Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community

santy001

Members
  • Content count

    4,803
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About santy001

  • Rank
    Stoke City Researcher

Favourite Team

  • Favourite Team
    Stoke City

Recent Profile Visitors

5,111 profile views
  1. Historical Regens

    Now entirely speculation on my behalf. But rights in the US with their sports and how players are a member of a particular body and such suggests perhaps there's something there where the organisation keeps rights or is a central administration for them. The players pretty much always belong to the league which isn't the case in most countries outside of the US. Or potentially they flat up just don't care. While even the financial side might not be prohibitive, how do you go about getting contact details for those rights holders/managers now. A very real problem is rating them as well, while FIFA likes to pretend that the legends of yesteryear are comparable to todays players, but defending and attacking have moved on. Fitness levels have changed massively, while their technical attributes would be comparable to the best of today, very few could fairly be claimed to have comparable stamina/endurance/natural fitness etc.
  2. I mean you're so far off the mark, so incomprehensibly wrong that you might as well be trying to argue the world is flat or the moon is made out of cheese. I've never been told I've got to alter a players ratings because they play for Stoke. In fact, it has no bearing on anything I do what a player at Arsenal, Man City, Burnley, Juventus, Genoa or anyone else is rated at. We have a loose set of guidelines, that basically reinforce the idea that for example, Stoke aren't the best team in the world. But we're also not the worst team in the world. We're somewhere in between, and the guidelines help put that into context, particularly for researchers who are new to the role. I don't ignore the guidelines, but I rate every player as I see fit and make the argument on the basis of what I believe about that player and welcome the thoughts/comparisons and insights of others involved in the process.
  3. Up until they're 18 or 19 I'll keep them at the club as the club facilities are best, and the clubs usually interested in loaning players are at a lower level which isn't really beneficial. More time to work with and learn from the experienced heads at the club, pick up ppm's and such. Then I'll be open to loans from like 19-21 at clubs where I think they'll perform well. It works very well for me - especially in a post hard-brexit world that I keep getting on my games.
  4. Realistic Stadiums in 3d

    I would expect this is a longer term plan, just its not ready yet for one reason or another. The one thing I could imagine causing problems would be either a) the memory associated with it being very bloated or b) expanding stadiums after the games begun causing issues.
  5. Players Outperforming their PA

    The biggest problem @noikeee with that isn't perhaps so much at the top end. Although Lionel Messi and Ronaldo being cleaved down to 170 players, and other low end 170 potential players becoming the new Messi/Ronaldo would draw a lot of complaints to those who drew this short straw. More tellingly, the problem would be when players in the 140-160 range, suddenly become top, top players and top players become mid-table journeymen. This is where it runs in to problems, because it becomes an arbitrary RNG mechanic. It's right to say it can allow for researchers getting it wrong, but setting fire to your house is also a successful way of getting rid of that spider in the living room. It's an indiscriminate, indelicate manner. Further to this, it has a distinct lack of basis in reality. Yes there was once upon a time when Jamie Vardy had the wrong PA, but it never would've fixed that. It's not our aim to have a strawman who does get 10-20PA more we can point to as though that makes it right.
  6. Players Outperforming their PA

    Well there's two aspects to this, outperforming your potential is merely good form. Good form occurs in the game, it leads to the illusion a player is better than he is. Now having more potential than you have is something different entirely. A 1 litre jug can never measure you more than 1 litre. It doesn't matter if before it was measuring chip fat, but now its measuring champagne. It doesn't matter if you keep pouring more into it. I expect most researchers will admit, PA isn't perfect, it's never going to be perfect, but until we master the art of future predictions it never will be. The biggest reason why dynamic PA can not happen is that this is a game, in games there are power creep mechanics which a dynamic PA would essentially become. Short of arbitrary, and quite frankly horrible, RNG to control it any kind of malleable PA is a terrible idea. The mechanisms to put in place to control it would be less organic and even more arbitrary. They would be less realistic. Otherwise, you just sign up 20 youngsters who are unattached, and within 5 years have the worlds best team. That is dynamic PA's end game. Further to this, you reach a point where having a good player becomes meaningless because there are so many good players. If the new middling journeyman becomes present days Lionel Messi, the game becomes very bland.
  7. I would contend, late bloomers are very much likely to be less noticed by players. Based on tendencies displayed on the forums, not many are likely to be looking at spending big money on a 27-30 year old player who has peaked late in their career.
  8. One side of the change with age process I haven't really seen in FM is indeed the increased strength, slightly more physical nature some players take as they get older (one of the elements Elpayaso is mentioning). Not all players do it, but it does happen with quite a few. If this niche element does happen in the game then either I don't sign players who are predisposed to doing it, or it feels a little rarer than it ought to.
  9. Catching up on this thread feels more that this has descended into a fairly circular discussion and while someone from SI like Neil might have wandered through, there's an awful lot of fluff. There's a feedback thread, now I can't say with absolute certainty that this is the desired formula, but in there posting what element of the game is concerned, what your issue is, and why it doesn't feel good to you is probably the best way to make something meaningful, intelligible and workable. What you think the solution is does indeed add a soothing element of "Here's my masterplan" and is what the feature request section is for, but if you have 30-40 posts in a thread each with little aspects of the bigger picture... it's likely to get ignored. Not maliciously, not because no one wants to hear these issues. Just because they're so scattered and so few and far between it would be impossible to pull it all together into something coherent to a third party in a timely manner. Keep the whole thing to a few sentences, odds are someone at SI can make sense of it, and the merits of it can be judged much easier.
  10. Indeed, but when he's bagging 30 a season for Stoke in the premier league, maybe I can put his CA back up to 129 like when he was doing it in FM
  11. Players being unsettled

