Sacked in FM2010

[Elrithral]

I'd much rather new users were helped by the game being more intuative and realistic, rather than taking the easy option of allowing the user to be invincible.

I agree, however we're all talking about this with years of FM/CM experience behind us. Think about FM09 and it's tactics system/difficulty (even compared to 08), then think about what age you were when you started playing the game (I started with 97/98). Do you honestly think that you aged 12/13 would a) have the patience to get to grips with todays FM, b) have the realistic footbaling know how to get to grips with todays FM.

I'm not a fan of difficulty levels, but I hoenstly believe that had CM97/98 been as hard as FM09, I would have played it once and then given up, which does seem a shame tbh.

[chopper99]

I agree, however we're all talking about this with years of FM/CM experience behind us. Think about FM09 and it's tactics system/difficulty (even compared to 08), then think about what age you were when you started playing the game (I started with 97/98). Do you honestly think that you aged 12/13 would a) have the patience to get to grips with todays FM, b) have the realistic footbaling know how to get to grips with todays FM.

I'm not a fan of difficulty levels, but I hoenstly believe that had CM97/98 been as hard as FM09, I would have played it once and then given up, which does seem a shame tbh.

To be honest when I was younger I had much more time and patience than I do now, so I would probably have found it easier to get into FM09. I honestly believe that.

But the main point is that we're talking about what we'd like to see in future games to help newer users. An unsackable option is the easy way out to me. What we actually need is a more intuative tactical interface, better feedback from your staff, more useful match analysis and other realistic things that should be implemented to improve all users' experiences.

[Elrithral]

But the main point is that we're talking about what we'd like to see in future games to help newer users. An unsackable option is the easy way out to me. What we actually need is a more intuative tactical interface, better feedback from your staff, more useful match analysis and other realistic things that should be implemented to improve all users' experiences.

What you said > Unsackable option. No doubt about it, but without what you said I believe an option does need to exist that makes it easier for new users to get to grips with the game.

[chopper99]

What you said > Unsackable option. No doubt about it, but without what you said I believe an option does need to exist that makes it easier for new users to get to grips with the game.

I'll agree with that. Something needs to be done to make the game more intuative for newer users, but the unsackable option is way down the list for me.

[dafuge]

What if disaster/sacking point is Euro League qualification with Manchester United or Barcelona? There's a chance that "lost confidence" will show up, but imo it's not disaster point int he strictest sense.

You take over Bayern Munich at the start of the game and there is no option to tell the board what you might achieve, they expect you to win the league. What if a new player comes to the game and isn't good at it, but isn't awful, they finish 3rd and exit at the group stages of the CL? They will get sacked, but the players won't necessarily have lsot faith in the manager's ability.

I am under the impression that FM09 is a lot more generous in terms of sackings and these examples of 'just falling short' may not result in a sacking, whereas they would on the earlier versions of the game. I may well be wrong though, I might have a go at testing this out.

[Glyn]

I'd suggest a 'sandbox-mode' option, where you can do what you like and not get sacked (so you can learn the game), but it only plays for one season. A bit like an extended demo version.

[Elrithral]

Imo it seems that you are forgiven if you fall short of expectations that you predict, but you are more likely to be sacked if you fall short of expectations that your board force upon you. I.e. if you say you'll win the league, you're less likely to get sacked if you don't win the league, than if the board expect you to win the league. If that makes sense

[thebigman1985]

i honestly dont get why people are against the option of a tickable box that stops u from being fired

YOU DON'T HAVE TO TICK THE BOX IF YOU WANT TO HAVE THE POSSIBILITY OF BEING FIRED STILL

it would help new players adapt to the game, and us old pros can leave the box un-ticked

what is the problem?

[Elrithral]

what is the problem?

If you actually read their posts you'll see they don't have an issue with the setting being added if it actually helps people, they just don't think it will help.

[thebigman1985]

well how would it not help people?

surely anyone would realise finishing 5th with real madrid is not a good thing, it would give them more chance to adjust tactics and etc

[Elrithral]

I'm not going to go over it again, have a read through dafuge and chopper's posts, their reasons and opinions are clearly explained.

