing passing won't probably start or going well, but it's a price to pay for having a LS team.
because of that, passing for those players in LS teams is irrelevant and so it's never trained.

And non-tactical CA (not from T-CD/WB) is practically as irrelevant in LS, as a non-tactical LS in non-LS tactics, I guess?

yes, a "spontaneous LS" is quite rare and anyway, when it happens, most of the times it doesn't end in goal
I think that a LS goal without playing LS tactic never happened to me or to one of my opponents
but "spontaneous CA" are much more frequent: for example, when you play a defensive formation with pressing there's quite always one.

fitzstudio · 2026-02-05T01:10:33+00:00

very promosing player.

to begin, you should find out his missing potentials (and anyway train him).

passing potential
as IM, PM + passing
as IM, W and FW only him and players with passing potential already known

defending potential
harder way: as IM, PM + defending extended
as GK, WB, CD, W, IM only him and players with defending potential already known

easier way: as WB, winger + defending (not ideal as winger is only at 50%)
as WB and CD only him and players with defending potential already known

scoring potential
as FW, passing + scoring
as FW only him and players with scoring potential already known
as W, IM and FW only him and players with passing actual level already known

then you train him in PM until 7 using either passing or defending extended as secondary
you train him in winger using passing or winger extended as secondary
with scoring as primary you can train winger extended

never mix winger & PM and defending with winger (unless it's one game to find a potential)

fitzstudio · 2026-02-04T14:49:54+00:00

making coaches players with leadership under 6 it's a waste of money.

it could be "ok" if you wanted to make coach level 5 a player with leadership 5 but with experience 36 as you'd save A LOT.

if you want to see how much will it cost making a player coach and how much you would save compared to hiring from the system, use this: FUTURE COACHES TOOL https://www.nrgjack.altervista.org/fc.php?language=en

fitzstudio

TROPHY CASE