Game is seriously flawed

So why is this game flawed?

Well, I just joined arsenal in 2017. I have guided Havant and waterlooville to the premiership in 2017. Then Arsenal offered me a job. So i was losing alot of games for Havant and Waterlooville, so it seemed certain i was gonna get relegated. So i acccept the arsenal job.

Now the flaw is, that Theo walcott is out of contract at the end of season. He is currently on 185000 a week, and is demanding 195000. How flawed is that. He is 28 years old. He isn't really worth that much a week in real life.

inflation maybe. The rate money is going in football at the moment £185k pw will be the average in 2017.

So you think a top player at a top club in five years time won't demand a top level wage, simply based on your perception that he isn't currently worth it.

Currently he's on at least £60k a week (the only reports of his contract are from 2 years ago quoting £3m per annum) and is probably a lot higher than that. And considering that player's contracts tend to peak at around the time they are 28-31 (because they are generally considered to peak in performance at that age), and the youth at which he signed the £60k pw contract £195k is not out of the question in real life (whether Arsenal would pay it is a different matter). And also consider that players of the "talent" of Rooney are getting £225k per week, Walcott has plenty of examples of players whom he is easily of the same level getting major money per week.

Now you could argue that financially clubs might not be in a position to pay these kinds of wages in 6 years time. But that would be a bad arguement, as SI do not take into account future possibilities when creating the financial module of the game (because a) it is so random in the first place, and b) it'd be hell on teh computers to code anything that wouldn't end up as a mockery of real life), and so release the game on the reasoable, for the game that is, basis that whatever trends are occouring now will continue.

So hopefully you now see that what you maintain as a serious flaw is nothing but your own pre-judgement of a player's ability and probably your own frustration with the way the real life game has sold out to Mammon.

well, still, i suppose i have a grudge against walcott, because I just don't think he is that good, especially in big matches. all he has is pace.

maybe he needs to play in his main role as a striker and it could chance my mind if he starts scoring many goals. but wenger wouldnt do this.

I probably won't resign him, because I just can't give into his demands of 195k a week.

It depends on how Walcott has done in-game - I'm guessing he's justified such a salary.

If not, of course, hand it over to the bugs forum...

It depends on how Walcott has done in-game - I'm guessing he's justified such a salary.

If not, of course, hand it over to the bugs forum...

Based on real life, I wouldn't say players would need to have performed that well to get outlandish salaries...

Surely his wage could be close to that sort of wage, regardless of form and achievement, simply because of yearly wage rises?

If he had a contract renewal that bumped his wage slightly, plus the almost standard 25% wage rise, wouldn't he start creeping towards a huge wage even if all he did was sit on the bench?

The wage could jump up even more if other teams were sniffing around him and his agent asked for a new contract to keep him there.

The previous Arsenal manager obviously thought he was worth the 185k a week as he gave him that contract, and due to the match engine prefering pace and acceleration in the strikers I'd play him there and he'll justify a 5.4% wage rise, just out of curiosity how much are you paying the players you rate per week?

A pacy, homegrown striker in his prime is demanding a high wage from a wealthy, top 4 team?

The game... it is ruined.

*burns laptop*

flawed indeed

To be fair I'd consider a bigger flaw the fact you can lead Havant & Waterlooville into the EPL in only 7 seasons...

inflation maybe. The rate money is going in football at the moment £185k pw will be the average in 2017.

Unfortunately its flawed because season tickets do not rise by the same rate. Therefore you have less income to pay for wages.

Don't agree with it being flawed due to the year and like most things with regards to economics the inflation will rise and so will people's wages, but in football we all know a lot of players get silly wages, so the argument in this case is flawed and not the game in my opinion.

Now the flaw is, that Theo walcott is out of contract at the end of season. He is currently on 185000 a week, and is demanding 195000. How flawed is that. He is 28 years old. He isn't really worth that much a week in real life.

What is Walcott's reputation? How has he played over the seasons? Is he and England regular? You have to take all these into account and ignore you're own opinions of his real life ability in 2011.

What's Walcotts starting wage?

A player with a 5 year contract starting at 50k, with a 25% yearly increase.....

Year 1: 12.5k increase to a grand total of 62.5k

Year 2: 15.625k increase to a grand total of 78.125k

Year 3: 19.531k increase to a grand total of 97.656k

Year 4: 24.414k increase to a grand total of 122.07k

Year 5: 30.517k increase to a grand total of 152.587k

An oversimplication, and my maths is all over the place, but it looks to me like an increase to 185k by 2017/18 is fairly easy if there's a clause like that in place.

inflation maybe. The rate money is going in football at the moment £185k pw will be the average in 2017.

