Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community

RBKalle

Members
  • Content Count

    7,473
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    6

About RBKalle

  • Rank
    Third Team

Favourite Team

  • Favourite Team
    Rosenborg BK - Odds BK

Currently Managing

  • Currently Managing
    Undrið FF

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. RBKalle

    Youth Intake ineffective

    Well, the Youth Only save's one and only goal is to stick with the bunch of talentless bozos our HoYD dumped on our training groud for a specific year, so of course the % of success, or at least of fulfilled potential (however low it can be) is higher than in regular games. And my main gripe was about how AI handles those players anyway. I know we human managers can more or less turn an Ali Dia into a presentable EPL striker with enough effort put into it... but what about the AI managers? The innate inability to develop anything that isn't basically "unscrewable" (ie. 130CA/180PA well-rounded prospects ready for first team action at 16-17) also means we can easily scoop up talented prospects but also rummage through the free agents list for some decent backups or resellable rejects. Would it? Maybe so for Conference players, but many League One/Two sides have their share of former academy prospects who didn't make it. With 3 or 4 playable tiers in a nation, there are enough sides to give a second chance at a lower level to a solid portion of the academy rejects instead of having a new batch of horrid newgens pop up every year. Take a look at the current squad for Ranheim Fotball in Norwegian Premier division. The vast majority (15, give or take a few) of their current players were at one point part of Rosenborg's Youth or 2nd team. And, having played as Rosenborg in every FM iteration ever, I remember most of them not being remotely good enough to become Premier Division players (top-half material even, as Ranheim surprised everyone and finished 7th, having even been up in 3rd place halfway through the season). Most of them instead ended up released by Rosenborg youth setup when they were younger and would have languished on free transfer and eventually retired, while IRL they found a more "forgiving" club that helped them to grow into Eliteserien players. Not NT material by any stretch of imagination (think 100-110 CA tops) but still good enough to stick around instead of disappearing and of being replaced by a bunch of hopeless newgens. I know many real-life youth players are "uneven", which is why they're still playing for youth sides/reserves instead of walking into the Starting XI... However FM takes it to the extreme and it'd need a bit of a rework. Not to have "half a dozen 170PA players in every intake", but merely to have players whose distribution resembles something realistic and workable. The biggest issue IMO is that unless a player has a huge potential (ie. enough CA points) to rectify, at least partially, his flaws, he's gonna be either completely useless in the long run. It's not uncommon to have, say, a very physically imposing player who's absolutely pants whenever a ball is involved. Or technically gifted kids with the build of a jockey... Usually they still do fine against low-level youth opposition by "exploiting" their only superior trait, but are ultimately too one-dimensional to make it.
  2. RBKalle

    Youth Intake ineffective

    You'd expect that a top club that invests millions per year on youth scouting, recruitment and training, with equally expensive staff and facilities would at least have a better decent/dross ratio than the local club that sends a guy looking for potential signings at the two super-amateur sides who train twice a week on a gravel pitch. But by all means, let's just make up stuff I've never said just to defend your side without even bothering to try to understand a word I said! How convenient. If you want to counter my point, please at least take the time to READ what I wrote instead of sticking the fingers in your ears and going "la la la, several PA 170 newgens every year!"
  3. RBKalle