[chopper99]

i honestly dont get why people are against the option of a tickable box that stops u from being fired

YOU DON'T HAVE TO TICK THE BOX IF YOU WANT TO HAVE THE POSSIBILITY OF BEING FIRED STILL

it would help new players adapt to the game, and us old pros can leave the box un-ticked

what is the problem?

Read the thread properly.

[Leeds_Leeds_Leeds!]

Why are people against it? If you don't HAVE to use it, then where is the problem?

It won't affect you or your game whatsoever.

I wouldn't use it but if someone wanted to, so what?

Comments like "stick to fifa manager" etc reall drag this forum down.

I couldn't agree more with this guy. This seems like a reasonable request. There are quite a few things in the game which could benefit from an 'optional' tag rather than simply being added in the game, such as press conferences.

Anyway I won't take this subject down another line, only to say I agree. I think there are too many people who do take this game far too seriously and defend the game blindly at all costs. I think it is safe to say these people offer nothing and have helped in now way with the progression of the game.

The comment of stick to fifa manager is both patronising and insulting. To believe you are some genius simply because you who can work a video game without any trouble and mock others who have trouble with it really is a pathetic display of self importance. If you are so superior then perhaps you should be managing in the real world rather than sat behind a computer thinking you are Alex Ferguson.

[chopper99]

The comment of stick to fifa manager is both patronising and insulting. To believe you are some genius simply because you who can work a video game without any trouble and mock others who have trouble with it really is a pathetic display of self importance. If you are so superior then perhaps you should be managing in the real world rather than sat behind a computer thinking you are Alex Ferguson.

While I agree with this I think you'll find that those people are in the minority in this thread. Most people who have disagreed with this idea have done so for vary valid and constructive reasons.

[SCIAG]

As for dropping out of the last playable league, there are some options: Carry on through the game and the game could positively discriminate to promote the team back the next season, or be fired anyway. Or give the option to do both. Options do exist.

And as mentioned before, relegation below the bottom is an extreme scenario if the player loads enough leagues and usually they would. Realistically players who use this will be restarting the game before the first relegation.

Some countries only have one league, though admittedly that's changing now with the league editor. However, what if I didn't know how the Peruvian Second Tier was structured, and couldn't load it?

The positively discriminating example is the best I've heard yet, but holidaying for a season would be boring and slow.

IMO a good number of players who'd use this would have no interest in managing in the lower leagues.

The morale-tactics issue: if problems with your tactics lead you to get into a situation where morale is rock bottom and players have lost confidence, then you have to be an extremely good motivator, man manager and tactician to turn that around. The only way I could see somebody pulling it off would be if they took over a side that was already struggling and they took a while to adjust to the tactics (a situation I've been in, though I wasn't quite at crisis point).

[Blanchflower1]

I think its a good idea as it is an option, I cant see why people would be so against it when you dont have to use it.

I agree with you here, Bro!!

[Stevicus]

No point in shooting down the OP tbh.

After all, it's only an option, it does not mean it has to be used.

"It's not realistic" is a poor reason to not include this.

I would like it, would help me get a long save on the go.

[therubberducky]

Dont see the point. If youre mediocre at the game you deserve the sack tbh.

[re-VELA-tion]

I find it bizarre that some people are so against this idea. Nobody would have to use it but it would be a help for less experienced players.

As I've heard mentioned many times on these forums, everyone is allowed to play the game how they like, so I would see this as a positive addition.(not that I would use it )

[tigerhgrrrrrr]

Dont see the point. If youre mediocre at the game you deserve the sack tbh.

No!!!!!, you dont deserve "punishment" for lack of performance - its a game for Chisakes! It is "Football Manager" not "Massage The Ego Of Underachievers In Life Just Because They Are Quite Good At What Is, At The End Of The Day, Just A Game".

[Stevicus]

I swear, if someone raises the "It's called football manager" excuse one more time..........

This is why GD suffers these days, it's all repetition.

[Andy[ro]]

There should be a sticky tread with "Stupid questions" like Can you become chairman? Can you spend your earned money? or The Not Be Able To Sack button. Some of your ideas will turn Football Manager into a Shooter game!