The game doesn't have inflation.

So his wage either went up due to great performances or a high yearly wage, and now he wants a touch more. Hardly a bug.

In my Luton game, he's on £62k a week in 2018. Joining me for a couple of million (on around £65k a week) over the Christmas window. He hasn't set the world on fire for Arsenal though, and will basically be a cheap, pacey extra option to extend my squad a bit for me.

I signed Walcott on a free in 2017 for my side and I got him for 42k a week. The game is not seriously flawed at all.

It is flawed in many ways. But not this one.

Far more important things to worry about than how much Walcott is being paid. If you really don't like him that much and think he's overpaid, get him off the books, should be easy if his contract is almost up.

Far more important things to worry about than how much Walcott is being paid. If you really don't like him that much and think he's overpaid, get him off the books, should be easy if his contract is almost up.

Thats exactly what i am going to do. get him off the books and let him go for a free transfer.

To be fair I'd consider a bigger flaw the fact you can lead Havant & Waterlooville into the EPL in only 7 seasons...

hehe, it is a flaw, but i didn't save cheat to get my self promoted. Justkept with the same tactic without messing around with the match preparation. Made some great free transfer signings.

ok i got his stats

215 apps, 45 goals, 6 assists, 3 mom, 6.95 avr rating. thats from start of career til 2018.

seriously, he is really bad player in real life, and in CM.

It's because wages inevitably become inflated, especially at a successful club. Someone posted a screen on here of a player on 1.2million a WEEK at man city. And every 16 year old I want to sign demands 25-50k a week, even if they're sunday league quality. The game punishes clubs that have money, and the AI is very poor at stopping it, among other things.

Joe Cole anyone? Not earning that amount but if he can be ridiculously overpaid what stops other players being in the same position?

Don't forget that Walcott also drives for McLaren - he's better at that, too.

If he wasn't fast, he wouldn't be a footballer.

Rubbish player.

That's not too much of an ask, he's in the prime of career and wants to be paid as such. Terrible thread!

Don't forget that Walcott also drives for McLaren - he's better at that, too.

Lol!

Why would you let him go on a free?! Surely you could raise your transfer budget by at least £10m as well as increasing your wage budget by £185k

Walcott tied for 16th in the premier league in goals and assists last season and played significantly less minutes than the majority of the players ahead of him. Not to mention the majority are also forwards and not midfielders. Just imagine what he could do if he wasn't "rubbish" and had more ability than just pace

http://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/en/premier-league/torschuetzen/wettbewerb_GB1_2010.html

Walcott tied for 16th in the premier league in goals and assists last season and played significantly less minutes than the majority of the players ahead of him. Not to mention the majority are also forwards and not midfielders. Just imagine what he could do if he wasn't "rubbish" and had more ability than just pace

http://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/en/premier-league/torschuetzen/wettbewerb_GB1_2010.html

Yeah its a pity he's rubbish then.

Just because he's asking for that much doesn't mean you have to give him that much a week it's called contract negotiations of course his agent will push for the best deal possible.

I set a amount I'm going to pay and stay with it they end up agreeing most of the time especially if you put the agents fee up.

It's because wages inevitably become inflated, especially at a successful club. Someone posted a screen on here of a player on 1.2million a WEEK at man city. And every 16 year old I want to sign demands 25-50k a week, even if they're sunday league quality. The game punishes clubs that have money, and the AI is very poor at stopping it, among other things.

Players can "see" how much room you have left in your wage budget, so that nastier kind of agent will demand based on that rather than what his player is actually worth.

When it comes to contract renewal time, budget adjust so you are only just covering your wages and players will demand less.

Players can "see" how much room you have left in your wage budget, so that nastier kind of agent will demand based on that rather than what his player is actually worth.

When it comes to contract renewal time, budget adjust so you are only just covering your wages and players will demand less.

Is that realistic? Or a bug in the game mechanics?

I'm sure it's realistic to a degree based on club reputation they would know the ballpark figure of what their teammates are being paid, but adjusting your wages/transfer budget up and down a few million to get different demands seems a little buggy?

Bit of both imo.

That's not too much of an ask, he's in the prime of career and wants to be paid as such. Terrible thread!

If this was a rubbish thread, there wouldn't be so many responses. obviously you just got a small narrow minded sort of thinking, hence, your quote.

If this was a rubbish thread, there wouldn't be so many responses. obviously you just got a small narrow minded sort of thinking, hence, your quote.

'If this were a rubbish thread'... Actually, that's not important.

Narrow minded? You said that the game is flawed because a top player in the prime of his career wants to get paid what he thinks he deserves? How is that a flaw in the game.