    Youth Intake ineffective

    As said months ago, I think the Youth Intake system needs a overhaul. Or at least a better explaination, if the former is out of question. I mean: logic dictates that we spend lots of money on top-level facilities, extensive scouting net, youth recruitement and on a HoYD with the highest attributes (and a six-figures wage). It turns out those factors are marginal at best during what has basically been outed as a LOTTERY, where all the aforementioned, expensive, improvements are merely "a couple of extra tickets". I know it's unrealistic to expect Messi-esque newgens at every intake, and I concur that no 16yo should EVER be ready to walk into a Top Clubs starting XI (can happen in lower leagues or in smaller nations, but still relatively rare). However, what the game is sorely missing ATM is what I call the "middle class" of youth intake. Players with ok or good potential, possibly with decent starting attributes (or at least with a "workable distribution" that are worth 2-3 years of moderate investement (basic wage) to be nurtured into ok professional players one tier (or even two) below the club's level. Instead most subpar newgens get released at the end of the trial and retire shortly after because of the usual Reputation Gap. LL clubs don't make an offer because the player's rep is too high. Player will expect offers from better clubs, but it won't happen because the player's CA/PPA/Rep aren't high enough for those clubs... So it's a vicious circle that will break only if the player rots on the free agents list long enough for his rep to drop. Too bad his growth will have stagnated anyway, making him a less appealing signing anyway. Also, some of the newgen templates are just AWFUL... Stuff that you wouldn't accept at any professional club that has invested millions on a state-of-the-art youth setup. A 500k p/y HoYD should never have the nerve to present us a 16yo CB with 4 Concentration, 6 Strength and 8 Tackling. Or a "promising" AMC with 14 Passing but 7 First Touch. Or, one of my all-time favourites, a CM with 14 Pace and Acc but <10 in First Touch, Passing and Technique. It's like... are you blind or what? Can't you see those "hot prospects" are flawed or not really suitable for their position? I expect a top-level Youth Setup to "fix" those inconsistencies long before the youth intake is presented to me... They're supposed to be the BEST our academy has found/trained for a specific class, so I'd at least want them to be ADEQUATE for the position they play. I can live with a situation where we don't churn out First Teamers year in and year out, but let's at least have presentable players we can later sell for 500k to our feeder clubs one or two tiers below.
  4. In a save I created on 19.1 and I noticed two Premier Division sides in Norway have moved to another stadium at the start of the 2019 season (season 2 in the save). Both relocations make absolute no sense whatsoever. * Sarpsborg 08 moved from Sarpsborg stadium to Telenor Arena in Fornebu (just outside Oslo), 60 miles and a one hour drive away. * Ranheim moved from EXTRA Arena in Ranheim to Fosshaugane Campus in Sogndal. A whopping 300 miles away in straight line (or a 8 hrs drive)! The thing is, both stadia were used in the opening season and there doesn't seem to be any expansion plan for either of them. And even if it were the case, both clubs had much better options available for a temporary stadium closer to them. Local rivalry nonwithstanding, S08 could have moved to Fredrikstad or even to Halden (good enough stadium there). Ranheim is basically a neighbourhood in Trondheim, so no need to relocate so far away. Is it an old, known bug that carried over on an "old" save?
  5. Exactly! I don't care how many shortcuts you take, if that's what makes FM more enjoyable to you. Obviously, if you decided to give your local club a sugardaddy, 100 gazillions, top-class facilities and 10 wonderkid newgens, I expect you NOT to push your 3-3-4 as a tactical masterpiece that will solve any issue and turn every casual FM'er into an all-conquering virtual Sir Alex... To be honest, if it makes for an interesting narrative, I wouldn't even mind reading about it in the FM Careers section. As said, just be honest about it and don't pretend you've found FM's holy grail, when it truth it was a mix of editing and reloading.
  6. Then it must be a bug... Have you tried starting a new save with the default db to see if the issue is still there with added players and future newgens? SI are great, but sometimes their priority for bug fixes and feature tweaks are a tad odd...
  7. But things should go back to normal with the first Youth Intake during the first season, so the problem only affects the "filler players" during the game's initialization. I can see why SI did it, as they probably didn't expect it to affect actual first-team players in active and playable country... Of course it is a big issue with user-created nations and leagues (real or fantasy, it doesn't matter) where the game itself has to generate most of the new players from the start. Then again, most user-created leagues are either low divisions in existing nations or top leagues in smaller nations not included in the original db, so for both scenarios a top PA of 119 is likely more than enough... Say, you're adding the 3rd or 4th tier to a playable country or you're creating the Andorran Premier Division... neither will have 120PA players from the get go. BTW, not saying it's a great idea to have a PA cap, because other factors like Youth Rating, Nation/League/Club Reputation etc should already dictate the average quality of all FM-generated players. You're new to FM, aren't you?
  8. Wait a minute!!! So it turns out ANY player added at the start of the game with the "add players to playable teams" option BY DESIGN has PA capped at 120?! I see why it is in place, as most inactive leagues in Top Nations have most of their players loaded anyway (via editor or even by default because of reputation or whatever), so this could affect only youth teams or low-level sides. Still, it's a bit of a problem with custom databases, like in the OP case, or with particularly odd game setups...
  9. RBKalle

