Costav

No, I am sorry, I probably misunderstood your post or got confused with other remarks about the calendar. I was not referring to the back to back matches, but to the amount of difficult games in a row. Atalanta had this year Milan, Inter, Bologna (which is a competitor for the UCL) and Juve in a row. Roma had something similar in December/January. Regarding the back to back matches, this is a well-know method of calculation for calendars. It is the simplest method you can adopt (among the complex ones) and it has been used within other games too (I remember PES doing the same). Basically different teams have the same (or almost the same) order of matches. As XaW explained, you can change it in the editor.

See Rome, Atalanta and Napoli calendar in serie A this year....

IRL kits (at a lowest levels) are selected based on which kit the away team brings, i.e. the completely opposite from the what somebody would imagine. This is because home teams have (usually) their storage facility at the pitch (or stadium), so they can easily change their kit, while is unrealistic for away teams to bring all kits they have. At the professional and semi-professional level the logistic is much more "easier" to manage and more organize, they know in advance home/away kits for every team and they can bring more kits whenever it needs. However, kit decision is always managed by the teams AND by the referees, because there are several standards to comply with (for example, in European competitions they have chromatic standards within the same kit too) and kits needs to be adapted also to the kit of the referees.

Why exactly? Just assume some of them may recognize it but some other don't. Example: Philippe Mexes, season 2010. One of the best player in Rome. He did want to earn more, but he did not want to leave. The club offers up to its wage cup. He did not accept and, at the end of the season, he decides to leave. In negotiation, this happens.

In which year are you? It seems to me that rdf was in the first or the second year. There can be several reasons why Sporting has a higher wage cap. You can do comparisons only "Ceteris paribus", or in very similar situations.

Then I don't know why he asked for more...maybe he perceived you initial offer as an insult ahaha! I have the same feeling, and I also feel it should be like this. I mean, there are similar limitation in RL, and if you (a generic you) want a product that tends to replicate those, you should be able to accept things that are not under you control. Imagine the situation where you can offer as much as you want....then everybody complaining because it's too easy to buy any player ahah.

I've faced this situation more than once in the past years, and here my considerations: 1. As far I understood, when a player negotiate the wage you should consider not only the basic wage he's asking you, but also the budget impact ("Wage budget cost", in bottom left of the page, which is the expected total wage they will receive, including bonuses and other fees). That's what they negotiate. So (MAYBE) you removed some bonuses and then the player decided to increase the basic wage request in order to keep the same wage level. As a demonstration, in the finance section, wage list, you see the total wage received by the players, not only the basic salary. 2. IRL there are some boards that establishes salary caps for every single player. It is absolutely realistic to imagine Sporting board decided to do the same, that's why you have a limit. Many years ago Roma had cap of 2.5 million each player (excluded for Totti and De Rossi). Few years ago Milan had the same policy. Just as an example. It's not only what @NineCloudNine said, it's also that the board could have decided not to spend more for reasons that are not made explicit. And if we want to compare FM to RL, you may face several of those episodes where a decision taken does not make any sense to you but it does to the people that have taken it.

Both FIFA and the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) declared that every fee in a second transfer must be included in the sell-on amount. So in real life every cent counts.

Why do you think so? It does not make sense to have the sell-on clause applicable only to a part of the deal. Usually sell-on clause are defined as in the example of Brighton and Malaga... 2.2 Should the Player’s registration be transferred on a permanent basis by Malaga at any time in the future then Malaga will pay to Brighton 12.5% (twelve and a half per cent) of any transfer fee received by Malaga (deducting the amount corresponding to solidarity contribution) up to a maximum sum of €750,000 (seven hundred and fifty thousand euros) see https://www.lewissilkin.com/en/insights/whats-the-meaning-of-a-football-transfer#:~:text=“The Sell-On Clause contains,services%3B therefore%2C the old club

I agree! That's why I see it as a bug more than an exploit

I don't agree. If you have a % sell clause you should be able to retrieve every single money the second team get after the sale. IRL too. Think about it: it would be very easy for each team no to receive any fixed amount and sell a player obtaining al; money after the first match or after the first conditional event, in order to avoid paying the %.

