kevgaleuk

sure. have uploaded - file name: KG - Journeyman - S01 - Montreal.fm

Can you add the ability to change and remove the highlight colours for human/affiliate clubs? Obviously the colours vary by skin but in essence your club e.g in a player's history or in the league history etc is a different colour to the rest which makes total sense BUT if you have more than 1 human team suddenly they are all highlighted in the same colour It would be great if it could either Be turned off altogether (I am sure some would prefer that) limited to JUST your human team so if I have multiple it is only showing me mine not the other players in MY view (and would work in reverse for theirs) be adjustable e.g. you choose a colour within the human manager add part

In the editor it now seems to search automatically even with no criteria e.g when you click clubs for example it searches all of them before allowing you to insert criteria, if you add nationality as a search item it searches that (instead of you needing to press apply filter like other variables) and if you go to something like changing a players club, or a club on their history, add a club for a loan/transfer it also searches all of the clubs before you add a filter e.g the name of the club With the size of the database this takes time which is a frustrating experience - can this be removed?

When you offer a player out and (I think) agree a price for a player these game seems to save this as their asking price and you often get clubs then offering that fee - however often you accept a fee + a sell on clause etc however they aren't stored so subsequent bids come in without that but greyed out so you can't challenge. Additionally when you accept a palatable loan deal future offers are very rarely aligned but often greyed out and non-negotiable (which would make sense if they were offering the same (e.g. an agent had informed them) but when they aren't its just a waste of my time Can you consider: A sell on fee expectation alongside the asking price so that both can be set and alerts clubs to the expectations? A loan example e.g. FEE & Wage contribution (which is there but doesn't seem to change based on accepting bids) Beyond this when clubs offer could there be a happy medium between all negotiable and all non-negotiable? For example when I offer for a player I'll often take off certain add ons immediately or lock what I am prepared to offer e.g. the up front, there and then payment. AI clubs don't. If they are set on a fee, fine but allow me to counter with add-ons etc. They can reject that which is their prerogative but the immediate take it or leave it (especially when sub acceptable) feels a little off to me

I wonder if this can be looked at as it seems to drive a lot of dead ends in the game For example... Players unhappy. How often is the young kid in the U23's coming to you after a transfer window is shut saying they are not happy as they feel they aren't going to make it at the club. Chances are not but until the summer (or at least the next window) I can't really do much about it. I appreciate a lot of the time that just ends in a great to know you know how I am feeling but it feels like a lost opportunity as I am sure part of management is managing these scenarios for both the senior pro's and the kids trying to knock on the door Possible fixes... Add into the interaction the option to revisit the chat at the end of the season. "focus on your development for the next couple of months and lets talk about it at the end of the season / just before the next transfer window" - perhaps in that follow up session (or even in the first one) rather than it be the full confrontation or full acceptance mode that interactions are today it could be based around the "playing time" mechanic. I see you as x this year, maybe x next year and so on. I see you as x this year but a loan next season to get the experience you need", things like that. Naturally they have their views which may or may not be aligned, they may or may not agree to the plan you have in place for them but its more of a conversation than an argument. They might push for an early loan for example, you might discuss what level etc For more senior pros I don't know if they necessarily come asking for loans but I do think the ability to discuss how you see them in the squad (more interactive method of changing playing time) is valuable - their form, other players form etc may all have changed it since they signed or that status was set. They may have gotten older and their playing time needs managing etc. For older players offering them the chance to be a player 18/21 coach on the side to help with their development might also alleviate the older pros wanting out because they are not playing - obviously for some it won't! Board Unhappy... Like players its a bit black and white - we set an expectation and you haven't met it - I feel like boards are ambitious but I suspect the Liverpool and Man City boards aren't jumping up and down on their manager for losing the league by 2 points; runs of injuries or another club being stellar is context that the AI doesn't seem to have. I think most boards have the challenge for / battle against mentality than the outright expectation. Maybe in 1 team leagues the expectation might be more pronounced but in leagues like the premier league I would suspect they know its a challenge not a given win. Obviously if you fall off by 10-20 points I'd expect dissatisfaction.

