Sacked in FM2010

[bearsy]

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.

I am well aware that it is not a blooming job, but thanks for pointing that out.

However, i would imagine that the major appeal for most players of the game is to take over their favourite team and immerse themselves completely in a realistic representation of the footballing world. The appeal of the game would dramatically decrease should it be unrealistic, hence why more users chose FM over CM, as FM is far more realistic.

[x42bn6]

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.

Not unworkable as we have options. As mentioned before the sorts of users who will use this option will have restarted before the first relegation, or would have saved-and-restarted matches. And if for some reason the user manages to bring Barcelona below Tercera División (or whatever the depth is in the game), then we have various ways to help the user - fire them anyway, or let them play on and positively discriminate to force promotion the next season, so Barcelona are in a playable league again but the user has to go on holiday.

Of course it is awkward but it is awkward because it will not happen in real life. However, some users will benefit from this option.

The real incentive for this game is to not get fired because you finish 2nd in 3 consecutive seasons with Manchester United or something. It's not the newbie's fault for making one or two mistakes.

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

Arguably neither does firing the user. Fear of being sacked lessens the fun in the game for the user.

Besides, what can the user do to "try harder"? Poke the sliders a little more?

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.

Morale plays a large part but no club slumps forever.

As said before sometimes these users will simply restart and try again (and again).

It helps them in the sense that they don't get fired from their favourite club.

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.

Well done: What does this have to do with things? These users will likely not want to jump from club to club and realistically they'll know that Reo-Coker cannot play the same way as Messi or Ronaldo.

Just as in career games and with a lot of us who play multiple games at various different periods in time, sometimes concurrently: We can take the good experiences and hone them into new games, so we know that Vagner Love = awesome => Sign Vagner Love. Failing that we look for a striker similar to Vagner Love and sign him instead. Newbies will learn this with or without the unsackable option.

So my view is simple. It's a bloody game and nobody has to learn anything from it. We get silly newbie questions on the forums all the time and people are happy to answer them irregardless. The editors are readily downloadable and preset tactics and training always helps things. People take the game to different levels of seriousness and not everyone aspires to be the number one Football Manager player.

Some people are simply happy to take control of their favourite club and try to get them into the Premiership. Some people are happy to take control of Liverpool and relegate them. Some people are happy to take Manchester City and bankrupt them as a challenge. To each his own and to try and impose a blasé "YOU MUST IMPROVE AND SACKING IS SUPPOSED TO SCARE YOU INTO DOING SO" into users for a game is quite frankly wrong. People play games to alleviate pressure, not pile more on themselves.

[x42bn6]

I am well aware that it is not a blooming job, but thanks for pointing that out.

However, i would imagine that the major appeal for most players of the game is to take over their favourite team and immerse themselves completely in a realistic representation of the footballing world. The appeal of the game would dramatically decrease should it be unrealistic, hence why more users chose FM over CM, as FM is far more realistic.

Realism is just one part of why Football Manager is more popular than Championship Manager.

However, can you not see how a "training mode" will attract a certain type of user?

I don't see the game's appeal dramatically decreasing as a result of an option which is fairly-well hidden but defaulted off and made clear that it will help newcomers to the game. Dumbing-down features historically has always helped the uptake of a product as long as the dumbing-down isn't taken too extreme (the "Win" button). Yes there are a solid number of users who have played Football Manager before it was even called Football Manager. However, if you want your product to grow, you must grow your market and find more customers in some way.

Upgrading the product again and again can only go so far.

[bearsy]

Not unworkable as we have options. As mentioned before the sorts of users who will use this option will have restarted before the first relegation, or would have saved-and-restarted matches. And if for some reason the user manages to bring Barcelona below Tercera División (or whatever the depth is in the game), then we have various ways to help the user - fire them anyway, or let them play on and positively discriminate to force promotion the next season, so Barcelona are in a playable league again but the user has to go on holiday.

Of course it is awkward but it is awkward because it will not happen in real life. However, some users will benefit from this option.

The real incentive for this game is to not get fired because you finish 2nd in 3 consecutive seasons with Manchester United or something. It's not the newbie's fault for making one or two mistakes.

An interesting point about forcing the user to go on holiday for a season. Best suggestion yet for making it playable. However, the user does not learn anything by being on holiday, so what is the point?

