Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Samaroy

  • Rank

Currently Managing

  • Currently Managing
    St. Etienne

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Jesus Christ....
  2. Samaroy

    Passive Player Development

    So iv'e been thinking for a while, as have many other more senior members of the community, that the AIs development of younger players is absolutely dreadful. But there seems to be an obvious fix? It seems player development is hugely linked to playing time. But almost too much? Sure playing time is a significant factor in developing as a young player. Getting senior games is vital. But if the AI isnt built to give younger players more of a go then surely you just tweak the %s that are assigned to training ground development, tutoring development and the other more passive forms of development. Hate seeing so many young studs in the game never developed by there AI clubs meaning unless I pitch in and buy them they never seem to reach their potential.
  3. Keen to take a look under the hood at a few roles to see exactly what they're coded to do? And then potentially play around with a few I don't believe work as they should if the coding is straight forward enough.
  4. Samaroy

    [Suggestion] National team loyalty

    Yeah I like this - I feel like this is similar to how the club managerial system works - the ass man gets the caretaker role and sometimes gets given the role full time - although certainly not often enough for my liking Overall like the idea but I feel like this can be done via a tweak of the relationships tab and maybe an implementation of your suggestion within the coding of the game - Making a caretaker or for national teams the u21s or u23s coach automatically in the running for a vacant senior position
  5. Samaroy

    [Suggestion] National team loyalty

    Not sure if this is the case in real life? I feel like it is in SOME select few nations but would depend on results etc. in which case it would be reflected in the game already through relationships and confidence with FA
  6. I'm at a total loss as to why this isn't already a thing. Why is it when i do a press conference I can't just immediately recieve some feedback as to how what I just said impacted my players, the board, the fans etc. With simple numbers. Eg. Alexis Sanchez lost confidence (-30 morale, & -2 finishing, -1 decisions for next game) - Note: im not even sure this is a real effect of a press conference just merely offering an example for ease of understanding SImilarly for training - why can't you show me the numbers associated with the various training options? Eg. Training Attacking 200% in Passing, Vision, Off the Ball, FInishing, Crossing, Long Shots, 75% in everything else GIve me the relevant feedback into what the choices I am making are actually doing. I know there are guides out there that suggest what does what, but why not just incorporate in numerical values for us to see and then decide based on that? Some may argue that this is "unrealistic" and that in real life you wouldnt know exact effects - Im 95% sure that in terms of how it is coded it is simple numerical values - so tell me what those numbers are just like you tell me how good a players ability to cross the ball is with a simple number out of 20. I feel like this alone would make all the features in FM feel more important. At the moment a vast majority of players leave training, team talks, interviews etc to the Ass Man because they are either unsure how the features work and how to best handle them or they don't believe they actually have any effect whatsoever and so they don't bother wasting their time with them. By providing the community with the actual effect of each action, i'm sure everyone would spend more time on these side features and actually gain some enjoyment from dabbling into them every now and then.
  7. Okay so this one might be a bit outlandish - but it allows for more personalization of players which is hardly a bad thing When assigning a player individual training instructions I think it could be cool to set thresholds - for example I love my advanced playmakers to just have the following - First Touch, Passing, Technique, Decisions and Vision. thats it. So how this could work is i set all of the above to 18, set the others to his current ability in those attributes and then he spends the % assigned to his individual training on the attributes I have set thresholds for. How this could work: Team training is set to General, Individual is set to Advanced Playmaker with the thresholds set as above, and his individual attribute training is set to first touch (his weakest of the 5) SO he would spend 33% of his CA gains on everything (general training), 33% on the 5 stats listed above and 33% extra on first touch. But once the attribute hits the threshold he just works on the others - so say passsing is at 17, it gets to 18 and so he works on getting the other 4 to 18 and not passing. Thoughts?
  8. Yeah can't argue with that explanation
  9. Simple addition to be able to ask for a feeder club/affiliation from x nation to enable regens from x nation to appear in your youth intake as well as being able to increase profile in x nation and have access to scouting reports of x nation. At the moment the system works in you asking for a feeder club/affiliation and then why, then the board gives you suggestions to choose from. I think you should be able to request a specific nation or club and interact with your board on how much this will cost and how much of the fee associated with this feeder club/affiliation will be taken out of your transfer budget each year.
  10. Is there a reason there isn't more PA ranges available to researchers? why not for example have the following options (across all the negative ranges not just my examples) -8 = 130-160 -80 = 135-160 -81 = 140-160 -82 = 145-160 -83 = 150-160 -84 = 155-160 -85 = 140-170 SO in essence it enables researchers to be like "okay well this player definitely will not be 130-135 he will be better than that but im not sure how much better" or "this player will almost certainly be the next kante 150-160" I suppose in typing that though I am realising it almost means they should just guess a slightly high estimate of their PA and just put it in at that PA figure rather than using a range
  11. This is so accurate. The same can be said for downloading tactics - ofcourse its tedious if you start a new game in the same place and boot up the same tactic you havent created yourself buying the same players you havent scouted in game to create the same team you played with on your last save.
  12. Well that's good to hear - I disagree that the weightings on each part of my suggestion are correct then because players often are ordinary or behind others in terms of development at 16-17 but have 5 star potential and others have 3 stars. The 5 stars are almost always better than the 3 stars. In real life im sure there are plenty of 3 stars who come out as better players in the end. This doesn't happen enough in FM. SO if what you're saying is correct the accuracy of reports needs to contain more error than it does currently so that what we are told is a 3 star prospect more often will actually become a 5 star player and a 5 star prospect will more often become just a 3 star player to add to the randomness of the game
  13. Another simple suggestion to fix the scouting system in FM Firstly can SI provide clarity as to what scouts actually factor into account when providing their opinion on potential ability? Secondly, if this isn't already the case - can the under the hood PA simply not be one of these factors? Wouldn't it be possible to use a formula - (which then also factors in scouting error) - based on current ability vs age (where he is in a perceived development curve), various attitudes like determination/professionalism etc, form and then a higher weighting towards physical attributes and more "natural" attributes that are harder to teach therefore indicating higher potential. So in essence the in-game prediction of Potential is not at all linked with the under the hood PA value. This would then fix the issue that is currently present that high PA players are too easy to spot. CA/PA suggestion on top of this could be a solution to the "late bloomer" problem. What if there was a cap on CA development based on training facilities and league reputation and then once players broke this cap or made it to the higher leagues - would see a rapid improvement even past the 25yo development cap?
  14. Samaroy

    Optimized Multiplayer

    In short, 5-10 official SI servers set to an advance schedule for an FM-Touch Feature set with all the leagues loaded but minimum features (match engine, Tactics, Transfers, Essentially the FM Touch feature set potentially even streamlined and optimized for online) Allow up to 50 players online at a time, maybe more. But more people can sign up and take their team to the top. Would be great fun and the next step for FM to start broadening its range of modes