Costav

If I may add something, I do scientific research for my work, I think to have a bit of clue what do tests means and how to "manipulate" (or show/use/explain) data. It would have extremely more accurate if they would have tested what they tested repeating 80 times a season of 38 matches instead of using the [(Total points/80 matches) x 38 matches] formula. First of all because they should have simulated the entire season to see if there is a common pattern of results during all the testing phase, and because there are some other hidden variables (as temperature, weather, date of the match) that I am sure have an impact on the final result. In addition, tactics of the opponent change, and that is something that maybe will have a different impact if they considered 95 matches instead of 80. However, I cannot express myself more clearly because I did not see the test they did. In conclusion, the point is that the comment of @Daveincid is completely fair because first of all they should have provided an explanation concerning the from 80 to 38 matches decision. Prerogative are even more important than results in these cases

I completely agree. Sometimes I have the feeling that high morale makes the difference between a goal and a shoot on posts/crossbar, but it is just a feeling and I am not claiming that this is fact per se.

But a feedback is not something that can be analyzed objectively. It's just a feeling about what your perception is. It's like people saying climate change is bull__sh(i)t, because there has always been cold and then warmer, and then colder etc. Then you look at the data and reality is different from perception... Perception cannot, per se, be analyzed as an indicator. If you think this is a problem the game has I suggest you report it in the bug forum. Otherwise it's just an exercise of complaining. And, again, I agree with you that this is something at least very strange...

Ok. So, did you report it in the bug forum?

I am sorry to say it out loud, but if this is the kind of thing that is breaking your immersion my feeling is that you are a bit exaggerating... I mean, the news came out and the article stated that your player doesn't want to move, so first of all there is nothing strange in the real dynamic of the game. Second, Everton may have a greater reputation than Norwich (you are only a couple of seasons further, reputation cannot be changed drastically), so it is not an impossible comparison in terms of reputation etc... It's not the most realistic news ever, sure, but in real life you hear a lot of extravagant news/connections between players and teams that I would not mind so much about this...that's why I have the feeling that those kinds of comments are a bit too much, especially when compared to the actual problems the game has

Not only @rsihn is right about the rest session, but you are also not training from a physical point of view. How could you expect them to have a good condition if they don't get trained on resistance, stamina etc....?

They do it, but not after a couple of days. In case, you will receive a message from the agent at least weeks later...

Thanks Zachary, There are also a couple more issues that I found recurrently in the game, but those are really minimal and not impacting on the game flow (such as the order in the list of a player attributes among different pages). Would you like to receive also those bug reports?

To be fair, based on my experience, premiums are not weighted in the same way as the initial amount of cash. The same is when you pay in instalments. So probably you would have bought the player for 50/60M cash but you include all those premiums the made the price increase. Then you can always find the loophole in the game, yes, but I would not exaggerate with the critics in this case.

So basically you're judging unrealistic the fact that a team can have a period of poor performance...

Mask the attributes of a player and base your judgement on staff reports (without using stars) and on the ability (the octagonal design), you will find the excitement again

Puoi anche modificare la schermata per visualizzare differenti valori come la Fatica, il carico di lavoro, etc... Consideralo in questo modo: è in forma per giocare una partita, ma ha della stanchezza pregressa. Questo vuol dire che durante la partita si stancherà più facilmente. Comunque hai un ricapitulativo di ogni giocatore nel Centro Medico. (Sorry guys for having written in Italian)

Maybe what @busngabb is expressing is too much on the limit of what is possible/not possible, but I agree with him with the fact that usually is easy to adapt a new player to your tactics without loosing cohesion and, more in general, team performance. If only they could expand and enrich the learning curve of the tactical side of your team this would be great. As an example, IRL there are play of players who play a little or not at all in the first part of the season and they then they become titular, just because they need to enter in the new team mechanisms, understand how to fit in the new coach's tactics (and so on...). In FM you can buy a new player and it will be determinant from the very beginning. I am not saying that has to be like this for every player, of course, but the learning curve is very steep that after half of the season almost every player in your team is 100% fitting your tactics, even if you are a new coach and you change completely their habits.