And when I was suggesting about what happens when they run out of leagues I wasnt really thinking of the player who manages Barcelona, Man U or Real. Chances are that despite the poor play of the user they will never get relegated. Yeah it will help those players who get sacked after 3 seasons as manager of United finishing second, but as to why they should be getting the sack after a run of those results suggests the issue is more with FM than training the user. You can bet United IRL wouldnt sack Fergie if he came second 3 years in a row. Wenger hasnt won anything in 5 years and hasnt been sacked, so shouldnt be in FM.

Arguably neither does firing the user. Fear of being sacked lessens the fun in the game for the user.

Besides, what can the user do to "try harder"? Poke the sliders a little more?

I was under the impression that people were clamouring for the inclusion of this option was because it allowed the user to learn how to play the game without the fear of the sack. All you have done with this point is agree that not sacking someone does not offer anything to the user. 'Fear of the sack'? As you keep saying, it is a game. Why should there be any fear?

Morale plays a large part but no club slumps forever.

As said before sometimes these users will simply restart and try again (and again).

It helps them in the sense that they don't get fired from their favourite club.

Agreed, no slump lasts for ever, unless of course you are Leeds, or Norwich, or Wimbledon. Surely the user who restarts will learn more about the match engine when he has players with a good to very good moral, rather than those with very poor moral.

[malleria]

Its more than a game, and besides, its a simulation, which means they try to get as close to relity as they can. A simulation of sackings in rwal life is that you cant just say i wont be sacked. Everyone of us who play the game got used to it ok, because we know football, if you dont know football, dont buy it. And if it gets that bad read the manual then play it and if u do get sacked start again and keep trying until u get it.

[Serdar]

I would love to have it, I dont mind losing matches but I hate it when I'm sacked because of poor couple of months following a 5 years of success. And please dont put this is realistic excuse, this is a GAME in first place. Another option for it in "new game settings" similar to hide player attributes. The ones who wants to have realistic stress can untick it but I personally would love to know that I wont be sacked after investing many hours into my club. Basically at the moment relegation means end of carreer, if you relagete then %90 you are fired and I dont feel like waiting for another team after getting fired.

[Elrithral]

Its more than a game, and besides, its a simulation, which means they try to get as close to relity as they can. A simulation of sackings in rwal life is that you cant just say i wont be sacked. Everyone of us who play the game got used to it ok, because we know football, if you dont know football, dont buy it. And if it gets that bad read the manual then play it and if u do get sacked start again and keep trying until u get it.

This simulation tripe grinds my gears. If you're so heart set on simulation and replicating real life football, why's it ok for a butcher from Leeds to pretend to manager of Real Madrid, but not for someone to avoid the sack? Which is more unrealistic?

[SCIAG]

I hate it when people use the "it's a game excuse" too- ultimately you give them two sticks and they grab the wrong end of them both.

"The ME isn't realistic enough"

"It's a game, it shouldn't look realistic"

[Serdar]

I did in FM08 after 22 seasons of success, one poor season and I was out.

But not in FM09, like you say, there doesn't seem to be the unfair sackings of previous versions.

I really hope this is the case. In Fm07 I had a team from fourth tier, I promoted them to first tier in eight years. Lots of time were invested in team. At the beginning of my ninth season I did not yet have enough money to challenge with other teams in transfer so I had go with promising youg players and hope to improve my team in cheap ways.

I had a succesfull transfer season and managed to bring 5 under 20 years old who were all very promising but as expected I started the season very bad.

I knew that team was growing in stats and adapting but results were not coming yet, by february I could already see improvement in performance and results but we were still second last on the table. But despite all my optimistic view and to be honest entertatining challenge to raise my team, board did not have more patience on me. They said something like "I cant help them to reach their potential", a local team 8 years ago now fires me after 8 years of success!. That was not fun!, that was not even realisitic!

I yet did not experience and such situation in FM09 but I know if it happens I wont touch that version again

[tcoleman1]

Stupid idea, along with setting the price of tickets, hotdogs, etc.

Although people moan about setting match price tickets because its too 'Football Managery'. I do think it could be an idea. For example on Carling cup night you could lower the price of tickets to encourage more people to go. Setting season ticket prices would also be useful, then you can lower or higher them depending on what your previous seasons number was.

[dafuge]

I really hope this is the case. In Fm07 I had a team from fourth tier, I promoted them to first tier in eight years. Lots of time were invested in team. At the beginning of my ninth season I did not yet have enough money to challenge with other teams in transfer so I had go with promising youg players and hope to improve my team in cheap ways.

