info provided Are recruitment meetings working correctly?

[Matt ex SEGA]

Here's my experience with these meetings.

I've agreed the positions that I feel we need players.  The reports that come back are absolutely miles off what I've stipulated (generally a quality mark - I don't care about current ability, I'm looking for 3.5 stars or upwards of future ability, under the age of 24).  They're bringing me players that are too old, players that aren't good enough.  "Here's a 30 year old with a 2.5 star potential rating that'd be worse than your current starter and backup".  Rinse and repeat.

Am I doing something wrong, am I being too constrained with the search?  Or is it just hard for them to find players?  I'm managing as Ajax so I guess its possible that they just don't feel they can find players that are of the right level?  As it stands, they're pretty unhelpful.

In other news - scouting meetings are similarly unhelpful... these have been crying out for the ability to filter results by age, position, attribute etc forever - but that's another story for another day...:)

 

P.s. loving the game overall - feels fast and fun even on my veteran laptop - thank you for your hard work, SI!

[freddieos]

same here - they are not working properly. I just skip nowadays.

[Ben Kenney]

Hi Matt, 

Thanks for the report and sorry to hear you are having trouble with these Recruitment Meetings. 

What you have described is different to what i'm seeing internally in regards to results returned from the positions i've set up in Recruitment Meetings. The players who are returned on the focuses seem to fit in within the age and PA criteria i've set. 

When you have this problem are you encountering this for positions that have been suggested by the AI or for positions that you have added yourself? 

If you have a save game from just before one of these Recruitment Meetings then im happy to have a look at your save. 

There is the ability to filter scouting meetings by age. As can be seen in below screenshot, we don't currently have the ability to search for position or attribute at the moment, although they would be a valid feature request for a future version. 

[Matt ex SEGA]

Hiya Ben - I saved just before a meeting and just uploaded it now - filename is "City" (I changed jobs). 

The suggestions I've been reviewing are a mix of the AI's own and some that I've added. 

First up is a review for attacking midfielder - 2 players already on my list, one 30 year old and a 35 year old.  It's been a little while, but I'm pretty sure all the searches I've set up have been for under 23's (it's a board objective).  Most of the following positions were similar.

Am I misunderstanding what's supposed to happen?  I'm guessing perhaps they're returning results into my inbox but then in this meeting they're just flashing me a few so perhaps I've misunderstood how the meetings are supposed to work - but I'd hope that there'd be a way to get people aligned around a clear target?

Thanks for taking the time to reply, I appreciate it!

 

[janrzm]

Hey SI people. 

I posted yesterday in the feedback thread. I feel it needs raising here as I feel its broken.

I like the format, but can someone explain why its so disjointed in terms of the suggestions. Surely, the players put forward by the staff in this meeting should in the main align with specific requirements of your club vision/culture?

For example, If the board want me to sign players under 23 why am I looking at 10 suggestions in this meeting all over 30? Not to mention players you can't afford or whos wage demands you'll never be able to meet. There's no logic to it and it kills immersion. Likewise it would be a benefit to be able to agree a more refined set of criteria ahead of the first meeting.

Fair enough to include a couple of "wild card" suggestions in there but these elements of the game must be logically linked. 

It's such a positive new addition but at the moment its a missed opportunity.

Cheers. @Ben Kenney 

[Ben Kenney]

14 hours ago, Matt ex SEGA said:

Hiya Ben - I saved just before a meeting and just uploaded it now - filename is "City" (I changed jobs). 

The suggestions I've been reviewing are a mix of the AI's own and some that I've added. 

First up is a review for attacking midfielder - 2 players already on my list, one 30 year old and a 35 year old.  It's been a little while, but I'm pretty sure all the searches I've set up have been for under 23's (it's a board objective).  Most of the following positions were similar.

Am I misunderstanding what's supposed to happen?  I'm guessing perhaps they're returning results into my inbox but then in this meeting they're just flashing me a few so perhaps I've misunderstood how the meetings are supposed to work - but I'd hope that there'd be a way to get people aligned around a clear target?

Thanks for taking the time to reply, I appreciate it!

 

Hi Matt, 

Thanks for the save. 

So the Recruitment Meeting you have here is the pre January transfer window recruitment meeting. The positions suggested here will be positions that your Recruitment Team feel you could improve upon ahead of the window. 

From here the user will be able to see some suggestions of players for these positions. The suggestions will be either A) From previously scouted players, these players would be able to be seen on the Players -> Scouted page within the scouting centre or B) Some suggestions on players who are either transfer/loan listed, free agents or available on a pre-contract .

Once you have viewed the reports of the players your staff have provided for you, you then have the option to create your own short term focus for the position in question this will see the scouting team go away on a short scouting assignment looking for players who can play in the position in question. You will be able to set your own criteria for this position Age, Role, CA/PA etc. The results of the assignments should be generated into your inbox and you will also be able to see the reports of the players found via the Scouting Centre and Scouting -> Assignments page. 

These short term focuses are where the user should be able to say you want to look for 18-23 AM's with at least 4.5* potential. And the scouts should then return players within that criteria. 

Does this help at all? 

14 hours ago, janrzm said:

Hey SI people. 

I posted yesterday in the feedback thread. I feel it needs raising here as I feel its broken.

I like the format, but can someone explain why its so disjointed in terms of the suggestions. Surely, the players put forward by the staff in this meeting should in the main align with specific requirements of your club vision/culture?

For example, If the board want me to sign players under 23 why am I looking at 10 suggestions in this meeting all over 30? Not to mention players you can't afford or whos wage demands you'll never be able to meet. There's no logic to it and it kills immersion. Likewise it would be a benefit to be able to agree a more refined set of criteria ahead of the first meeting.

Fair enough to include a couple of "wild card" suggestions in there but these elements of the game must be logically linked. 

It's such a positive new addition but at the moment its a missed opportunity.

Cheers. @Ben Kenney 

Thanks for the feedback. 

The players suggested by your Recruitment Team in these meetings should ideally meet the club visions that the club have. The suggested players will come from the players who your scouting team have generated reports on. These will be the players who can be found  on the Players -> Scouted page. As you mention there will also be some 'Wildcard' options, where the Recruitment Team will highlight some players who are transfer listed, coming to the end of their contract etc. 

Now in my save game here i'm in charge of Rangers and have a vision of 'Sign Players Under the age 23 for first team' club vision. When I attend the Recruitment Meeting, the majority of the previously scouted players who are returned as suggestions are players under the age of 23. With the 'Wildcard' options being over the age of 23. 

If you are receiving more suggestions for players that go against your club visions then match your club visions then I would be very interested in taking a look at your save game. 

In regards to the transfer/wage budgets aspect then this may well require some further balancing. But it is a balancing act, if we restrict suggested players to what the user can currently afford within their current budgets then the players returned in these meetings could be very limited. I think players who are currently out of the clubs reach wages wise could still be returned in these meetings, as it is making the user aware of the player and the user can always offload players to make room in the wage budget for them. What I would be very wary of is say a user in charge of a Premier Division club with only £20K p/w left in their wage budget, only being returned with suggestions of players whose wage demands fit in to that £20K, because then we are really limiting the players who are then returned.