Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community

Jelle Slaets

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Jelle Slaets

  • Rank

About Me

  • About Me


  • Interests

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Setting it to real time is a bad idea. Setting it to high will not harm anything, but I don't think the benefit will be that high, as windows already gives foreground processes a higher priority by default.
  2. Windows vista and onwards will use unused ram to cache applications / files so they will start faster when you open them. This consumes memory,hoewever, it will free items from the cache when it is needed for active programs. So there is nothing to worry about. You can see this in the task manager ij the performance tab I believe.
  3. As I play commentary only and key moments only I have no idea of any of this. However, there are some hidden attributes like 'sportsmanship' and maybe 'controversy'. I guess (not) having those for the player who is in control of the ball / throw in, may affect how it is dealt with.
  4. Slowly climbing up the value charts with my Anderlecht side, at about 500 million after about 10 seasons, with a 160 million loan debt for a new stadium.
  5. When I do a career save, and have won everything, and have plenty of money to spend, I usually always end up with my personal goal of having an all domestic (in my case Belgian players) squad, and win everything with those. Gives the game an extra challenge.
  6. Did you add him to the 'unwanted list', when putting him as transfer listed? Cause then the DoF will also accept bids, trying to offload the players.
  7. I think it's a pretty simple combination of things that make it happen: - Scouting is too powerful, so it's pretty easy to reliably get good prospects - Good prospects develop to reliably and fast, so they can quickly reach their potential and be amazing, or make you lots of money - It's easy to have a big squad of world beaters, and no one will ever complain, and cause money is a non issue, it will just remain simple to keep this squad I think if finances become more realistic, and scouting / player development becomes less reliable, the human manager will need to: - Spend more transfer money and wages on established players to compete, not just quality regens at lower wages. - Have a bigger squad size, to host more prospects. (Just from personal experience, I always spend the first weeks in my new career games, getting rid of about half the players at my club, to end up with a ~ 22-25 player squad. Down from the 40 or so players there are at the start.. This will then also cost a lot more money. I hope the game will become more realistic in the financial model, where it would actually reflect most teams struggling to break even, not just have them all running massive profits easily.
  8. I can see that the balance of quality players stays about the same over the years. However: What I think is the problem with the "squad building" AI, is that, after a couple seasons, and al throughout a long career save, there are no "top teams", apart from yourself. Could you check in your save, or soap test or whatever: The top (3/4) teams in the divisions (CA wise)/ rep wise And compare those values to the top 3/4 teams after 30 years. I have this feeling, that those values will have spread out throughout the entire league, so while on paper, there is the same number of quality in the leagues, there is no strong competition from a couple teams, which is slightly compensated by a little stronger mid table / bottom table teams. Or maybe it's just too easy for human managers to get a squad with too high CA values, which will remove any challenge after a while due to a big gap with the competition, just cause scouting is too good and player development is too predictable / fast when done right.
  9. http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php/342662-Improving-my-FM-performance-advice-need-please http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php/342669-Improving-my-FM-performance-advice-need-please aren't 2 topics enough already?
  10. As to the first, I believe it is a 10 or 20 difference, but I'm not sure. I have no idea why they do it like that, but I guess it more or less an easy way to add players in a 10 scale then a 200 scale. Personally, I don't really care about that point, and while it seems weird, I don't mind that a players passing in 1 game is a little less then in another. But that's just me. I wouldn't mind them giving all player a fixed value And to the second point: I can see your idea, and I can see how it works. But I also see it then again limiting in a way. We would still like to keep a limit on the total development of a player. Say, the current 200 PA. Else we would get extremely imbalanced players, which have way too overpowered stats or combination of stats... The way it would then be implemented is to split this 200PA over the different attribute groups.. like some technical wizzkid, but mentally unstable, could have Technical PA 120 Mental PA 30 Physical PA 50 A more balanced defender would have technical PA 50 Mental 60 Physical 90 And so one. This does impose a little more limits to the manager, as he can no longer develop players as much as they want in certain aspects, example: no matter how much you would have Henry Train scoring, even at young age, once he reaches the technical limit, it stops... Just at much as now mental stats increase will stop, when you reach the technical limit. Though you could argue this is (more) realistic then the current model. No matter how you look at it, a player will once reach his potential, and no longer develop, that is a part of life. I do believe this limit is now reached far too soon, especially with human managers, so we run into this wall faster. If this development model would become slower, so players peak at age 28-30, I think we would have a lot more options to 'shape' players and to see their mental attributes rise later, or to refocus their skill points.