I had a succesfull transfer season and managed to bring 5 under 20 years old who were all very promising but as expected I started the season very bad.

I knew that team was growing in stats and adapting but results were not coming yet, by february I could already see improvement in performance and results but we were still second last on the table. But despite all my optimistic view and to be honest entertatining challenge to raise my team, board did not have more patience on me. They said something like "I cant help them to reach their potential", a local team 8 years ago now fires me after 8 years of success!. That was not fun!, that was not even realisitic!

I yet did not experience and such situation in FM09 but I know if it happens I wont touch that version again

I had almost the same experience with FM07, I took Staines from the BSS to the PL only to be sacked after a board takeover at the end of the season. My form towards the end of the season wasn't great, but we still finished above our expectation and our league position never dropped. Annoyingly, because the takeover happened at the end of the season I never got a chance to 'prove myself'.

I kicked up quite a fuss at the time (some of you might remember it) and got some pretty good feedback from people at SI who worked on that area of the game. The 'unsackable' option came into the discussion then, but I wasn't personally interested in it, I was more interested in unfair sackings being tweaked.

I can't confirm it, but I have a feeling that FM09 is a lot kinder with sackings for managers who have made great progress with a club.

This message:

is new to this version and I suspect that my previous success will be taken into account should my job come ever under threat. Again, I'm not 100% sure this is the case but this message didn't appear on older versions where unfair sackings seemed a lot more common.

[jakobx]

Its more than a game, and besides, its a simulation, which means they try to get as close to relity as they can. A simulation of sackings in rwal life is that you cant just say i wont be sacked. Everyone of us who play the game got used to it ok, because we know football, if you dont know football, dont buy it. And if it gets that bad read the manual then play it and if u do get sacked start again and keep trying until u get it.

Its not a simulation. Its a game. There is nothing in FM that is even remotely like being a real manager. Dont pretend there is. Its as much a manager simulator as doom is a soldier simulator.

To get back to the topic. The feature requested here is optional. Those who dont want to use it dont have to use it. There are many options in the game that i dont use yet i dont come here complaining why they are still in the game. Other people might use them and its none of my business if they choose to do that.

[Elrithral]

Its not a simulation. Its a game. There is nothing in FM that is even remotely like being a real manager. Dont pretend there is. Its as much a manager simulator as doom is a soldier simulator.

That's jumping from one end of the rubbish argument spectrum to the other. It's a happy medium afaic, half simulation, half game, so neither argument actually stands up.

[lance101]

If you don't like being sacked, you can always retire the "sacked manager" and add a new manager right on the same day, with the same name... no need to add this feature!

[SCIAG]

That's jumping from one end of the rubbish argument spectrum to the other. It's a happy medium afaic, half simulation, half game, so neither argument actually stands up.

Exactly

And it's the better half of each. As opposed to "stupidly hard" (simulation) and "not based on real football" (game).

[bearsy]

Although people moan about setting match price tickets because its too 'Football Managery'. I do think it could be an idea. For example on Carling cup night you could lower the price of tickets to encourage more people to go. Setting season ticket prices would also be useful, then you can lower or higher them depending on what your previous seasons number was.

It is not the football managers job to set prices. That belongs to the Chief exec and other non-footballing employees at the club.

[x42bn6]

An interesting point about forcing the user to go on holiday for a season. Best suggestion yet for making it playable. However, the user does not learn anything by being on holiday, so what is the point?

The user learns nothing by being fired either. However, they get to continue with their own team, which is a plus for the user.

I was under the impression that people were clamouring for the inclusion of this option was because it allowed the user to learn how to play the game without the fear of the sack. All you have done with this point is agree that not sacking someone does not offer anything to the user. 'Fear of the sack'? As you keep saying, it is a game. Why should there be any fear?

There is a "fear" because the user doesn't want to get fired, and there is a chance it may happen. This is fear.

Agreed, no slump lasts for ever, unless of course you are Leeds, or Norwich, or Wimbledon. Surely the user who restarts will learn more about the match engine when he has players with a good to very good moral, rather than those with very poor moral.

And as I've said before they don't have to learn anything if they don't want to. They simply want to play with their favourite team.

