Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community

Neb

Members
  • Content count

    244
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Neb

  • Rank
    Amateur

About Me

  • About Me
    Up to my neck in Jam...
  1. Personally I think you shouldn't be able to see any players/staff attributes and only see your own players/staff attributes once they've settled at the club. You should be able to see a rough outline of the attributes (ie whats good, what isn't) initially, after a month or two see the preferred moves as well and more accurate attribute numbers but only see everything (or what we see now) when the player is fully settled. Which might take several seasons. Something like that would be ace, as it'd mean once you'd got settled with some players and moved clubs you'd be inclined to move bring the players to your new club. It would also mean transfers would be a bit of a gamble.... but it is in real life too! So many transfers don't work out as the manager has overestimated the players skill. Or the player isn't what the manager thought he was...
  2. I was meaning that if the most professional hard working 16yr old player has 5 for jumping, no matter how much he trains until the age of 24 that attribute would only increase by a small amount. So his 'potential' is limited by his current ability. Obviously if he was to move from the conference to man utd, where the coaches, training and match experience are better, then his rate of improvement would change. so he would end up a better player as a result. (thats a seperate argument to this thread..) I feel the issue is that the AI doesn't recognise the fact he has poor jumping. If it did then either the owning club should look to improve it, or realise that the player is never going to be good enough. But they shouldn't be bought or played just because they have a high CA or PA. We can only see attributes and we make our minds up on that basis. The AI can 'see' CA and PA (I know its not quite as simple as that) but doesn't use the attributes when deciding who should play. Its a similar vein to an issue I had. A Centre Back was 21, playing excellently with a really high average rating, man of the match etc. but no one was interested in him. This was because even though his defending attributes were really good (all 15+) his CA was only at 120. Other players had higher CA/PA but had better crossing, penalties, free kicks, etc... so they ended up as worse CBs. At the end of the day, the CA or PA are irrelevant. Its just the attributes that count to performances. But the AI will always pick a 150CA player with rubbish attributes for that position over a 120CA player with excellent attributes. If every player had 200PA but only the players with the best initial attributes and those with the best mental characteristics at the best clubs who had the best 'upbringing' and were also exceedingly lucky got to 200CA, would that not be a better approximation of real life?
  3. I see it as an issue with the clubs recognising talent when they see it. I think clubs buy players based on either the CA or their PA, if there's a striker with a CA of 100 and a PA of 180 but with finishing of 1, then he's going to bought and played in preference to another striker with a CA of 90 and a PA of 170 but with finishing of 15. As long as the AI continues to assess the quality of players based on their CA and PA I think this mismatch between human managers and the AI will always continue. The human manager will recruit the youth with good base attributes whereas the AI recruits the players with the good base CA (And PA). Since there are thousands of AI managers, the 'wrong' players are developed. It feeds into my opinion that PA should be removed, leaving a naturally limited CA based on: 'max CA' = 'years to develop' x 'development CA per year' That would mean a good young player could become excellent but a poor young player could only become ok (assuming his development is perfect. AI managers should look at a 16yr old with good attributes and think that based on his age and his quality he could be an excellent player by the time he is 21. They shouldn't evaluate a player on his CA/PA and ignore the fact that he isn't actually very good in his position in the first place.
  4. I personally really enjoy the long term games, seeing the young players you bought go through their careers. The feeling of moulding a team over many many seasons, taking them through several promotions, etc. On FM09 it took between 20-30 hours to get through a season. so for 10 in game seasons thats 200-300 hours! That was no problem when I was at school or at uni, but now that will take over a year... so I only have time to play half a career, so whats the point? I still buy it anyway just incase I am sick or injured at home and have a lot of time on my hands. I much prefer CM 01/02, which you can still get with updated 2009 players and leagues! yay!
  5. The idea sounds more realistic than something like "The Arnold Swarzenegger Arena"....
  6. I remember "Sick As A Parrot" game from the early nineties! I didn't realise it was still going! I personally reckon the current system is a bit too precise. I'd prefer to have to scout a player in a different league for 6 months before I even got close to seeing exactly what his attributes were. I think you'd have to know your own players attributes otherwise it would make the game very difficult. But I think that the accuracy of the view on your own players should gradually increase with the time you work with them. So the attributes start off a bit vague, but after 6-12 months you can see them accurately. I'd like visibility of your new players attributes to depend out their ability and the ability of your assistant, ie, is your assistant good at scouting current ability or adaptable? I basically want the 'Fog of War' to thicken, and include your own team. I think it would give the transfer system a bit more risk (unless you scouted comprehensively). I don't think it should be possible to completely know all of a players attributes until you've been his manager for at least 6 months. It'd mean that managers tend to buy players they've worked with before because the risk of signing someone completely new is too great.
