Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

10 "You're a bum, Rock"

About Ylt

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. This thread has taken a very interesting development. Some guy's suggested game/challenge is a brilliant idea. It'd be good fun getting plenty of people to participate and it has the potential to be a very constructive process as Cougar mentioned.
  2. From what I have seen of it this series is a good example of how scouting and player identification is overpowered and being exploited in the lower leagues to rocket towards the top: . It's not that relevant in terms of high potential youngsters with high fees as most of the players in the series are unlikely to have huge potential. It does, however show that it is very easy to scout and develop great potential youngster for your current level to help you soar through the leagues and I cannot see how this cannot be extrapolated to bigger clubs and very high potential youngsters. That's a fine example of a syllogism. Whether you decide to infer something from it that cannot be rationally done is not my fault. I explored what appears to be your issues with it i.e. whether the transfers were being forced be people or facilitated by the game. Regardless it is a sound deduction as from the premises it must be deduced that the game environment is different from reality, although that's not necessarily the games fault. I was merely outlining my reasoning, which starts out with the difference in transfer behaviour in game and in real life and necessarily leads to the realisation that something different is going on in-game. Then I went on to argue what that something is etc.. On another note, It's completely irrelevant whether the AI does these transfers, since it by no means is playing the game optimally. Please explain to me how that is detrimental to the discussion? Just because I used Genie Scout to quickly find an example refuting the claim that you could negotiate these types of deals into reasonable amounts everything I say is now worthless? You seem to have some irrational problem with third party scouting tools. If the discussed player was found legitimately the point would be the exact same. I have provided plenty of evidence to help estimate the real life market for 15-16 year-olds and found that it seems to be considerably lower than in game. Ultimately a £4m valuation of Luke Shaw as 16 was considered extremely high in the words of The Independent. How is that not an indication of the real life market. Can you provide me with better evidence than existing transfers and negotiations? It'd be interesting to contact the top clubs around the world and hear their opinions, but I'm afraid they'd ignore me. I have dealt with that since the first page. I operate from the assumption that anything has a price and I believe the world around is producing countless examples of that. This is exactly why I am trying to direct this discussion towards an estimation of the real life transfermarket. I also explained that and why I am doing it once before. Based on the research I have done (no doubt fairly limited) I have produced the claim that in real life £15m would be enough to buy any 15-16 year-old. Then I went onto backward chaining (obviously mainly hypothetical) and began with whether big clubs would actually make those bids (£15m) if they had sufficient knowledge of players potential abilities and inferred that they probably would since real life high current ability players are worth much more. From that I concluded that since they don't make such offers they don't have sufficient knowledge i.e. 15-16 year-olds are not worth +£15m in real life. If anyone came in with such a bid the selling club would sell immediately just as any banana plantation would sell instantly if somebody bid $5/kg above the market price. Those cases of just no don't exist. There do exist examples of the buying club not being willing to me a sellings club's valuation, but that valuation is never above £15m.
  3. I don't see many people complaining that you're entitled to buy a youngster for +£15m, but rather people that argue that a situation in which you would want to do that is unrealistic. I am arguing that it is a problem that in many cases it is rational to pay that kind of money for a 15-16 year-old because it's so likely that he turns into something great. I'd love a game where I'd be scared off by a £5m asking price, but for many youngsters that seem like a bargain in game. The point is that the game creates an environment where it is completely viable to buy teenage boys for crazy amounts. But such a situation is very unlikely to ever occur because real life potential ability is such an imperceptible concept. As we saw with the real life Messi no one had a clue about his true potential when he was 15. On another note, even when people cheat and use external scouting tools it's still a valid point and the game shouldn't actively prevent people from cheating by introducing unrealistic measures. If people want to cheat and find high PA players and buy them cheaply they are more than welcome to do so on there own saves. They don't disturb or irritate anyone in doing so, unless they do it in public challenges or online games. If some clubs had supernatural scouting abilities in real life they'd be scouring the world for youngsters who will turn into stars in the future for very low fees. Altogether, the discussion is not about complaining but about improvements to the scouting system making the game harder and more immersive.
  4. @YKW A very good summation of the discussion in this thread. Not because it generally is in agreement with my line of reasoning, but because it highlights the various valid points on either side of the argument. I attempted to do the same in post 206, but that wasn't nearly as succinct and unbiased.
