Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'rep'.
Found 1 result
*** Disclaimer*** First and foremost as always, I unfortunately feel the need to inform anybody that reads this that this isn't a rant or a flaming post. All of my posts are meant to foster discussion. Sometimes, sadly the community turns against one another. Secondly, since I discovered FM, I've had nothing but success at it... The first few versions I lucked into it and everything past that has been about applying real world tactics within the confines of the definitions of Football Manager. I would presume that it's wide spread knowledge that club and manager reputation is considered to be broken by most users. A user can win league, cup, and Champions League title year after year only to see their reputation barely increase and in some cases even drop. This has been observed by users playing in leagues with low reputations as well as users playing in leagues such as the EPL. The reason that this is an issue for most players is that reputation has been programmed such a far-reaching impact on the game. It affects sponsorship money, the level of player you're able to attract, transfer and contract fees (incoming and outgoing), etc. This is effectively shown here Football Manager Reputation Experiment . In this three part experiment, the user gives non-league side Halifax the maximum reputation in the game while dropping Arsenal's reputation to the lowest possible. An overview of the impact is that Arsenal were forced to sell a large majority of their starting players during the first three transfer windows while being unable to bring any player in. Over the course of four seasons they became a Euro Cup tier side. Meanwhile, Halifax stormed up the leagues and made a fair amount of money while doing it. But what's particularly of note for my point is that in four years, Arsenal went from a reputation of 1 (the lowest you can possibly have) to about 5500 (about three stars). That's a massive jump in a relatively short amount of time for a side that lost most of it's well-known players, staff, and only qualified for the Euro Cup here and there. I say massive relative to how a user-controlled team's reputation seems to work. Again, despite user's signing or developing some of the world's most renowned players, winning the biggest competitions in successive years, taking on big names in pre-season setups, the reputation never jumps that quickly in that amount of time. So the question becomes about if there are mechanics in play to artificially influence a user-controlled team's reputation. It would seem that there's a strong possibility that this is true and it would make sense. Many users become bored after they feel that they can buy any regen and basically plug and play. So it would make sense that if users can achieve unrealistic success with minnow clubs, perhaps the developers felt that having a more "realistic" reputation system would lead to a degraded challenge and experience. Basically, by having the AI team's reputation be more dynamic, it allows for a continued and varied challenge for the user over the course of a save. What are your thoughts on this?