Critique of FM08 transfer mechanism - will it ever change?

[diem2007]

Coming a little late to the party, but hopefully people will still read my extensive thoughts on this...

Pretty much agree with what he said...

[endtime]

It's not that simple. "Fixing" the transfer system isn't possible without extensive work on other (all) areas of the game. Stuff like inflated transfer fees requires a reworking of the financial module. Making the game "recognize" players who perform well by generating interest from bigger clubs requires a reworking of the way AI picks players (otherwise AI clubs will spend large amounts of money on a player and immediately stick him in the reserves and never play him). Resolving the whole CA/PA vs. reputation vs. performance conundrum requires something like a complete overhaul of the game's philosophy. I'm obviously worried by the apparent lack of progress in this area, but really, people who expect that sacking Ter or something will help the transfer system in any way are deluded.

[diem2007]

but really, people who expect that sacking Ter or something will help the transfer system in any way are deluded.

The debate about what resources should be put into what aspect of the game is and interesting discussion. I happen to believe that the effort of using eye-motion analysis of which button users use and the development of a Web 2.0 skin was a waste of said resources that would have been better deployed elsewhere like the transfer system or even developing a new function that users have been asking for, like far more improved post-match analysis.

D.

[Ter]

Those resources are human beings with feelings, not objects you can discard at will

[CowRonaldo]

Ter, do you know anyone in transfers who can tell you if they're working on this?

If not, no problem but in medival times that's how information got around.

[diem2007]

Those resources are human beings with feelings, not objects you can discard at will Wink

Depends on your socialist/capitalist/protectionist/free market beliefs doesnt it?

Now to be fair, I didnt say sack anyone. I said that I believe that SI should have the discussion about what resources it uses where in terms of game development. I am assuming that SI does not employ eye-motion analysis gurus so had to use resources to ask a firm of consultants to tell them how users play the game. If this team is actually in-house I make no apology for saying that they are a waste of resources.

It is clear on the back someone telling SI how someone like me plays the game that SI decided to devote resources to changing the skin and the way the game presents information. I still dont use the Web 2.0 buttons, so from my point of view that resource decision has been a waste. I would prefer the resources be deployed to meet the concerns of users, especially those concerns that have been highlighted for a number of years (i.e. transfer system). At no point in the forums between FM07 & FM08 was there a number of threads demanding that FM08 look like a Social Networking site. Yet that was the highly hearalded change we got.

To go back to your orignial point, if the staff devoted to each development of the game are always going to be retained beyond the actual release of each game, then surely SI will become a very bloated company as new staff recruited for to develop specific change for each release are kept on even if the change becomes a settled feature. This would mean that eventually each release would be a cosmetic update. Just a thought.

D.

[George Graham]

Originally posted by Ched:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">players is i believe often related to the reputation system not working well. in your macdonald and maynard example, it is likely that the clubs who would in real life be interested in that level of player - championship

I think i've made the point before, but i feel that there should be a long term and short term reputation.

E.g. a long term rep is relative to the clubs history, fan base, long term expectations.

Whilst the short term rep could account for current league/cup preformance, e.g. a club that is usually top 10, but breaks into the CL one season, would have an increase in short term rep - which would lead to higher quality players willing to join...but with get out clauses etc.

Whilst a protracted period of success would lead to the club being recognised as one of the greats. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Agree- in fact your idea applies throughout the game.

Case in fact is my current Nottm Forest side, tipped as dead certs for relegation. But after 29 games we are 6th and playing well yet we are still not favourites for ANY game, meaning when they did start to play badly I couldnt have a go at them because they were expected to lose due to reputation only working over the long term.

The "correct" way (well in FMs world anyway) was to not be harsh on them even when 0-4 down at home at half-time in order to try and keep morale up.

The thing is you have to do this in FM as morale is king, although irl a rollicking would be in order as your player who have had a season above all expectation should not suffer a massive morale drop or worse get annoyed at you!

[DMaster2]

It would be good if player exchange and loan on fees could work next year

[Masquerade]

I totally agree with the initial post and while I have read some of the ones that followed there are 6 pages of the things so I'll risk possibly asking a question that's already been posted.

