Guest Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 That rules out one possible cause. I guess all that's left is to assess the actual rep scores of the clubs (not the star value), it could be that other clubs have received increases for a variety of reasons over the seasons. but have not seen their scores decrease when they fail to maintain a high level of sporting success. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Georgik Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 That rules out one possible cause.I guess all that's left is to assess the actual rep scores of the clubs (not the star value), it could be that other clubs have received increases for a variety of reasons over the seasons. but have not seen their scores decrease when they fail to maintain a high level of sporting success. It is odd though ... see how Liverpool's stature declined because they didn't won EPL for so long, in the 70s and 80s they were among the best teams in the world, surely the biggest in England, now Man Utd has taken its place. Same happened with Chelsea and City because of the money pumped into their clubs, their reputation and fan-base expanded alot (even if they didn't won so many trophies compared with my example). I hope that in FM16 this issue will be adressed and how the reputation changes would be closer to reality. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 What I find is that if a club has a rep increase then consistently performs close to what would be expected of them but not have any actual success then their reputation will not drop. Think I'll call it the Arsenal effect. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
martinji Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 I think there should be two reputations for each club, which crudely speaking could be called "Recent" or "Success" reputation, and "Historical" or "Brand" reputation. The former would change much more quickly and relate to how successful a club is perceived to currently be. This should be the main reputation used for players who want to win things, and sponsors who want to be associated with a winning brand. The latter is harder to define exactly but is basically how "big" a club is thought to be in of itself, which can be quite divorced from recent success. I think this is more like the current reputation in that it would be comprised of several factors not just success - media profile, richness, historical success, strong values, star players (even if aging) etc. This reputation would be most important to sponsors who want a high profile name and/or strong brand associations, and players who are after glamour or the challenge of helping a past giant back to success (or just the cash that comes with doing so). Current UK teams whose historical/brand reputation exceeds their recent/success reputation would be Rangers, Newcastle, Liverpool/Arsenal/Spurs to a degree, Leeds, Forest etc. Current UK teams whose recent/success reputation exceeds their historical/brand reputation would be Swansea, Stoke, Southampton, Bournemouth etc. Having a dual-rep system would primarily lead to more realistic media comments, betting odds etc , and more nuance in player decision making. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dddddd Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 Then you clearly haven't read the rest of the topic. Trophies aren't the be all and end all. Bayern, Real and Barca are probably always going to bigger reputation, no matter what. Because they're a bigger club. Nothing mind-boggling about it. agreed but I'm not talking about being bigger than barcelona - I'm talking about Wolfsburg, Real Sociedad and Espanyol - none of those teams have bigger reps than spurs now, never mind after winning a raft of trophies. Plus I've been playing this game for years and you nomally climb to the top fairly quickly - this year is different. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dddddd Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 Facilities, players (Both ability & rep), money etc etc etc all count towards reputation.Its not just about how much you've won. SI may be looking at how its calculated but honestly is it really that important? if it's not important to you why are you bothering to read a post about it??? facilities are top and I'm the richest club in the world and my players count for 8 of the 10 most expensive players on the planet - any scale you measure it on, I should be top - not 12th Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cougar2010 Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 facilities are top and I'm the richest club in the world and my players count for 8 of the 10 most expensive players on the planet - any scale you measure it on, I should be top - not 12th Clearly not else you wouldn't be 12th would you SI need to look at the calculation to see exactly what goes into it and whether the weighting of each input is fair, you'll never get one on here because none of us see the code and are only commenting from experience. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.