how transfers work ?

[Wad1923]

a player valued 30 000 000. I offer him to clubs for 10 000 000. Nobody wants him. For the last season in Primer division – appearances-32, gls-5, assist-11, pom -3 av r  - 7.20.

 What is wrong with him if I can't sell him ask 3 times less from his value ?

I don't understand how transfers works. What should i do to sell players ? 

[TCSawyer]

Try buying him if he was at another club, he'd cost you 75 million! 

[Aksi92]

Show screenshot of the player. 

[Wad1923]

45 minutes ago, Aksi92 said:

Show screenshot of the player. 

Theo Walcott from Arsenal.

the same situation with Aaren Ramsey 

[forameuss]

Why would anyway want those players?  They'll be on enormous wages, and unlikely to accept much lower.  I'd imagine any clubs that could afford the wages wouldn't be the least bit interested.  You could probably offer them for free and struggle for takers

[Cougar2010]

8 minutes ago, Wad1923 said:

Theo Walcott from Arsenal.

the same situation with Aaren Ramsey 

As forameuss has said you need need to look at the individual situation.

As long as the players want to stay at the club then its only bigger clubs that will interest them.  That leaves you with a very small number of clubs they could move to, do those clubs need them? can they afford the fee & the wages?

That means they have to move either sideways or downwards and to do that the players need to want to move and be willing to drop their wage demands.  Once that happens you'll get offers.

Basically the way the AI is coded is that clubs won't make offers for players that aren't interested in moving so when other prem clubs scout Walcott & Ramsey they are told the player isn't interested in joining.

[Wad1923]

35 minutes ago, forameuss said:

Why would anyway want those players?  They'll be on enormous wages, and unlikely to accept much lower.  I'd imagine any clubs that could afford the wages wouldn't be the least bit interested.  You could probably offer them for free and struggle for takers

I have such situation with other player. And the club which bought that player just asked compensation for part of wages.

Also I offer them for free - nothing. 

They are good players, I just want change tactic and they are not good for that. 

And the bug is why the game shows their values so high but nobody want them even for free ? Adviser told me it's mistake to put Walcott to transeflist, he is very good and important player. Where is logic ?

[forameuss]

1 minute ago, Wad1923 said:

I have such situation with other player. And the club which bought that player just asked compensation for part of wages.

Also I offer them for free - nothing. 

They are good players, I just want change tactic and they are not good for that. 

And the bug is why the game shows their values so high but nobody want them even for free ? Adviser told me it's mistake to put Walcott to transeflist, he is very good and important player. Where is logic ?

It's perfectly logical.  Value is a function of a number of factors - contract length, salary, reputatioon etc - so that's not a bug.  But at the same time, value is effectively irrelevant.  The only true value of a player is how much a buyer is willing to pay for a player.  And no-one is willing to pay much for those players because they will be on very, very high wages that price most clubs out of the market.

There really is no bug here, it's working logically and as expected.

[Cougar2010]

1 minute ago, Wad1923 said:

And the bug is why the game shows their values so high but nobody want them even for free ? Adviser told me it's mistake to put Walcott to transeflist, he is very good and important player. Where is logic ?

The problem is with your choices as manager, you are making illogical choices.

Walcott is rated as a good player, he has no intention of leaving, your coaches are telling you not to list him and yet you go ahead anyway.

The game is coded to work in particular ways, its not coded for managers that make illogical decisions.

[Wad1923]

43 minutes ago, Cougar2010 said:

As forameuss has said you need need to look at the individual situation.

As long as the players want to stay at the club then its only bigger clubs that will interest them.  That leaves you with a very small number of clubs they could move to, do those clubs need them? can they afford the fee & the wages?

That means they have to move either sideways or downwards and to do that the players need to want to move and be willing to drop their wage demands.  Once that happens you'll get offers.

Basically the way the AI is coded is that clubs won't make offers for players that aren't interested in moving so when other prem clubs scout Walcott & Ramsey they are told the player isn't interested in joining.

Theo Walcott is happy in club 

Aaren Ramsey  is unhappy 

no difference for transfer 

And If it so how you say the Game could show, that clubs interesting to buy that player but .... price to high... cant afford wage.. But nothing, nobody is interested in them 

[Wad1923]

4 minutes ago, forameuss said:

It's perfectly logical.  Value is a function of a number of factors - contract length, salary, reputatioon etc - so that's not a bug.  But at the same time, value is effectively irrelevant.  The only true value of a player is how much a buyer is willing to pay for a player.  And no-one is willing to pay much for those players because they will be on very, very high wages that price most clubs out of the market.

