Question about editing stadium expansion capacity

Tottenham-36000 capacity, with a 55000 max potential capacity. At the end of the first season the board always expands to 55k and a cost of £21mill, and it only takes 5months to finish. I presume it's hard-coded and not based on finishing anywhere particular in the league.

However, i was thinking about using the pre game editor to effectivley take away that capacity for expansion, so that it falls more in line with real life, in which Tottenham are actually going to either rebuild the stadium or move somewhere else, in 5 years for the first option, or in 2 years for the second option.

My questions are-

1) If i take away the potential capacity at White hart lane through the editor, what effect will this have on transfer budgets? I don't want to be given a monster budget because they are not using it on stadium expansion, as Spurs do not have £50mill to spend on transfers in real life, not at this moment anway. By the same token, i don't want to be given a paltry budget due to small capacity.

2) What are the chances of getting a stadium re-build within 5 seasons, if i have some success(i.e-keeping Spurs in the Champions league and a premier league title here and there)?

The reason i ask is because i prefer as much realism as possible and don't like the unrealistic and unfair advantage the club gets from completing a big stadium expansion within 5 months.

Cheers for any help, and if there is any other factors to consider when messing with the editor please say

how do you know the potential capacity?

how do you know the potential capacity?

the editor or FMRTE will tell you.

i would think in this case you would get a bigger transfer budget if you have a heap of money left over. If you want to push them into replacing the stadium you might want to think about reducing the condition of it, may help speed things along.

deadfncat, the official pre game editor tells you what the max capacity is. Of course WHL does have room for this capacity.

Milner, i am perfectly content to reside in a 36k seater for 3-5 seasons, as this falls in line with what is possible(in real life-Spurs will not be expand the stadium after this season, nor within 5 months, even if we won European cup and prem title!).

The thing i would like is for them not to expand the stadium straight away, and for me not to get a huge bank balance as a result of no stadium expansion. And then try my luck with the board regarding a stadium re-build. How long does it take a rich club to build a new stadium as it happens, and does it effect transfers? I would quite like that, not being abble to spend big money would be a good challeng

Infact perhaps i should just holiday through a season and see what happens

deadfncat, the official pre game editor tells you what the max capacity is. Of course WHL does have room for this capacity.

Milner, i am perfectly content to reside in a 36k seater for 3-5 seasons, as this falls in line with what is possible(in real life-Spurs will not be expand the stadium after this season, nor within 5 months, even if we won European cup and prem title!).

The thing i would like is for them not to expand the stadium straight away, and for me not to get a huge bank balance as a result of no stadium expansion. And then try my luck with the board regarding a stadium re-build. How long does it take a rich club to build a new stadium as it happens, and does it effect transfers? I would quite like that, not being abble to spend big money would be a good challeng

sorry i thought you were meaning ways to speed things along!!

I dont think it affects your transfer budget too much as clubs take loans out to pay for them, the monthly payment for these loans is never huge in the game, so you dont overly notice it.

I think what you would have to do is set yourself limits, yes you may end up with bit extra in the bank if you dont improve the stadium but you dont have to spend it, also it would be interesting to see how the club does finacially in the long term with such a small stadium, can you keep up with the rest of the EPL?

Thats what i'm thinking. I dislike big transfers, well big in comparison i mean. Never spend more than 15mill on a player which is quite reserved for a big prem club.

Of course, in real life Spurs always have about 20mill to spend on the right player, although levy is imposing sell to buys policies on harry now, which is sensible. But i wouldnt want the AI board to start thinking, we have a small capacity and therefore no money will be made available, which is not how Tottenham operate because we have rich owners

stadium expansion was always based on attendances in the previous versions of the game, dunno if SI have changed the criteria for 2011. You had to have an average attendance of over 90% of the stadium's capacity before the board would agree. I would think Spurs have that level of attendance anyway, so the board will expand the stadium automatically, even without you asking for it, if they have cash in the bank.

Probably the only way to prevent the expansion would be to not increase the club's bank balance in the editor.

I've noticed though that when a club puts money into expansion, transfer budgets are (worryingly) not affected. In one Palermo save I had, the club plowed 21m to expand by 16,000 seats, we had 1.5m left in the bank for the forthcoming season, with a transfer budget of 15m. Needless to say, I didn't spend it..