could you consider 5 things... When listing players some way of distinguishing between those being loaned for development vs those you're happy to let go out (older or unwanted players). The reason for this is that I would assume for young players the bigger clubs are less concerned about the financial aspect and more about their development so if my £500 a week player doesn't get a fee and we pay his wages but he gets to play a whole season the board should not be unhappy vs that expensive striker who I don't want but would like off the wage bill you'd expect them to want a fee and wage contribution When fees are included can you make it easier to understand the finances - the box on the right sort of tells you but its not clear. Maybe have it as a loan fee (total) with the monthly contribution in brackets and the section at the bottom to be loan fee (x) + wages (y) + future fee if one exists (z). = total Linked to 1) - A board expectation (not necessarily binding but indicative of their happiness) for the fee/wage contribution e.g. young players under a certain wage they're happy with no fee and low wages so long as the player is going to be a regular somewhere; for players over a certain wage but still needing development (future, youngster and breakthrough) no fee but some contribution to wages and players over a certain age / squad status a level of fee / contribution When agreeing to let a player go out on loan, 1) don't make it a promise - you are open to it so long as certain conditions are met and your agent can do some work to help drum up interest behind you listing them for loan & 2) when agreeing to a loan setting the conditions e.g. wage contribution, a fee etc so that when you reject stupid offers for a player you'd not necessarily want to see leave the squad they don't get arsey In the "add to development" section can you add "fee" to the list of options. I can't tell me DOF/Assigned Staff Member that I do or don't want a fee to be included

Would it also be possible to ORDER multiple transfer offers (that arrive at the same time) best to worst to make it easy to negotiate the best offer first and then cascade that to the rest of the offers And with loans could you consider 4 things... When listing players some way of distinguishing between those being loaned for development vs those you're happy to let go out (older or unwanted players). The reason for this is that I would assume for young players the bigger clubs are less concerned about the financial aspect and more about their development so if my £500 a week player doesn't get a fee and we pay his wages but he gets to play a whole season the board should not be unhappy vs that expensive striker who I don't want but would like off the wage bill you'd expect them to want a fee and wage contribution When fees are included can you make it easier to understand the finances - the box on the right sort of tells you but its not clear. Maybe have it as a loan fee (total) with the monthly contribution in brackets and the section at the bottom to be loan fee (x) + wages (y) + future fee if one exists (z). = total Linked to 1) - A board expectation (not necessarily binding but indicative of their happiness) for the fee/wage contribution e.g. young players under a certain wage they're happy with no fee and low wages so long as the player is going to be a regular somewhere; for players over a certain wage but still needing development (future, youngster and breakthrough) no fee but some contribution to wages and players over a certain age / squad status a level of fee / contribution When agreeing to let a player go out on loan, 1) don't make it a promise - you are open to it so long as certain conditions are met and your agent can do some work to help drum up interest behind you listing them for loan & 2) when agreeing to a loan setting the conditions e.g. wage contribution, a fee etc so that when you reject stupid offers for a player you'd not necessarily want to see leave the squad they don't get arsey

In a previous iteration of FM I am sure there was an option to use last offer when negotiating multiple offers. Essentially allowing you to copy and paste what you consider to be acceptable to the subsequent offers. I'd love to see this re-introduced. I know there is the accept and provide ultimatum to other clubs but this only works every now and again and its not something you can proactively select (I'd be happy if this was the option) Secondly so many bids come through as non-negotiable there is no way of saying why you are rejecting them (e.g. squad status on a loan or the balance between fee and wages or the inclusion of a wage contribution or no sell-on fee etc.) I'd love to be able to provide feedback on why I am rejecting that as some kind of informal negotiation to the club Finally, I often offer players for loan and a typical offer will be 0 Fee, 100% wages and a Regular starter for my young kids (0-5k in wages); you get clubs offering that which is great BUT within a day you get clubs offering a fee and 20% wages on a fringe basis. Obviously they get rejected but having already accepted a bid there needs to be an option to reply with the acceptable bid from your perspective. Maybe an extension of that ultimatum thing that occasionally pops up..

2 very tactical things please When you place an advert can you either embed the ability to advertise for multiple of the same role (e.g. I need 3 physios) or the ability to leave the advert running if you recruit one (but still need more) - currently it closes the advert even if you haven't filled available spaces If someone rejects you (resigns a contract, chooses someone else) can you include a line that reminds you what you offered them? If you are recruiting multiple people (especially roles like analysts, physios etc where people could do a few different roles) it can be tricky to remember what you offered them and therefore go and start the search again

When someone makes a transfer offer for a player (not yours) you can see (on the transfer page of the player profile under recent offers) the initial fee offered, but when a loan is made you cannot see if there is a fee or not, can this be changed?