There really is no bug here, it's working logically and as expected.

I have such situation with other player. And the club which bought that player just asked compensation for part of wages. Why nobody do the same with them ?

So you are really belive if tommorow Arsenal put Theo Walcott ,  Aaren Ramsey to transfer list and ask free for them nobody would not buy them ?

[Maaka]

6 minutes ago, Wad1923 said:

I have such situation with other player. And the club which bought that player just asked compensation for part of wages. Why nobody do the same with them ?

So you are really belive if tommorow Arsenal put Theo Walcott ,  Aaren Ramsey to transfer list and ask free for them nobody would not buy them ?

Nobody said that noone wants to buy Walcott or Ramsey, but the AI does the calculations first, even if they see that they can get the player quite cheap, just looking at the transfer fee, the complete "package" is not feasible for the club. Either they cannot afford the wages they reckon they'll have to pay, or they realise that the players most likely doesn't want to join an inferior team.

Because the AI manager calculates this first, it comes to the conclusion that it will not be able to complete the deal, thus are not bothered to try in the first place.

[Wad1923]

8 minutes ago, Maaka said:

Nobody said that noone wants to buy Walcott or Ramsey, but the AI does the calculations first, even if they see that they can get the player quite cheap, just looking at the transfer fee, the complete "package" is not feasible for the club. Either they cannot afford the wages they reckon they'll have to pay, or they realise that the players most likely doesn't want to join an inferior team.

Because the AI manager calculates this first, it comes to the conclusion that it will not be able to complete the deal, thus are not bothered to try in the first place.

Did you play the game? Example from the game 

I offered Ozil to clubs, set him in the transfer list, ask 80м. Manchester gave me a counter offer 45м ... I asked 60m.  ...  Manchester accepted the offer. But then Manchester failed the transfer because could not negotiate wage with Ozil 

Where is your AI calculations, "package" ...
it's just bugs of the game

[Maaka]

5 minutes ago, Wad1923 said:

Did you play the game? Example from the game 

I offered Ozil to clubs, set him in the transfer list, ask 80м. Manchester gave me a counter offer 45м ... I asked 60m.  ...  Manchester accepted the offer. But then Manchester failed the transfer because could not negotiate wage with Ozil 

Where is your AI calculations, "package" ...
it's just bugs of the game

I never said that the AI fully "completed" the deal before making a bid, just that in the case of Walcott/Ramsey, the managers of teams with lower stature than Arsenal believes they either cannot afford the wages or will not be able to persuade them to join, therefore not making an offer to begin with.

Your other example is different, you offer Özil, he's a player that teams of the same stature as Arsenal would want, as he offers an improvement on their current squads (sadly, neither Walcott nor Ramsey does that, thus the bigger teams won't bid for them), therefore "Manchester" (either City or United both have the resources to complete such a deal) negotiates a transfer with you.
But that doesn't in any way mean that they HAVE TO seal the deal with the player. Maybe the player wanted a longer (or shorter) deal than the club did, or they couldn't agree on the bonuses. Many factors has to be taken into account.

Anyway, it's important to remember that we're talking about two very different things here, the first example is about managers (AI) that reckon they cannot afford a player, contract-wise, and therefore doesn't bother with a transfer offer, nothing to do with the second example.

[Wad1923]

32 minutes ago, Maaka said:

I never said that the AI fully "completed" the deal before making a bid, just that in the case of Walcott/Ramsey, the managers of teams with lower stature than Arsenal believes they either cannot afford the wages or will not be able to persuade them to join, therefore not making an offer to begin with.

Your other example is different, you offer Özil, he's a player that teams of the same stature as Arsenal would want, as he offers an improvement on their current squads (sadly, neither Walcott nor Ramsey does that, thus the bigger teams won't bid for them), therefore "Manchester" (either City or United both have the resources to complete such a deal) negotiates a transfer with you.
But that doesn't in any way mean that they HAVE TO seal the deal with the player. Maybe the player wanted a longer (or shorter) deal than the club did, or they couldn't agree on the bonuses. Many factors has to be taken into account.

