Why is maximum wage so low? Not very real life is it?

Football manager kind of bores me playing a normal game so the only fun I get out of it these days is by going a club and making it as so they have been taken over by some rich russian or arab by giving myself 1billion transfer funds and buying a dream team. It's quite sad but i really feel as though I am this russian/arab billionaire and living out my fantasies.

I also set my wage budget to a huge amount too, yet for some reason the most I can offer top players is around £145,000 a week. Before the patch, I remember I was able to offer players upto around 3million pounds per week. I used to get a real buzz from offering players this sort of money. Some of you will say, why would you want to offer that sort of money, but this sort of thing gives me pleasure, and that after all is what the game is about.

So what I want to know is why has the patch changed this? In real life there was talks of ronaldo being offered 300k, ronaldinho 200k, and robinho got a huge wage from city. This ain't even real life anyway, it's a game, so why change it? Is there anyway at all that I can get rid of this ridiculous wage cap??

its not really ridicilous tbh if the player wants no were near that why would the board cough up the cash

well if you have the money, it is useful to persuade a player who is not interested in signing. If you offer him a million a week, it usually does the trick.

the reason i think it's ridiculous is because this is one of the only reasons i play the game still and I used to be able to do it, so why the change in the patch.

Players seem to be more interested in the clubs reputation on FM rather than money. It took me a while to even get close to signing Bojan from Barcelona because my reputation wasn't high enough. Eventually I signed him on a free transfer because I made Arsenal a better club by winning the CL 3 times. David Villa stayed at Valencia because he enjoyed playing for them and because he was loyal to them, even though every top club was after his signature.

If I were you, I'd just stick to the the patch you speak of and spend to your heart's content.

I used FMM to mess around with Man City and gave myself £800 million pound transfer budget. I typed the wrong amount in the wage budget and ended up with a £30 million pound a week wage budget but could only offer 125k a week which is not right with that much of a wage budget.

I used FMM to mess around with Man City and gave myself £800 million pound transfer budget. I typed the wrong amount in the wage budget and ended up with a £30 million pound a week wage budget but could only offer 125k a week which is not right with that much of a wage budget.

how often is it that a club has a £30M wage budget

a.hugh - pick your top 5 transfer targets. Offer #5 the 145k p/w. Once he signs that contract, it should change your wage structure, so the next player you might be able to offer 180k p/w. You give that to #4. .... by the time you get up to #1, you should be able to offer the 300k p/w that you want to.

Also, you might want to adjust your chairman's stats in the editor. I suggest high Ambition, low Business Sense, very low Interference, high Patience, etc - basically for each attribute think to yourself "How do I think this would interact with my manager and my budgets?" Avoid the extremes for most things - 1 for Interference is fine, but for other things you might try 5-15 as your range.

I used FMM to mess around with Man City and gave myself £800 million pound transfer budget. I typed the wrong amount in the wage budget and ended up with a £30 million pound a week wage budget but could only offer 125k a week which is not right with that much of a wage budget.

I am also man city and I have game myself 500 million pounds a week bidget and am only able to offer 145k a week.

I do not endorse this way of playing the game but from my experience i think it is a valid point.

I offered Fabregas £100,000 a week with a 25% pay rise (think this was accidental or he demanded it)

Unfortunately when his contract was running down, my board wouldn't allow me to offer him the £200,000 he wanted.

t to.

Also, you might want to adjust your chairman's stats in the editor. I suggest high Ambition, low Business Sense, very low Interference, high Patience, etc - basically for each attribute think to yourself "How do I think this would interact with my manager and my budgets?" Avoid the extremes for most things - 1 for Interference is fine, but for other things you might try 5-15 as your range.

There is no stats for business sense, interference or patience, etc?

There is no stats for business sense, interference or patience, etc?

There is.....

There is.....

When i create a chairman in editor there is not. Where about then if there is?

i agree with this, i'm sick of being told i'm $250K per week below my wage budget, but when I go to offer Miquel Veloso his new contract I can only offer him $180k per week (he is on $100K presently). I have the room under the cap, why won't they let me offer it to him?

