forameuss

Some people need new hobbies.

Well, no, not really. Number 1 essentially means it's received no attention at all, because it's deemed too low a priority. Number 2 would require a significant amount of effort already burned into it for them to decide it wasn't worth keeping going. Number 3, as I said, is somewhere in between the two.

Almost certainly one of two things. It's either such low priority relative to other issues that it's yet to receive the sort of attention needed to actually fix it, or it's a lot harder to fix than it seems and they've yet to find a suitable solution. Or a somewhere-in-between third option which is a bit of both - it would take too long to fix relative to its priority.

Not currently. Only really supports starting from a fresh point. No idea, would depend on how they've changed the unique IDs. If they've shifted, you'll probably run into problems.

And where exactly have they explicitly said they are "satisfied with it"? I'd be surprised if that's ever the case. It's almost like there's a lot more to fixing something in a complicated system than a Disneyland style "if you just wish hard enough".

I presume then that the problem is a snowball effect. If the reputation or rewards on offer for winning the league end up being too high, then one team winning it is going to make them odds on favourites to do it again. If they win again, they're stronger still, and on and on until they're largely untouchable. The only way you could really stop that happening without intervening yourself would be to eliminate that boost as much as possible. Even then, certain teams are probably always going to rise to the top.

It literally says it's named after the manager, who is also OP going by the screenshot.

No idea. But a skin is just a visual front-end on the back-end data. The export functionality doesn't care about what skin you have I'd imagine. Raise it as a bug if you want a real answer, no-one here is going to know for sure.

The export functionalities have always been janky in game. I doubt there's anything that can be done other than it being fixed at source, and that's unlikely to happen given how relatively minor the issue is. Maybe with the move to Unity, but I wouldn't hold my breath.

Another (unfortunately minor) update on things with this. I know on the last post I talked about almost having an updated version, but in my infinite wisdom, I changed my approach to how I gathered together all the changes I was making. After spending ages getting all the testing right, I went to do a final check of everything and it was error central. I think some stuff got mismerged, particularly on the spreadsheet side, and I'm faced with spending ages watching it fail, making minor changes, then pushing it to the next failure. Couple that with getting generally less time to work on things, and it's not the greatest recipe, so I apologise. Hopefully I can still release that incremental version, but will let you know. One thing I am pursuing though when I get a chance is a sort of 2.0 version. I know, I know, I'm talking about a 2.0 version when 1.0 is still toss, but from working on this it's clear that having that Excel step is really not doing anyone any favours. It's awkward, it's platform-specific, and it just doesn't work very well generally. I'm investigating whether I can build something that really simplifies the whole process and removes all the woolly stuff that keeps breaking, but that might end up being a longer-term FM25 based project. And of course, that'll probably be where SI completely change the way data is structured or something.

Without plugging it in and having a look at it, I'm reaching in the dark a bit, but from experience of errors like that, I suspect it's an ID collision of sorts. When the editor reports that record not found, it's because it's trying to assign a change to an item with ID X, but X doesn't exist. As an example from yours, you're creating a city with ID 2000337279, and then trying to assign all the changes to object 2000314856. That latter object doesn't exist, so you see RECORD NOT FOUND. I'm at work, so can't see the spreadsheet you've linked, there might be something in there, or it could be an issue with the system itself. If I get a chance I'll take a look, but getting less and less time to look at this unfortunately.

Good luck with that. The "proper package" will only provide you with a key to load into Steam.

Ah, sorry, you're right. Dynamic Youth Rating, will edit that.

And that's exactly the problem. Like I said, I'd like that too, but I can completely see why SI would be reticent to do that with the way things are. And I'm not pretending like it's death threats and anarchy (we've not gotten that bad, luckily) but look at Dynamic PA Dynamic Youth Rating (oops) as an example. Communicated as a new feature, and everyone got excited. Way too excited in a lot of cases, because what they imagined that meant was way off what SI imagined it meant (the latter being a lot closer to reality in my opinion). Could that have been communicated more effectively to stop the hype train? Possibly, but it shows that positivity can be a problem too when it gets out of hand. Ultimately, certain people just have a stance in mind, and they'll twist anything to fit that. I see nothing but negatives to SI really starting to communicate more. Anything that lessens that pushes it into "what's the point" territory.

What do people really want or think is happening? I think SI are quite open about wanting to be told what's wrong so they can go and fix it, but after that, what do people want? Constant daily posts of "we're looking"? With the best will in the world, reporting an issue is probably about 5% of getting it fixed, and in some cases that's generous. Complex-looking things might end up being easy, simple-looking things might end up being too costly or difficult to fix to be viable. I'm struggling to think of a way they could communicate without it descending into farce and being ruined by a small minority. A full roadmap and insight into the nitty-gritty would hold value for me, but I expect that would be ammunition for certain people to chuck coal into the hype-train engine so they can complain later when it doesn't meet their completely made-up expectations. Timelines would be an absolutely mental thing for them to communicate for obvious reasons. As a developer myself, I'd far rather they spent their attentions actually working to fix things than feel they needed to coddle people who need them to throw out comments just to show they're not sitting twiddling their thumbs. And those people probably wouldn't be happy then anyway.