[SCIAG]

I swear, if someone raises the "It's called football manager" excuse one more time..........

This is why GD suffers these days, it's all repetition.

It's your tactics

[thebigman1985]

Dont see the point. If youre mediocre at the game you deserve the sack tbh.

im sorry alex fergason

ive never been sacked in fm history, but i still see it as a viable option for newcomers to the game

[bearsy]

No!!!!!, you dont deserve "punishment" for lack of performance - its a game for Chisakes! It is "Football Manager" not "Massage The Ego Of Underachievers In Life Just Because They Are Quite Good At What Is, At The End Of The Day, Just A Game".

Nor is it a game for 'pampered mummy's boys' who are 'wonderful at everything'. The problem with some people is that they think we should be rewarding mediocrity. If you ain't good enough, then you should get the sack. And yeah, its a game. A game that strives to be the most realistic representation of the footballing world. Adding such functions simply degrade the game, IMO.

[tigerhgrrrrrr]

Nor is it a game for 'pampered mummy's boys' who are 'wonderful at everything'. The problem with some people is that they think we should be rewarding mediocrity. If you ain't good enough, then you should get the sack. And yeah, its a game. A game that strives to be the most realistic representation of the footballing world. Adding such functions simply degrade the game, IMO.

"Pampered mummies boys" who are not "wonderful" at FM apparantly! LOL. Once more, my posts are not about "rewarding mediocrity" just not about "punishing lack of success" or indeed "failure" if that word gratifies you as you insist on pushing people down below your own perceived "level", apparantly. It still worries me that some are so passionate about stopping others playing the game their own way, especially when that "way" is the inclusion of an "option". Your own Posts show no lack of intelligence but they also show no compassion to those who maybe do not have your gameplaying "gift", which is a little sad. But sadly you are not alone in your views it seems, so I shall save my efforts for threads that look forward with understanding, though I feel sorry for the OP - his question was not as unreasonable as it has been made to appear. PS. Realism isnt everything.

[Wee Aja]

I have not, nor will I, read this entire thread (as I've heard it all before) but I'm going to say exactly what I say each time this idea comes up.... I really don't see the problem with having this option. Every other game has selectable difficulty levels, I don't see why FM should be any different.

[bearsy]

"Pampered mummies boys" who are not "wonderful" at FM apparantly! LOL. Once more, my posts are not about "rewarding mediocrity" just not about "punishing lack of success" or indeed "failure" if that word gratifies you as you insist on pushing people down below your own perceived "level", apparantly. It still worries me that some are so passionate about stopping others playing the game their own way, especially when that "way" is the inclusion of an "option". Your own Posts show no lack of intelligence but they also show no compassion to those who maybe do not have your gameplaying "gift", which is a little sad. But sadly you are not alone in your views it seems, so I shall save my efforts for threads that look forward with understanding, though I feel sorry for the OP - his question was not as unreasonable as it has been made to appear. PS. Realism isnt everything.

You seem very aggressive and seem incapable of responding reasonably to a thread without resorting to insulting someone who disagrees with your opinion. It shows yourself to have a lack of manners, class and intelligence. I was merely responding to your point about being punished for a lack of performance. That point alone is probably the most ridiculous statement I have read in the entire thread. It is a football management sim. Therefore it tries to simulate scenarios faced in modern day football. Now show me a football club where a lack of performance is not punished, often by the sack.

Realism is not everything. You are right, provided you are playing a zombie shooter or a alien fighting game. But this is Football Manager and if it loses its realism then it lowers its standards and allows it's competitors to catch up. Perhaps if realism is not your thing, dare I suggest you try another game?

Oh and for the record, I am by no means a gameplaying god with a gift. Don't quote me as saying I had a gift, when I have made no such statement. I am quite happily an average gamer enjoying mediocre success.

