wazzaflow10

It depends on what team you are and what you're doing. There's been plenty of examples by people here selling for more than value. If you're playing as a PL team you're not going to get a ton of value shedding players from your team. If you're a newly promoted team from league one to the championship you're not going to get championship money for league one players. And its entirely possible to get players below value from the AI if they're transfer listed or unhappy. I got John Stones from MC in a 2021 save for 12M and sold him for nearly 40M a few years later to Barca. I've unsettled players who were long term targets and forced a move. Could the AI do with some work negotiating? absolutely. I've had my share of frustrating negotiations that have gone haywire for no apparent reason. But in regards to the board not allowing a transfer because its below their min valuation doesn't seem wrong even if they're paying for wages on a player you don't plan on using. They could easily turn around and sack a manager and the next guy comes in and makes the guy you wanted to sell a key player.

What's the value on his player page (assuming you haven't put a price tag on him)? Transfermarkt has him as 225k currently. Selling him at 180k would be a 20% discount so it's not totally outrageous to be blocked imo. It'd be nice if there was a bit more dialogue between the manager and the board before it happened to state why he's being sold so low. But it probably means you can push the negotiation more and up the value either through clauses or outright fees. The best solution is to play him more even if you don't want to so you can demand more money.

What's the value on his player page (assuming you haven't put a price tag on him)? Transfermarkt has him as 225k currently. Selling him at 180k would be a 20% discount so it's not totally outrageous to be blocked imo. It'd be nice if there was a bit more dialogue between the manager and the board before it happened to state why he's being sold so low. But it probably means you can push the negotiation more and up the value either through clauses or outright fees. The best solution is to play him more even if you don't want to so you can demand more money.

Agreed. I'd be fine if they just showed a range (so long as it isn't always the middle number) or even inaccuracies unless you were tracking them for a long time (and I mean like 6 months maybe a year), akin to declaring someone as a top target. I don't have an issue with the concept of the focuses. It should only show you players that are interested or meet the criteria. And if that's 0 players or 100 players that's fine. But somewhere along the way they've conflated the point of recruitment focuses and scouting so now there's just one module that doesn't really serve the purpose of either very well. I don't understand the point of the CA/PA stars in the focus set up if the focus won't return players who aren't equal to your team's CA. I'm asking for the scout to find players with 1/2 silver CA star and 1/2 silver PA stars and up and I get 0 results half the time. I should be inundated with reports. So much so it should be impossible to dig through them. This isn't to say setting 1/2 CA stars and 3 PA stars should be a automatic wonderkid finder. there should be a sufficient number of players and unknown PA and CA attributes that you have to track players for a very long time (long enough for other AI teams to find them and sign them before you) that its inefficient to cast such a wide net. They can also make wonderkids incredibly unlikely to sign for clubs that either have a ton of first team and/or youth players at their position or are not one of the bigger teams in the world. Players should also evaluate playing time pathways much more and demand a certain pathway if they are that highly rated along with pay increases such that we have to make a serious commitment to them or risk the player causing a fuss and the agent developing a bad relationship and not wanting to work with us. I know that's easier said than done from a programming perspective but I'm hopeful the module can be improved in the future.

Been "broken" at least since december patch. Its okay-ish if you're a small club but according to them the game will automatically filter out players who are wholly uninterested in joining your or players it deems not good enough for your squad. So the game simultaneously scouts and doesn't scout players. Its fine if they don't have anyone to recommend based on your criteria (i.e. you only want a striker thats 3* CA and 5* PA and plays in Africa) but there should still be players that you can see were scouted and said doesn't fit for whatever reason. It seemed that they didn't want to give you the view to everyone for fear that people would abuse it and only scout for wonderkids and beat the AI to every signing. I get their point but its very frustrating to only view a fraction of the actual players in the game when you're a big club. Its my main dissatisfaction with the game. Hoping 25 gets tweaked a bit.