Anyway, it's important to remember that we're talking about two very different things here, the first example is about managers (AI) that reckon they cannot afford a player, contract-wise, and therefore doesn't bother with a transfer offer, nothing to do with the second example.

You are really a wise man and I believe it's possible explained everything if it is really want, but it's not interesting to play if you can't sell good players with discount without headache.

Anyway I hope i've found a part of the decision of the problem. I offered Walcott with 100% wage contribution and finally a lot of clubs want to buy him for 15m. But it doesn't work with Ramsey, still looking for decision. And why that clubs couldn't gave me a counter offer with that clause (100% wage contribution ) ? Instead i should like a monkey tryes different buttons and see results 

Can i beg some part of my staff with tasks to sell players, who are in the transfer list and my stuff find a way how to sell them. How i've found with Walcott ?

[Maaka]

I wouldn't advise that you sell a player while at the same time retaining 100% of his wage. You're selling him for 15 million (GBP?), how much i his salary per week? I believe roughly 150k (GBP), so if you're contributing 100% of his wage for a two year contract, then the 15 mill you got for him has gone back to pay for his wages. Every single penny, you're left with absolutely nothing.

For the second part, yes, you can delegate this task to a member of the staff (ideally, since you're Arsenal, you may have retained Wenger as a DoF, then you can task him with getting rid of the players you don't want to keep at the club.)

[vozzon]

4 hours ago, Wad1923 said:

Theo Walcott from Arsenal.

the same situation with Aaren Ramsey 

i had that issue with Walcott when i started my arsenal save. Was worth 57 mill (all figures australian dollars) was about to sell him for 25 mill but he would accept newcastles offer. Kept him and he played really well and sold him later in the year for 65 mill.

All depends on timing and form, which also happened in previous years, just hard to sell players at the beginning of a save. 

 

 

[JordanMilly]

6 hours ago, Maaka said:

I wouldn't advise that you sell a player while at the same time retaining 100% of his wage. You're selling him for 15 million (GBP?), how much i his salary per week? I believe roughly 150k (GBP), so if you're contributing 100% of his wage for a two year contract, then the 15 mill you got for him has gone back to pay for his wages. Every single penny, you're left with absolutely nothing.

For the second part, yes, you can delegate this task to a member of the staff (ideally, since you're Arsenal, you may have retained Wenger as a DoF, then you can task him with getting rid of the players you don't want to keep at the club.)

I believe the wage contribution only lasts for one year. That seemed to be the case with FM17.

[Maaka]

1 hour ago, JordanMillward_1 said:

I believe the wage contribution only lasts for one year. That seemed to be the case with FM17.

Ok, if so, then roughly half of the transfer fee (in this case) will be spent on retaining the salary, so effectively, he's sold for £7,5m.. Still not a very good deal.

[yezzko]

5 hours ago, JordanMillward_1 said:

I believe the wage contribution only lasts for one year. That seemed to be the case with FM17.

As far as i know the wage contribution lasts until his current contract ends or until his contract at new club ends, whichever comes first.

[Maaka]

48 minutes ago, yezzko said:

As far as i know the wage contribution lasts until his current contract ends or until his contract at new club ends, whichever comes first.

If so, then in the above example, he's pretty much on the losing side of the deal..

[Wad1923]

13 hours ago, Maaka said:

then you can task him with getting rid of the players you don't want to keep at the club.

Oh really. Could you please show screenshot ? I can't find that option 

 

1 hour ago, yezzko said:

As far as i know the wage contribution lasts until his current contract ends or until his contract at new club ends, whichever comes first.

yes thats right. You pay his wage for duration of his current contract.

I am in 1 July 2018. Walcott' contract expires 30.06.19. So 12 mothes for 681 000 euro = 8 172 000 euro. And clubs ready to buy him for 15 000 000 euro, So transfer costs near 7 000 000 euro. But nobody whanted him for 10 000 000 euro and then for 0 euro ??? It's Bug of that game. 

And it's very serious bug. Becaurse it's imposibale in real life such situation. Eaven Costa was sold  to Atletico Madrid for 50m. And i have a good player who is valued 30m euro who played almost every game in the last season and have good statistic I can't sell easy even with discount. 