  5. Yeah drivel is the word. I am Danish so it's very likely my posts contain a fair amount of mistakes, but as long as we understand each other I hope it is fine. It definitely is a test, just a very simple one. The test could have included various players, but I have no desire to invest that amount of time into it. It was a simple example that you can easily (on first try) find players with ridiculous valuations and not be able to negotiate anything that even resembles reality. As stated the player wasn't even particularly desirable and didn't have that good attributes. Why shouldn't I pick the most outrageous example I could find? It doesn't make it any less valid. The argument is not whether most transfers are extreme, but that some involve exorbitant asking prices. If you don't like my test you're welcome to do a more extensive one. If you read my comments you will clearly see that I do not have anything against the current transfer market, I am merely stating that it is not realistic for 15-16 year-olds. I frequently use Genie Scout for various experiments and to better understand how the game works, but when I play a serious save there is no fun in using it as the game is even less of a challenge that way. Admittedly just having looked at Genie Scout once you naturally acquire a somewhat unfair edge as you'll undoubtedly get a better understanding of a lot of the under the hood factors in the game, but then again FM is a fun game and not much of a competitive game. Anybody with a decent competitive mindset could master it in a few days (with the exception of tactics). It's a nice laid-back simulation game that is thoroughly enjoyable. However this is completely off topic, and you can believe what you want.
  6. That was done purely to show a test (albeit a little unfair one) of the claim that you could negotiate a reasonable price. I started a random save with Man. City, holidayed to to the end of march. Used Genie Scout to find the highest potential players instantly. Started negotiations with various players and picked out that goalkeeper as the best example. The I holidayed to the beginning of the next month declared interest again and continued negotiations. I continued with that for over a year with little progress. I'd advice you to be a little more thoughtful before judging people. Edit: It was meant as in general. They happen in various peoples saves. Rarely in mine as I seldom manage clubs with that kind of money.Anyway, your logic is flawed. Just because you don't take part in the market doesn't mean it doesn't exist. I don't buy a watch for £5,000, but there definitely exists a market for them. Furthermore regardless of you do the transfer if you enquire for a player you will still be met with unrealistically high valuations.
  7. Too clearly state my line of reasoning: +£15m transfers for 15-16 year-olds happen in game +£15m transfers for 15-16 year-olds doesn't happen in reality The game doesn't match reality in this aspect. A simple logical syllogism. Now the question is whether it is the people playing the game who are forcing these unrealistic transfers (for whatever reason) or if it is the game environment that facilitates such a market. First the real life market for youngster (15-16) must be estimated. The latter is best done by examining both successful transfers of such youngsters and unsuccessful ones. Furthermore one could investigate databases such as transfermarkt.co.uk who specialises in player valuations, but obviously there is no better indicator of the market than the market itself, so actual transactions and negotiations are best for this exercise. I have already given a few examples of either and looked at some of the current best players in the world when they were at that age. I previously argued that the real life market for 15-16 year-olds were £5m at max, which generally seem to be the case, but I have just found an exception that does justify some of the extreme valuations a little (hardly a surprise that I'm the only one to put up any counter-evidence ): http://talksport.com/magazine/features/2011-10-04/green-walcott-sterling-bostock-rajkovic-and-more-expensive-teenagers Although Walcotts £12.5m transfer has later been settled at £9.1m and included various clauses and only a £5m immediate outlay it was nonetheless a +£10m transfer for a 16 year-old (less than two months to his 17th birthday). Walcott is record breaking though and in game +£15m direct outlays are regularly rejected (even for 14-15 year-olds). Another interesting case: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2049367/Chelsea-pay-2m-14-year-old-Oluwaseyi-Ojo.html, clearly suggesting that the in-game market isn't in line with reality. From all this we can estimate that the market for 15-16 year-olds is generally sub £7.5m with a few (or as far as I know 1) exceptions. Thus it would be unreasonable to assume that any +£15m bid for such a youngster wouldn't be immediately accepted as the bid is hugely above the general market price. Next question is these transfer don't happen in real life? In order to answer that the factors determining player valuations must be found. Not surprisingly these are mainly a players perceived current ability and perceived potential ability as well as his importance for his current team and suitability for the buying team. For a youngster the latter two are almost irrelevant as he is unlikely to be playing for the first team, whilst current ability for the same reasons is not the deciding factor. Hence perceived potential ability is the factor that will push up