Meanonsunday

Adding some detail to this comment . What is missing is the item ‘capacity for seated fixtures’ that you can find for other German clubs such as Dortmund. But it fact the bug is worse because UEFA tournaments now allow standing, so all German clubs should be using the full capacity for Champions League (easily confirmed by looking at attendance for Dortmund v PSG last week). Of course this applies generally to other countries in UEFA, but in FM23 and 24 the rule has not been updated. Hope it can be fixed for FM25.

I get that some people find using the pre-game editor difficult, but reverting Brexit seems oddly specific. The EU exception to U18 movement is a political convenience for FIFA disliked by even many EU countries. If you think players should be able to move at 16 (when they are legally adults in many countries) then why not just change it worldwide. Personally I do occasionally do saves where some of the protectionist rules are removed, but I’m sure the way I think the football world should be run is not going to be exactly the way other people would choose so I just appreciate having the editor to customize.

Just change the skin back to default.

Unfortunately there seems to be logic in the game where players ask for more money based on how much remaining wage budget you have rather than only being based on some absolute sense of what they are worth. This can be favorable when money is tight, but as you found it can create massive inflation if you suddenly have a big wage budget. All you can really do is shift that extra wage money over into the transfer budget and save it there; usually the wage demands will decrease right away. The guys on high wages are not going to accept pay cuts so you need to ditch them at the end of the season. I would never have anyone on more than 1k/week before you reach League 2.

You forgot when they recommend a player to learn a trait then as soon as he learns it they recommend to unlearn it. Avoid weak foot, use weak foot more, back and forth. Same with individual training of attributes. Then what about recommending new staff all the time; if you took their advice you’d end up spending millions buying out contracts and replacing half of the staff members every year with new people that are better on one attribute but worse on the others that matter.

Squad seems too small to me. Having 3-5 injured at the same time is common and then imagine some players get called up to international u21, Olympics etc when you still have games. Maybe you have some young players you can call up immediately to fill in; I’m usually playing in countries where anyone 18+ has to go on loan because the reserves don’t play in a proper league that will increase their attributes.

Step 3 also doesn’t work for players you want to loan in your first team, so you either have to drop them down to the reserves (making the player angry) or else give the DOF the ability to sell first team players (no way; this is the lunatic that offered 50% of my wage budget to a backup in his mid 30s). The other big problem is the loan manager not understanding that 90% of 10k + 100k/ month is a lot more than 100% of 10k. Since the AI controlled teams are programmed to bargain they usually drop the wage percentage below what is asked thus bamboozling the loan manager who rejects offers that are many times higher than what was asked.

Obviously if you "banned" gegenpress you know it is a better tactic if you want to win. So you aren't disagreeing with OP; he didn't say it was the only way to win, just that it is the easiest way to win. If you have better players you can win with almost any tactic but if the AI has exactly the same players as you then youre going to lose by messing around with possession tactics. Fast counters with players coming inside from the wings turn the ball over a lot less than slowly passing it around the midfield.

It's perhaps a minor point, but irl you can in fact select candidates based on sex in situations that would apply to staff of a football team. You could select female candidates to a womens team on the basis that the players would be more comfortable with a woman (wouldn't work for all positions but imagine saying that women couldnt choose a female doctor, physio or trainer). And for a mens team you'd be allowed to select women on the basis that they are under-represented in pretty much every position (the law specifically allows for favouring the under-represented sex). I'm not saying its right or wrong, just that is what the law is in UK and EU.

Just an individual case but my DoF just offered Fabinho a pre-contract for 275k a week, 40k clean sheet bonus, 8k appearance fee. My entire wage budget is less than 700k/ week (Brazilian club, Serie A). Since I had just been forced to sell one of my best players there was probably enough in the transfer budget to shift over to wages to cover it. But that is insane; half the wage budget to an old player with no transfer value and who would probably take 10% of that if his contract actually expired.

This is just wrong. When the player signs a pre-contract it is binding on him. FIFA has ruled on this multiple times. The fact that a release exists in the current contract is an obligation on the players current team, but if the player is not free to negotiate (because of the pre-contract) then it’s irrelevant. The same is true if the player had signed a future contract with his current team; he is not free to negotiate with another team and the existence of release clause is irrelevant.

I don’t think there’s anything specific to London. If your club has a particular ethnic group in that area then they are likely to show up in your intake. Obviously London has many such groups but they will apply according to where they are located not to the whole of London. So for example Cypriots tend to show up in the intake for Orient, because they live in that part of East London. The other thing to keep in mind is that because there are so many teams in the London area better players that may live close to your team will get pulled into the intake of higher reputation teams.

In the second leg you have to shout based on the aggregate score. Does it make sense? Not to me, but it’s been that way for many years so it’s a feature not a bug.

I generally leave my staff in control of the U21 and U18 team training and player management, and the dynamics are always bad (I don’t think I’ve ever seen cohesion reach average and it’s usually abysmal). Based on this I can’t imagine that AI teams have dynamics in the same way that player controlled teams do.

So, now you’ve changed your position from every player knows every other players salary to one single time one player knows another’s salary? I’m glad you’ve come around to a realistic point of view.

Yes.

SI specifically stated that it was removed based on a request from the PFA and because the PFA contract forbade it. You can disagree without being a drama queen about it, talking about dying on hills and acting like it’s a personal insult if someone disagrees with you.

In England yes, because the players union negotiated that. Do rules in one country now apply to the whole world?

A few years ago I remember a comment from SI that said that disciplining a player could affect aggression. But I don’t know if that was ever true. In the discussion about removal of fining for performance in FM24 SI denied that this ever increased determination (😂😂 people were using this to cheese determination forever and especially since tutoring was replaced). But then in FM23 they said they reduced the effect of fining on determination. So I think that even people at SI don’t know how it actually works. Personally I don’t want those 19-20 aggression players because they turn into maniacs unless their dirtiness is very low.

That thread got locked now anyway. Too bad you can’t have a discussion here without some people getting mad that their post didn’t immediately make everyone else agree with them.

This doesn’t even make any sense. The PFA doesn’t negotiate individual player wages and never has. The players are all individual contractors negotiating their own wages and the other players have no idea what salary and bonus they might be getting except for rumors in the media.

It used to be an exploit, but it was already nerfed so much in FM23 that I don't see that as a reason to remove it totally.

I'm not sure why some people feel the need to defend this kind of basic error in logic. There are a few principles in negotiating that we should all be able to agree and that should be built into the way agents behave: 1) If we are negotiating then the agent must have some contract that he will accept. He is a professional agent not some amateur doing it for ***** and giggles. 2) The agent does not start with an offer equal to the lowest price he will accept. He would be immediately fired by the player for such a stupid tactic; giving away your lowest price is the worst thing you can do as a seller. You or I might do this negotiating with a friend or family member, but a professional always starts higher ... because maybe you will accept. 3) The agent NEVER asks for more than his initial proposal. Only a small child negotiates this way. No, he does not get "angry" and ask for more, he is not a big baby. If the session ends with no agreement then its reasonable that he might put up the price in a future negotiation, but not within a single session. 4) If at any point in the session you offer as much (or more) than the original proposal he will accept. Again, the player would fire him (and probably sue) if he rejected a price the player wanted to accept and then ended negotiations.