My personal pet hate so far with the game is along the same lines but to do with the backroom staff instead of the playing staff. Why, when I had a transfer budget of 100k, an actual balance of much more, and a wage budget which I was below by 400k p/w am I not able to offer more than 30kp/w for my assistant manager? In this particular case the most I could offer him (Marcel Desailly in my game) was 28kp/w and regardless of how hefty a signing on fee I added he continued to refuse to renew stating he would not accept such a low weekly wage. There was no possible way I could have retained Marcel and in the current state of the game probably any other assistant manager who becomes too good for the maximum wage you're allowed to offer

[Masquerade]

budget of 100*m -.-

[aenariel]

Originally posted by Ter:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Do you know under WHOSE expertise/ department the transfer system falls under and why we've not heard a peep from them in this thread yet?

Yes, and I've shown them this thread. Not everyone at SI post on the forums nor are they required to do so I'm afraid. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thank you Ter. That's about all I wanted to know.

Cheers mate.

[Kill Rock Stars]

Originally posted by Masquerade:

I totally agree with the initial post and while I have read some of the ones that followed there are 6 pages of the things so I'll risk possibly asking a question that's already been posted.

My personal pet hate so far with the game is along the same lines but to do with the backroom staff instead of the playing staff. Why, when I had a transfer budget of 100k, an actual balance of much more, and a wage budget which I was below by 400k p/w am I not able to offer more than 30kp/w for my assistant manager? In this particular case the most I could offer him (Marcel Desailly in my game) was 28kp/w and regardless of how hefty a signing on fee I added he continued to refuse to renew stating he would not accept such a low weekly wage. There was no possible way I could have retained Marcel and in the current state of the game probably any other assistant manager who becomes too good for the maximum wage you're allowed to offer

as frankfurt i'm the 6th richest club in the world and 250k under my wage limit, and can only offer assistant managers and coaches 5.5k a week. it's insane.

[Mister Z]

Originally posted by endtime:

It's not that simple. "Fixing" the transfer system isn't possible without extensive work on other (all) areas of the game. Stuff like inflated transfer fees requires a reworking of the financial module. Making the game "recognize" players who perform well by generating interest from bigger clubs requires a reworking of the way AI picks players (otherwise AI clubs will spend large amounts of money on a player and immediately stick him in the reserves and never play him). Resolving the whole CA/PA vs. reputation vs. performance conundrum requires something like a complete overhaul of the game's philosophy. I'm obviously worried by the apparent lack of progress in this area, but really, people who expect that sacking Ter or something will help the transfer system in any way are deluded.

I agree with endtime that due to the complexity of the match engine that there is no quick fix for the transfer system. It involves Finance, CA/PA, players status, player performance, player happiness, club reputation etc. Furthermore an intelligent and realistic “negotiation “ routine is not something you program on your lunch break.

This means, sadly for most contributors to this excellent thread , there will be no fix in the near future for the transfer system, unless in the dungeons of SI those unnamed brave lads Ter spoke about are working since FM05 on a approved version of the transfer system and won’t be allowed to communicate to people till it is finished.

[Dixie]

I just read the whole thread and would like to add my two pennorth.

on older versions of FM and indeed CM it was easy to build a squad of international superstars by buying young 'wonderkids' training them up, selling for big bucks, building an empire and then raping your opposition's squads for their prize assets.

It's my belief that SI have recognised this pattern and created a 'work around' which makes life much harder for the user. You can still pull together a great squad in time, but the hassle involved in getting rid of unwanted players coupled with the struggle to land your prime targets have made the game much tougher (some may add more realistic ?!).

If this 'work around' exists then it is a bit crude (similar to the 90th minute equaliser work around but that's another subject) but it does the job it was designed to do.....it's now time for SI to fine tune this in order to make the scenarios as realistic as possible.

[Tom Leeburn]

Originally posted by Dixie:

I just read the whole thread and would like to add my two pennorth.

on older versions of FM and indeed CM it was easy to build a squad of international superstars by buying young 'wonderkids' training them up, selling for big bucks, building an empire and then raping your opposition's squads for their prize assets.

It's my belief that SI have recognised this pattern and created a 'work around' which makes life much harder for the user. You can still pull together a great squad in time, but the hassle involved in getting rid of unwanted players coupled with the struggle to land your prime targets have made the game much tougher (some may add more realistic ?!).