[SCIAG]

I think if this was implemented, it would be a good idea if, when the user reaches to point when they would have been fired, a message comes up saying something like:

Under different circumstances, the board would have sacked you today. However, we think you deserve another chance, as a former member of the board has given us some compelling evidence

Let's expand from there (this part is spur of the moment): maybe given this message, players with certain personalities have a dramatic increase in motivation for five or six games. If they play well/the team wins, they stay motivated, and their morale rises even quicker than usual. There are messages of the fans getting behind the team more, maybe the players see small increases in attributes like work rate and determination. That stops the "slump" after it hits what would normally be rock bottom. It would be as if a new manager has been appointed, except they haven't.

Of course, it still depends on the motivational qualities of the manager- if he says something majorly wrong ("I expect a win" away to Man United, as manager of Stoke, for example) then the player's won't be so motivated. It doesn't just apply to team talks obviously, also media, player and manager interaction. And he has to get his tactics right, and deal with the issue of form.

[mseel82]

Personally this idea isn't for me, let me get that out the way early.

But for those players that like to play as their favourite teams without getting sacked, what about a "Sandbox" option. In other words you cant get sacked, you could move freely between clubs whenever you want, transfer any player without contract hindrance or transfer funds or budgets. This would give your new player the oppurtunity of trying tactics ect with the best players or without fear of a sacking. This option would also be quite interesting for sharing saved games. You could create any number of scenarios using this option and then turn "Sandbox" off and put "Career" mode back on to play the scenario out.

Would this not be a better option than a "unsackable" option as all users could use it for making scenarios and new users can try it for tactics and players ect...

Thoughts??

[tigerhgrrrrrr]

Another option instead / alongside "Unsackable" could be "Neutral Morale" where all players are peranemently on normal morale regardless of any influencing feature. As the morale effecting game components (eg team talks) are considered by some to be very "buggy" or poorly coded / implemented, it could help strugglers a long way.

[SCIAG]

But then, you might as well remove team talks, all forms of interaction, the downsides of tutoring, offering players wages more than their team mates, and so on.

[Elrithral]

I see your point tiger and it makes sense, but the more tinkering involved the less like FM it becomes. Unsackable is bad enough, by all accounts, neutral morale would cause outrage.

[jakobx]

But then, you might as well remove team talks, all forms of interaction, the downsides of tutoring, offering players wages more than their team mates, and so on.

remove team talks? That's actually a good idea

[tigerhgrrrrrr]

I see your point tiger and it makes sense, but the more tinkering involved the less like FM it becomes. Unsackable is bad enough, by all accounts, neutral morale would cause outrage.

Yes thats what I thought! LOL

Still, it would only be an option, but it machine gun's down in flames the "lets not go unsackable because of the morale problem it causes..." arguement.

Now, lets wait for all those reasoned and polite responses.....

[Kenco]

Personally this idea isn't for me, let me get that out the way early.

But for those players that like to play as their favourite teams without getting sacked, what about a "Sandbox" option. In other words you cant get sacked, you could move freely between clubs whenever you want, transfer any player without contract hindrance or transfer funds or budgets. This would give your new player the oppurtunity of trying tactics ect with the best players or without fear of a sacking. This option would also be quite interesting for sharing saved games. You could create any number of scenarios using this option and then turn "Sandbox" off and put "Career" mode back on to play the scenario out.

Would this not be a better option than a "unsackable" option as all users could use it for making scenarios and new users can try it for tactics and players ect...

Thoughts??

I think we already have the editor for this.

[jdlovesunited]

Its a game, not real life. I am one of these players that likes to stick to one club and thats it, when i get fired i usually have a sulk and end my save and then struggle to find the urge to start a new game. All it takes is a few bad injuries, a take over or just punching above your weight for a season and then your 12 seasons building up the club mean jack sh*@.

If its optional no way can it be a bad thing, especially for new players. Since they seem to be making FM10 newbie friendlier.

Also the argument that what happens when you get relegated below the bottom playable league, either the game ends or you just DONT GET RELEGATED *SHOCK HORROR* .............. its a game, get over yourselves.

[dafuge]

All it takes is a few bad injuries, a take over or just punching above your weight for a season and then your 12 seasons building up the club mean jack sh*@.

I'm not sure this is the case anymore, have a look at my last post in this thread.

If you've got an example from FM09 which disproves it, I'd like to see it as it is only really a theory at the moment.