I mean you can still transfer list players for it if you're not in a situation where you think they should be feeling that way. the game is still telling you something about the players hidden attributes most likely. It might happen a little too frequently imo or not always in the correct context but you can still do something indirectly about it. There doesn't have to be a magic button to solve every problem with a click immediately.

Just because you can't do anything about it doesn't mean it shouldn't be in the game. It can be implemented better/more logically but you shouldn't be able to control/affect everything. You're not supposed to be omnipotent.

defensive or cautious mentality doesn't mean you won't score or go on attack. What team are you?

The first one is the original fm23 database. I think so but they're not the same save so I can't be 100% sure. I wasn't specifically tracking his development when I started my save. He spent two years on loan before coming back as a rotational starter. But other than that no. I'm sure I had him grouped with Bruno Fernandes for mentoring so it could be from that. I believe Fernandes is highly aggressive/brave so it could be mentoring/squad personality influences. His personality changed from balanced to fairly ambitious so something under the hood most likely. I'm not an expert in development by any means. I just think the game should mimic some bits of real life where a player who has potential has a period of super accelerated growth from an average youth prospect to a squad player/starter in a shorter period of time. I'd be happy to be proven wrong by someone who's looked at this more holistically.

In a sense I guess yes. It'd be different than say a 17 year old wonderkid who's had high attributes since the game created them. Here's someone like Garnacho at the beginning of FM23 and FM24 and latest update. and my version of FM23 Garnacho 5 years into the game. He eventually kind of gets there but as you can see there's still recent development and its certainly not from a lack of playing time. Granted I'm probably not the best at maximising development or knowing all the tips and tricks but I'd love to see someone try to start 18 year old Garnacho in October of 2022 get him to roughly these attributes while missing 2 months due to injury as well. I don't know what SI uses to determine player development paths but they should use their own researchers updates and use that as a model for player progression. I'd love to see in future games variation between players getting better faster via training with your first team v getting match experience elsewhere. It just feels very unlikely that you'd have player who started in reserves like Garnacho was and then within 6 months become a first teamer (with the attribtues to support it). Personally I think attributes should fluctuate (as a matter of perception but not necessarily in reality) a lot more on these player pages to reflect form/morale/training performance to give the game some extra bit of dynamism to transfer policy/activity. As a matter of speaking players should be able to look better than their CA and PA if performances justify it. Equally so a player should be able to look worse than their CA if they're on a bad run of form. No this isn't they were really good before they were 18. This is a regular looking youth player (doesn't even have to have high potential) and then a very quick rise to a new ability tier. Not the wonderkid at 16 with world class ability.

I think part of the issues is that development is very linear. you go one step each progression and it can take a long long time for players to reach their potential in some cases in my experience. It would be great to see some variation of a teenager just bursting onto the scene and have the attributes of a world class player after having marginal attributes during their youth career. Obviously this is PA willing I'm not asking for just have a player go from tweener championship to top level premier league player in the matter of a few months.

this tends to give active teams better academy players too right? It'll get a little unbalanced in terms of needing to buy/sell players since most of your needs will be covered by youth players.

The manual part of this is way too painful when you're at a bigger club with 15-20 scouts in my opinion. LLM its maybe a little more practical and maybe more realistic than saying to scout the whole area you've assigned.

I actually like owning things for one and despise everything becoming a subscription. The number one problem with subscription model is licensing imo. How would you feel if during a save SI lost licensing for a league you were in and your save was ruined as a result? Hell I get mad when Paradox updates their games from CK or HOI and old saves aren't compatible anymore. I also doubt a lot of fixes or mods would be even allowed - one of the reasons I never bothered with Stadia and my biggest pro for playing PC games: fine tuned control compared to consoles Just as an example GTA4 lost a fair bit of the original radio/music due to licensing and they actually went back and patched the game to take it out. Besides its quite fun to go back in time for these games to get a snapshot of the world sometimes or enjoy simpler features/functions. Also it's harder to make nostalgic memories once you're an adult. So a lot of pining for games like they used to be is just everyone wanting to experience the feeling of awe you get as a child playing video games and only the good games have survived the last 40+ years.

fair enough.