Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community

tmpusr

Members+
  • Content Count

    51
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About tmpusr

  • Rank
    Amateur

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Given that my team has hit the woodwork 113 times over the past two seasons (about 60 matches per season), I'd say there is some room for improvement... :P
  2. It is definitely not the same situation and the discrepancy is much larger, I agree. In the last 20 years Porto was the only team from a smaller league to win the CL (it is more common in EL with 7/20 winners playing in smaller leagues). That being said, FM is not reality as I said in my previous posts. It's quite easy for a human user to load his/her team with wonderkids and win the CL a few years later. Therefore imho, what SI should consider is ways to either prevent this (I've outlined some above) or embrace this (i.e. accept that this is an alternate reality and allow the user to create a "super club" from a smaller league and let the rest of the game treat it as such). Of course it's more complicated than that That being said, the TV money explosion you refer to happened a bit later. For instance, back in '95 less than 20% of the Spanish teams revenue came from broadcasting rights and more than 45% came from stadium tickets (match day and season). This changed radically over the next decade (with TV rights raising to 33% and tickets dropping to 32%, while the absolute figure of TV revenue tripled). In England, EPL was still under their first contract for their TV rights. It was in '98 that they signed their second deal for almost double the money. That's an excellent point that I didn't know and hadn't researched. I wonder if that would change if they consistently made it to the later stages of CL or if they win 1-2 ELs. It's definitely something I'll keep my eye on. The individual TV deals are the norm in many countries (e.g. Greece). It was also one of the main reasons that until the mid 10s Real Madrid and Barcelona were so incredibly richer than the rest of the La Liga teams. Personally, I wouldn't expect TV rights to reach EPL or La Liga figures in Greece. I would however expect a super successful club to get something like 1/3 of the money they make, as well as not facing the problems we've mentioned above (insane renewal demands because of underutilized transfer budget, players being severely undervalued etc). I understand your point, but I'm not sure I agree with this trail of thought unless your squad consist of really "exotic" nationalities :P If you have players from well established countries (Brazil, Argentina, Spain, France, Italy etc), one wouldn't expect people in these countries to really bother with the 1-2 great players in a small league since they are used to producing great talent. It is however an interesting point that along with merchandise sales, TV money might also increase if you buy reputable players from China, South Korea, USA etc.
  3. I beg to differ. Ajax had 2 runs when they actually became the best team in the world: in the 1970s they won 3 European Cups in a row and in the 1990s they won one UEFA Cup, 1 CL and lost their second final in row on a penalty shootout. The reasons they broke up are (understandably) not reflected in the game: In the 70s, Cruyff was by far the best paid player in the Ajax team -almost twice as much as the rest- and he was injury-prone (rumor has it that some of them were fake). His personal doctor advised him not to play on the second leg of the 1973 European Cup quarter final, even though the team doctor had cleared him for the game. Cruyff denied participating which caused turmoil in the team. As a result, when the Ajax players voted for the captain of the '73-'74 season, Keizer was elected which led to Cruyff's request for transfer and subsequent transfer to Barcelona. Without Cruyff, Ajax was not at the same level and soon disintegrated. Therefore, this reason is not related to money, league reputation or anything similar but rather problematic dynamics. In the 90s, Ajax was destroyed by the Bosman ruling which suddenly allowed free agency and unlimited EU players in squads. This is related to money, since one would assume that if Ajax had enough money, they might be able to keep their players from leaving. Back in the day however, sponsorships and TV rights were not the most important factor for a team's income as they are today. Teams relied mostly on tickets and that put Ajax in a huge disadvantage since until '96 they were playing in either De Meer (with a capacity of 19000 people) or Olympisch stadium (with a capacity of 22000 people). Comparing this capacity to the capacity of the stadiums of the rest of the top teams in Europe (Bernabeu: 81000, Camp Nou: 99000, Delle Alpi: 69000, San Siro: 76000 etc) explains why Ajax had such a financial disadvantage. Nowadays, things are different: sponsors, marketing/merchandise and TV rights account for the majority of top teams income (along with prize money). There is no fundamental reason why a team from e.g. Netherlands would be able to attract this income if they have a successful run. Maybe they will not get the broadcasting money of EPL, but a significant increase in TV rights is very possible: afaik Ligue 1 broadcasting rights increased by 50% due to the surge of PSG. I would imagine that should PSG sign an individual TV deal, the increase on their income would be much much higher. I'm not sure if when you mentioned Ajax you had in mind their recent good run. In this case, we're not talking about a very successful team (compared to the "super clubs" we create in FM): They lost in the final of EL a few years back and in the semis of CL last year. In between they were inconsistent. Monaco is a different story: they belong to the French League which is one of the top 5 leagues so in the game they should have no problem increasing their income. In reality, Monaco has to deal with PSG that won't allow them to grow. They might be able to manage an upset or two, but in the long run they don't have the capacity to compete with PSG and therefore are forced to be a selling club. A very successful one, but a selling club. Without PSG in the picture, maybe things would be different. Hope the above make sense :)