[doagrl]

I love the idea of an unsackable tick box being added to the game. It's not like this would be the only game that has that option since Fifa Manager has had it for years so obviously it can be done.

I don't understand how it hurts the people who wouldn't use it since all they have to do is leave it unchecked. And for the people who do want to use it for whatever reason; new players, club ruiners, or players like me who just don't care about all those tactics and preparation hoops that the new FMs want to make you jump through can go on with our playing without fear that we'll have to add new managers into the game after getting the boot.

It all comes down to choice and just because you can't see the benefit to how you play the game there is no need to argue against that choice for someone else. I personally find press conferences, team talks, intricate tactical sliders, training scheduling and a fair number of the playable leagues completely unnecesary to how I want to play the game but I understand that other people want that stuff so why should I make it a personal crusade against such things.

At the end of the day we should all have the ability to play the game that we buy the way that we want and a simple "play with sacking: yes/no" tick box shouldn't be a problem for SI to implement in the game for the people who want it.

[Flemming1966]

Totally agree :-)

[bearsy]

I love the idea of an unsackable tick box being added to the game. It's not like this would be the only game that has that option since Fifa Manager has had it for years so obviously it can be done.

I don't understand how it hurts the people who wouldn't use it since all they have to do is leave it unchecked. And for the people who do want to use it for whatever reason; new players, club ruiners, or players like me who just don't care about all those tactics and preparation hoops that the new FMs want to make you jump through can go on with our playing without fear that we'll have to add new managers into the game after getting the boot.

It all comes down to choice and just because you can't see the benefit to how you play the game there is no need to argue against that choice for someone else. I personally find press conferences, team talks, intricate tactical sliders, training scheduling and a fair number of the playable leagues completely unnecesary to how I want to play the game but I understand that other people want that stuff so why should I make it a personal crusade against such things.

At the end of the day we should all have the ability to play the game that we buy the way that we want and a simple "play with sacking: yes/no" tick box shouldn't be a problem for SI to implement in the game for the people who want it.

If you don't like the 'hoops that the new fms want to make you jump through' play another game.

[doagrl]

If you don't like the 'hoops that the new fms want to make you jump through' play another game.

I find it very disturbing that you would spend time on the official SI forums inviting their paying customers to stop being their paying customers. And if I'm not mistaken this isn't the first time in this thread that you mentioned something similar about people who want things from the game that you personally don't want to see.

No one is stopping you from enjoying your copy of FM by playing the way that you want to play so why do you care how others choose to enjoy their games.

[Ranbir]

See no problem in helping make the game accessible for newcomers to this type of game.

[tigerhgrrrrrr]

Yes thats what I thought! LOL

Still, it would only be an option, but it machine gun's down in flames the "lets not go unsackable because of the morale problem it causes..." arguement.

Now, lets wait for all those reasoned and polite responses.....

I still havent been burnt at the stake! LOL

[tigerhgrrrrrr]

I find it very disturbing that you would spend time on the official SI forums inviting their paying customers to stop being their paying customers. And if I'm not mistaken this isn't the first time in this thread that you mentioned something similar about people who want things from the game that you personally don't want to see.

No one is stopping you from enjoying your copy of FM by playing the way that you want to play so why do you care how others choose to enjoy their games.

Indeed, some Poster's curious attitudes to inflicting upon other people their own particular "way" of gaming makes me wonder how long it is until we see the serious suggestion that "When you are sacked the game should LOCK so that you can no longer play it at all!"

Unrelated to this, Dafuge's point about FM09 not having "unfair" sackings is interesting though. To be honest I personally have not been sacked in FM09 though I am only an average, if studious FM'er. The OP however is all about not getting sacked at all, and considering what I feel is actually quite a surprisingly large response in favour of the OP (I thought it would be more negatively received), I feel SI should at least consider it for FM11. Some may not buy the game because of its exclusion, the thread suggests, but the only current purchasers who would stop buying because if its inclusion are those prepared to throw their toys out of the pram because an OPTIONAL feature they did not want included...has been included. I would suggest they are less of a loss than the many who are desperate for the extra aid that unsackable would be. I must add that I think the proposed FM10 changes will make the game less of a puzzle so more "accessible".

[Arsenal_Fan_1986]

It would only be an option so people wouldn't have to use it. I wouldn't use it either, I think it would take the pressure to win and the excitment away. But it may help new players but maybe it can't be on all the time.