As far as I know, every money transfer are included in the percentage of next sale established in the original acquisition of the player. When the player is sold again and there is a new % of next sale clause, this ends in the original transfer too. If this does not work for league games or league appearances, I am pretty sure it should be reported as a bug.

Che strano. Non so cosa dirti allora, prova con il commento di @XaW

Did you select as Giocabile all other divisions or they are on "Guarda soltanto" mode?

But they did not go with "complete official silence on patch timing". I don't remember when/where it was but I've read a couple of time SI staff saying in this forum that the winter update and the patch would have arrived end-February/early March (and I honestly do not spend too much time on the forum, so it could be ever more often that they stated this). If people expect an official statement saying "you are going to have the patch at XXam of day XXX" I don't think it is realistic for two main reasons: i) you have official statements for facts, not forecasting or things you are willing to do, ii) it may takes more time to fix known and/or unknown issues. Imagine they notice an issue the day before the announced release of the patch. Would you prefer them to have the issue solved or to have the patch at the time and date they announced months ago? Bonus: iii) you should announce only things/actions that you will be able to hold...

Immagine if they announce that they will work on a specific topic and then the result of the patch is not what some of the players will expect: DRAMA! "They said they were going to work on it and the result is bad!" And even if you do everything correctly and you improve and correct everything you announced, there will always be somebody complaining about the fact that the changes are not the ones that should be implemented. The fact is that here in this blog we don't even manage to agree to what's good or not. Now there is a wave of people reporting (more or less) the same feedback about something and a participant in the conversation could think: "see, evrybody agrees with me!", just because people that do not agree with you don't step in to say "no you are wrong" (there is not a judgment value behind the sentence, it's just the dynamic regarding wide blog conversations). So every announce they make will result extremely false to some...whenever they do a move, they're mistaken. Would you announce something similar if you were in their shoes?

In which UEFA competition are you qualified? Which competition Feyenoord plays? Not everything can be related only to reputation. At the end, it is possible that they wanted to earn more and then, when they received the offer, they were satisfied with the offer to Feyenoord because of other clauses or promises. You may have assumed that some of the adds-in requested were not interesting for you, and the negotiation went toward an higher request in the base salary. Sometimes it happens in real life too.. Did you make an offer for the player or you just assumed that, being the demand too high, you would not have been able to (or did not want to) match it? Most of the time, when you make a contract offer for a player and the payer choose another team, the message explains you why he took that decision

No no, I am not talking about American football when you have two different line-ups. Here I am talking about movement/disposition with or without ball. I am in the football world (and I study football too, because I like to coach and I have a followed courses from the italian FA) long enough to know that there are a looot of things that are currently implemented but that you cannot replicate in FM. I tried a lot of different tactical combinations, but the replication is very limited because the ME does not include such solutions (and I believe it is like this because such solutions are not even considered). And this is a pity because it would give another level of immersion. I know that the majority of FM players (in a wider sense) are just interested in believing they can be Mourinho/Guardiola within a software, but the cool thing of FM is that the game replicates (or at least try to) the RL in a very comprehensive way, and this is very good! So when I hear comments like SI needs to simplify tactics because "there are more styles in FM than in real life" or "there's is no defensive possession football irl" I am like "ooookaaaaaay, let's turn off Fifa and talk about coaching a team". Then I know it's a game, and I don't pretend they will exploit every single minimal possibility that can be applied in real life. It's fair enough as the game is right now, although a bit more of tactical improvement could be very welcome. p.s. Of course this is absolutely not personal, I would not like to sound like I am addressing directly to you even if am answering to a conversation I am having with you. It is more as a general comment