    Regen Faces

    Considering officially licensed faces are plain 2D pictures and so are facepacks, I don't see why SI had to go 3D when it'd have sufficed reverting to what they had been using before FM17 with adequate results. FM is not a graphics-oriented game, so if the newgens' faces are only needed in static menus, there's no need to implement a fully-generated 3D face as if it were an arcade/sim game where in-match visuals are key features.
  10. Does this happen only to the newgens in your new country? Did you set a reasonable Youth Rating value for the country? Are its options for Economy and Importance set as "Developed" and "Important"? Also, not every youth player at a top club has a high PA anyway, so the game will populate the now empty U18 team accordingly. Maybe not a single player >120 is a bit odd, but it depends on the size of the sample you analyzed.
  11. RBKalle

    Stadium architecture

    I'm no expert in legal matters, but how is a "running track between the stands and the pitch" or "bowl-like structure with three levels of stands" something than can be licensed? I mean, it's just stuff that exists. I'd understand it if it were a brick-by-brick replica of privately owned structure, complete with other copyrighted material (like club name, logos, emblems, stadium name, sponsor logos etc), but as long as "generic" stuff goes, why is it an issue? It's maybe a tad trickier when it's about unique and recognizable models (e.g. the towers at San Siro or Bologna, Wembley's "circlet") or locations (Braga, Marina Bay...), but sufficiently life-like generic versions of commonly used structures and combinations shouldn't be that big of an issue. Or at least a vaguely consistency for the attendance and a bit more of variety and "realism" when it comes to generic stadiums. It'd be a step forward from the current "everything small looks like Generic League One stadium" and "everything big looks like Konami Stadium"
  12. More boring than 6 press conferences per week? The game doesn't need artificial difficulty to become harder or more compelling. If I get a locker-room riot because I refused to give a raise to my 5th choice CM and the 3rd and 4th choices CM are siding with him (despite them being in direct competition for that spot and/or the unhappy player being unreasonable, greedy and not an influential member of the team), it's not a compelling challenge, it's 50% a lottery and 50% a dick move. Tactical mistakes and transfers mistakes? Sure! But praising or criticizing a player and it suddenly turning it into a flame-war between manager and player doesn't count as a challenge. It should be possible to fail, by picking an unreasonable tactic or by wasting your entire budget on players who aren't good enough, but your scouts and their performances still convinced you they were worth the money. THOSE are actual mistakes I'm willing to make, and actually I'd want them, especially the latter case, to be more commonplace. But, again, a mutiny or a morale crisis because you picked the wrong answer in a kind of interaction that barely deserves to be part of the game is NOT a fair challenge. Like he explained, the game strongly suggests you it's a good thing to do. It's like having a huge "PRESS ME" button, and expect you not to even get close to it. Of course the OP could have avoided talking to his players so often, but can you blame him for doing so? Actually the saddest part is that you can easily play entire (ridiculously successful) seasons without even interacting once with any of your players outside of general team talks and the two team meetings at the start and at the end of the season. I know because it has worked wonders for me. You can't screw up if you don't do a thing... Which brings me back to my original question: is it really worth it if the advantages are limited and the risk/reward ratio is so low?!
  13. IMO the actual problem isn't how tedious, repetitive, gimmicky and potentially disruptive the interactions in FM are... The thing is that, as some have said already, they're easily negligible. Many users, even experienced ones, feel (rightfully) compelled to use all those chances for interaction, hoping they'll become "morale boosts", "wake-up calls" and basically just a little extra factor to turn the game into a "Click Continue and Win" experience. But since interactions have a looooong way to go still, most of the time an apparently innocuous and inconsequential comment can snowball into a locker-room riot if you pick the wrong option for the wrong player. It's like trying to get your 14yo kid to put their smartphone down to do the dishes. There's no way to predict if the request will be greeted with a grumpy one-liner, with surprising cooperation or with a grade-A scene. The game just devolves into a matter of "pick the least disruptive option" instead of "pick what makes sense in context". So unless your side have lost 0-5 to some minnows in the Cup's first round, you'll NEVER give them the hairdryer treatement and you won't criticize or fine a player unless he caused 4 penalties and basically looked like