Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


1 Follower

About forameuss

  • Rank

Favourite Team

  • Favourite Team
    Partick Thistle

Recent Profile Visitors

8,182 profile views
  1. I managed 294 with Lincoln Red Imps Now granted, that looks impressive, but it is in the illustrious Argus Insurance Premier Division, and at this point in the save we were basically Stone Cold hospitalising some local enhancement talent jobbers at a house show. That equates to 14 years unbeaten in the league by the way, at which point we were pumped 6-3. "Fun" fact too. Thanks to the small number of games in the league, and still facing every team three times, our 7-0 revenge beating later in the season only sat us level on goal difference. It all came down to the penultimate game of the season, where we drew 2-2 and won the league on goal difference, with just +78 in it. After 14 years unbeaten, we almost lost the league. ITSAFUNNYOLDGAMETOMECLIVE.
  2. Basically, yeah. I don't think ignoring things like that really affects your save too much. On a slightly related point, people get hung up on the "realism" part too much. At its core, FM is probably not strictly a simulation, more an approximation. It's by far the most realistic in its field, but it's not really that realistic. There's plenty in there you could argue about, but it only really matters if you let it. Think of it like an RPG - you're playing the role of the manager on a journeyman save, and with a bit of imagination and just letting yourself enjoy it, the game's fine.
  3. And that's fair enough. But there's a big difference between knowing they look pretty bad - which they do - and suddenly deciding that this alone is what breaks immersion.
  4. I've always wondered about this "immersion-breaking" thing. You're playing a glorified spreadsheet - are you really saying that you're going through the game fine, but seeing a cobbled together regen face suddenly pushes you over the edge? Irrational hyperbole isn't really going to change much.
  5. Because personal accountability is an archaic concept these days. It's much easier and far more cathartic to just blame someone, anyone else, rather than accept that you just ballsed up. Me make mistake? That's unpossible!
  6. And he sticks the landing! Just call it complex, and that no-one knows for sure, that way you can say anything outlandishly false and it doesn't matter. ...except, there's a group that do know how everything ties together, and they've said - repeatedly - that posts like this are completely and demonstrably false. But aye, we'll never know.
  7. Or, behind door number 2, they're not predetermined at all. Why is that so hard for some to grasp?
  8. I'm not going to reiterate the same point I've made through the entire thread - particularly when apparently it draws cries of OUTED. But when you're saying that at the very least, you want to develop players you can sell off for 500k, then you've clearly lost grip with the reality you're trying to model. Do you really see that as being a realistic outcome for every youth intake? And the first part isn't even true either. In the real world, the likely progression is that your "200PA" players are scattered amongst the world. If their talent is noticed early, they'll probably be noticed at some "super-amateur" side like you mention. They'll then likely be brought into a larger club, either a higher profile youth side or, as appears to be apparent nowadays, added to the massive trawler sent out by bigger clubs so that they can have ranks of hundreds of kids who will likely never make it. This is likely all happening before you even come to the age FM brings youths into the world. So what are we supposed to do to model that in game? I guess if you're being 100% true to life, you're going to have small clubs full of absolute jobbers (because big clubs have already stolen them) and the bigger clubs with intakes of hundreds of players, most of which are similarly dross, dotted with players that might be, what, 140PA? Because superstars are incredibly rare, so even under that system you'd likely not get one. So basically, no point in investing anything in facilities at a low level, because bigger clubs will get the players anyway. Instead, the game condenses the process, as though the players themselves don't exist before intake day (because what would be the point otherwise?). Big clubs are then free to put the trawlers out to make up for the shortfalls in their own system, which happen in real life and in game. They're keeping it as realistic as they can while still fitting with the structure of the game. They're never going to be able to replicate wee Johnny Bloggs starting out for his local youth club before being picked up by a big club academy at the age of 12.
  9. "Outed" - in caps no less - as a lottery? That suggests that it some point it wasn't completely obvious that that was what it was. It's almost like it's designed as such because - for what this game is concerned with at least - that's exactly how it is in real life. But by all means, let's just melt down a serviceable system into a game of top trumps where you can improve facilities and get 170PA players out each year. How thrilling.
  10. I'd imagine most just play a save they enjoy rather than worrying what other people think. Honestly, different people will see different things...differently. If you want to reload every match you don't win, go for it, and if you want to play in forensic detail without anything considered tenuous then do that.
  11. I think I managed to get 14 or 16 in Gibraltar. May have been in the cup (although it would've been to same-league opposition). Not that much of an achievement though.
  12. You rarely get such a high degree of missing the point in the first two posts of a thread. It's really quite something.
  13. If you genuinely believe that they're going to give you anything as detailed as a roadmap and - lol - actual timeframes, when it's fairly clear and obvious why they stopped communicating as much on this board in particular years ago, then you're setting yourself up for your own disappointment.
  14. Well, that's really hard to track. Just because you yourself haven't done anything, doesn't mean that circumstances are always going to be constant. Morale is constantly shifting, day-to-day, even minute-to-minute during a game. I'd imagine - and I have nothing other than my own logic - that whether a player is "happy" is a sum, at its most simplistic form, with a number of variables in them. One variable - your handling of them, say - may dip, but others may rise to cancel out the effect. Maybe when he complains you're on a losing streak, but then you win 3 on the bounce and suddenly everything seems rosier. It could be anything. Or maybe he's just being stroppy. Granted, if there are no other inputs, you shouldn't just be able to put your fingers in your ears until it goes away, but there are other inputs, not all of them controllable, directly or otherwise. Always worth doing. Conversations like this usually end up in a circular bun-fight. Actual evidence brought up to SI will allow them to look at it and definitively decide whether or not there's an issue there.
  15. That's a pretty simplistic way of looking at it. If the game is at point A, and player X is unhappy, and you do nothing, then by point B that unhappiness disappears, that doesn't really prove that anything is wrong. Anything can happen in the interim with hundreds upon hundreds of variables. It very well could be wrong, of course, but it's not as simple as saying that you ignoring it is the only variable. The only way to find it if it's intended behaviour is raising it as a bug, so the devs can actually tell you. They won't do that here.
  • Create New...