santy001

Members
  • Content count

    4,630
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About santy001

  • Rank
    Stoke City Researcher

Favourite Team

  • Favourite Team
    Stoke City

Recent Profile Visitors

4,736 profile views
  1. It has some moderately base-line and immersion aspects that can justify it, and I don't think anyone would deny it being in the game would make it more realistic. But, it'd most likely be a very much novel thing most would do once and not return to. Or if it was integrated in such a manner you had to go through it in order to become a full, senior manager, it'd be lambasted. The main problem is there is no end game to it all, some might enjoy that aspect of the game but odds are its probably not a commercially viable amount of people. There's only a finite amount of development hours, and this is the kind of thing that would take up too many for what it is. Some job roles would be largely off-limits as well, either due to inability to reproduce in any meaningful way what those roles do or pretty much anything regarding u18's. It's already a bit of an uncertain area when it comes to the elements we already have in game involving u18's. There may be no problems at all, but there's enormous potential for problems on that front.
  2. Scouts do lack a lot of nuance and context though, which is a problem through the game with staff, and just a problem of AI in general though. To my understanding scout reports are mainly going to be a logical process trying to come across as an abstract opinion - which means there won't always be a great difference in opinion - just varying degrees of accuracy.
  3. It happens quite frequently, especially if the youngster starts off promisingly. I had my staff rating a player at 5 star potential for years, and it was only at around the age of 21 it dropped significantly, and by the time he was 23 it was down to 2 stars. By that point he hadn't really improved in about 4 years. I'd actually say FM's star rating system is less reliable than ever, I see so many 4 bright, 5 faded star potential players who I know just won't make it. I see so many who I know wouldn't even make championship football. I also see a large quantity of 1.5-2 star rated players, who will perform excellently in certain positions. I still think flexibility to PA is the wrong way to go about this, and rather adjustments to CA acquisition is the way forward. The biggest indicator is as Barside says, the hidden mental attributes. I think if there were more flexibility in the early years among these attributes, and a less clear picture of where they were at until a player has been able to prove a tendency/behaviour then it will feel a lot more organic. The biggest reason why any kind of externally influenced PA should be off the table for me is that players aren't stupid, it might stand up to one FM release without someone figuring it out, but it would pretty drastically require an overhaul as soon as players figure it out and youth-booster guides become commonplace.
  4. I can definitely see the point, but on the flip side, when you look at any feature or aspect of the game you can always say "well if we delay it until the next edition we can add a bit more" and it can get stuck in a loop. If its out there in the wild, getting feedback from players, getting interaction the impetus grows to improve and refine. Your other points about how much attention a manager pays to it is quite valid though, I completely ignore it as is anyway. It's impact does probably lie elsewhere, it hasn't happened yet, but perhaps a Donald Trumpesc style football manager may bring social media to life in the world of management.
  5. The criticisms have validity to them, but its an iterative system. On FM18 it would, you'd expect be better than FM17, and on FM19 it will be better than 18. There are some clear limitations on it at the moment, which is probably why it doesn't have anything noteworthy attached to it besides any non-descript fluff. In the future it could form a part of the player interaction and discipline elements of the game, transfers, and other elements. It takes time though, and the "all or nothing" approach doesn't really work, because every aspect of the game gets refinement, iterated upon and improved as time passes.
  6. There definitely is a set premier league pitch size now, not in the boundaries of X to Y like it used to be, but an actual fixed size they want all pitches to be. However, there can be dispensation granted to not follow this exactly. In some cases, its like Liverpool who could not physically accommodate the required pitch size (possibly changed with their new stand I haven't kept up to date on their pitch size) and other clubs like Stoke, who were granted dispensation despite having ample room initially. There is usually a premier league handbook each season which lists each team and their pitch size I think, I'm sure I recall in one season something like 6-8 teams didn't have the required pitch size.
  7. If you stop enjoying any game, for any reason, you should take time away from it. There's not much to say about this. It can be based on real issues, it can be based on perceived issues, it can be based on entire fabrications but if you're not enjoying it then there's no real point. There's nothing wrong with that.