[Burnleyfan4life]

i think a few people are saying that whats the point telling SI to make the game more and more realistic if your going to throw in something that doesnt really need to be there. if you get sacked and are new retire and become new user at that club or save and reload if you lose, i dont personally see a point in it but someone earlier said "new players who may not know football" well if you dont know football why would buy the game, yes maybe a young player just starting to use it but why not put a ticker during a processing screen saying for any problems or advice on the game go to "sigames.com" would be alot simplier and wouldnt make the game seem too unrealistic

[tigerhgrrrrrr]

You seem very aggressive and seem incapable of responding reasonably to a thread without resorting to insulting someone who disagrees with your opinion. It shows yourself to have a lack of manners, class and intelligence. I was merely responding to your point about being punished for a lack of performance. That point alone is probably the most ridiculous statement I have read in the entire thread. It is a football management sim. Therefore it tries to simulate scenarios faced in modern day football. Now show me a football club where a lack of performance is not punished, often by the sack.

Realism is not everything. You are right, provided you are playing a zombie shooter or a alien fighting game. But this is Football Manager and if it loses its realism then it lowers its standards and allows it's competitors to catch up. Perhaps if realism is not your thing, dare I suggest you try another game?

Oh and for the record, I am by no means a gameplaying god with a gift. Don't quote me as saying I had a gift, when I have made no such statement. I am quite happily an average gamer enjoying mediocre success.

I think this judgement is extremely harsh and more agressive and classless than my own previous posts (my opinion of course), though I shall let others and especially the moderators be the arbiters in that point, however...

a/ I apologise for making you think so

b/ I apologise that you feel insulted although insinuating you had a gift when you havent was indeed an error on my part

c/ It is not universally accepted as a sim (no matter how it is branded), it is a game. Dont believe me?, then ask a real football manager if you want confimation of that point.

d/ As I so keenly stated in an earlier post, all opinions aired are opinions and not statements of fact - and I accept that mine may not be right, necessarily.

e/ NO Poster in favour of "unsackable" has cited realism as a reason for it - its an OPTIONAL aid for gameplayers.

f/ I would rather in my own way try to improve FM than ditch it and play another game.

Am still confused that such passion is aimed at the non-inclusion of an option.

Any common ground to share Bearsy?, because I am no longer engaging in anything that may be deemed oneupmanship in this thread.

[thebigman1985]

Nor is it a game for 'pampered mummy's boys' who are 'wonderful at everything'. The problem with some people is that they think we should be rewarding mediocrity. If you ain't good enough, then you should get the sack. And yeah, its a game. A game that strives to be the most realistic representation of the footballing world. Adding such functions simply degrade the game, IMO.

nothing worse than a keyboard warrior who thinks hes the best cus he can play a football management game and do well!

have a cookie mate! your awesome, can we be e-friends and you can tell me all about how you downloaded a tactic from these forums that exploited the match engine!

your so cool!!!

[RTNs]

would be great if in fm10, when the chairman accepts an offer for a player that you really don't want to be sold if you could threaten to quit in an attempt to stop the sale:thup:

[Kenco]

nothing worse than a keyboard warrior who thinks hes the best cus he can play a football management game and do well!

have a cookie mate! your awesome, can we be e-friends and you can tell me all about how you downloaded a tactic from these forums that exploited the match engine!

your so cool!!!

Ha ha! Funniest post in this thread!

[Fqdd]

That's an interesting response from someone who uses downloaded tactics. It's ok for you to 'cheat' but not for others?

The truth is, everybody plays their game how they see fit. It doesn't affect anybody else whatsoever, so no harm done. If I am doing a 'bring a lower league club up through the ranks' game I could possibly use the no sack option. Other than that I probably wouldn't bother. Either way it's no skin of anybody's nose.

I'm sorry I hurt your feelings, mate.

[DreamReaver]

I think it would be a great option in FM.

Other than helping new players to the game, giving people a chance to play without the worry of being sacked if they happen to be not very good at the game, but it also opens up multiple challenges for the experienced managed.

You could see how you go by having a team with all the same nationalities, yes I know you can play a national team, but having a team full of Australians playing in the English leagues would be an interesting challenge. Imagine having a team like Liverpool, but only with French players or with players with only one name.

You could try a completely different formation for each new season and see how you go.

You could try a creating a team with only teenagers, or whatever.

I think the possibilities would be endless, and you wouldn't have to worry about being sacked if what ever you wanting to do with your team turns out to be catastrophic.

