Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community

leviathan1904

Members
  • Content Count

    35
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About leviathan1904

  • Rank
    Amateur

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. When negotiating contracts, it would be helpful to see if an added player bonus like "X for winning the CL title" is economically balanced in comparison to the amount of extra bonus that the club receives for winning the CL title. Let's say, you have 15 players in your squad financially participating on your success in the way as mentioned. It would not make sense for the target of solid finances to distribute more then you get in total. So, there should be a warning or at least a financial bonus overview how much you will likely earn and spend.
  2. To attract the player, clubs sometimes include a signing bonus, which is an one time amount paid by the (buying) club to the player on his signing. So far I know, in FM19 a "signing on fee" is just necessary when you offer a contract to a player with an expired contract status. In my point of view, it would make sense, if it become an obligatory category, in general, besides wage, loyalty bonus and agent fee, because in football market it is used not only in the context of expired contracts, but also when you have to pay transfer fee or want to renew a contract of your own player.
  3. https://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/2008/nov/19/argentina-napoli Would like to see such "software" in-game or scouting reports on my next opponent should/could visualize something like that.
  4. Yes, I totally agree. Would be very helpful and should be easily done.
  5. You are talking about clauses, aren't you? According to "wage structure", there is a recommended limit (information just below the wage field) when you are bargaining. If you choose "key player" instead of backup or what ever, then it's different. But it's just about the basic salary.
  6. Der Auftrag bleibt beim Chefscout, mein frei gewordener Scout wird beschäftigungslos. Habe nochmal ein bisschen rumgespielt. Es liegt tatsächlich an der Reihenfolge der Scouts (absteigend wird vergeben), wenn alle einen noch laufenden Auftrag haben. Ist nicht ganz optimal gelöst. Wenn ich vorgeschlagene Wettbewerbe künftig scouten möchte, muss ich wohl erst nachschauen und dann manuell hinzufügen. Kostet ein paar Klicks, aber dann ist das wohl so. Möglicherweise wird das bei künftigen FM-Versionen ja noch überarbeitet. Das gibt es ohnehin noch ein paar Klick-Sparmöglichkeiten im Scouting-Bereich, den ich ansonsten mag.
  7. Verwende mal diesen Thread. Kann das aber auch gerne an anderer Stelle nochmal auf Englisch posten. Wie in dem Screenshot zu sehen, bekomme ich Vorschläge in mein Postfach, welche Wettbewerbe gescoutet werden könnten. Finde diese Neuerung im FM19 super! Allerdings liegt der Teufel im Detail. Wenn ich auf den "Scout"-Button im Fenster klicke, öffnet sich das Pop-up für den Scouting-Auftrag. Soweit ist alles prima. Wenn ich jedoch weiterführend den Auftrag allgemein an den "Scoutingpool" vergebe - also keine konkrete Person dafür auswähle -, dann kommt es zu unlogischen - oder sagen wir besser: ärgerlichen - Zuweisungen. In meinem Beispiel wird nämlich der Auftrag, die 3. Liga zu scouten, ausgerechnet dem Scout zugewiesen, der bereits einen unbefristet laufenden Auftrag hat. Derjenige, der nur noch drei Wochen mit seinem bisherigen Auftrag beschäftigt ist, und als erstes in Frage käme (weil bald verfügbar), bleibt unberücksichtigt. Würde ich das nicht manuell überprüfen, dann käme es niemals dazu, dass die 3. Liga gescoutet wird. Liegt das an der Sortierung der Scouts, die ich ja eh nicht beeinflussen kann? Also dass der Scout oben immer den nächsten Auftrag bekommt, wenn keiner frei ist und nur der Scouting-Pool gewählt wird? Wenn ja, gibt es eine Möglichkeit an dieser "Rangfolge" etwas zu ändern?
  8. To expand on both, would like to see some kind of optional timetable for every scout - so you can organize his/their whole season (scouting-plan), if you want to, not just the next assignment. Want to say: go 3 months to X, go 3 months to Y, go 3 months to Z. In this perspective, templates (see: BruceyNTFC) and more details (see: RomaRulez) could be integrated.
  9. Would be handy, if you could reactivate a previous and review the next scouting assignment (maybe by clicking on a "green plus" behind it). Seeing the former or the next setting pop-up, you could have the option for editing, without overriding the current assignment. All in all, both would be a time saver.
  10. Then the reasons of moaning should be clarified adequately. Boss, I want to play more, because my training and match performance is very well. Players who have recently accepted a new contract that defines their team status are moaning. I agree, but a few weeks later I am whining... and half of the team says, oh yes, he got a point, treat him with respect.
  11. Then they have to improve it IMO. Substituted during halftime (playing 45+2 minutes) is essentially better than introduced during halftime (playing 45+3 minutes)? I do not think so. Starting11 should have an impact, yes, because your playing time is not necessarily reduced from the beginning, so starting11 has higher value (in a sense of reputation too). But we need more steps for backup players. Sitting on the bench, but his training performance was very well, the backup player should ask for playing time. Sitting on the bench and introduced for 30, 20, 10 minutes should be taken into account. Playing 30 minutes very well, the backup player should claim for more minutes, maybe eventually starting11. Playing 30 minutes, average performance, he should mostly accept his team status.
  12. I am using a match plan, called "powerplay", but the option for canceling it during a match seems not to work. After setting "do not use match plan" in 00:07, it is still activated in 20:31: I have tried it, afterwards, again and again - still the same result. My impression is that it is not just a problem of display, the match plan is still working.
  13. Thanks for replying and clarifying. Personally, I can not see any contradiction between recommendation by your assistant and decision by yourself. On the contrary, here lies the opportunity to link tactic and team report in a sense of balance and elimination process. Willing to play fluid counter attack, but having just lame ducks in your squad - your assistant should advice against it or at least show pro and con, if you ask him for his opinion. Even if you are training acceleration and speed, your players will never become Usain Bolt. As an alternative to the top-down approach, some kind of bottom-up would be great.
  14. The core of match plans is generalization (so, reducing complexity), isn't it? You don't need the precise result for scenarios (0-0, 1-0 or 1-1, 1-1 or 2-1 or 1-2), but some kind of path dependence, maybe linked with time designation: "drawing-since-the-beginning", "being-in-front-after-drawing" , "falling-behind-after-drawing", "drawing-after-being-in-front", "drawing-after-falling-behind". It would be enough because you can set up different match plans for different opponents (being favorite, being underdog, balanced). Personally, it don't think, managers IRL would make it too complicated. The rest is coaching and reacting spontaneously, without automated substitutions.
×
×
  • Create New...