Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community

martinji

Members
  • Content count

    2,409
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About martinji

  • Rank
    Semi Pro

About Me

  • About Me
    London

Interests

  • Interests
    Poker, Chess, Film, Reading, Travelling

Favourite Team

  • Favourite Team
    PLymouth Argyle
  1. Ending of this

    I kind of miss the old days when CM2 (and CM97/98) had a time limit which I think was 25 years. Used to force me to create a new save and try different things. Now I just can't walk away from a save ... 61 seasons into my current one
  2. I think there is a good case to be able to have a team meeting after 3 games. IRL if Man City's (say) first 3 games of the season were against Hull, Middlesbrough and Palace and they lost them all, then the media and certain groups of fans would be all over it. For one of the top teams, 3 defeats at the start of the season is enough to put a huge dent in a title or even top 4 push, and you certainly wouldn't be able to afford another one. We can say that 3 games is not enough to establish form, but if they are 3 unexpected losses in a row, then in today's day and age that is enough to be regarded a mini crisis and a team meeting would be a logical thing to do. But this should only make sense if the 3 results were very bad. The game needs to be sophisticated enough to model this.
  3. I think it would be good and realistic if after breaking off negotiations, you sometimes got a news article which might even be the same evening or next day, or might be substantially longer, which would either be a personal note from one of your staff or even unattributed, saying "You've heard through the grapevine that such-and-such may be willing to re-open negotiations", or a media speculation along the same lines. These could have a button click to take you straight into the negotiations stage (for unattached players or your own players) or straight into the make a bid screen. This would make the process a bit less tedious and also be a helpful reminder. But it wouldn't always happen if either the player got signed in the meantime or was a prima-donna with too much pride.
  4. Just playing Devil's advocate here because I agree the attendance progression does seem too low. But one of the drawbacks of being between Cardiff and Swansea with those two cities and clubs being relatively accessible, is possibly that even though you have grown your club to a decent stature, Cardiff/Swansea may be in the English Premier League/championship (and may be in Europe themselves?) which would be more of a draw for many people? whereas in eg Denmark that you compare to, most teams would not be competing with teams from another league for support. NB don't know if the game is sophisticated enough to model it, just suggesting it as a real life factor.
  5. Though I don't visit or post that frequently, much like others have said you come to recognise names and styles and I thought he was a very good mod and always contributed something useful. RIP.
  6. Absolutely absurd wages

    I agree with you, it sounds extreme to me. PLayers in the spanish 4th division, what are they currently earning? I assume less than league 2 in this country and that the majority are on less than 1k per week, and very rare to be above 2k pw? Of course some would not want to uproot themselves but you should find plenty of takers for 2-4k per week IMO, especially among older players for whom club & league rep should not be as important (they aren't thinking about their future career) and who would be happy to get a last big payday.
  7. All it needs is to change the message to say something along the lines of "PLAYER is unwilling to discuss a new contract with your club. However your contract offer has been noted", and set whatever internal variable is needed to record the contract offer has been made. Quite surprised this hasn't been fixed yet as it has been an issue for years.
  8. 100% agree with this. I don't think it is *that* difficult to improve what there is, either. Just ensuring the AI is joined up between transfers and team selection would be a start (so we don't get cases where the AI spends masses on a player because of high perceived PA or CA, then never plays him because his actual CA is not high enough, and he rots away in the reserves). Right now, I feel CM is a game with an incredibly complex match engine that is at the centre of a very simplistic AI squad building and management. I would much rather play a game where that is the other way around, because I have zero interest in tactics, I get my whole enjoyment out of playing the transfer market, nurturing youngsters, choosing how to rotate my team when I have several upcoming matches etc, and would rather that side of it was more of a challenge.
  9. Managing EPL a Thing of the Past?

    If you don't want to start in a lower league you can always put your own constraints on your spending, give yourself a maximum spend and maximum wage limit that makes it still challenging. You could allow progress by setting these limits higher depending on where you finish, eg top half you allow yourself to spend a bit more, top 6 a bit more again, CL spots you probably relax limits completely. I know its artificial but might be a way to recapture what you're looking for.
  10. completely agree. It's the development towards PA (and the ease with which high PA players can be spotted when young) that most needs fixing, not the CA/PA system itself. If this was changed though, I do then think some randomness might be interesting. Like 1 in 1000 (say) players chosen completely at random in the database when a game is initialised, get their PA boosted to 170+. Some of them would already be too old for this to matter, some would be young and would just then become unexpectedly high potential youngsters, but those in the middle would have a chance of being real late bloomers.
  11. I find I can usually get away with giving young players a low fixed weekly wage but a high appearance fee. This works for me since I will only generally play them in a handful of first team games. I'm also assuming if I loan them out, they don't get their appearance fee for each loan appearance, though not 100% sure.
  12. When that moment comes...

    I keep oldies as long as they keep producing the goods. Yes it can be hard to let them go once they do start to decline, but the way I look at it, I'm doing them a favour selling them to a club where they'll get more playing time. If there is a player who is a club legend (in my mind) and whose mood changes to "doesn't want to leave the club" when I offer them out, then sometimes I change my mind and keep them, especially if they can be beneficial tutors for younger players, and/or they'll probably retire in one year anyway. I do also look to offer them backroom roles if available and their skills merit it.
  13. Ridiculous Teams

    along similar lines, in my game I noticed that Brazil had a lot of very good players with the same single word name. I think it might have been "Souza". sure they would have some makeweights as well, I was very tempted to become Brazil manager and pick an entire team called "Souza". In the end I cba though.
  14. Record international caps?

    One of my players scored 184 international goals for France, in I think 200 appearances (Fm12), under AI management.
  15. Reputation issue

    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.
×