If this 'work around' exists then it is a bit crude (similar to the 90th minute equaliser work around but that's another subject) but it does the job it was designed to do.....it's now time for SI to fine tune this in order to make the scenarios as realistic as possible.

i dont know if it is deffinately more realistic to prevent this. Few clubs irl run a very rational transfer system.

totenham have done recently and i would think are probably making money out of it. e.g they bought players like carick, lennon, dawson and huddlestone all for well below 5mil all are worth alot more now. there are more e.g they signed routledge for free and have just sold him to villa for 1.5mil. berbatov will probably get sold for at least double his purchase price.

similarly wenger has turned a massive profit on transfers at arsenal and you regularly hear that there is alot of money available to him if he wants to spend it.

contrast this with manchester utd, they dont tend to operate with great foresight and tend to buy players at their maximum value. (with the obvious exception of ronaldo). e.g carrick was available from west ham for ~3mil. he was clearly an excellent talent even then, it would have been intelligent to sign him then, if they werent certain about him he could have been sent out on loan, but he was almost certain not to decrease in value. instead they had a period in which players like a.smith o shea and giggs played in central midfield and then ended paying max value for carrick later.

sevilla are another example. they have excellent youth development and a brilliant director of football who has made some excellent signings (e.g julio baptista and daniel alves). By selling a few players (Ramos, Reyes & baptista), and investing wisely they have managed to transform themselves into one of the biggest clubs in spain.

my point is that it is possible to make money by playing the transfer system in an intelligent manner, several clubs do do this in real life and it should be possible in the game. instead it is rediculously hard to dispose of players, and incredibly expensive to buy them.

[Ched]

Originally posted by Mister Z:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by endtime:

It's not that simple. "Fixing" the transfer system isn't possible without extensive work on other (all) areas of the game. Stuff like inflated transfer fees requires a reworking of the financial module. Making the game "recognize" players who perform well by generating interest from bigger clubs requires a reworking of the way AI picks players (otherwise AI clubs will spend large amounts of money on a player and immediately stick him in the reserves and never play him). Resolving the whole CA/PA vs. reputation vs. performance conundrum requires something like a complete overhaul of the game's philosophy. I'm obviously worried by the apparent lack of progress in this area, but really, people who expect that sacking Ter or something will help the transfer system in any way are deluded.

I agree with endtime that due to the complexity of the match engine that there is no quick fix for the transfer system. It involves Finance, CA/PA, players status, player performance, player happiness, club reputation etc. Furthermore an intelligent and realistic “negotiation “ routine is not something you program on your lunch break.

This means, sadly for most contributors to this excellent thread , there will be no fix in the near future for the transfer system, unless in the dungeons of SI those unnamed brave lads Ter spoke about are working since FM05 on a approved version of the transfer system and won’t be allowed to communicate to people till it is finished. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Whilst i appreciate that some things would be difficult to implement, i feel that things such as repeated enquiries, and basic negotiation (e.g. stop raising your asking price every day) should be fairly straight forward.

But i suppose only SI know what can be added.

[Hauler24]

Way late in a reply and I have to say that this is one of the most well mannered threads there is on this website. Now for my little take....

Ter thanks for commenting and at least trying to level with the community about some of the things that go on with the testers and people who make the game.

You said this, "Yes, and I've shown them this thread. Not everyone at SI post on the forums nor are they required to do so I'm afraid."

When I read that I was a bit taken back by that cause I think it would not only help the developers to have an open relationship with the community, but it would also help make rants a lot less seen IMO. I feel that we as the community will never really truly be heard until that happens. I love the game and I will be back next year but it seems that some problems have been around forever with no real effort(totally just my opinion and not a fact) to make or even look into some of the things that 85% of the people on this forum have been talking about for some years now. The only thing that I feel may help would be to have better more open dialog with us. Again thank you Ter for your comments and also Ched well said sir..... well said.

[Ched]

Originally posted by Hauler24:

Way late in a reply and I have to say that this is one of the most well mannered threads there is on this website. Now for my little take....

Ter thanks for commenting and at least trying to level with the community about some of the things that go on with the testers and people who make the game.

You said this, "Yes, and I've shown them this thread. Not everyone at SI post on the forums nor are they required to do so I'm afraid."

When I read that I was a bit taken back by that cause I think it would not only help the developers to have an open relationship with the community, but it would also help make rants a lot less seen IMO. I feel that we as the community will never really truly be heard until that happens. I love the game and I will be back next year but it seems that some problems have been around forever with no real effort(totally just my opinion and not a fact) to make or even look into some of the things that 85% of the people on this forum have been talking about for some years now. The only thing that I feel may help would be to have better more open dialog with us. Again thank you Ter for your comments and also Ched well said sir..... well said.

