Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Peljam

  • Rank


  • Biography
    Generally grumpy/sleepy


  • Interests
    Godzilla, Football, South Park, Sci Fi, Stand Up Comedy fan

Favourite Team

  • Favourite Team
    Huddersfield, Hull

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Thanks, will do. It is from a completely new save. Same edited files and packs etc. but for some reason it hasn't crashed (made it to 2045 so far!). No idea what triggered the other crash so consistently at that date.
  2. I've started the game again, same settings, and go on holiday. It was got past 2031 now. I'm not sure what caused the original dump.
  3. See I struggle with this. On one hand I get what you mean, when there's a new verison out with new things in you want to play it but there's nothing making you do that, and there's nothing to stop you going back to the version you preferred and carrying on with it. It's not the case you have 12 months to play and then the game just stops working. I was really enjoying my FM17 save, and even though FM18 had come out I carried on with it until I reached a point I felt was the 'end' (winning the SPL with the mighty Berwick Rangers). I played it for more than the yearly window. Just because a new version was out didn't mean I had to stop, and the new version didn't change my enjoyment of the old version. I've got people on my steam friends list who play FM12 on a regular basis because they love it. I played FM13 more or less through to FM15. Basically if the version is good enough and the save is good enough then I'm not going to stick to the yearly window just because a new version is out. If I'm enjoying what I've got I'll continue. I know part of the point is that if there was a 2 year cycle more could be done but that, and the reasons for and against, have been debated to death on the forums.
  4. True, a more official SI road map would be welcome
  5. More official responses would be nice, I don't think any of us would be against that. But it's like you said the tone is always going to be an issue as there'll be users that rather than having questions will have assumptions and/or accusations. The more official responses seem to appear in feedback threads which aren't always the most friendly of places. The Ask thread was good. I guess as a community the more we do to help each other and share/debate properly the better the atmosphere and the more likely official responses would be. If there are innaccuracies or conspiracy theories (scripting!) then they need challenging, and if people are spouting vitriolic opinons dressed up as 'All this is true and I speak for the masses' they need challenging. In terms of who to trust I think it's case of using reason, logic and evidence first. Ignore who is saying it and focus on what has been said. If there's no evidence supporting it (maybe it's about something going on under the hood) then the focus can switch more onto who has said it. There are some names that pop up a lot and you can see on past posts where they have got their information from.
  6. To be fair a lot of the questions originally posed by the OP were either opinion based rather than factual, or overly accusatory. They were never going to get a response. The rest were all questions where the views, experience and knowledge of other long term users would have been helpful. There are plenty here who have worked in the games industry, there are plenty who have been in-house or early beta testers who know how it works. There are lots of members of the community who know tons about tactics, ME and the A.I. because of their past conservations with SI, or consulting, or going above and beyond in their own games and experiments. You can see it in some of the responses about the development of the ME. But the OP basically dismissed all of this with the framing of the entire thread.
  7. Uploaded to FTP as Atoll Test precrash SEPT19 2031
  8. Before we start - I realise this is not a vanilla version of the game. I have two edits running - One that adds 4 customs leagues, some cups, lots of teams to Tahiti (including the editing of some oceania nations), and one that adds an annual international league between 6 of those teams. I've been holidaying the game to see how it shapes up and it gets to september 19th, 2031 just fine. But on the 20th it will always crash. I was running a graphics/logo pack I had made but I've also tried it with it removed and the cache cleared, the crash still happens. I've tried to check scheduling but I can't see any competitions being scheduled or rolling over on that date. The league and cup fixtures have already been drawn, even for relevant international qualifiers or are yet to be drawn. I can't see anything special about the date, for that year. I've attached the crash dump, and the two edited files in case they are needed. I understand because it's not a standard save it might not be a priority but I've got my fingers crossed that some light might be shed on it as I'm planning on playing a save using these edits well past the 2031 mark. I'll try to upload the save to the ftp. Atoll Championship Cup 18.fmf FP Tahiti 18 Expansion.fmf FM 2018 v18.1.3.1045020 (2017.12.07 12.44.36).dmp
  9. Oh wait...I mean, they had made a fair point really about value of the game over it's lifespan/hours played compared to initial up front price but okay... Right so if someone disagrees with your set of opinions it is because they are primitive, a child, or part of a sect (inflexible fanboys). But you obviously have none of these qualities - the understanding you've shown of development cycles, profits, pricing and the history of FM is on point, you've been reasonable and I can clearly see you are here for a real debate rather than to just shout your opinion over everyone else ... There we go. You just want to potificate about your personal immovable views on the state of the game. Which is a pity because if you were willing to actually debate and allow room for opinions and experiences other than your own you might have got some answers. Instead you asked a list of questions, didn't like the response and have redrawn the debate as 'Oh no one is actually meant to try to give me an answer/engage with this unless they agree'. Looking forward to this car crash of a thread
  10. Another maybe obvious question. I've edited Tahiti and have a leagye system where teams from Tahiti and some other countries all play. The teams from the other countries have regens of their own nationality, for the most part. The regens from Tahiti based teams all have Tahiti as their 1st nationality and French as the 2nd. I understand that there is historical link between France and, well French Polynesia, but I was wondering if there is a way to remove or reduce the likelihood of French as a second nationality? I've checked the nation settings, and I've checked the region settings. There's nothing obvious in there I can see to edit.
  11. Thanks! I was looking in completions settings/rules when it was the nation information in the database I needed all along
  12. Might be an obvious one but... I have a custom league set up. All the clubs in it are from one of five possible countries (the league is based in country A. The teams could be from A to E). I want to limit the number of foreign players allowed (which I can do generally) but I only want countries other than A-E count as foreign. I want clubs to be able to have any number of players from A-E but only 3 from any other nation. At the moment I’m just able to restrict the number of foreign players generally. So a club from country B for example can have as many as they want from B but players from any other country including A, C, D and E count as Foreign. Is there an obvious option I’m missing? A list of exceptions in the rules?
  13. I have similar ish confusion as well. I'm on a heavily edited database but I basically have no real scouting budget. It's like £50 or something tiny like that (which is fine). I can't afford any packages. I've got two scouts and they are still going off and getting reports for me but nothing is happening to the budget as far as I can see, or at least I'm not receiving a message saying I can't scout because of funding issues. To me it seems fair enough that I can scout the players know to me because I've already paid the wages of the scouts, but the lack of financial hit for doing so doesn't seem to fit in with what other people are experiencing. That inconsistency means I'm not sure how scouting finances actually work
  14. Thanks that's my curiousity satisfied for the moment! On general feedback in a vauge attempt to go back on topic I'm enjoying it so far. Not had a chance to do too much but it feels much more polished than the beta (which I was enjoying anyway) and I've not come across any issues. I managed to convert FM17 editor files over to FM18 and let the game holiday to 2034 last night. No crashes etc. so it seems nice and stable to me (I only had 2 crashes during the beta anyway). The long term squad bulding seems good - it's a hugely fictional league system I've tested out so it might not represent the standard gameplay but even in 2034 the squads look well rounded for the most part, attendance changes and stadium sizes seem realistic (within the confines of the fictional league). I've not noticed any long term finance issues in that league either. I'm pretty happy with it.
  15. Off topic I guess but I'm curious - how are collisions and the physical side represented at the moment? Does anyone know? I remember a version of FM where strikers just seemed to ghost past/through defenders so all that was needed was pace and finishing to bag goals but thats not quite the case anymore. What is being calculated when two players are in the same space though? When two are running for the ball together or a ball carrier and a defender meet? I'm just wondering what it is based on now.