[Wad1923]

11 hours ago, vozzon said:

i had that issue with Walcott when i started my arsenal save. Was worth 57 mill (all figures australian dollars) was about to sell him for 25 mill but he would accept newcastles offer. Kept him and he played really well and sold him later in the year for 65 mill.

All depends on timing and form, which also happened in previous years, just hard to sell players at the beginning of a save. 

 

 

when you sold him ? date ?

[Maaka]

1 hour ago, Wad1923 said:

Oh really. Could you please show screenshot ? I can't find that option 

 

Sorry, not at home, so not now, but there's a dropdown menu under "Staff" (IIRC) where you have "responsibilities" (or something similar), from there you can delegate most tasks, traning, scouting, transfers etc.

1 hour ago, Wad1923 said:

I am in 1 July 2018. Walcott' contract expires 30.06.19. So 12 mothes for 681 000 euro = 8 172 000 euro. And clubs ready to buy him for 15 000 000 euro, So transfer costs near 7 000 000 euro. But nobody whanted him for 10 000 000 euro and then for 0 euro ??? It's Bug of that game. 

And it's very serious bug. Becaurse it's imposibale in real life such situation. Eaven Costa was sold  to Atletico Madrid for 50m. And i have a good player who is valued 30m euro who played almost every game in the last season and have good statistic I can't sell easy even with discount. 

No, it's not a "bug". You have a player you don't want, so you're offering him to other clubs. As stated earlier, those clubs who probably can afford his wages, don't see him as a good enough player to spend a lot of money on (wages), so you're losing some potential buyers on that part. For those who would deem him an upgrade on their current squads, most of those will look at his wages as of now, and in many cases will see that he will probably be to expensive for them to acquire, and there you've lost other potential buyers. Still some will refuse to make an offer because they simply don't believe he's willing to join a club of a lesser stature that what he's at now, a club challenging for top positions and playing regularly in continental tournaments, in contrast to mid table clubs, with the occational odd cup run.

So, there you pretty much have it, he's either not good enough, too expensive, or not willing to take a step down, in the eyes of the potential buyers, hence they're not making any offers.

Of course you might still get the odd transfer offer, and then it's your job to negotiate that offer to what suits you and your club, but high earning squad players at Arsenal will always be hard to sell (just look at what it has been IRL the last few years, lots of players have had to see their contracts expire before leaving, or they've left on loan, see the likes of Bendtner, Fabianski and Park.)

[Cougar2010]

1 hour ago, Wad1923 said:

And it's very serious bug. Becaurse it's imposibale in real life such situation. Eaven Costa was sold  to Atletico Madrid for 50m. And i have a good player who is valued 30m euro who played almost every game in the last season and have good statistic I can't sell easy even with discount. 

How long did it take for the Costa transfer?  It lasted over two transfer windows and it won't be registered & completed until the third window which is approx one year.

Its been explained why its not a bug, its the way you communicate with the game.  If you want to sell a player like Walcott/Ramsey you either need a bigger club who wants them or you need to make it known you don't want them and wait for them to accept that they have to move on if they want to play.

 

[Wad1923]

1 hour ago, Cougar2010 said:

How long did it take for the Costa transfer?  It lasted over two transfer windows and it won't be registered & completed until the third window which is approx one year.

Its been explained why its not a bug, its the way you communicate with the game.  If you want to sell a player like Walcott/Ramsey you either need a bigger club who wants them or you need to make it known you don't want them and wait for them to accept that they have to move on if they want to play.

 

Just because Costa wants only Atletico and Atletico was banned transfers until 2018. That is why so long.

Clubs like Newcastle or Middlesbrough... Sevilia, Atletico, Porto.... a lot of Chinese clubs, Turkish clubs can allowed to buy such players and would buy Walcott/Ramsey in real life. For instance as Robin van Persie 

its impossible that Star players are hard to sell. Can you give any example in real life ?

 

1 hour ago, Maaka said:

Of course you might still get the odd transfer offer, and then it's your job to negotiate that offer to what suits you and your club, but high earning squad players at Arsenal will always be hard to sell (just look at what it has been IRL the last few years, lots of players have had to see their contracts expire before leaving, or they've left on loan, see the likes of Bendtner, Fabianski and Park.)

But you are talking about players who had problems with play time and had bad statistics for the last season . In my game Walcott is top assist  in season 2017 in League

[Cougar2010]

1 minute ago, Wad1923 said:

Just because Costa wants only Atletico and Atletico was banned transfers until 2018. That is why so long.

