Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community

4Five9

Members
  • Content count

    1,049
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About 4Five9

  • Rank
    Part-Timer

About Me

  • About Me
    https://angryfarmersunited.com/

Favourite Team

  • Favourite Team
    Spurs

Recent Profile Visitors

974 profile views
  1. I'd like to see them go as they currently add very little to the game. There are many elements of a real manager's day to day work that don't translate into a game/simulation. This, in its current guise, is one of them. If you want realism then where are the indepth nutritional reports and dietary advice for players, when do we get advice from physios and specialists such as podiatrists on orthotics and gait altering devices and the progress the players make and so on. Some things despite being realistic, are either dull, too specialised or mindlessly repetitive. For example, imagine having to spend the vast majority of game time on training rather than playing games and transfers, this would be realistic but perhaps, not fun. A simulation is ultimately still a game and games like this are supposed to be an entertaining leap into a different world. Not a clickathon where you have little interest in what the buttons say or do but rather try to find the click that gives you the optimum result/minimises the negative impact; where eccentricities are excessively punished rather than celebrated ("When the seagulls follow the trawler, it's because they think sardines will be thrown into the sea"). Too many games seem to be designed with the purpose of maximising the time the user has to play the game; FM really doesn't need extra time sinks. According to Steam (and I probably should be embarrassed about this), I racked up 1959 hours on FM11 before buying this version! It's pretty obvious that you're getting the game right (and that I should get out more) but a couple of things are a wee bit crap, current press conferences being one of them. It's a shame because when media interaction was initially added, I really enjoyed the novelty and uses (the interactions that came prior to press conferences) but this seems to be a bit of a stale dead end at the mo. I'm not sure this would be worth the time and/or dedicating resources to develop the AI enough to make it entertaining when there are plenty of other areas that might add a lot more to the game.
  2. Constructive Criticism

    Most of the interactions are bloated timesinks at the moment, press conferences are probably the worst imo. Most of them need streamlining and making more relevant. Press conferences: Make them once a week only (Fridays?) where you get asked ~8 questions; 2 on the last match, 2 on the next match, 2 on your team and 2 on other areas (awards etc). The options on attendance should be: a) attend, b) assman attends or c) decline to attend - where there is no penalty for non-attendance should you not want to. If you feel the need to give your players a boost/play mind games etc, then you can attend if you want. Press interactions: You should only be able to respond to transfer stories based on key players/hot prospects. Back up players aren't newsworthy, not every transfer needs to be poured over in detail. Player interactions/team talks: These need reworking radically. Team talks should be a reflection on the overall team performance/aims, they shouldn't be based on individual performances, especially when you can (and generally have to) talk to each team member to praise/criticise performance. All team talks should be for the team overall (no individual instructions in this) and clearly based on a number of factors (opponents/how well the team has gelled/importance of match) with talks clearly based on those circumstances (no more generic guess the correct talk - even though they can be to an extent predictable, there's simply not enough feedback to warrant how important they are considered). For example, if I'm playing the first leg of a CL knockout round away, my main focus for the team is to try and not concede - this is what I want to convey, this should impress on them the need to not take risks (and potentially play more defensively than my tactics say). Or, if I'm Vasco playing Fla, "For the fans" doesn't really cut it. Weak, generic motivational phrases really don't get the message across - especially when they're used in such a repetitive manner. Talks need to be far more tailored to suit the match ahead and with an aim in mind rather than a random motivational type speech. Less cod psychology and more specific controls here. The bloat in player interactions at the moment is the need (despite team talks) to have to go through each player individually and comment on match performance (if you expect to build a good relationship up and maintain good performance that is) - this needs streamlining and linking up properly. Individual instructions should come via interactions, with long term goals (manager requests as well as manager promises) set. Feedback needs to be clearer too, a player agreeing with what you say doesn't mean anything unless they indicate a clear intention to do as they've been told (or not) - put player intentions under where manager promises are displayed. The manager requests need to cover a large number of options and could even be part of the process in transfers (e.g. to play and develop as a trequartista in the long term, to behave appropriately and professionally, reduce the number of cards they get, put more effort in, don't talk to the press and so on). Player responses to this would give a far clearer indication of how professional/adaptable/loyal a player is. A carrot and stick approach to this would work too, with successful compliance linked to a manager promise of more game time, new contract etc and refusal with dropping to the reserves, transfer listed, fines etc. The interactions need to flow properly and be reduced to a more focused conversation with a much larger delay between them. A max of 2-3 requests for a fixed amount of time (per season?) dependant on professionalism/age, would give a semblance of control and feedback into interactions without making it a continual chore. These could also be linked towards a more organic approach to developing PPMs, where a player would develop them according to the role, rather than the pick and mix approach at the mo. [EDIT: Not removing the choice of ppms but rather if you want a player to develop a certain way, for that season they would work on developing some specific ppms for that role, which you can always add to at a further date if they aren't as comprehensive as you want] Basically these interactions need to be for the long term, not a continuous match by match process. I want to build up good relationships and maintain performance without the babysitting (unless a player is so unprofessional they need it). Praise/criticism should be based on long term form, not immediate form constantly.
  3. Hey, at least we scored against the Germans
  4. I had this too; I deleted the shortlist from the 'Edit Shortlists' option and the problem went.
×