the price for a youngsters. Based on that and the fact that no +£15m transfers for 15-16 year-olds has occurred it can be concluded that either the knowledge of a youngsters future potential isn't clear enough to warrant such transfers or that +£15m simply is too much even if the future potential can be estimated with great accuracy. The latter is very unlikely though as we see deals of +£75m for more developed players, and it would seem irrational for a club to wait a few years and pay 5 times the amount that they could have paid when the player was 16, if they already had a strong idea of his potential. Why do we see +£15m valuations and transfers in game then? Even if the occurrence of these transfers are merely shrugged off as people being careless with the in-game money and taking unwarranted gambles, it doesn't describe the selling clubs initially imposing extremely high valuations that are way above market price. Why do they start demanding +£30m when +£15m should be more than enough to scare of buying clubs as it is in real life? Firstly I do not accept the first assumption, as more often than not your scouted youngsters turn out to have fantastic potential and then +£15m is not reckless. The scouting is just so accurate that you can hardly go completely wrong. If you want to test: start a save with Real Madrid, hire the best possible scouts (ask the board for more every time you can), send them to scout the top 15-20 talent producing countries and maybe have a few roaming scouts to maybe pick up the unlikely Haitian wonderkid and scout nations excessively on regen dates/exploit the regen overview and scout all big clubs regens. After 5-10 seasons use the editor or Genie Scout and check how many +185 PA regens you have in your club and compare to how many are in the game. Regarding players that are excessively expensive and therefore can't be bought consider them yours since their valuations are unrealistic. I didn't do the test myself, but I played as Real Madrid on my first ever save on FM14 and by the time I started to get bored (around 2020) I became familiar with Genie Scout and tried it out. I happened to have almost every 185+ PA player in the game including a couple of 200 PA regens. The few I hadn't found never reached their potential, which all of mine did. My scouting network was controlled by the Director of Football throughout the save. Granted, I could have been lucky, but with all my later saves I have experienced the same thing. Looking at the attributes and mentality of a youngster and several 20/20 JPA/JPP reports gives you a very clear overview of the players potential ability. Although people understandably don't care as much for in-game money as real clubs do for theirs, it's still evident that people have too much knowledge of player potentials and the ability to make them reach it to be deterred by a realistic valuation. So basically the in-game market for these players is hugely inflated due to too great certainty of a players potential. If it was much more of a risk surely there would be no such market as £5m valuations of/demand for a 15 year-old would suddenly seem steep rather than a bargain. Much like real life.
  8. I'm not a game developer, and neither am I saying that the changes I suggested are any good, I am merely claiming that they would make in game scouting more in line with reality. Obviously a realistic game isn't desirable as 99.99... % (naturally including myself) of people in here wouldn't stand a chance in real life management. Millions would like to manage in the BPL, but only the very best get the job. I am convinced that if I or most other FM players were to take over Real Madrid in real life they would like be relegated from La Liga within 10 years given that the club and players actually followed my instructions and not just acted as if I weren't there as they'd indisputably be better off without a manager than with me in charge. Yet in FM I'd be disappointed if I didn't lead them to 10 straight La Liga titles. I recommend you read my previous post. In addition a rudimentary study of demand and supply might enlighten you. The thread has basically not moved on from my posts in the middle of page 1. Nothing in that post has been refuted by anything but irrational dribble, no evidence whatsoever: "Call it what you want, these cases simply don't exist irl. Everybody is for sale for the right price, and for a 15 year old in real life that price is not over £15 mill. and that is even being extremely conservative. Anyone arguing such cases to be realistic seem to be completely oblivious to the real life uncertainty surrounding a 15 year old's future ability and just how much £15 mill. is. As an example Lionel Messi (arguably the best ever footballer) in 2003 (age 15-16) was close to being released on a free due to Barcelona's financial instability just so that they did not have to finance his family's stay in Catalunya (http://www.givemesport.com/369519-ba...leave-for-free). Who thinks they would not have sold if a bid of £5 mill. came in? Now, why did no teams come in then for the future best player in the world when they could snap him up for very "little"? Obviously because very few had seen him play or even knew about him and no outsiders could possibly foresee that he would reach a level even close to what he did. At the time he simply wasn't worth that kind of money. In Football Manager Barcelona would know (or at least be aware of his huge potential) his 199 PA right after the youth intake and would probably not let him go for less than his +£30 mill buy-out clause. Edit: Actually Shaw is an interesting example for this discussion (from Wikipedia): "During the January 2012 transfer window, it was reported that Premier League clubs Arsenal, Chelsea, and Manchester City had shown interest in signing 16-year-old Shaw, with the then-Championship club reportedly valuing the defender at £4 million.