Clubs like Newcastle or Middlesbrough... Sevilia, Atletico, Porto.... a lot of Chinese clubs, Turkish clubs can allowed to buy such players and would buy Walcott/Ramsey in real life. For instance as Robin van Persie 

its impossible that Star players are hard to sell. Can you give any example in real life ?

But the player has to want to move.

Players have a legal binding contract with the club, just because you want rid of them doesn't mean they'll leave, thats real life.

Look at Daniel Sturridge at the moment, he has struggled to get back in the team after injury and there are little snippets starting to come out that he has accepted that he may have to move to get regular football.

Basically though its been explained to you and you aren't making an effort to understand why so we are really just wasting our time at this point.

The game isn't going to change so your approach has to else you'll continue to have the same issues.

[Wad1923]

12 minutes ago, Cougar2010 said:

But the player has to want to move.

Players have a legal binding contract with the club, just because you want rid of them doesn't mean they'll leave, thats real life.

Look at Daniel Sturridge at the moment, he has struggled to get back in the team after injury and there are little snippets starting to come out that he has accepted that he may have to move to get regular football.

Basically though its been explained to you and you aren't making an effort to understand why so we are really just wasting our time at this point.

The game isn't going to change so your approach has to else you'll continue to have the same issues.

I want to stress the problem of that game.

Player is valued very high - 40m but nobody wants him for 10m. In real life it's impossible.

If player doesn't want to leave a club, such situations shows in the game but not in my case. I saw situations when transfer was  agreed but Player says no. 

So it's obviously the game has to show less value of players or should be a lot offers to buy from clubs. when asking price 3 times less

[puffascruffowitz]

I had to offload Walcott for I think 12 million and agree to pay half his wages for the remainder of his contract. The fact of the matter is those high wage/average players who aren't needed won't be easy to move.

Having said that I recently was messing around with a City save trying to "ruin" them. I offered out all the first team players for 1K and 100% of wages paid. There were 4 or 5 players with no bids! I think John Stones, Kyle Walker, and a couple of others. That to me makes no sense. Most players I had offers instantly after that, but not for them. That kind of goes against the logic that it's their wages.

I could see KIND OF that maybe clubs know they won't want to join so don't even bother, but I find that hard to believe. What's the explanation in those scenarios (nevermind how unrealistic they are)

 

[Cougar2010]

9 minutes ago, puffascruffowitz said:

I had to offload Walcott for I think 12 million and agree to pay half his wages for the remainder of his contract. The fact of the matter is those high wage/average players who aren't needed won't be easy to move.

Having said that I recently was messing around with a City save trying to "ruin" them. I offered out all the first team players for 1K and 100% of wages paid. There were 4 or 5 players with no bids! I think John Stones, Kyle Walker, and a couple of others. That to me makes no sense. Most players I had offers instantly after that, but not for them. That kind of goes against the logic that it's their wages.

I could see KIND OF that maybe clubs know they won't want to join so don't even bother, but I find that hard to believe. What's the explanation in those scenarios (nevermind how unrealistic they are)

Well first of all as you've pointed its an unrealistic situation because it simply wouldn't happen IRL. 

With that in mind you shouldn't expect that SI has coded the system to deal with that type of unrealistic situation effectively.  So the system is basically making the best it can of the unrealistic situation.  Why would nobody take those players? Could be a number of things, players not wanting to leave, players not wanting to join the clubs that would be interested in them, other clubs not needing players in thsoe positions etc.

While I'm only guessing there its worth noting that if you upload your save and ask SI to look at it they can look under the hood and give you a more detailed answer including teams that were interested in those but chose not to make offers (Inc the reason why).

 

[Wad1923]

3 minutes ago, Cougar2010 said:

Why would nobody take those players? Could be a number of things, players not wanting to leave, players not wanting to join the clubs that would be interested in them, other clubs not needing players in thsoe positions etc.

No you again wrong.  That kind of situation you can see it in the game. "agent has indicated that his client has rejected the contract offer from..." or player doesn't want to change club now
But more often just "no clubs consides a deal for ..." 
If it was how you say and instead of that phrase i could see something from "a number of things ..." that was be great. I could understand why.

Now it looks stupied.