Also, you're only getting responses because you post was provocative. The same can be said for somebody is trolling.

Less of the handbags lads.

'If this were a rubbish thread'... Actually, that's not important.

Narrow minded? You said that the game is flawed because a top player in the prime of his career wants to get paid what he thinks he deserves? How is that a flaw in the game.

Also, you're only getting responses because you post was provocative. The same can be said for somebody is trolling.

exactly!

I would say its a terrible thread, but its not, its a good example of someone blaming the game when they dont really understand how things work, they should sticky these kinds of threads with big titles like "read this rubbish before making your own thread"

exactly!

I would say its a terrible thread, but its not, its a good example of someone blaming the game when they dont really understand how things work, they should sticky these kinds of threads with big titles like "read this rubbish before making your own thread"

Cool, I just love the community who think they own this community because they have over 1000 posts,

Ohhhh look at me, I got over 1000 posts, so i can have a grudge at anybody who doesn't understands the game. I understand it cause I have over 1000 posts, ohhhh aaaahh, whos next then?

Enough of the bickering- you have all been warned before in the thread.

*edit*

actually no point.

'If this were a rubbish thread'... Actually, that's not important.

Narrow minded? You said that the game is flawed because a top player in the prime of his career wants to get paid what he thinks he deserves? How is that a flaw in the game.

Also, you're only getting responses because you post was provocative. The same can be said for somebody is trolling.

THe game is all about stats, so a person with awesome stats, will command a high weekly salary. I can understand why cesc fabrab and mascherano (spelling not right) can command over £200k a week in my game. But theo walcot, who as just mediore stats, and only speed, he hasn't had a good history. so why should he command £195k aweek? I will get rid of him, simply because he is not good in real life, and also in the game.

THe thing is, when he plays for arsenal against me, he performs awesome, but he doesn;t play good for me and cannot perform where others can. so in my opinion the game is flawed that a player can ask for the 25% wage increase a year, because it won;t be in every real players contract.

it doesnt have to be in ever single players contract, the fact is he is at his peak, and he wants a wage increase, its a no brainer, no bug, no problem with the game. Just because you do not rate a player and cannot use him in the correct way to make him effective does not mean their is a problem with the game.

ANY player can ask for a wage increase, and ANY club can put a 25% wage increase into a contract.

Again, no bug, not even close.

it doesnt have to be in ever single players contract, the fact is he is at his peak, and he wants a wage increase, its a no brainer, no bug, no problem with the game. Just because you do not rate a player and cannot use him in the correct way to make him effective does not mean their is a problem with the game.

ANY player can ask for a wage increase, and ANY club can put a 25% wage increase into a contract.

Again, no bug, not even close.

Whether I used him in the right way or not, he still wouldn't perform. obviously if others can perform better than him in his position, there is nothing wrong with my tactics. Its purely down to him. Overrated, and defintely a flaw that he can command this sort of wage. Even though he is at his peak, his history tells the story. He has done SFA for himself. SO your saying he can command this sort of money because he is at his peak regardless of his previous history?

Also, i never said it was a bug, i said its a flaw that needs to be looked into.

If you cannot get him to perform in the game you are doing something wrong, as you have said he has played well against you, obviously the AI knew how to use him better than you do, thats not the players fault. When used correctly Walcott is devastating, with the pace he has he can tear up any team in Europe. At 28, still playing for one of the worlds top clubs, first team by the sounds of things, i would imagine still getting a game for England, yes a player at his peak, because your tactically inept at using him does not mean he is rubbish.

Whether I used him in the right way or not, he still wouldn't perform. obviously if others can perform better than him in his position, there is nothing wrong with my tactics. Its purely down to him. Overrated, and defintely a flaw that he can command this sort of wage. Even though he is at his peak, his history tells the story. He has done SFA for himself. SO your saying he can command this sort of money because he is at his peak regardless of his previous history?

Also, i never said it was a bug, i said its a flaw that needs to be looked into.

Personally, I think £195k/week for Walcott is a bug if his performances aren't justified.

Seeing as there's only about 3 people on here with more posts than me, does that mean if I arranged something to happen to them, the forums would pass into my ownership?

But he is a bad player, I have two other players that can play better than him. When walcot is in the team, my team perform bad. so obviously he has a bad karma about him or something. Look, I don't wanna go round in circles, but he is a bad player in real life, and in the game, he is exactly the same. A bad player commanding 195k aweek is taking the biscuit tbh. Anyways, no worries, I am looking forward to get rid of him at the end of the season.

He may be bad for you, but he's definitely not a bad player.

With his pace and a little training in the right places he can easily become a 30+ goal a season striker.