Maybe you could check it at the start of the game and it only works for your first contract, or maybe first season. you could really ruin a big team with this option though, relegate Man Utd and keep your job lol.

[Boaxzel]

If users want this option it cant be a big deal to implant it, and I would never myself use it, and 99% wouldnt use it, so why care if they implanted it?

It would be a option, so why be against it?

Would be like "Remove Play in window" option because I never play in window. its a option and if someone wants a small thing like that then why should we even bother to whine about it like it ruins your game experience?

[lovingthegreen]

I would use it just because I treat FM like a fan, meaning that I am behind my team win or lose, promotion or relegation, and I want to be able to play with that one team for as long as I want.

[silva_gunner]

I think everyone is starting to take this a little too seriously. It was an idea, and not one you have to agree with. If you don't then go somewhere else or at least be constructive. I happen to think it's not bad, but if anyone disagree's thats their problem.

Also,

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.

You seriously underestimate the attention span of some of us kids here. I was 14 when i started FM09 and am still at it.

[gulsenas]

I had almost the same experience with FM07, I took Staines from the BSS to the PL only to be sacked after a board takeover at the end of the season. My form towards the end of the season wasn't great, but we still finished above our expectation and our league position never dropped. Annoyingly, because the takeover happened at the end of the season I never got a chance to 'prove myself'.

I kicked up quite a fuss at the time (some of you might remember it) and got some pretty good feedback from people at SI who worked on that area of the game. The 'unsackable' option came into the discussion then, but I wasn't personally interested in it, I was more interested in unfair sackings being tweaked.

I can't confirm it, but I have a feeling that FM09 is a lot kinder with sackings for managers who have made great progress with a club.

This message:

is new to this version and I suspect that my previous success will be taken into account should my job come ever under threat. Again, I'm not 100% sure this is the case but this message didn't appear on older versions where unfair sackings seemed a lot more common.

I was managing Chester on FM09. Took them from weak Coca cola league 2 side, to a strong Championship team. But my 10 th season started quite poor (mainly due to injuries and some tactical experiments) and i got kicked out. No respect for what I did from board. I think that's quite unfair tbh...

[deltablue]

I suppose there is a call for it, if you have a certain club you want to experience the ups and downs of managing then it'd be useful, though I doubt thats many people, even regarding managing your favourite club, I've been doing it in my main game with great success and that hasn't stopped me wanting a change of pace after a long time. which I've been getting on saves where I've been testing league combinations to find a depth/speed balance, but also been using the opportunity to have a new challenge. The confidence boost from the rise in club stature partly negates the need for such a feature to avoid sackings after 1 bad season in a club you've otherwise excelled at.

[sacripante]

As many people, i like to start with a club in the lowest league, and as many people i see nothing wrong in an "no-sack" option.. After all, that simply will let everyone decide HOW to play.

No-sack is not "invicible" or "immortality" or "infinite lifes", u can always lost games, so what is the problem?

And for the "super-realism lovers", i have a suggestion for SI.. What if u could start the game one times only? After all, everyone irl has only one life.. so why they should be able to restart as many games as they want?

[dafuge]

I was managing Chester on FM09. Took them from weak Coca cola league 2 side, to a strong Championship team. But my 10 th season started quite poor (mainly due to injuries and some tactical experiments) and i got kicked out. No respect for what I did from board. I think that's quite unfair tbh...

While it is a good achievement, I'm not sure that two promotions in ten years would be enough to guarantee your job. Did you have that message about 'increase in stature' that I posted?

How was your progress spread over those ten years? Was it a gradual improvement every year or did the club take backward steps at any point?

[Leeds_Leeds_Leeds!]

If this is so unrealistic why do games such as Call of Duty or G.R.A.W. on the xbox360 (and yes I hate comparing but these two games are recognised as some of the best ever made) have options to reduce or increase the likelyhood of your death when shot? This isn't realistic at all in real life?? How many times do you see a soldier get shot in the arm, leg and stomach, then hide behind a wall for 10 seconds and be fully healed?

Anyone who owns these games knows they are very enjoyable though. If I choose a difficult level I dont complete a mission and then think, wow I did well there but what about all the other wimps who only did it on easy! I just enjoy my game because that is all that should matter. I don't begrudge anyone to have the chance of getting further in a game and seeing the nice results you can get with success all because they play it at an easier level than me.