20 minutes ago, Cougar2010 said:

upload your save and ask SI to look at it they can look under the hood and give you a more detailed answer including teams that were interested in those but chose not to make offers (Inc the reason why).

that great idea

[Cougar2010]

Just now, Wad1923 said:

No you again wrong.  That kind of situation you can see it in the game. "agent has indicated that his client has rejected the contract offer from..." or player doesn't want to change club now
But more often just "no clubs consides a deal for ..." 
If it was how you say and instead of that phrase i could see something from "a number of things ..." that was be great. I could understand why.

No you can't see it in game.

These are decisions made by AI managers prior to making an offer.  If they scout a player and their scout tells them that the player isn't interested in joining they won't make an offer.

The situations you have listed above are where a player might be interested but the player & club can't come to an agreement.

[Maaka]

2 hours ago, Wad1923 said:

Just because Costa wants only Atletico and Atletico was banned transfers until 2018. That is why so long.

Clubs like Newcastle or Middlesbrough... Sevilia, Atletico, Porto.... a lot of Chinese clubs, Turkish clubs can allowed to buy such players and would buy Walcott/Ramsey in real life. For instance as Robin van Persie 

its impossible that Star players are hard to sell. Can you give any example in real life ?

 

But you are talking about players who had problems with play time and had bad statistics for the last season . In my game Walcott is top assist  in season 2017 in League

My point was that players on high salaries are hard to sell.

I'm sorry, but you have to acknowledge the fact that, like in real life, players playing for big clubs (even though they're not necessarily playing every week) are not very likely to take a step down combined with the same (or even lower) wages. Your RvP example is of a player who's past his peak, and had been more or less constantly injured for two years. Such a player is more likely to take that step down, either to resurge his career, or to cash in on the last few seasons he's got. And I'm pretty sure that Fenerbahce pays him considerably less than Man Utd did.
So if I was to put that situation into FM, then the AI manager of Fener had scouted RvP, found that he'd probably be available for less than his market value, and probably willing to take a drop in wages in order to get first team football, so he made a bid.
To the contrary, I reckon that the AI managers contemplating a bid for Walcott has scouted him, and found that he either wouldn't be willing to take that step down, and/or accept a wage reduction, so they simply do not bid for him. It's quite simple, actually. (As stated before, he also lacks the quality to be considered a transfer option for clubs like Man Utd, Man City, Chelsea etc.)

[puffascruffowitz]

4 hours ago, Cougar2010 said:

Well first of all as you've pointed its an unrealistic situation because it simply wouldn't happen IRL. 

With that in mind you shouldn't expect that SI has coded the system to deal with that type of unrealistic situation effectively.  So the system is basically making the best it can of the unrealistic situation.  Why would nobody take those players? Could be a number of things, players not wanting to leave, players not wanting to join the clubs that would be interested in them, other clubs not needing players in thsoe positions etc.

While I'm only guessing there its worth noting that if you upload your save and ask SI to look at it they can look under the hood and give you a more detailed answer including teams that were interested in those but chose not to make offers (Inc the reason why).

 

I just found it interesting, I do understand when selling players it will be very difficult and I don't particularly mind it. That save I was messing with City my intention wasn't to find out about selling players it was just a goof.

[Spurs08]

2 hours ago, puffascruffowitz said:

I just found it interesting, I do understand when selling players it will be very difficult and I don't particularly mind it. That save I was messing with City my intention wasn't to find out about selling players it was just a goof.

I'd say it's almost certainly that the players don't want to move to any of the clubs that are interested in them. Remember that especially at the start the big clubs tend to have pretty balanced squads - if they have a player better than the one you're offering in the same position, they know that the loan player won't play much and could become disruptive to the dressing room. Meanwhile, the players won't want to hurt their careers by moving to smaller clubs. Particularly Walker and other new signings are less likely to accept moves.

[stoned_assasin]

To me its silly all round, why would anyone offer out a guy for 0 and pay all his wages unless he was (unhappy and causing issues in the changing room at worst) but on the other hand why wouldn't any big club take a great player risk free. I mean they could just buy him and sell him later even if they didn't want him as they arent paying a penny for him (fee or wage wise). There is some reasons that spring to mind why clubs wouldn't bother to make an offer but at the end of the day a bargain is a bargain and these bargains would be stupid to pass up upon.