[10] Southampton quickly responded to such claims though, with then-manager Nigel Adkins assuring the media that "Luke Shaw is a big part of our future plans", and claiming that the club had "no intention ... of letting any of [their] young players move on"" From the Independent: "An asking price of £4m is extremely high for a teenager who has not even played senior football but the market value for the best young players, and in particular, the best young English players, is rising all the time." (http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/f...n-6287747.html). From that we can gather that the Premier League sides were scared of by the announcement that £4 mill. wouldn't be enough although no such bids were actually made in the first place. £4 mill. was already considered "extremely high", so I wonder if a bid of £10 (2.5 the alleged valuation) would have been enough? It seems very unlikely that it wouldn't have been, but on a more factual note it appears that the threshold valuation scaring off potential suitors in real life was around £4mill and not +£50 mill. It's really quite clear that there is blatant discrepancy between game and reality in this regard, but as previously stated it is sort of necessary to prevent the game from being too easy and I don't really mind it. I'm just not under the illusion that it's realistic.
  9. To make scouting even resemble reality I suggest star rating is removed and attributes be masked completely at all times for all players. Managers would then have to pick based on game performances/statistics and training performances (which is something that could be expanded on considerably) exactly as in real life and not on perfect knowledge that one player has better attributes than another. Scouts could then provide written reports with hints as to how good attributes a scouted player has, what part of his game is strong/weak, how he is likely to improve/worsen over the years. They could also calculate shapley values for you and compile an overview of detailed match stats (similar to the reports-->stats/form tab) so that the manager doesn't need to search through all this information himself. Let the scouts do the scouting, and instead of them coming up with some covenient magical golden stars they could actually use the plethora of statistical data already available in their reports and complement these with some comments on the players general ability of which they have garnered knowledge through watching their training and games. I realise this might make the game infuriatingly hard and a complete revamp of the scouting system would probably be needed for the game to even be playable, but if realism is strived for something of that sort is definitely needed. The current playing experience is fun, but not very realistic. It's enjoyable to take a team from the sixth tier (or lower with custom databases) of English football to UCL glory, but I don't pretend to be able to do it in real life. My involvement in this thread is not to criticise the ludicrous valuations of youngsters as the game would be tediously easy if you could pick up every future world beater for realistic amounts, but rather to direct the discussion towards scouting and player identification, the main reason for such valuations, and in the process educate the seemingly abundant flock of illusory people obstinately maintaining the irrationally imagined realism of this aspect of the game. Do you feel so attached to the game that anything perceived as criticism must be categorically rejected? The game being unrealistic is not necessarily bad, I'd argue it's good thing since it makes managing much easier, less complicated and consequently more fun than in real life. The game isn't realistic; 15-16 year-olds don't have these exorbitant valuations in real life, and Whitehawk doesn't win the Champions League. It's good fun though.
  10. This is exactly the point being made. There shouldn't be such discrepancies between a game trying to emulate the real life footballing world and the reality. The reason for this discrepancy is mainly that scouting in game is vastly superior to real life scouting, which makes youngsters (age 15-16) hugely more valuable, hence the change of topic to scouting. Another reason, as mentioned by YKW, is that the game doesn't value money as a particular important asset as there are no negative consequences related to spending enormous amounts of money. If your +£50m striker doesn't perform the board, media etc. don't respond at all, whereas in real life you would be under serious pressure. The same goes for youngsters. In real life if you brought in a 16 year old for £20m there would be huge expectations of him from the get go, whereas in game no one cares if he doesn't perform the first 4 years or ends up flopping entirely. If negative consequences such as managers being sacked because of reckless spending or managers temporarily being sanctioned from making transfers or severely monitored (director of football could administer this in the meantime) were introduced, people might be discouraged from making such transfers and in turn AI clubs could lower their ridiculous asking prices, altogether moving towards real life standards. Well put.