  4. First of all, thanks Neil for your post. Let me respond to some of your points though: The whole game is not realistic (and imho it shouldn't, otherwise it wouldn't be fun). There is no point in history when every manager in the world became super dumb and a newcomer was the only smart one, but the moment I start my save that's exactly what happens. The truth is, human users are much much smarter than AI managers and this puts us in the position to create "super clubs" within a few years even if in reality it would take decades (or might even be outright impossible). To put it in a different way, I've been playing the same save (with AEK from Greece) in every version of FM since 06/07. In most versions I would start winning the CL within 3 years (sometimes I could do it even in 2, occasionally it would take me 4+), without using the editor. It's not that hard if you know what to do. Now, if you want to maintain realism I would argue there are 3 main ways all of which have their drawbacks/problems: Make the AI smarter: probably the most obvious and correct solution, but definitely the hardest one technically. Even with the huge advances in AI research of the past few years, it's still far from being competitive to human intelligence at least in this context and without requiring a supercomputer. Make it harder for the user to create super teams: this would entail making it VERY hard to scout and find wonderkids, VERY hard to buy them in affordable prices and VERY hard to improve the facilities of the club. Imho this would mean kill some of the realism (there is no fundamental reason why a club from a smaller league would not be able to scout and buy wonderkids, Porto used to do it all the time in the 00s) in order to maintain the realism at the top level. Make it harder for the user to win: regardless of what team the user assembles and the tactics he/she uses, make it virtually impossible to win enough. Imho that would be the worst solution (and probably one of the few reasons that would make me stop purchasing the game) but it would achieve the realism goal at the result level. The current status of allowing the user to create super teams, be very successful and then put a financial stranglehold so that he/she spends most of the time in the finances tab trying to figure out how to keep the balance positive when players have ridiculous demands, imho takes a good chunk of the fun out of it. And given that in this case a super club has been created out of the blue, the realism argument imho is weaker: there are no real data points to draw conclusions from. It's equally possible that there would be no increase in money income (not even the dynamic increase already present in the game) or that sponsors, TV broadcasters and fans would go nuts for the new phenomenon and pour money to it. Thanks!
  5. I play in Greece and I face most of the problems you mention. In my case, sponsorship growth is fine (I started with about 20M euros and after 8-9 years I get 120M euros which is more than I expected). On the other hand, TV money is way too low (started with 5M euros, now I get 19M euros). Granted, Greek Superleague is nowhere near EPL or La Liga, but my team gets an individual TV deal, so it should be at least 50M or 60M (since Real Madrid is making ~150M, 1/3 of that sounds reasonable if another team becomes the most reputable). Merchandise sales are also a huge pain and I've posted about this repeatedly. The issue with very low offers is a problem because of the balancing act of finances: I cannot give them the amount of money Real Madrid or PSG would offer them, thus they become unhappy or ask for ridiculous new contracts. As an example, I had a 18 year old wonderkid unhappy and asking to leave because he wanted a new contract after I rejected an offer from Borussia Dortmund for him. He is currently making 1.27M euros per year. His initial request when I tried to renew him was for 15M (!!). Even if we assume that after negotiations he would accept 12M, it's totally unreasonable. He wouldn't get 12M at Borussia Dortmund (in my experience such cases end up getting around 7M) and my team is more reputable than Dortmund. At the same time, another 21-year old asked for 13M in order to renew (he's making 1.23M). This whole thing happened because I sold some players in order to reduce my wages, since they were older and making a lot (and, surprise, were asking for 15M+ in order to renew). In other words, I lowered my wages and now I have to get them all the way back to where they were (and higher) because... I lowered my wages. I'm ok with low offers in order to unsettle the player since I use this tactic as well against AI teams (not sure if they happen IRL tbh) but not if it's the reason for my player demands to explode.
  6. That would depend on the circumstance I believe. In my saves (I typically play in Greece), after a few good seasons both my first and my youth teams become way better than the rest of the league, thus having a youngster play would not harm the team's results (which is important so that they don't get bad match ratings). That being said, since writing this I figured out that this is already possible though not explicitly: in the "Available first team players for Under 19s match" email, one can set which players should play in the next youth match (and, crucially, their position as well).
  7. With the risk of being seen as obsessive (given that many of my posts revolve around this topic), I believe the game lacks depth regarding financial development. My suggestion would be to add a financial center (similar to the development center) that would: Provide detailed information regarding the team profile in different countries, merchandise sales etc. I've outlined most of my ideas in a previous feature request. Provide more information regarding sponsorships (potentially with suggestions on how to get better deals the following year). New staff roles that help your team's financial development (marketing advisor, sponsorship advisor etc). While such additions might sound weird, Real Madrid even offers a specialized MBA on sports management, so it makes sense to add such roles.