 

Kinda like someone offering you a top of the range car for free even insurance and fuel payed but you turn it down because you already have a similar car.

[forameuss]

9 minutes ago, stoned_assasin said:

To me its silly all round, why would anyone offer out a guy for 0 and pay all his wages unless he was (unhappy and causing issues in the changing room at worst) but on the other hand why wouldn't any big club take a great player risk free. I mean they could just buy him and sell him later even if they didn't want him as they arent paying a penny for him (fee or wage wise). There is some reasons that spring to mind why clubs wouldn't bother to make an offer but at the end of the day a bargain is a bargain and these bargains would be stupid to pass up upon.

 

Kinda like someone offering you a top of the range car for free even insurance and fuel payed but you turn it down because you already have a similar car.

But in those situations it's taking the game down a nonsensical route that it probably can't cope with.  You can argue that the user should be allowed to do whatever they want, even if it is stupid, but I doubt it's consciously coded against, just not something that's handled.  The AI already suffers from a complete lack of context, so it's going to struggle with this.

[stoned_assasin]

1 minute ago, forameuss said:

But in those situations it's taking the game down a nonsensical route that it probably can't cope with.  You can argue that the user should be allowed to do whatever they want, even if it is stupid, but I doubt it's consciously coded against, just not something that's handled.  The AI already suffers from a complete lack of context, so it's going to struggle with this.

Yea its nothing that bothers me tbh because the user shouldn't be doing it in the 1st place.

[Maaka]

And if you're at first at it to actively destroy a team like that, then you can just as well use the editor to transfer players anyway.

[coxy100]

1 hour ago, forameuss said:

But in those situations it's taking the game down a nonsensical route that it probably can't cope with.  You can argue that the user should be allowed to do whatever they want, even if it is stupid, but I doubt it's consciously coded against, just not something that's handled.  The AI already suffers from a complete lack of context, so it's going to struggle with this.

Can't agree with this mate.  The AI should not be struggling with being offered a player (e.g. John Stones) for £1000 and all of his wages being paid for.  For example Real Madrid could come in and buy him - and it's a step up in club value so Stones would take it.  

It's not realistic when players don't get offers from clubs in those situations (however daft the situation is).

[forameuss]

Just now, coxy100 said:

Can't agree with this mate.  The AI should not be struggling with being offered a player (e.g. John Stones) for £1000 and all of his wages being paid for.  For example Real Madrid could come in and buy him - and it's a step up in club value so Stones would take it.  

It's not realistic when players don't get offers from clubs in those situations (however daft the situation is).

Well, they do.

Like I said, the AI struggles with context in all aspects of the game, and always has.  They don't want the player, so they're not going to accept even a ridiculous offer that would - and I know this is said a lot, but I'm confident it actually applies here - never happen in real life.  

The question then becomes, should they be coding to make this something the AI reacts to?  Should they be allowing the AI to take advantage of the human user doing something so stupid and backward?  Or should they use their limited development time to code forward, rather than backward?  Rhetorical question of course, and responses would vary depending on your viewpoint.

[Cougar2010]

3 minutes ago, coxy100 said:

Can't agree with this mate.  The AI should not be struggling with being offered a player (e.g. John Stones) for £1000 and all of his wages being paid for.  For example Real Madrid could come in and buy him - and it's a step up in club value so Stones would take it.  

It's not realistic when players don't get offers from clubs in those situations (however daft the situation is).

But Real Madrid don't need him because they have enough players in his position of equal or better quality.

You also don't know if Stones would accept a move abroad in game.

The AI isn't coded to make money, its coded to build & improve a squad.  We all know its not perfect but there is reasoning behind it.

If the save game was uploaded for SI to look at they could give a detailed breakdown of why teams weren't interested as they have done before for other users.

Personally though if you want it coded so that the unrealistic situation doesn't happen I would rather see the board block the manager from offering the player for that sort of money.

[sporadicsmiles]

Firstly, OP, you cannot complain about bugs when you are giving the game nonsensical inputs. The game is coded to deal with standard inputs, which are found in every day life. If you give it nonsense inputs, you will get nonsense as an output. That is how coding works. You cannot possibly code to deal with every bizarre thing a user may want to do. Offering a player for no money and paying all their wages is a nonsense input, which the AI will not be able to respond to in the manner you think it should.