And when your players loose all moral/confidence with you, hate you etc., it could be reset for the start of the new season. And if you happen to be relegated in the lowest division you have set for your league, the game will just either end or doesn't let you get relegated so you can continue on.

As a lot of people have said, it would be only an option and if you don't want to use it, you don't have to and that way it won't effect your experience on how you play your game and will continue to keep it real for the people that want it realistic.

[Wee Aja]

Some very interesting points, DreamReaver - you've expanded on the idea somewhat

ps - about your signature.... Bill Shankly was Scottish

[tigerhgrrrrrr]

I think it would be a great option in FM.

Other than helping new players to the game, giving people a chance to play without the worry of being sacked if they happen to be not very good at the game, but it also opens up multiple challenges for the experienced managed.

You could see how you go by having a team with all the same nationalities, yes I know you can play a national team, but having a team full of Australians playing in the English leagues would be an interesting challenge. Imagine having a team like Liverpool, but only with French players or with players with only one name.

You could try a completely different formation for each new season and see how you go.

You could try a creating a team with only teenagers, or whatever.

I think the possibilities would be endless, and you wouldn't have to worry about being sacked if what ever you wanting to do with your team turns out to be catastrophic.

And when your players loose all moral/confidence with you, hate you etc., it could be reset for the start of the new season. And if you happen to be relegated in the lowest division you have set for your league, the game will just either end or doesn't let you get relegated so you can continue on.

As a lot of people have said, it would be only an option and if you don't want to use it, you don't have to and that way it won't effect your experience on how you play your game and will continue to keep it real for the people that want it realistic.

Whilst I agree in principle with your Post I had kept away from the "Relegated team wont get relegated" issue. Whilst I support unsackability my own view on realism would clash with League tables being "Adjusted" at the Seasons end, but that is just my view and Options are options as I have said (am just a little too much of a traditionalist for that). I just feel that particular step could give the likes of Craigcwwe & Bearsy a more "reasonable" arguement for its non-inclusion.

It sems that some can only see the unsackable option as a charter for losers to make themselves feel good about themselves, just like those who suggest a "win the game" button. Does anyone really think that a player who is prepared to persist but lose match after match hence the need not to be sacked, would be the sort of person who would want to cheat to fix results?. Ultimately they can "manage" their opponents teams & fiddle matches anyway so winning is assured, if winning is the only object.

If anyone is concerned that FM records would be deemed pointless by artifical game aids maybe by selecting "unsackable" or any other similar inclusion, the players name could be modified by the game code so "John Smith" will always read "Coach John Smith" or "John Smith Jnr." or something, just so those that some perceive as "cheats" are always clearly associated with the fact that they have had use of an in game aid. Personally I dont care how other play the game, "cheat" or whatever, though it is annoying when those that have fiddled come on Posting about their billiance.

[x42bn6]

Nor is it a game for 'pampered mummy's boys' who are 'wonderful at everything'. The problem with some people is that they think we should be rewarding mediocrity. If you ain't good enough, then you should get the sack. And yeah, its a game. A game that strives to be the most realistic representation of the footballing world. Adding such functions simply degrade the game, IMO.

I don't think you're getting the definition of a game, whose purpose is to entertain, not teach or frustrate. It is not attempting to reward mediocrity or punish success.

There are features in the game which are not realistic. Managers do not have 100% scouting knowledge of their countries; managers do not use sliders to dictate tactics and Vagner Love is not a must-buy player in real-life.

The idea of an "unsackable option" is possibly misworded or inappropriate but I don't understand why people are coming down so hard on it for the sake of "it's not realistic" when a game by definition is not realistic.

A "training mode" of some sort where players are unsackable plus other options (such as the tactics wizard automatically enabled, automatically enabled help, useful help bubbles, no attribute masking and so on) would help new players immensely without frustrating them. Once they've wet their toes, then they can turn the mode off (or just some of the options) and they are ready to go.

[Elrithral]

Nor is it a game for 'pampered mummy's boys' who are 'wonderful at everything'. The problem with some people is that they think we should be rewarding mediocrity. If you ain't good enough, then you should get the sack. And yeah, its a game. A game that strives to be the most realistic representation of the footballing world. Adding such functions simply degrade the game, IMO.