I agree that 99% this is a bug, but I am just wondering: have you ever considered that the board made you promise to use at least two NEW YOUNG PLAYERS other than the ones already in your first squad?

That's the thing (please see it as a positive constructive comment): at them moment I have the feeling that the game is too much England-based (e.g. reflects the English dynamics of football even if you play the game coaching in another country). In Italy, for example, defenses are more careful and you see less goals during the weekend. That could a be a possible improvement (at least for the top 5 European tournaments) for FM25, 26 etc, not only speaking of the ME but also from the dynamic point of view (again, in Italy after 4 bad matches you are questioned by the president and you risk to be fired, in FM you can run half a season under the expectation and the board is waiting and supporting you much more patiently...)

Ok, the comment was just to put in evidence that achievement badges are not a good indicator of the difficulty of the game, although difficulty, for some verse, could be intended as a very subjective concept. After 20 years of FM I find the game easy, because I understood which are the main dynamics that drive a team to success. On the other side, other users could find it difficult because, for example, they don't mind about training staff and other details that are relevant...

Are you sure you are not including too many recovery sessions in your schedule? One suggestion for you could be to use "general" training session (blue ones) on the thirs slot the day after a match (those are very lights sessions, so you don't stress too much players). Also, keeping a "normal" schedule varying the training intensity (assigning the max to the youngest in your squad) could be an option

Thanks!

I don't agree. If you manage to qualify in Champions League the first year after a promotion in one of the top leagues you don't win a title, but you can still think that the game is easy...

Something that I find very challenging is to make "invisible" (through the color palette) the player attributes. Basically you need to use stats, staff reports, comparison between players and the octagonal diagram of ability. After 15 years of FM I finally had some difficulties in achieving board objectives

It seems completely correct to me: if somebody makes you a promise about a problem you have, you could not be 100% happy and sure about it until the promise is kept....

To be fair, I have the feeling that the difficulty in correcting all the bugs you all mentioned is coming from the fact that not every user is experiencing them. For example, I'm during the third season in FM24 coming from my FM23 save and I did not experience a lot of the problems you mentioned (frequent unrealistic results like 5-4 or 8-0, players complaining about squad depth having only 19/20 first team players, and some many other problems). I don't deny they exist, maybe they are not frequent as you mentioned and that's why it's so hard to correct them. Moreover, some interactions are coming from the way every user is managing the team: you could not expect players 100% happy if you contract all of them as Star Players to convince them to join your team and then, "all of a sudden", they are not happy with their time on the pitch (I am just giving an example, I know that there are various problems concerning players happiness and locker room "riots"). That said, is FM24 a perfect game? Absolutely not. Is there room for improvement? Absolutely yes. Do we deserve a better game having paid more or less 40/50 euros? YES. P.s. Unless you are biased, you cannot deny that the ME is at least better than last year's...

Hello, I am pretty new on the forum, even though I played every version of FM since the time it was still Championship Manager/Scudetto (in Italian). I did not follow the entire topic, but I could not disagree more with the argument that you have to set your own limits while playing the game. For me, as long as you are not cheating (controlling more than one team to accept very low offers or using save scum to mention two "tricks") you can play the game as you wish and say that you find the game easy. Indeed, I have the feeling that the last FMs are more focused on the "widely cool kinds of stuff" of being a manager (like the last day of market transfers windows, or the new recruitment system, which I am not saying that it is something to drop or that it's unrealistic) than on things that have a strong impact on a match (knowledge of the tactics, fitness for the role). I understand that is to sell more and to earn more (I don't blame them for this), but sometimes I have the feeling that the field-managerial side of the game has been a bit forgotten during the last 5/10 editions. If you set up correctly some "key" aspects of your experience (have a good staff, have the wage budget under the limit, focus on keeping the morale very high) then all of a sudden you are able to overperform (not winning everything, but have always very good and better results during your career) with any kind of team. That's why I would say that the game began to seem easier.