Currently when trimming your squad you have 2 options - do nothing and hope teams come in vs listing them and having to accept low offers Previously you could at least lower their "value" which seemed to indicate to teams there was a discussion to be had but now that causes a player to kick off In a previous iteration I am sure I remember there being a transfer status (similar to playing time) which ranged from unavailable to listed and included something akin to open to offers I feel like clubs make it known they are open to offers without formally transfer listing players (actively want to get rid) causing interest but not at super low prices level.. would it be possible to add something like this back in to allow that middle ground between you'd have to add several more 000's to make me even listen vs how about we pay you to take our 20m striker

Adding to this - in the PGE can you make it easier to disable B/ii/2/reserve teams and include some kind of permanent removal. Some are in affiliates and some are in the reserve section with the ones in the reserve sections (where you can select a never used option) seem to stick vs the ones in affiliates which don't. Would it be possible to put all B type teams in that section to enable complete and easy removal of them Also can you make the non-use of a B type team mass editable!

Plus on this for staff (managers) can you add the ability to take staff with e.g their key backroom staff?

Would it be possible to add the ability to add clauses, instalments, and other future aspects when arranging a future transfer? You can do this in the PGE but the IGE is just a binary fee with a couple of % clauses etc Added to that can you add the ability to include squad status/playing time & contract details?

Is there a way of adding to the PGE (and making it mass editable) the ability for teams to make players unavailable for selection when under transfer offer? Effectively being able to stop the AI from selecting a player who is on the verge of leaving the club unless there are no other options. Often a player will be under offer, bid accepted, in the contract / medical phase yet they are being selected to play even if the club themselves have transfer listed or listed them for loan. Pre-season I get because it will be fitness and for smaller clubs I get they may not have an option but for the bigger clubs where there is depth teams will likely not be playing that player / the player is unlikely to be at the club to play... Being able to edit the club philosophy towards playing listed/loanlisted or under offer players would help with this

Currently in the IGE you can edit the affiliations but you cannot edit the relationship between clubs and their B teams. In the PGE there is some possibility to edit them As someone who really wants SI to sort the bugs out of B team usage (or at least how it appears in player histories) - players having rows of a B team on their history yet they never played any games / teams even moving players to the B team in the first place - I want to be able to disable the players move freely option like you can with affiliates What I have found is that I can pretty much disable B teams before the start of a new game BUT they sprout new ones during the game and within a season the fix was redundant. Being able to edit the B/C/ii/2 Team affiliation would be a good work around

FM have, over time, done a lot with dynamic reputations etc but I still feel expectations are unrealistic I have managed a few clubs into the Premier League over many years playing the game and if you win the championship reasonably easily the expectations the next season are almost always mid-table which given the gulf is not true to RL. Even a club like Brentford this year will likely be expecting a relegation fight and apart from the traditional top 6 maybe top 8 or 9 now I can't imagine expectation (not hope) is far beyond avoiding relegation. The expectation for building on success should be slower IMO Add in if you do have success e.g. finish top 8 or top 6 as a small to medium club, suddenly you are favourites both in games or expectation against the biggest teams - again the rise (or fall) of clubs reputation/expectations should be a lot slower to reflect RL As an example I got Norwich to 6th in the second season up and was taken over by a tycoon (that 1 in a million occurrence) but rather than repeating that seasons success as a maximum, investing and building (as is being predicted for Newcastle) the immediate expectation was Top 4 and the media had me finishing 3rd next season... In reality when Leicester won the league did they get predicted to do it again? No, everyone expected the big clubs to invest and normal service to be resumed. Add in European commitments they were predicted (if memory serves) to be 4-6th... over time they have got to the point where we all largely expect them to be top 6 maybe pushing top 4... West Ham - terrific season and now seen as top 6 but not expected to be top 4 and so on

It would be amazing if this could be amended to reflect (how it appears) clubs negotiations From the little we see as fans I get the impression that clubs effectively negotiate the valuation of the player or the total package required. They then seem to barter over the structure of these (up front vs conditional fees) and then still further the basis of these fees (lump sum vs payment over time etc) I'd love to see FM follow the same sort of structure - especially when selling a player. I think he is worth X to the club (or will be) and therefore a deal reflecting that needs to be reached. In both sales & purchases some degree of club input into it would be good too. While IL the manager very rarely is involved at all I get the way FM does it for playability but it would be good to have the club steer you as to their expectations so you don't do what you think and the board is constantly unhappy with the finances involved...

I am sure there is a technical term for it but essentially having elements of the database that will update upon change (or selecting an option to publish) in existing games rather than requiring new games to be started. The obvious area for this is player histories - I often try and clean up the player histories at the launch of every new FM edition but invariably miss some. It would be great if I could amend the histories/fees etc in the editor and these be reflected in the game without starting a new save.