  11. Because you know with great certainty that the player is going to be good in the future. In real life the player's future potential would be completely uncertain, which means that his value would be much less. Within the game it is only rational not to sell high potential 15-16 year olds even for preposterously large fees because the chance that they will turn out to be great is huge. There is simply too much certainty regarding a youngster's potential and his ability to reach it. If you had as little certainty as in real life a sub £5m bid might seem more attractive as for all you know there might only be a 1/20 chance that the youngster is even going to be good enough for you first team. In general why do you guys think it is so easy to take a non league team to BPL and UCL glory within very few seasons in the game? Obviously because it is extremely easy to identify young prospects and develop them and because the AI is very poor at squad building. I.e. the main edge the human players has over the AI is the ability to exploit the certainty of player potential and player growth. I'm surprised we are yet to see the likes of Whitehawk rise to glory in under 15 years given that it happens hundreds of times on every FM edition. Maybe we armchair managers are just better than the real life ones? With all this said it is a daunting task to emulate real life scouting in a game. Even player attributes are unrealistically conclusive of a player's ability. It is quite handy that I can just send out a couple of scouts to look at a group of strikers and within a short time I have perfect knowledge of their finishing, composure, first touch, pace etc. stated as easy understandable 1-20 values. SI is going in the right direction by making scouting harder and using attributes as ranges, but clearly scouting and ability identification in game is still considerably easier (to put it mildly) than in real life. Obviously if these are made too hard/realistic the game would be much more difficult which could ruin the experience for many, so it might be in everybody's interest that the game doesn't resemble reality too much in this regard.
  12. I have not experienced one save in which the English League doesn't overtake the Spanish within 5 years (UEFA coefficients) regardless of where I manage. Obviously it could certainly happen that the English league takes the top spot in the near future despite the massive Spanish current lead, but it's a little silly that it happens almost every time. There seem to be an unreasonable English hegemony in the game, which is not really correspondent with the international results English clubs has produced in the past few years.
  13. So now you're argument is that I should just not sign the player that I have scouted because if I do, it will be unrealistic because of the unrealistically high valuation that the selling club has imposed? That sounds paradoxical; that I have to stop myself from doing something unrealistic and then pretend the game is now realistic. I'd say id would be smarter to fix what is making the game unrealistic in the first place. Edit: Much akin to real life. Actually removing it completely would be quite interesting. Scouts could then report player ratings, which could be masked, and give some small indications as to what they think of the player based primarily on their current attributes and performances. For example along the lines: "This player has good technical abilities and is likely to develop them further." The: "This player could be a good Championship player" also seem too revealing unless there was a rather significant chance that this wasn't the case of which maybe a small chance of him getting better and a bigger chance of him not making it. Here I am mainly talking about 14-16 year olds straight from the youth intake. Otherwise so precise reports should take much longer (maybe up to years for very young players) to be produced either through the player being at your club or continued scouting. Not necessarily constant scouting, but regularly over a long period of time.
  14. My first post: "This is really more an issue of it being way too easy (for AI teams and human players alike) to identify very young players with high potential ability and getting them to reach it (although AI teams are pretty poor at the latter)." I think that is pretty clear. There are no +£15m bids because the actual market for such players are way lower as witnessed by the transfers of Martial and Ødegaard who by themselves are rather extreme exceptions. In real life teams have very little idea of the potential of unused (on first team or high level) 15-16 years players, which is why they are not worth very much. Teams do not keep their future stars because they reject massive bids, but rather because no one has much of an idea how good those players will get. In game however AI teams instantly pick up on how good a youngster will get creating these exorbitantly bloated prices and in game scouts are also far too reliable so human players very quickly discover the best prospects as well. As you very well point out the very notion of +£15m bids for 15-16 year olds is absurd, yet you go on to defend that it is realistic when it happens in game. The game unrealistically forces this to happen because of unrealistic knowledge of player potential as I pointed out in my first post.
  • Create New...