As many people have noted, it is not straightforward to get rid of guys on huge wages (just as it is not in real life). I have an aging but still good Lewandowski playing for my B side and collecting 300k/month wages because I simply cannot find a buyer for him. He is not a valid option for top sides due to his age (the same as he is not a valid option for my own side), and other sides who may be interested will  never be able to afford his wages. I have to just let his contract run down. I also had Guedes on the transfer list for an entire year before somebody came in with an offer, for similar reasons. It is one of those things that happens both in real life and in the game. Your examples are clearly of this sort. Ramsey and Walcott are not going to improve any side of similar stature to Arsenal, and are going to be too expensive for smaller sides, and probably not interested in joining. Or rather, they would join for a pay increase (which they are clearly not going to get).

I will also note that as a player, I would do the same as the AI here. I might have a look to check if I am interested, but chances are I would baulk at their wages and figure that my money is better spent elsewhere - there are going to be cheaper, younger options than Ramsey and Walcott available. I have turned down a number of high profile players in my current save on this basis. Indeed, I have only twice times signed players in this circumstance; Erikson from Spurs because I desperately needed experience and quality in midfield, and Sule from Man Utd for similar reasons in my defense. Otherwise, I do not want the cast offs of other sides. If they are not good enough for Arsenal, they are not good enough for me.

So if you are that dead set on getting rid of them may I suggest two things? The first would be to also offer them for loan, so you can at least get them partially off your wage budget. It is far more likely a team will be interested in a loan as it is a much smaller financial risk than a transfer. The second option would be to just retrain the players to get them to be able to play in your new style of play. I do this often with players who fall out of contention in a position due to better options being available. If I feel they can do a job elsewhere in my squad, I will retrain them to that position and give them a shot. An example would be a AMC/FC who was never going to get ahead of my main strikers, and was more an AMC than anything else, and I do not use AMCs. He was ineffective at CM, but I needed a CM and I felt he could do a job for me. So instead of selling him, I retrained him and he spent a year learning the position and playing for the reserves. He is now ready to become one of the key players in my squad. I took the time to train his PPMs as well, to mitigate some of his flaws. If you are stuck with players, make the most of them.

[vozzon]

On 11/20/2017 at 22:55, Wad1923 said:

when you sold him ? date ?

sold him start of the 2nd season. He was injured for 3 weeks at the end of the year so waited until he was fully fit. He had a really good year and won the premier league. 

[Nacaw]

It's gotten progressively harder to sell (good) players in the last few editions of FM. It makes sense from a human vs AI standpoint because it's one of the most obvious ways we can outplay the AI., For example, buying a player and knowing you will sell him next season for profit. The AI simply wouldn't do that, and no team would really do that IRL either, but it's been a common strategy used by players over the years.  That isn't really an explanation, but more of an "it's realistic, so let's embrace it" argument.

The main reason for this problem, as I see it in the FM 18 edition, is that the AI is now much better at spotting and playing NEWGENS. That creates less demand for current premiership players. 5 seasons into my current premiership save. Arsenal currently has 10 newgens in the first team squad, Chelsea 8, Liverpool 9, Man City 9, Man Utd 11, Spurs 12. Lower reputation clubs are not quite as high, but this behavior strongly mimics the way players build their squad, and means the AI is less likely to spend a bunch of cash on players of the Walcott ilk 

[fmonit]

On 20/11/2017 at 11:33, vozzon said:

i had that issue with Walcott when i started my arsenal save. Was worth 57 mill (all figures australian dollars) was about to sell him for 25 mill but he would accept newcastles offer. Kept him and he played really well and sold him later in the year for 65 mill.

All depends on timing and form, which also happened in previous years, just hard to sell players at the beginning of a save. 

 

 

Very true. In my Southampton save, I bought a 28yo Croatian generated player for 24.5M (aud) as he was a bench warmer at Real Madrid. His value was 40M. Luckily I could just afford his wage demands. He played awesome in my squad and I was able to sell him for 70M to Spurs 2 seasons later! 

 

Bought a 21yo Russian as his successor with that money. 

Also brought in 36yo De Bruyne on a free for 1 season before he retired. Still had to pay 300k/week for him, but it was worth it! 

[upthetoon]

I think there is no bug in this. 

It' a problem, if for eg. Newcastle can't offload Ayoze perez or mitrovic.