Jump to content

Should SI remove the 127 and 225 goal barrier?


Should SI remove the 127 and 225 goal barrier?  

22 members have voted

  1. 1. Should SI remove the 127 and 225 goal barrier?

    • Yes they should. It makes counting how many goals your striker scores more accurately
    • No they should not. The limit is set high enough already
    • Maybe they should in the future when FM becomes a 64 bit software. tremendously


Recommended Posts

I don't care, but I wish people would respect your wish to play the game how you want to play it - and then appreciate how annoying the issue is... I can imagine it quite easily, it would ruin record keeping and completely do my head in.

From what I have read - 64-bit will make this do-able - so by all means if it doesn't take long, they should look to increase it.

No issues on why it is set as it is now, makes no sense to have it any higher, and its a coding issue anyway. BUT, like I said, people can play how they want and if it doesnt take much I think they should. So my vote goes to option 3.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not aware of any such limit. If you care to explain, preferably along with the reasons given by SI for its necessity, I promise to give an answer to that.

Once your striker scores more than 127 league goals a season, the number automatically drops to ZERO. The same applies for career international goals where the number is either 225 or 255 goals. (can't remember the exact figure! :()

Anyway some people have managed to score more than 255 international goals without cheating and when the goal tally comes back to ZERO, they feel gutted!

At least you don't "cheat" or play the game differently, that is why you are not aware of this issue! :D

Good for you mate!

Link to post
Share on other sites

The league one no, but the international one, maybe up it a bit, only because I believe that some teams, epsecially in North America and Australasia are very poor and if a good player is there could easily score 5+ every game he plays against them. Therefore 40 caps at 5 goals a game against them little nations would be 200 and they would score more goals against other nations too

Link to post
Share on other sites

Simple answer, NO..Why should SI change it just to please people who blatently cheat? Cheat all you want, but dont expect SI to cater for your needs ;)

So how did you know about this limit in the first place? Through "cheating" right??? :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't care, but I wish people would respect your wish to play the game how you want to play it - and then appreciate how annoying the issue is... I can imagine it quite easily, it would ruin record keeping and completely do my head in.

From what I have read - 64-bit will make this do-able - so by all means if it doesn't take long, they should look to increase it.

No issues on why it is set as it is now, makes no sense to have it any higher, and its a coding issue anyway. BUT, like I said, people can play how they want and if it doesnt take much I think they should. So my vote goes to option 3.

That is quite right mate! :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

The league one no, but the international one, maybe up it a bit, only because I believe that some teams, epsecially in North America and Australasia are very poor and if a good player is there could easily score 5+ every game he plays against them. Therefore 40 caps at 5 goals a game against them little nations would be 200 and they would score more goals against other nations too

5 goals a game, for 40 games is impossible, even with 20 for consistency (hidden stat) unless you use something like the corner tactic.

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 goals a game, for 40 games is impossible, even with 20 for consistency (hidden stat) unless you use something like the corner tactic.

Technically speaking the corner tactic should not be labeled as a "cheat" tactic but as an exploitation! :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

So how did you know about this limit in the first place? Through "cheating" right??? :D

Nope, because ive seen a handfull of people on this forum that keep banging on about it ;) Like i said before, i dont mind people who cheat, its their game and they can play it how they please..But to expect SI to change this just because of cheaters, it just seems wrong IMO..

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nope, because ive seen a handfull of people on this forum that keep banging on about it ;) Like i said before, i dont mind people who cheat, its their game and they can play it how they please..But to expect SI to change this just because of cheaters, it just seems wrong IMO..

This is not just for cheaters but those who would like to modify their games and do some experiments for the love of FM like me! For example, make a player a legend and see how many goals he can score against teams using a crap formation like 0-5-5. Will his value go up tremendously if he scores 400 league goals per season?

These are the things I would like to find out in my game world. So it is not just cheating per ser. It is more than that. It is attempting to play the game differently. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Didn't know about this until now. Have never com close to either. But I say remove it. People should be able to play the way they want. If they want to cheat, so be it, it doesn't affect anyone else.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You know, just by looking at the thread title I knew who the poster was going to be...

Anyway, only remove it if players are shown to hit the limit often within the boundaries of the game coding (ie. non-modified "super-players" or by making the opposition weaker)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly - so its all about how much time SI would require in order to make the change. If we knew that then it would mean a lot more lol.

"Yes! SI should spend 2 months on changing the coding to allow infinite goals to be recorded, at the expense of time spent on refining the 3D match engine"

Now we don't want that... :p:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

64 bit has nothing to do with it - its to do with how many "bytes" are allocated to store a particular value. a single extra byte would be sufficient to support over 65000 goals which is plenty no matter how much you cheat, but would increase the size of the save game file, and the memory usage of the game while it runs.

I seem to remember that tracksuit manager (a true classic) couldn't cope with players having more than 127 caps. Since players never aged in that game, but just had their attributes randomized every now and then, I used to keep a notebook to help me keep track of how many times a particular player's cap (and sometimes goal) count had wrapped around.

Link to post
Share on other sites

To label this as being for the benefit for all is disingenuous to say the least.

I went for option 3. If SI are making changes anyway which make this easy to implement and test as part of other changes then fine.

What you have to remember is that to make this change would take SI resource to implement and test the cost of which I borne by all of us through the game cover price. On addition that resource could have been used to implement a new feature or improve an existing one.

So in fact except for an extreme minority the rest of us all lose out.

The limits don't make your game crash or unplayable it's just a record-keeping and, dare I say, vanity issue.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You know, just by looking at the thread title I knew who the poster was going to be...

Anyway, only remove it if players are shown to hit the limit often within the boundaries of the game coding (ie. non-modified "super-players" or by making the opposition weaker)

I never realize I am becoming famous around here....or is infamous the correct term to use? :D :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

Have discussed this with you directly before, the answer is still the same, due to limitations within the game and the fact as people have pointed out the numbers shown are completely unrealistic this isn't going to happen. Am closing this thread. Cheers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...