I absolute agree with you. That's why, in order to improve the difficulty, I decided to remove quality data from my players (and from the staff). I did not change the skin, but I made the attributes disappear using the color palette. Since then I found the game realistically challenging, and I need to rely only on the octagonal distribution of attributes, staff reports and individual comparison to choose players. I would strongly suggest to try it. I found the game more interesting and, finally, I made some mistakes on the market. I can remember that before this change my only mistake on the transfer market in 20 years of FM was buying once Giroud that scored 2 goals in the first half of the season. Otherwise every transfer season was really easy. Now I need to investigate very well players to buy them, and sometimes I cannot buy them because I am too late or I just cannot take a decision based on the knowledge I have. This not to mention that matches are now more complex and unpredictable

You're right. I also believe that, and I would not like to sound too pretentious, being FM a game with a strong English-root, the baseline is the premier league. There are plenty of examples of tactics developed in the last decades that are not even considered in the game, while when Sheffield (I thought it was Wednesday but I am not sure) brought on the pitch the wide-center back immediately they translate it into the game, e so they did for Ruben Dias in Man City. This is a limitation because football (especially for the tactic world) is not represented by the Premier League (which tactically is not the benchmark). In addition, another tactical limit is the field of tactic assimilation for new players. If you think about it, there is almost no learning curve when you buy a new layer, and you can directly put it into your tactics and he will perform very well. Even the board dynamic is very english-based: In Italy, for example, 4/5 matches not very well and you are questioned and you risk your position. To see the firsts sacking in the game you need to wait until late November/early December for very dangerous situations. Those are limitations that break a bit the immersion. Of course there are a lot of things that work and I (as well as others, I guess) am happy with them.

I am sorry, but tactics in FM are almost elementary. You basically have limited options. You cannot defend in an alternative way other than you basic 11 structure. IRL there are plenty of cases when in phase of possession you change your disposition on the filed, and then you change it back when out of possession of the ball.... They added the inverted wing this year and this is something, but when you look only at the premier league it is difficult to carry in the game the state of art of football tactics.

And this is exactly what means to have a "quasi"-realistic game. Thank you very much, your explanation is the best argument for those doubting the improved realism of the ME.

I am Italian too, I follow the Serie A as anybody (although I am not a "gobbo"). But I think that compare the Juventus style to park the bus is not really fear. I would say more that they play (mainly) "Standard" while still 0-0 (with lo defensive block) and then switch to "Defensive" when leading. I also agree that the problem is not the tactic per se but the ME, but I also think that the ME this year is better than last year (i hoped they have improved the "tactical on-field" side of the game this year, but as they are not too much into tactics as we are in Italy I did not expect so many changes to it)

Let me add me something else: I am not saying that the pre-set tactics are perfect. They may serve as a starting point, and of course they need to be consistent otherwise what's the point of having them? In reality, if you think carefully about it, it makes sense. The more you have the ball, the less your opponent will have opportunity to score. Then of course it all depends of the ability of your team to implement that kind of style. I do, from time to time, and most of the times it works. Then I cannot expect that 100% of the times I use I have the result I want, otherwise I would not find realistic the game. Mentality is just one aspect of the game. I saw one of your comment regarding Allegri, and I suppose you are Italian: the park the bus tactic is like "Palla in tribuna". Nobody cares about the possession, you just defend the result. Rarely you can implement it along the entire match (mourinho did it in Barcelona-Intern in 2010 or past year Bayer Leverkusen-Roma, semi-final Uefa Cup), most of the times an entire match like this is impossible to carry on

The example is too extreme: you could expect to have some result when using that style during the last 10/15 minutes of a match trying to avoid to concede occasions, but if you play an entire season with the "Park the bus" tactic, leaving the ball in the feet of your opponents, at the end you cannot expect to have good results (unless this is the only way for you to make points because you are technically in high deficit compared with your opponents) I would also add that statistically, when you decide to focus only on the "clean sheet", in the long run will will concede goals.