While i agree with your sentiments, i think the current level of SI directed hostility would make any increase in SI dialog highly unlikely.

It's a sad reflection of what a few idiots can achieve when they start being abusive.

Hopefully when the powers that be get 'round to adding more mods (or whatever measures they come up with to deal with these forums) then we will se a return to a more pro-SI forum.

[Dougeh]

Overhauls of areas like this are as people say a lot of work. I am wondering when SI are going to wipe the slate clean and start from scratch again? I am assuming that they have been doing minor upgrades and alterations for the last few years. Thats what it looks like from an external viewpoint anyway.

Its time to raise the bar again. Look what happened to Pro Evolution Soccer - was happy to make minor changes year in year out while the competition caught up. What eventually happened? Fifa gave them an absolute tonking this past year.

Im not suggesting Fifa Manager is suddenly going to take over next year, that would be ludicrous ... but I cant honestly say there has been a groundbreaking new addition in a while and that worries me. The way forward is in my opinion for SI to start over and do it all again, except far far better & built on proper intelligence models.

[DaveRH]

Originally posted by Dougeh:

The way forward is in my opinion for SI to start over and do it all again, except far far better & built on proper intelligence models.

It won't happen. The move from the CM3 to CM4 engine (which is what FM uses now) was pretty much a disaster but the newer engine is completely modular.

SI should have the ability to overhaul the transfer model (or any other element of the game as a whole) without making substantial changes to other areas of the game.

[dannyboy24]

Okay, excellent thread, thought i'd add my two cents, hope there is still more interest.

Overall I think clearly the transfer system does have some serious flaws in it, although I think it's passable, just not up to the standard of the rest of the game. It's something of an aging relic.

A thing that ticks me off about the Transfer system is the chairmen jumping in and accepting offers. Now clearly this happens in real life, but do SI believe that in every case it's ever happened for real, the Manager simply receives an email or fax saying, I've accepted Bid of X million for player Y, discussion over. Or do they think that in some cases the Chairman/Chief Executive went to the Manager and said, we've got the Offer, I thinl it's too good to refuse, do you agree?, if not, why not? - I can't tell you the amount of times i've been negiogating a fee for a player and the Chairmen accepts an offer when i'm positive they would pay more if pressed.

On the "I can't give players away", this I think is all linked to age, every year I easily sell off youth players that have no future with the club for very close to the stated value. (Usually around 75 - 95% of value, not an unreasonable mark down for someone you don't want and have placed on the transfer list), Often this players are utter rubbish, with no potential to speak of, going to league 1 and 2.

But when I try to sell off older players, Xabi Alonso for example, at the age of 33, still playing well, and likely to accept wages of somewhere in the region of 25 - 50k a week, I could not give him away on a free, and I'm running every major european league. No one wanted him, even with a healthy list of interested clubs.

[dannyboy24]

Sorry, another thing I meant to add.

Ched has been going on about having different types of releases. Great Idea, something I suggested in another thread was to have a regular yearly update which was bug fixes and data updates - to be released regularly at whatever time made most sense, say shortly after the august transfer window closed? I know a lot of people buy the new version of the game simply because has the updated teams and players etc.

And then have another release cycle that saw them release a new "full version" when they felt happy with the state of the game etc. Say every 18 - 20 months. That would give them more time to work on bigger changes. I think SI unknowningly backed themselves into a corner when they called the first FM, "FM 2005", instead of simply "Football Manager (1)".

Clearly under that release pattern the new full releases would probably cost more than they do now, but I know I'd pay more if every new release was a proper step forward, instead of the nudges forward new releases currently seem to be constrained to.

[DaveRH]

Originally posted by dannyboy24:

A thing that ticks me off about the Transfer system is the chairmen jumping in and accepting offers. Now clearly this happens in real life, but do SI believe that in every case it's ever happened for real, the Manager simply receives an email or fax saying, I've accepted Bid of X million for player Y, discussion over. Or do they think that in some cases the Chairman/Chief Executive went to the Manager and said, we've got the Offer, I thinl it's too good to refuse, do you agree?, if not, why not?QUOTE]

Actually, there are well documentated cases of chairmen not even bothering to inform the manager that negotiations were under way until the deal was done and the player was leaving.

Don't get me wrong - your idea is sound and the opportunity to interact with the board is welcome. But I think the "this just would not happen" arguement is not correct.

[dannyboy24]

Originally posted by DaveRH:

Actually, there are well documentated cases of chairmen not even bothering to inform the manager that negotiations were under way until the deal was done and the player was leaving.