I wouldn't increase the bank balance, but nor would i decrease it.

But surely if i take out the potential for stadium expansion in the editor, and have it's current no. of seats as the maximum, they cannot go ahead with expansion and will be forced to re-build down the line?

I wouldn't increase the bank balance, but nor would i decrease it.

But surely if i take out the potential for stadium expansion in the editor, and have it's current no. of seats as the maximum, they cannot go ahead with expansion and will be forced to re-build down the line?

the only thing that would worry me would be the game messing up because they cant expand, hopefully shouldnt be an issue tho. But your right they cant expand it if you set it right in the editor. You might end up with them starting ahead with it quicker if you are always packing out WHL and they cant expand.

I think there's a checkbox in the Editor that makes the local council block any proposed expansions of the stadium. After about 5 yrs of the stadium being packed out and constant requests for expansion by yourself (followed by subsequent blocking by the council) they'll take the decision to build a new one.

As milnernpoint mentioned previously, the repayments that the club makes on loans to build a new stadium are pretty low each month, as long as you're comfortable with having the club saddled with 300m of debt for 25 yrs or so.

Would be kinda sad to leave WHL though no?

It would be sad, yes, but it's going to happen at some point. How long does it take for a whole stadium re-build though? Because that way, if it is a couple of seasons, then i would be able to stay at WHL for a while longer with current capacity.

Only takes 2 seasons usually to build the new stadium, I hate this personally 'cos the names of the stadia are always ridiculous. "Zola Stadium" for Chelsea I remember seeing once...

Only takes 2 seasons usually to build the new stadium, I hate this personally 'cos the names of the stadia are always ridiculous. "Zola Stadium" for Chelsea I remember seeing once...

whats wrong with Zola Stadium?

It sounds shockingly cheesy and would never happen in real life.

It sounds shockingly cheesy and would never happen in real life.

yes but in real life there is an almost infinite amount of different names the stadium could end up as, and since SI are not allowed to use names of sponsorships or anything like that choosing club legends is better than nothing at all. Its more realistic than them staying at stamford bridge for the rest of time.

Well I wouldn't declare staying at the current stadium as a solution to a cheesy stadium name... I'd probably just edit the name with FMRTE or something once it's completed. Niggling details like that do my head in.

Well I wouldn't declare staying at the current stadium as a solution to a cheesy stadium name... I'd probably just edit the name with FMRTE or something once it's completed. Niggling details like that do my head in.

what would be your solution then? What names should the game generate in this situation?

The most obvious ones would be street name or part of a town where the stadium is built... Of course these aren't in the database and would require a bit of an overhaul in later versions but it makes the most sense for me... Then there would be brands/sponsors, which already exist to a certain degree in the game.

The most obvious ones would be street name or part of a town where the stadium is built... Of course these aren't in the database and would require a bit of an overhaul in later versions but it makes the most sense for me... Then there would be brands/sponsors, which already exist to a certain degree in the game.

but SI cannot use brands or sponsors unless they are already in place, for legal reasons, they are not allowed to decide say for example that Nike decided to sponsor a new stadium for Chelsea can you imagine how much that would cost to be allowed to randomly dump massive brand names into the game, and like you have said there are no streets or areas of cities in FM, and i think to add them in for every team would be a massive amount of useless data really.

I personally think the icons name is brilliant, Juve at Buffon Park, Real at the Christiano Ronaldo Stadium.

Look at the default shirts or stadium advertising boards.... They exist already (minus the top teams). Why would Real Madrid name a stadium after a player they've had for a couple of years? Nonsensical. Even something like 'New St. James Park' would be better.

Look at the default shirts or stadium advertising boards.... They exist already (minus the top teams). Why would Real Madrid name a stadium after a player they've had for a couple of years? Nonsensical. Even something like 'New St. James Park' would be better.

yes they exist only when teams already have these in place, ie Reebok stadium. There would be huge financial implications for SI if they were to start adding brand names into the game where they dont exist at the moment. Real named that stadium after he had won world player of the year 6 times in the space of a 10 year career with them, i never said it was at the start of the game or anything.