  8. This is mostly down to how people play the game in my experience. On recent FM's I've had Lewandowski, Van Persie, the German Kiessling (don't have the letters on my keyboard), Suarez, all playing the lead role up front for me beyond 35 and even as late as 39 still knocking in over 20 a year. In a deep lying playmaker role, as long as the technical attributes are there a player could carry on indefinitely in some of the formations I use. Just in my most recent save I've gotten Crewe to the premier league inside 5 years mostly off the back of 34+ players who were without a club and could do a job for a couple of years. If your formation relies on 90 minutes of high activity, high intensity runs and such then absolutely they won't be usable, have a system where they just need to be in the right place at the right time and age, pace, acceleration and stamina are fairly meaningless. A lot of old players, if playing regularly, don't deteriorate mentally or technically that much, only physically which is to be expected. Although I do disagree with FM's regular assertion that strength too declines, a number of players will actually increase their core strength to make up for the lost speed as they get older. - - - - - As for some of the comments made by FM Peace in regard to attributes, it is as others have been said, attributes have different weightings. But those weightings are far more nuanced, and are incredibly complex. Let's saying, purely hypothetically for a player who can just play central defence, his tackling weighting is 10. Now, for just a right back it could be 11. For a player who can play CB and RB it might be 10.6, but a player who can play CB, RB, but has a main position of DM it might be 9.5 but for just a DM its 9. That's entirely illustrative, and in no way indicative of the actual weightings - for 2 reasons, one we don't disclose weightings as far as I'm aware, secondly... I couldn't be bothered to trawl through and draw up all the possible different combinations because a player can be rated from 1-20 in any position.
  9. Had this topic been mentioned a couple months ago, I'd have wholeheartedly agreed and in general it does seem the way of things. However, I was actually exasperated recently in a save game with Crewe who upon promotion to the Premier League had so little an upturn in reputation on their ascent I could sign hardly anyone. My signings were limited to young wantaway players who were 20-24 and hadn't made an impact at their club. I couldn't even find any types who would just be interested in the money, a lot of championship players were beyond my grasp. An unattached Fabian Delph was the highest profile signing I managed that season. Despite being a premier league team the ranking of the club was still lower half championship. That in itself is something you could perhaps argue for, but the clubs reputation rose upon relegation, which was somewhat more confusing.
  10. In regards to offsetting it, most people perhaps may not realise just how much you can offset it. For me, the best position to offset weak consistency and important matches (and mentals in general) is the AMC position for a playmaker. It's very easy to create a low pressure, time on the ball role there that means the effects of consistency and such are far less prominent. In the case of most attributes as well, the difference between 1 and 20 isn't that high. It's why in the research forums, suggestions of single attributes being even as much as 2/3 points higher/lower are dismissed because it wouldn't come close to achieving what people think it would achieve.
  11. Physical attributes aren't affected by consistency, but we reach into the territory now of peering beyond how much people are perhaps meant to know about the game. Consistency and important matches are modifiers, but there is no publicly available information on how much of a modifier they are. However, you can offset these impacts through other attributes like professionalism. High individual attributes like concentration and decisions will also offset these passively, particularly combined with tactics. The biggest problem, and you won't accept this in all likeliness, is you're looking at information you're not supposed to be looking at and trying to compare two very different processes to one another. I appreciate you're trying to increase my and other researchers workload with the FM game, but we're not paid. However, the work we do already ties in with what you're wanting to be created. It already exists. There are templates, or rather there is an infrastructure in the code of the game which has country by country variance and draws upon other attributes we researchers set for our clubs that helps mould and shape regens coming through. The back room staff in the game also do this. If we just provided templates, it would actually be a massive step backwards and create a very "samey" game from save to save. There has to be a certain acceptance of how it is, its a system than in 10 years time will be better than it is now. And right now its better than it was 10 years ago (which is around when it first came into the game I think?) There is an iterative improvement process in place. It's hard to bridge the gap because you posted you believe you can do the work of 1200 researchers in 1 month for a process that is always happening year round to an extent with "active" phases of 3-4 months in total. It dilutes the validity or well intentions of any points you make. If you truly believe that then no response in this thread is going to satisfy you.