  11. While the discussion may be interesting, it has been held so many times, it loses its edge a little, but I'll just drop my 2 cents, since at least it is a more or less constructive thread in between all the crying for patches. To answer those questions of: 1. I think we should look at what all scouts look at: CA combined with age. It's not happening in this game now unfortunately, but I think what happens with scouting in real life (and thus also for the SI DB), is that we look at what a player can do at a certain age, and predict his future. And for some players, this will mean they are under estimated, and for it will mean they are overhyped, but in all, this should balance out just fine. I believe the only problem with the CA/PA system in this game, is that scouting sees the PA, where it should not IMO. It should just look at age and CA, just like real scouts in real life do. Which would mean, it would miss some 'high PA' players, and they would be undiscovered by most teams, until a later age, and thus become late bloomers, or just have a under performing career. Another problem is development being to reliable when under the guidance of human managers, but this has nothing to do with PA, more the training / development of players, and I hope this will be tackeled. 2. The same thing as in number one, age and CA. Say his CA went up the last years, and of course his age as well, we make a new guesstimate. This will be both for players doing better, and players doing worse, as scouting is never an exact science. It's making predictions on how players will evolve to present a DB which is always up to date to the current state of football. And like predicting the weather 1 yr in advance, impossible to get completely right. 3. I have no idea what you mean with this question, but the biggest problem of PA is that people know there is PA. And that people have access to the editor and tools like FMRTE to see this value, and scouting guessing it too accurately. People should look at their players, and their current stats, and form, and progress he has been making, his age, ... Not to a hidden value which determines his maximum potential. 4. I think the development of players and their attributes sure have room for improvement. I think their physical attributes may max out too fast. Their mental too. I now see too many young powerhouses, where this could probably grow more stable over time, so players, even in human hands, even 'early bloomers', will still slowly grow till the age of say 27-28. In human hands, players can reach their full potential much too quickly imho, which makes 'playing with kids' and 'buying cheap youngster and developing them' too easy, and make the game too easy as well. 5. I don't like the idea, as it is pretty much the same thing, only more complicated. PA takes in account everything, and creates nicely balanced players imo. I don't have any regens / players with weird balances in between categories. You could say it could help to improve the development model, but I don't think any separate PA values are needed, and that it can be done in the current model. To me, keeping the PA/CA model is fine. I don't see any better alternative, and I think all suggestions for a dynamic PA, are very open to exploits, or don't improve the game or development model at all. You could say now that the current model will miss some players who will turn out great in 7 years, but were never spotted, true. However, going to a dynamic PA, you will get the opposite, and a lot of complete third rate players will turn out to be world class players. So both systems will have the exact same problem. The main benefit I see in the current PA model, is that it's a very good way to balance the amount of great players and good players and normal players ... over the years, so there will always be the same balance. Any dynamic system, (which to me will be very prone to humans figuring out how it works), will probably suffer many editions to get the right balance, and in the end, I don't see what added benefit they have over the current system, which will eventually have the same amount of world class players / great players / good players / ... I think SI's focus should be on improving scouting and development (actually, the financial model to me is far more in need of work then any of those, let alone CA/PA). If people were not aware of PA, and those 2 were better, I think you would see that everything will look extremely natural, as PA in that case, just ensures there is a right balance of players of all quality. And some will have good CA at young age and fail to develop, some will have low CA at some age and fail to develop. Some will develop slowly, but never really make it into quality material in the end, and some will make it to be the next Messi.
  12. If you say this years version is the worst ever, surely you're joking or never played CM4. That version had tons of patches and basically needed 2-3 years before it had a game which was fun to play and didn't have many show stopping bugs. I think it's strange how every year people are talking about it being the worst version ever. It's been like this for years now, so if you haven't learned by now to only buy the game at half price in December, I'm sure you'll be the first one to pre order it again next year. If only to enjoy posting your opinion in the feedback thread. I voted maybe, cause, well, since I started working and getting older, my gaming habbits died out a bit, so I only play a few seasons on each game, so having it on release day is less important, I may even skip a season now and then. I also see the last few years, they have been putting a lot of work into areas I don't really care about: - 2D pitch - 3D pitch - Press confs / match day experience - Agents - Feeder / parent teams While a lot of thing I do care about still seems to be exactly the same as 10 years ago. ( AI team building / finances / facilities mgmt / CA-PA system / ..) So maybe I'll even just decide to skip versions till I see one of the areas I'm interested in featured on the improved features list. Who knows. Just to give you an idea: this is the change log for the 8th patch for CM4. Just look at home many 'Crash fixes' still had to be done after 7 patches:
  13. Fm is 32 bit, so itself wont consume more than 3.2GB of RAM. However, your OS / Browser / background programs also consume memory, so having 8GB will probably still benefit an average user. I'm sure if you finely tune your windows PC and limit the background processes, 4GB will perform good as well, but with todays prices for memory, I think 8GB will be a good deal.
  14. I think it's very subjective to say the game is broken or not. The ME is probably the core game play for people who like the tactical aspect of FM. I myself pretty much skip the entire tactical aspect of the game, simply chose a standard 4-4-2 tactic supplied by the game, watch matches commentary only, and enjoy the player buying / squad building / financial control (this area needs a lot more work than the ME imho. ) / staff building / ... And even I noticed the same things mentioned here above, many long shots, and a **** tons of goals since last update. I have strikers breaking all records for goals scored, and 5-0 6-0 games are no exception any more, but happen quite regularly. I feel this should probably be toned down, but after 7 pages of feedback, minus maybe 5 of back and forth arguing, I'm sure this has already been covered.
  • Create New...