Would you be happier if every club ended up at "new x stadium" or "new x Arena" as stadium names? That would get very boring very quickly.

I do agree the names is not a perfect solution but there are not a lot of options for the game to choose from, seems much better than everyone ending up at a new stadium with pretty much the exact same name as the old one.

perhaps 1 way of making people happy would be to let them have a say on what the new ground could be called when its announced its being built at their club

maybe have 2 lists 2 click on to decide. so lets say they manage man utd for example. list 1 could include say ferguson, giggs, scholes, solksjaer and new trafford. list 2 includes park, arena, stadium or blank if new trafford is chosen. players click on which they want from each list and job done!

ive never got a stadium built in the game before but im sure you the choice when naming a stadium dont you?

ive never got a stadium built in the game before but im sure you the choice when naming a stadium dont you?

no you dont, the board announce the name of the new stadium when they say its being built. though u could change it by fmrte if its not to your liking

You still don't understand what i'm saying. Brand's already exist within the game as shown in this screenshot of the default Mansfield Town kit;

I'm not saying SI should go out and add all the sports brands out there but utilising something that is already in game could be a better way to go about the naming of new stadiums.

You still don't understand what i'm saying. Brand's already exist within the game as shown in this screenshot of the default Mansfield Town kit;

I'm not saying SI should go out and add all the sports brands out there but utilising something that is already in game could be a better way to go about the naming of new stadiums.

but there are massive legal implications with doing that, they would first have to ask each of these "brands" for permission to do that for which they would most likely have to pay, there would also have to be something in the game that would prevent brands being used for teams that use rival brands ie Nike and Addidas. Also would the game re-use the same brands, would you end up with "Reebok Stadium", "Reebok Ground", Reebok Arena"? Would every brand be able to sponsor a stadium i highly doubt the kit sponsor for Mansfield as in your example would have the finacial clout to finance a stadium, would this be any more or less realistic in terms of the game?

perhaps 1 way of making people happy would be to let them have a say on what the new ground could be called when its announced its being built at their club

maybe have 2 lists 2 click on to decide. so lets say they manage man utd for example. list 1 could include say ferguson, giggs, scholes, solksjaer and new trafford. list 2 includes park, arena, stadium or blank if new trafford is chosen. players click on which they want from each list and job done!

Great idea, you should put this in the enhancements section of the site. If we had a selection of past greats AND a free text field (with a limited number of say 15 chars) in case you don't like the choices given, then that would be amazing. From the selection of past greats, it should never be a player as recent as Giggs though, Charlton or Best would be much more suitable. I like the idea of legendary managers being included too. Busby Park or Shanklyfield would be great!

Great idea, you should put this in the enhancements section of the site. If we had a selection of past greats AND a free text field (with a limited number of say 15 chars) in case you don't like the choices given, then that would be amazing. From the selection of past greats, it should never be a player as recent as Giggs though, Charlton or Best would be much more suitable. I like the idea of legendary managers being included too. Busby Park or Shanklyfield would be great!

why not Giggs? he is now the all time leading man u player, won more than anyone else and played more games than anyone else, and for arguments sake he is probably the best player they have and will ever produce.

I understand where you're coming from, but realistically stadia and other public buildings and street names aren't named after contemporary people unless that person either met with an untimely demise or else contributed a large chunk of cash towards building it.

Do you not think it a bit odd for Ryan Giggs, just after retiring can watch MU play at the Giggs Arena? Would be a bit insulting to Sir B. Charlton and the rest of United's history. Busby babes etc.

I understand where you're coming from, but realistically stadia and other public buildings and street names aren't named after contemporary people unless that person either met with an untimely demise or else contributed a large chunk of cash towards building it.

Do you not think it a bit odd for Ryan Giggs, just after retiring can watch MU play at the Giggs Arena? Would be a bit insulting to Sir B. Charlton and the rest of United's history. Busby babes etc.

yeah to be honest i do see what your saying, i just think in the context of the game its the best solution to a tricky problem.

Agreed

Though I really like dontask's idea, particularly if there was a free text field to enter your own. Woudn't be that hard for SI to do either, since nicknames can already be entered for players, they could apply the same code for stadia also.