He wants $220K per week (he is my rock in midfield and won Midfielder of the year last year) so I have no problem giving him what he wants.

This needs to be looked into, he is a club favourite surely they'd want to keep him regardless?

So it's unrealistic that there is a cap on wages, but people feel that they should be able to offer £1m pw or £220k pw, how is that realistic?

Players seem to be more interested in the clubs reputation on FM rather than money.

That's a point I'd like to see discussed.

IRL most rich teams gain reputation solely because of being rich. See Shakhtar or, for all that matters, Man City. While the first was pretty unknown to most westerners that are not interested in international football, the moment they signed a few players for a lot of cash, they became well known. Man City undoubtedly "gained" reputation because of its recent takeover.

Another thing that should make clubs gain reputation is the signing of big stars. I find it odd it works the other way around on FM: you have to gain rep to sign big stars, not sign big stars to gain rep.

IRL a rich club attracts star players because of the money alone. Well, maybe not Messi or Ronaldinho, la creme de la creme, but all the players that are not already established on the super teams. Robinho going for Man City is a prime example. I can't see it happening on FM.

This was so well reflected in CM 01/02, I wonder why it changed so much version after version.

the reason i think it's ridiculous is because this is one of the only reasons i play the game still and I used to be able to do it, so why the change in the patch.

I'd suggest playing a different game in that case! There are plenty of football management games that allow you to ride rough-shod over reality and create dream teams.

If this is the only reason you play the game then that seems ridiculous to me and why not just unpatch your game and play the older version?

When i create a chairman in editor there is not. Where about then if there is?

In their attibutes section.

Wild guesses but perhaps the board want the excess to be spent on 2-3 quality players rather than just one 'star'? Or maybe there is a concern over other players wanting parity? No idea how the game is coded in this respect, but tbh it isn't realistic to just throw money around. Even the likes of Abramovich set limits, which is why you don't get Kaka, et al, wandering off because the chairman says 'No worries, £1 million a week if you come'.

I know in lower leagues, salary is capped in relation to turnover. Maybe it is the same in the top leagues?

I'd suggest playing a different game in that case! There are plenty of football management games that allow you to ride rough-shod over reality and create dream teams.

If this is the only reason you play the game then that seems ridiculous to me and why not just unpatch your game and play the older version?

Too many bugs without patch...

That's a point I'd like to see discussed.

IRL most rich teams gain reputation solely because of being rich. See Shakhtar or, for all that matters, Man City. While the first was pretty unknown to most westerners that are not interested in international football, the moment they signed a few players for a lot of cash, they became well known. Man City undoubtedly "gained" reputation because of its recent takeover.

Another thing that should make clubs gain reputation is the signing of big stars. I find it odd it works the other way around on FM: you have to gain rep to sign big stars, not sign big stars to gain rep.

IRL a rich club attracts star players because of the money alone. Well, maybe not Messi or Ronaldinho, la creme de la creme, but all the players that are not already established on the super teams. Robinho going for Man City is a prime example. I can't see it happening on FM.

This was so well reflected in CM 01/02, I wonder why it changed so much version after version.

Spot on mate. In real life, players are not motivated by club reputation - those days are well gone - but by who offers them the most money. If you remember, there was also talks of Ronaldinho going to city, even before the abu dhabi takeover. I wouldn't be suprised if Ronaldo (cr7) ends up at city too.

The fact of life is (nothing against players as anyone of us would do the same) if man utd offer you 100k a week to play for them but man city offer you 200k a week, there is only one place you are going to go. I sometimes think, what can a player get for 200k a week that he can't get on 100k a week, but that isn't the point. Our brains just see those extra figures and cannot resist. If you are earning 1billion a week and you get offered 2billion a week, you would definately jump at the chance, even though you could never spend it all. Money makes the world go round - as that old saying goes...

I don't know what the problem is. I was allowed to offer some of my top players up to £200k/week after a couple of years.

Also, Robinho is only on £92k at Man City, so not a huge wage.