  8. Youth team managers decide which players to field based on CA instead of PA. While this is expected, it should be possible for the first team manager to suggest/force playing wonderkids to help them develop optimally. Given that one can loan a wonderkid to other teams and "force" them to play him as a first team player, it makes sense to be able to do this in the youth team as well (which is under the manager's authority).
  9. Also: Lack of presence in the box (except for your CM no-one's really going forward) IWB, IF and Overlap right, apart from unbalanced and a huge width problem as stated above, sounds contradicting
  10. Bump Also a bonus question: if my merch sales increase after buying some players and then I sell them, do my sales return to the previous number (like the players never joined), do they remain at the new level (like the players never left) or do they drop somewhere in between (resembling an increased club profile)?
  11. Especially if it's fixed against the user. It makes no sense to purposely frustrate the players, since it might make them not buy the next version(s)
  12. AEK, Greek Superleague (which currently is the 8th most reputable league). Is the league reputation relevant?
  13. It's not clear to me how player reputation, team success and merchandise sales interact. I've become the most reputable club in the world and my merchandise sales is hovering around 12M , while the merchandise sales of e.g. Real Madrid is around 100M. Note that I purposely bought 2 Japanese players, 2 South Korean players, 1 Australian player and Donnarumma, and I've established commercial affiliations with clubs in Japan, China and Australia. Even though it does make sense to take a few years till I reach the sales of Real Madrid, unless I actively try to buy players with the goal of increasing merchandise sales they remain stagnant. Essentially my question boils down to: in order to increase my merchandise sales I need players with high reputation (or mediocre reputation but originating from countries like Japan, South Korea and Australia), unless I'm missing something. If my team success doesn't increase the reputation of the players in my team, how can it be increased? Is there maybe another reason that merchandise sales are so lower for me (I'm playing with AEK from Greece) that I should focus on fixing? Thanks!
  14. Quite often I'm playing a very condensed schedule with games every 48 or 72 hours . Such cases are extremely hard to handle because of fatigue. As a result I would suggest adding (at least some of) the following options: Add an option to rest players because of a very condensed schedule. The players should be (much more) willing to accept it compared to the standard rest interaction options since it is fairly obvious that only very bad personalities would insist on playing on 70% condition. This should help alleviate the "not enough playing time" complains when heavily rotating. Make the players more willing to rest league games if they have already won the league and are still in cup competitions (e.g. CL). This is more generic and not so tied to condensed schedule but it is an addition I would like to see since it would help develop other players and it sounds fairly realistic. Add selective training, where some players are following a different schedule than the rest. When I have a game coming right after I've played one and I can't rotate, I typically only schedule recovery/rest/match preview/match review sessions, in order to improve their condition as much as possible. It would be nice to only apply this to players that have played in the last game or are fatigued, while the rest improve their attributes through normal training, Players could volunteer not playing in games if they're very tired (e.g. condition < 80%), again to avoid the "not enough playing time" issues. Obviously, the best solution would be to have better scheduling with games spread out more neatly in the season but I understand that it is not an easy problem to tackle.
  15. Thanks for the response @Michael Mallia. I uploaded my save (AEK.fm). If you look into the scouting section you will find: Mario Salvo (Adaptability 17) has been on the same assignment (Italy, France, Portugal) for about 6 years. He was already familiar with Italy since he is Italian. He managed to get full knowledge of France but he is at 3% on Portugal. Similar story with Carlos Ruiz (Adaptability 19). On the same assignment for 4.5 years, already familiar with Spain, managed full knowledge of Germany, Belgium is at 11%, Netherlands at 0%. Ditto for Roberto Geraci (Adaptability 17). On the same assignment for 4.5 years, managed full knowledge of Mexico, USA is at 12%. Hank Grim (Adaptability 17). On the same assignment for 4.5 years. He had partial knowledge of Denmark, Sweden and Norway when I signed him. He is still at 73% in Denmark, 69% in Sweden, 68% in Norway. Diego Medina (Adaptability 20). On the same assignment for 4.5 years. South Africa 98%, Angola 0%. Even worse: Tomasso Dalledonne (Adaptability 16). On the same assignment for 4.5 years. Algeria, Morocco, Tunisia all at 1%, Egypt 0% Juan Mauricio Echeverria (Adaptability 15). On the same assignment for 4.5 years. Already familiar with Colombia when signed. Peru still at 13%, Chile 2%, Ecuador 0%. David Friio (Adaptability 19). On the same assignment for 4.5 years. Already partially familiar with CIV when signed. CIV at 30%, Senegal 30%, Nigeria 2%, Ghana 0%. Victor Marchesini (Adaptability 16). On the same assignment for 4.5 years. COD at 1%, Cameroon 0%. Keep in mind that I had to get rid of a number of scouts because they wouldn't increase their knowledge in the assigned nations. Please let me know if you need anything else. Thanks! P.S.: After looking at the numbers above, I wonder if you need to tweak the speed of accumulating nation knowledge on the scouts. In the first category, they've managed to get full knowledge of one nation in 4.5 years+. That sounds too much, especially given that there was essentially no knowledge increase in other nations. They should either increase all together, or getting full knowledge of a nation should happen within a couple of years or so (imho). The second category looks clearly like a bug though.
×
×
  • Create New...