Don't get me wrong - your idea is sound and the opportunity to interact with the board is welcome. But I think the "this just would not happen" arguement is not correct.

I wasn't saying it doesn't happen, what I was saying is, it doesn't happen on every single occasion.

[Mike7077]

I wasn't sure where best to post this, but I just wanted to vent a little bit of frustration.

I've been making an enquiry for a player, but despite using 8.0.2, I still get the same old problem of the negotiating process being obscure.

Basically, I make my enquiry, they declare a price, I balk at it and suggest a lower one, so they come back with an even higher one.

Will this ever be fixed? Why does it happen in the first place? Surely one of two things should happen. Our prices should meet in the middle as they creep down and I creep up. Or one of us should back out because the other isn't prepared to quote an acceptable price.

[Ched]

Originally posted by Mike7077:

I wasn't sure where best to post this, but I just wanted to vent a little bit of frustration.

I've been making an enquiry for a player, but despite using 8.0.2, I still get the same old problem of the negotiating process being obscure.

Basically, I make my enquiry, they declare a price, I balk at it and suggest a lower one, so they come back with an even higher one.

Will this ever be fixed? Why does it happen in the first place? Surely one of two things should happen. Our prices should meet in the middle as they creep down and I creep up. Or one of us should back out because the other isn't prepared to quote an acceptable price.

This has been around for quite a while and i can only assume that either SI lack the ability or lack the desire to fix it.

Had a perfect example roughly 10 minutes ago,

Miguel Veloso - i enquire

AI - £20m please

User - £10m (his value is £5m...)

AI - £20m

User - £10m upfront, £7.5m over 24months

AI - £22m please

User - £10m upfront, £10m over 24months, 10% sell on.

AI - £29m please

User - screams in rage

- considers quitting in disgust, then buys gago for £9m

The sooner this changes the better.

[philreeduk]

The sooner this changes the better.

Yep totally agree mate, we all love SI and the CM/FM series but i feel that this flaw has to be fixed for next year. All this talk of the transfer system is making me remember CM2 when you could totally work around having to pay anything for a single player good times :>

[Frank Dashwood]

Great thread this - Every single one of the problems you mentioned has irritated me over the years. In particular on FM08 is the fact that from mid may to sep 1st, and again mid dec to jan 1st i get an endless stream of inquiries or useless bids of stupidly low amounts for my best players. I set an acceptable value for the transfer to which they say no... 2 days later i get the stupid bid/inquiry again, repeated ad infinitum.

Infact I feel so strongly about this issue you even got me posting on the forums to agree with you.

I've been playing cm/fm games since SI started making them, (and the original FM on the spectrum! Damn i feel old) and imho your right in saying that the transfers section of the game is now arguably its worst feature, having not been updated significantly for a long time. Hopefully SI will read this thread and come to see that this part of the game needs some love.

Ok thats my mini rant over, now i will got back to lurking and reading that epic thread about the Bandits

[Jase1982]

hmmmmmm....just discovered this thread after the latest post was closed.

yeah, I agree with this problem but its been exactly like this for as long as I can remember.

The negotiation process has never been what I would call a "proper" negotiation. to put it frankly, if I, in my working life were to enter into a negotiation with anyone similar to the AI, I would probably leave the room.

I see that the fact you can offer £25m after the AI wanted £28m, only for the them to return and request £30m has been mentioned....that happens far too frequently. Quite annoying really, and really emphasises my first comment...that type of behaviour indicates a lack of willing to negotiate.

In my opinnion also, they need to remove the asking price functionality. Mainly because it allows me to price all my star players out of the market, which means I get to keep them for x amount of years whilst teams are only interested, yet obviously can't afford the asking price. I know this aids me to no end, but it isn't really realistic.

To summarise, I haven't seen any real improvement or change in the negotiation process ever. It's still at the same level it was during the CM years, and is definitely the next aspect of FM, SI really need to work on.

SI have worked endlessly to improve the tactical aspect of the game, it's about time they migrated their efforts.

[robin_trott_hoof]

Whilst i appreciate that some things would be difficult to implement, i feel that things such as repeated enquiries, and basic negotiation (e.g. stop raising your asking price every day) should be fairly straight forward.

In my opinion, the only issues that could be improved with transfers are those mentioned here (negotiations/repeated enquiries) and the fact that player value needs to be more influenced by the wealth of the parent club.