Is this post serious? Very disappointed that an interesting debate with daf and chopper has turned into a slanging match for the socially inept.

[DayleSmith]

How would it help new players :S

They should, as someone else suggested, learn from mistakes like all of us did.

They'd be learning the game the wrong way. Also, by the time you would usually be sacked, the players morale would be rock bottom so it'd hardly make it easier.

[x42bn6]

How would it help new players :S

They should, as someone else suggested, learn from mistakes like all of us did.

They'd be learning the game the wrong way. Also, by the time you would usually be sacked, the players morale would be rock bottom so it'd hardly make it easier.

There is no "right way" or "wrong way" when it comes to games like these.

You can never "beat" Football Manager so there is no "right" way of playing.

Surely losing multiple games allows one to learn? How does getting sacked by itself teach you anything unless you sent off an ultimatum?

[jakobx]

I would use the no sack option if it was available. Not because i suck at the game but because i dont trust the game. I had quite a few close calls in FM08 because of crappy confidence module. Or how about those random team takeover sackings. Sure those happen in real life, but this is a game. You shouldnt be punished randomly.

I am still wondering why some people are against this OPTION. You dont have to use it. So why do people think others shouldnt be allowed to use it? Ive read the thread but i cant see any good reasons against this option. Some might say its not realistic but thats just laughable. What part of FM is realistic anyway? So what are those good reasons against this option people are talking about?

[dafuge]

Is this post serious? Very disappointed that an interesting debate with daf and chopper has turned into a slanging match for the socially inept.

It is quite sad the way this has gone. I was quite enjoying a debate over the practicalities of the option but it seems to have just gone back to the same old realism argument, which inevitably has resorted to petty bickering.

Just to throw another idea in, what about manager contracts? Would an 'unsackable' option also come with an 'automatic contract renewal' feature?

[Elrithral]

They'd be learning the game the wrong way.

I'd love to hear all about the right way......

Just to throw another idea in, what about manager contracts? Would an 'unsackable' option also come with an 'automatic contract renewal' feature?

Perhaps there wouldn't be a contract, no need for negotiation or offers etc. A permanent rolling contract?

I don't think that many people would use it for career games, but say someone wanted to write a story for FMS in which they were hopeless, but somehow kept their job or someone wanted to replicate a realistic tactic that their club uses, but they couldn't get it right straight away and had to go through a number of "new users". It would be a handy feature, but an avoidable feature for those of us who enjoy the thrill of avoiding redundancy by the skin of our teeth

[Suzie MUFC]

Other SI games have had a similar option so they already have the know how to put it in. I don't see why there would be such opposition to the idea. If you're not interested in using it then don't use it, but a little checkbox in the options menu isn't going to ruin or affect your game in any way at all and it could make someone else's game more enjoyable. I think it would be a decent idea and don't see a problem with it at all.

I was just about to say the same thing, make it an optional checkbox when starting a game like the "Make transfer budgets in first transfer window available" and "Fog of War". Have to say I would've like this option when I was managing Liverpool a while back, I was really into managing them, and then 3 seasons in, I was sacked because we were constantly 8th. Fair enough, but it ruined a nice experience for me.

[dafuge]

Have to say I would've like this option when I was managing Liverpool a while back, I was really into managing them, and then 3 seasons in, I was sacked because we were constantly 8th. Fair enough, but it ruined a nice experience for me.

Did you consider using a save game editor to add yourself back as manager?

[bearsy]

nothing worse than a keyboard warrior who thinks hes the best cus he can play a football management game and do well!

have a cookie mate! your awesome, can we be e-friends and you can tell me all about how you downloaded a tactic from these forums that exploited the match engine!

your so cool!!!

At what point have I said I am good at the game? I'm not. But on the rare occasions I do achieve some success, I want it to mean something, gain a sense of achievement. Whats wrong with that?

If you read my post you would realise, or maybe not, that I was simply stating that the game should not be rewarding those who struggle or are mediocre. If it did where is the incentive to improve and achieve? You should only be rewarded for excellence, as in real life.