It's a sad state of affairs if people cannot give others a chance to enjoy a game at a level comfortable to them which may not be so difficult to someone else. It's discrimination in a way, saying others are less intelligent/not as good at gaming as you and therefore should suffer. Anyone who doesn't like the idea of a different difficulty level or a 'no sack' option is simpy taking this game too serious, no other way of putting it.

What are you going to do if it is introduced, sit behind your computer constantly chuntering to yourself about how many people there are out there playing it at an easier level?? I doubt anyone would do this or I hope they wouldn't so really there is no argument for these things not to be implemented.

[Ranbir]

It is not the football managers job to set prices.

It isn't the football manager's job to specifically deal with the finer details of a player's contract, let alone transfers, is it? Why isn't Peter Kenyon handling my transfer dealings? And if it isn't me, why is my Assistant manager doing it? Surely that's up to Director of Football or whatever suit the club has.

Speaking of realism, look at the starting options when you start a new game, attribute masking, fake names, already a fair few "unrealistic" options are available. One more won't hurt your game. It doesn't hurt mine!

[gulsenas]

While it is a good achievement, I'm not sure that two promotions in ten years would be enough to guarantee your job. Did you have that message about 'increase in stature' that I posted?

How was your progress spread over those ten years? Was it a gradual improvement every year or did the club take backward steps at any point?

Well, maybe my progress wasn't so impressive, to get me a status like SAF has...

I don't remember getting a message about stature. Ofcourse in confidence view, the stature was "good".

My progress was without backward steps, only 10th season's start went wrong, and i got sack in November...

It ruined my save, which I played for 8 days total.

But now I learned my lesson, and when starting a new game, I change chairman's attribute. Patience - 20

That's cheating, but...

[tigerhgrrrrrr]

If this is so unrealistic why do games such as Call of Duty or G.R.A.W. on the xbox360 (and yes I hate comparing but these two games are recognised as some of the best ever made) have options to reduce or increase the likelyhood of your death when shot? This isn't realistic at all in real life?? How many times do you see a soldier get shot in the arm, leg and stomach, then hide behind a wall for 10 seconds and be fully healed?

Anyone who owns these games knows they are very enjoyable though. If I choose a difficult level I dont complete a mission and then think, wow I did well there but what about all the other wimps who only did it on easy! I just enjoy my game because that is all that should matter. I don't begrudge anyone to have the chance of getting further in a game and seeing the nice results you can get with success all because they play it at an easier level than me.

It's a sad state of affairs if people cannot give others a chance to enjoy a game at a level comfortable to them which may not be so difficult to someone else. It's discrimination in a way, saying others are less intelligent/not as good at gaming as you and therefore should suffer. Anyone who doesn't like the idea of a different difficulty level or a 'no sack' option is simpy taking this game too serious, no other way of putting it.

What are you going to do if it is introduced, sit behind your computer constantly chuntering to yourself about how many people there are out there playing it at an easier level?? I doubt anyone would do this or I hope they wouldn't so really there is no argument for these things not to be implemented.

Quite right.

The issue of "how much to charge for pies" is a thorny one too. I dont want to do that, it is extremely unlikely Fergie & Arsene do that - but how about choosing accomodation for away games?. I know for a fact that certain top flight managers have a very big say in this as they know the morale benefit in real life of correct accomodation, which could be reflected in the game. Again not sure I want to do it but if you are after total realism it is an issue that you should have control over. Also at the Walkers Stadium Martin Allen made the cavernous home dressing room smaller (fact!) to encourage a closer knit feel for team talks etc. So therefore if you are going down the road of ultimate realism you should be able to change the size of the dressing rooms! So to those other Posters who have, let's not use realism as a selective way of backing up our own points of view because it is a double edged sword!.

[SGartz]

Hi!

Will it be possible to click a 'Not able to get sacked' button in FM2010?

Why not I guess if it's easy to do. Would give new players a good start to the game.

I would also like to see an option to turn the transfer window off.

[Ranbir]

You mean free transfers any time or just stuck to home growing? That'd be a challenge!

[Unknown Hacker]

FMH 09 has that option, but you need to acheive above expectations at your team for at least a decade to unlock it, it is a good idea, if you want to ruin a team, without getting sacked...

[SGartz]

You mean free transfers any time or just stuck to home growing? That'd be a challenge!

No, I just mean no transfer windows so you can make transfers at any time in the season!