a complete amateur. It's simply NOT WORTH IT. You can easily ignore 90% of those interactions. Only talk to a player unless it's positively unavoidable (team meetings, team talks, non-skippable issues) Which brings us to the main point of contention. Is all that really necessary (if it can't be done "right"? The obvious rebuttal is BUT REALISM!!!!! To which, I tend to get kinda annoyed because (as proven by the "old and resuscitated" training module), when realism gets in the way of a flowing gaming experience, it'd be put aside for the major goal of usability. People need to eat, drink and sleep too, but no devs would code those basic activities in a RPG/action game. Or at least not in a hardcore way. Only an actual "survivor simulation" would need those to be key parts of a game, and that'd be a very very niche product. So, while football MANAGERS do talk to players, arrange detailed training schedules and take part in tedious press conferences, are all those boring or micromanaging aspects really needed to make FM a great game? As usual, I'd wish SI had focused more on fixing key aspects of the game (team building, transfers, players development, less emphasis on hard figures like ability and more on performances etc). I still feel FM is a very unbalanced game, with realism being brutal at times while other aspects are firmly planted in the "power fantasy" territory, which BTW, is a key part of any game. So if my life as a manager can be miserable due to all that soul-crushing realism between one game and the next one, I shouldn't be able to top CL group stage including Barça, Napoli and CSKA Moscow with the original Rosenborg team in season one... (Including a Leicester-esque 4-2 win at San Paolo and 1-2 at Camp Nou). Want to go down the realism path for real? Good luck selling a game where with the likes of Everton or Deportivo you'll be lucky to steal a 4th place every 10 seasons, and if you're managing outside the Top nations, making the CL group stage will be a monumental feat. But if, as it should be, the user gets a lot of "acceptable breaks from reality", why are we forced to sit through boring press conferences, tricky conversations with moody players and nonsensical chats with a bunch of spoiled kids who don't seem to understand how football works?
  14. Numerical attributes are a less controversial thing because as long as they're kept within a reasonable and realistic range (ie. you don't rate Messi's dribbling at 5/20), there isn't a legit ground to complain. Overall and specific ratings have existed in football games for like 30 years and nobody, AFAIK, ever complained (except fans of specific teams/players who feel X or Y should be 86 instead of 84 etc). Even the potentially more controversial ones, like Workrate, Determination or Professionalism etc can be easily defended as the reflection of real-life performances/events. Say, a player who has changed 10 clubs in 5 seasons can rightfully be assigned a low Loyalty. A guy with a story of controversies inside and outside the field can't really file a lawsuit if his Professionalism/Temperament attributes are low. Just like a striker who has scored an average of 5 goals per season can't get offended about a single-digits finishing attribute. On the other hand, if the player description goes like: "John Doe, 25yo, English, Striker, Personality "Unprofessional"" you can definitely see why it COULD (not say it should) ruffle some feathers. And considering we're indeed dealing with peculiar characters, would it be so odd for one of those Unprofessional/Slackers/Temperamental guys suddenly decide SI need to give them some money for defamation of character?
  15. I'm not disagreeing with you... I just stated what I'm quite sure is the logic behind SI's choice not to include downright negative descriptions for actual players' personalities. Do you think SI would be so wary, hadn't such "childish stuff" been source of some legal issue, maybe even just hinted informally? Media say and write all sorts of crap about players, but you'd be surprised to find out how petty the football world is. Criticism is accepted, but it always come with a risk. You ask the wrong question to a manager/player, you'll get ignored or you'll even get a passive-aggressive rebuttal or an openly rude one. You keep on saying negative stuff about a club/manager/player, you can EASILY become persona non grata at their press conferences, training sessions etc. (this has been confirmed to me by a seasoned journalist during a class: "you may always want to be in the good graces of top managers, directors, players etc, or you'll be left out in the cold). So I'm not one bit surprises SI may have gotten some calls in the past from "some people" about the wording of some descriptions. P.S. Sorry, but I wouldn't really use America's approach to "free speech" as of a late as a positive one, considering even a single poorly worded tweet can basically destroy a career beyond repair... Just imagine labelling a minority player as "unprofessional"... I'm sure the likes of Buzzfeed etc would simply accept it as "sports talk"
×