    I've found playing them through their unhappiness is just generally the best way. I tend to load contracts up with optional extensions, and final year appearances once players are on the limit of what I feel comfortable paying them. It means a 1 year contract can potentially be a 5 year, and a 5 year can potentially be a 9 year contract. I usually go for a 3 year + 2 year option on most players I sign past 25, but different contracts work for different players. While you could for example keep a 17 year old tied down to a 9 year deal on like 20-30k a week, you'd be running the risk of him being unhappy and leaving in his prime which would be a waste.
  12. In addition to this @Muja, there was a question mark on the end, which suggested it was a question. I recalled there being big changes in the past, and vaguely the reasons attached but wasn't certain. The only authoritative aspect of FM my voice carries any weight with is Stoke City data. There's very little discussion on that front though, unless Peter Crouch accidentally starts becoming the top goalscorer again. When it comes to definitions, tactically there is room for improvement (I feel this ought to be clean cut, while attributes should be more vague. So you can explicitly say what you want doing, but if a player isn't doing it, its not as immediately obvious as to why). However, there is a very real issue between what it actually does & means in a lightweight and compact manner. There's also the fact that there is FM terminology, and what people equate to those words meaning based off their interpretation. Which is a battle you can never really win, short of making up your own words. You also need some kind of buffer that explains it in a way that players understand, and allows players to move towards what they want to do. That's a very difficult sweetspot to hit. Few people actively engage in trying to provide really valuable feedback through the channels on how it feels to them when they're trying to do this stuff. It's hard to judge, but if you can see a thousand people are saying "I think X does Y because of Z, but its actually not doing Y" then its more likely it'd get looked at. Jumping Reach is the perfect example, the attribute was renamed, the description updated and confusion has reduced, it still exists but it is now very much in the territory of where those who are still wrong are more so because they refuse to accept the correct definition or look it up. Rather than it being more ambiguous like it was in the past and Tim Cahill discussions were a frequent topic.
  13. That does sound very likely. Would be something to check with the Finnish research team to see if perhaps the nearby towns have been set too highly desirable place to live. On the flip side, I'm sure it wouldn't just be fair to arbitrarily say they should be rated as terrible places to live, as that seems unnecessarily harsh. There's also the question over Upson himself, was he a free agent at the time? He took a big cut to go to Brighton, and indeed to come to Stoke in the first place, in the pursuit of first team football. He is likely moulded as someone who wants to keep playing as long as he can, which would increase the likelihood of going lower down the pyramid and/or on less money.
  14. Aren't the criticisms made by @Muja basically what lead to SI ditching the sliders because you couldn't really do what you wanted with them (such as its impossible to convey & understand what the difference between notch 9, and notch 10 of creative freedom means) and had SI rebuilding the match engine from scratch? It feels more like yearning for a simpler, easier to beat match engine and remembering the features of that match engine and suggesting they should return. The whole point about tactical importance being irrelevant, its all about the players. I agree wholeheartedly, it's why Arsenal have only managed 2 wins out of 11 when coming to play Stoke at home, because Stoke have the better team, nothing tactical at all there. On the flip side to your point about vagueness, I feel the game is still far too explicit in the way it provides information about so many things. I spend most of my time trying to convince anyone who will listen various aspects should be more vague, they should be more obscured and in some cases should not be referenced at all until later in players careers.
  15. I have often begun considering replacing players around the age of 29 on FM, but for a CB and LB I had, there just wasn't anyone good enough to replace yet so I kept them on. I released the LB at 36, still with a pace around 13 or 14. A year, maybe even two, too soon but he still wanted 300k per week to stay with me which could be better used elsewhere. The CB I had did decline quite sharply in the final year in terms of pace, but at 37 when he decided to retire he was still on an 11 for pace. I'd argue there is less predictability to it this year, as some players you expect should be able to continue longer at the top decline early 30's, others continue on longer. This is the first FM in years I've felt comfortable having such old players in the top flight, such was the comfort with it at one point in the last season I had 6 or 7 over 30's in the line-up.
×