  7. Excellent, the bandits are back! Here are my predictions- -The bandits to storm the league undefeated -The sheriffs to get promoted in second place. -All bar one of the sheriffs original players to leave in January, the last following in the summer. -All of the bandits to leave in/or before the summer -Sheriffs to get successive promotions (due to having a squad in place) -Bandits to struggle initially after promotion (due to not having a squad in place) -The sheriffs to plateau in the 1st division initally then yo yo between the championship and the 1st division for a couple of years but steady progression for the bandits. -Bandits to beat the sheriffs into the premiership. -Idiots to play in the premiership before any of the original bandits. -A former bandit to coach the bandits within 20 seasons
  8. In a way, I'd prefer to have the star system the way it is, than change it. the reason I say that, how many clubs change their coaches every season? constantly recruit the 'best' staff as they become available? I'd say very few. Most clubs offer senior players the chance to become coaches and they stay there for years! keeping it the way it is (but obviously making people more aware of it) would be good in my book. I'd be more likely to be loyal to the DC thats played in my team for 10 seasons, than bin him just because I've seen another coach with 1 better in defensive coaching.... I'd like more development of coaches as well. With players you can see performace/training to see when they're as good as they are going to get. with coaches it all seems a bit random. It'd be nice to be able to have some way of working out how good they are and how good they could become, and a means of improving them. It might just be as simple as sending them away on 'courses', with the higher levels more expensive so only weathly clubs/chairmen would allow coaches to be sent away for a week or two. I guess the word I'm looking for would be 'interaction' with staff. Asking them about your own players is one thing, asking them about tactics?, or signings?, or training? would be nice too.
  9. I was just making the point that the reason other clubs aren't coming in to loan them is that they are happy and established first team players. Other clubs might come in to loan them if they were unhappy. So if he really wants to loan them, there might be a demand for them on loan if they weren't being 'seen' by the AI as happy at their current club. Its a theory I've never tried, but then I've never wanted to loan out a top class international that should be in my first team. The example of tevez is a good one, because he is an established player that no one would dream of even attempting to loan. That is exactly what the OP is describing as his problem
  10. Any potential loaning club will assume that since the players are fighting for first team games at arsenal that there is no point attempting to loan them. It'd be the same as southampton approaching man united to loan tevez. Theres no way tevez would want to leave man u when he's fighting for his first team slot. So theres no point in southampton attempting to loan him is there? If you really really want to loan them, fine them so they get angry with you then loan them. the AI will see that they aren't happy and approach them.
  11. I know, but my solution doesn't. Sorry, didn't word that very well! My thought was that SI has the ability to make changes to the players in the database if it so wishes. Its the exploit where managers can ask a player to learn a skill that concerns me. If a DC is already in the game as a ST, then he's probably reasonably good at it, so the effect of the weighted attributes wouldn't be that great. Its the young ST that is asked to train DC solely because it'll make them a better ST that is the problem and I think my solution above would prevent it happening.
  12. Is it just as simple as making players refuse to retrain in a position they aren't any good at? If I've a young striker that has rubbish defensive skills and I ask him to retrain as a defender, he'll not be a very good defender, but his attacking attributes will increase. Just make the AI check that before a player accepts to retrain it looks to see whether he'd be any good at it first. If he will be good, then there wouldn't be any exploitation advantage of retraining him in the first place. I've always played in defence. I'm rubbish upfront, no composure, no technique and can't finish. If I was asked to retrain as a striker I think I'd tell the coach to stop being stupid. If I was good at it the coach might want me to play there, but he'd acknowledge that I might not be as good in defence as a result. My good attacking attributes would reduce my defensive ability due to using up CA points. This solution doesn't affect existing players with multiple positions in the database, only the exploit to train players to new positions.
  13. I get the impression that if a player is unhappy it manifests itself in various ways - dislikes manager, dislikes player, dislikes coach, unhappy with training, doesn't like formation, can't settle, etc. So its not necessarily the other player that is making him unhappy, its the fact that he's not happy in general. As long as you continue to play them, protect them from the media, generally keep them happy the issue goes away. Fining them probably isn't the best approach! I've had players before that cannot settle and they are really unhappy, but as soon as they start playing in the first team and start playing well, they stop caring about not liking the area, learn english and settle.
  14. Roaming Scouts

    I think this has been confirmed as a bug... If you watch your scout carefully, he'll be in slovenia and then he'll travel back to slovenia to scout again...and again...and again.... bit of a pain really.. there isn't much point in having a new feature if it doesn't work!
×