  12. Perhaps as a researcher I can help shed a bit of light on this. I've sought clarity on the matter because it does impact upon research, and it was indeed confirmed that hidden attributes like consistency and important matches do change. At some point in time they were much more static, or entirely static, but that is not the case any more. How much movement there is/can be I'm not sure of. One of the big problems is making attributes like consistency and important matches malleable is the playerbase will break it unless its incredibly well done. Being incredibly well done coincidentally means making it very hard to figure out, or putting a large amount of it purely down to chance. The thing is, if there's ever a process in the game which guarantees you can improve these attributes players will have to take it. Consistency and important matches are powerful in what they do, as are all the hidden attributes. Generally speaking, for all real life players that young, the advise we receive for attributes like important matches and consistency is they should be left empty. Let the game decide, it provides variation from save to save, it can then emulate how a players career might go. Personally I feel like we need a banded system similar to what we use for PA's of young players, I've made this clear in the relevant places but there could be a better solution in the works none of us are yet aware of. There's too much of a focus on things like this though, because ultimately, the game does normalise. If the average top flight leagues consistency goes from 13 to 11, its the same for everyone. That's why its the new average. The biggest problem with the regen system: It's trying to do the work of was it Miles said 1200 people who only have to do it for 1 years worth of players (which is still a huge amount mind), instead season in season out. The FM regen system is effectively the yearly research team condensed into your game. How do you condense the process that re-creates real players so well when you consider its enormity? The spread of attributes is a very interesting topic though, for Xherdan Shaqiri, last year I was deciding what attributes to submit and I had a 130ish CA model, a 150ish model and a 174CA model. They all worked and played like Shaqiri in FM16. I actually heavily favoured the 174CA model since it left a player who had a handful of magical moments, but often left you feeling disappointed that he didn't quite live up to what his ability suggested he should do. The 130CA model also had a handful of magical moments, which is right for Shaqiri, yet you always felt like he was performing well above himself.
  13. This is a problem is you use a continue timer on the game, or go on holiday. The default behaviour for transfers is that if it continues before you actually choose the confirm/cancel option from the message it defaults to confirm. Which in most situations works fine (I don't think it'd be reasonable to offer some kind of rules engine for players to scenarios) but there is one scenario - the lack of a work permit where cancel rather than confirm would be the more ideal option. If a player fails his work permit, it either needs an absolute hard-stop on the continue process (currently it stalls it a couple of times before continuing, unlike some other prompts) or its default behaviour changing because past the age of 22/23 having a player without a work permit is likely to not be of much use to the player.
  14. I agree with this completely, FMT is the perfect niche of the game for casual network games. We would love to pick 20 players each in a draft fashion and make that database, or create even teams and just go at it in a league. It's all possible in the main version, but its slower and with a few hours a week we like to get through as much as we can in terms of actual games, rather than the full experience.
  15. I've recently been playing a network game with Barcelona, Suarez scored close to 70 in his first season despite an injury in March. Messi and Neymar weren't being played to score the majority of goals, but Neymar was above 40 and Messi above 50. By the time we knocked the save on the head (less money in Spain for the top few than we thought there would be) at the end of the 3rd season. I hadn't lost a league game as Barcelona because the front trio was just too potent. The AI does struggle to utilise these players, but I think this is more of an issue with the AI not yet being able to distinguish when it is the stronger team, and when it has players who you can genuinely play so aggressively with you don't need to worry about holding back. If equally large clubs were to play the same way with their somewhat lesser players, they would get absolutely decimated by being so aggressive. Admittedly I'm not too interested in watching the videos of the experiments (because they're so horribly flawed right from the off there is no way to make it a meaningful test) but I think its an area that will just take time to improve. Yet on the flip side, how much have they stood out in the 10 league games Barcelona have dropped points in during the league this year, how much have they stood out in the champions league & cup ties they lost/drew - I'm guessing all in they've drawn or lost in somewhere between 15-20 games out of around 50. That's hardly dominance on an unrivalled scale is it?