[x42bn6]

At what point have I said I am good at the game? I'm not. But on the rare occasions I do achieve some success, I want it to mean something, gain a sense of achievement. Whats wrong with that?

If you read my post you would realise, or maybe not, that I was simply stating that the game should not be rewarding those who struggle or are mediocre. If it did where is the incentive to improve and achieve? You should only be rewarded for excellence, as in real life.

Bloody hell mate, the whole point of a game is to relax and chill!

The only gain you have in being good at Football Manager is a sense of fun. Even when losing you're meant to have some measure of fun. Success in Football Manager does not translate over into real life and should never do so.

You work hard in life so as to reap the benefits of an increased salary and better quality of life. You do not "work" in Football Manager. Football Manager, like all games, is not a job (unless you are a professional gamer, and I don't believe there are any for Football Manager), and therefore you have absolutely no reason to pour your life-blood into the game and strive to be better.

Some people will be happy to play with their Blue Square North team and stay as a semi-professional side, even if it means never going above Blue Square Premier. Sure, it's not the most successful thing in the world but who cares? If they enjoy the game that way, then so be it.

[bearsy]

I don't think you're getting the definition of a game, whose purpose is to entertain, not teach or frustrate. It is not attempting to reward mediocrity or punish success.

There are features in the game which are not realistic. Managers do not have 100% scouting knowledge of their countries; managers do not use sliders to dictate tactics and Vagner Love is not a must-buy player in real-life.

The idea of an "unsackable option" is possibly misworded or inappropriate but I don't understand why people are coming down so hard on it for the sake of "it's not realistic" when a game by definition is not realistic.

A "training mode" of some sort where players are unsackable plus other options (such as the tactics wizard automatically enabled, automatically enabled help, useful help bubbles, no attribute masking and so on) would help new players immensely without frustrating them. Once they've wet their toes, then they can turn the mode off (or just some of the options) and they are ready to go.

I quite agree that there are elements of the game that are unrealistic. For me the fact that at the majority of the big clubs contracts and transfer negotiation are handled by a 'sporting director', club president, or chief exec. However, I personally feel that the result of this and the issues you mentioned, are due to the best interpretations of the developers at producing certain areas of the game as realistically as possible. For example, the match engine as changed in the new edition as they attempt to make the whole experience more realistic.

But, this is completely different to adding an 'unsackable' option, as this is 'deliberately' stepping away from realism, with the aim of aiding the user. Personally, I would much rather see other options, guides and aids be added as they would assist the user in understanding the game. The 'unsackable' option, however, does not teach the user anything. It merely gives the user more time at a club, and allowing the user more time to find a solution.

My main issues with the option are

1/ Ultimately the option is unworkable, as the user will be sacked if they run out of playable leagues. Simply not relegating a team is a complete no no for me. The reasons for which are obvious I hope.

2/ The option does not 'teach' newbies anything. It does not give the user anything other than time.

3/ Extra time at a club does not necessarily help the newbie. For example, a user could have lost so many games that the squad becomes so demoralised that regardless of how the user improves their tactics to suit their team, they will still lose.

4/ Learning how to improve a team is highly dependant on the situation and the game at the time. Solving the problems at one particular club are highly unlikely to act as a 'blue print' for success at other clubs.

My solutions to the option are basically to not include the option, but improve the tuition and help offered to the gamer. Great strides have been made in helping the user in recent iterations, including preset tactics and positions, help windows that pop up everynow and then, team reports helping see weaknesses on squad positions, assistant manager info on match day (which I find invaluable) to name but a few. However, some users chose not to take advantage of the options and will never learn regardless of how much time they spend unsacked at a club.

Just my thoughts, now let the slagging begin.

[aggressive minor]

Despite everyone jumping all over him, it is actually a good idea. The game is much harder than it used to be and so many people can find it a bit overwhelming. Its a good idea for those struggling with the game.

People on here suspect and moan about cheats, but end of the day you play the game how you want! I used to cheat loads in my younger CM days, but nowdays I would never even contemplate it. Play the game how you want! (Just don't boast about how good you are if you cheat!)