Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community
santy001

Thoughts on player retirement

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, Seb Wassell said:

Once the game begins there is no difference between a newgen and a real player. If Aduriz can do it a similar newgen can too.

But a similar newgen struggles to, because the game typically usually takes more than a point off a player's pace every season in his thirties which means any newgen who (like Aduriz) was never quick to start off with has pace down in the mid single digits much earlier than 37. (And of course for match engine reasons a 37 year old who's slowly declined to 5 pace is even less useful in FM La Liga than real life La Liga)

The big difference is that players who mature before the start of the game generally don't see researchers reduce their pace at quite that rate unless and until they reach their terminal decline phase, which is often quite late in the careers of players with regular football and injury luck. I'd say the researcher who thinks 37 year old Aduriz is barely any slower than 29 year old Aduriz is probably getting it right...     

I suspect one of the big problems is that the game doesn't model body types whereas IRL some of the slow-striding players (including many who were never especially quick) barely get any slower at all until their body just goes, whilst players who rely on bursts of leg speed see it slowly erode even if they're fit and playing. I also don't think there's any real backward looking element in FM's retirement model that considers whether a player has already lost a lot of speed (and in doing so, probably changed their running style to something less likely to further stress the body). I think the universal gradual decline in FM is a bigger problem than players suddenly falling off cliffs, which definitely happens to most players before 39 and sometimes does happen to player in their early thirties. I'm fine with the game killing off the Giggs-esque freaks who make it to 39 with decent pace pretty quickly.

Goalkeepers dropping agility is a particular bugbear of mine as well (though I've never been sure whether it matters as much to their shot-stopping ability as it sounds) since it tends to start to decline before the age generally considered a keeper's prime and then go very quickly, whereas IRL they're drilled to stay sprightly into their late thirties (injuries and professionalism permitting). It's not immobility that retires keepers so much as longer and more painful recovery time after matches, eventual decline in all their reactions and an unwillingness to sit on the bench forever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 ore fa, Stubz ha scritto:

That's moving the goal posts of the OP and you're still basing it on perception not looking at stats to back you up.

 

There's nobody over 37 who has played in The Championship.

There's nobody over 39 who has played in League One.

And there is one player in League Two who is 40.

 

You've also been moving the goalposts by picking 40 as the sweet spot to prove FM's model of decline is realistic...

I'm perfectly aware of Totti and Giggs being very rare EXCEPTIONS, but my main concern is that NO newgen (ie. no players who didn't start as an old, but still top-quality) can ever achieve that because FM doesn't handle physical decline in a varied enough way.

As said, there are enough good-to-competent players in their mid-30s in real life, at various levels (from Quagliarella in Serie A to, say, a 41yo Frode Kippe in Norway) whereas in FM nobody has had a chance to still be relevant unless they were starting their decline from very high attributes (18-20).

2 ore fa, Stubz ha scritto:

SI have it bang on with "39 being a death sentence"

39 may work as far as top leagues go. But what about 37 at a lower level?

In FM, the lower you get, the earlier and deadlier the decline is... A quick top winger can hold his own into his early-mid 30s by virtue of his downfall starting from a rather high point, while an average League One-level player will be completely done for by his 33rd birthday if his peak attributes were like 12 or 13 with a two-digits CA...

On the other hand, real-life is more forgiving the lower you go down the pyramid and the nations ranking...

A 37yo EPL players must still be a beast to keep his spot. A 37yo player in a third-tier league or nation can still be valuable to his side despite questionable physical shape and all the mobility of a sleepy sloth.

2 ore fa, Seb Wassell ha scritto:

For example, the assumption that older players are hampered in game by their low pace is an ME question rather than Progression.

It's a two-fold problem...

Research isn't my main concern here, but I just used Pirlo and Xavi as terms of comparison. How many newgen CM with 10 Acc/Pace at 32 or 33 could still be viable choices for a top club two years down the line with the current progression model and in the current ME?

8 ore fa, Seb Wassell ha scritto:

Once the game begins there is no difference between a newgen and a real player. If Aduriz can do it a similar newgen can too.


My point is that there probably CAN'T be a player like Aduriz at 37 who has been generated by the gameworld...

Aduriz was never a top player, so his stats at his PEAK were never high enough to allow his decline to leave him at 37 as a decent Top-Level striker.

His newgen counterpart'd have started to decline around 32, with 34 as his latest "sell by" date.

Edited by RBKalle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, RBKalle said:

 

You've also been moving the goalposts by picking 40 as the sweet spot to prove FM's model of decline is realistic...

No i haven't I've been addressing the OP which said "39 seems like a death sentence" and is about his 39 year old player retiring. and The OP was talking about PL football.

And I listed the over 38s, 36s  and over 34s. There's 16 players over 34 who have played PL football this season. I think that's a pretty conclusive stat that 34-39 retirement is highly likely, if not a certainty for every player in the league.

 

And I searched the European completions to check for players at small but successful European clubs. Same trends.

 

Until someone provides evidence supporting that the game is unrealistic in its treatment of older players (including real life vs an explored save, not just guesses and confirmation bias) I don't need to say anything else, all the actual evidence and not presumptions are in my posts, all I see in others is wannabe know-it-alls thinking their human memory and presumptions are worth more than SIs 20 years of research and my 10 minutes of fact checking.

 

And what about lower league football? he didn't ask about lower league football, and I provided stats for that too. You haven't  provided anything to dispute the games version of events just what your perceptions of world football are. Have you got a lower league save to show us that players don't go above 32? Have you looked at any stats? Or are you just strawmaning me?

 

The problem here is you all have fuzzy memories and warm nostalgia hugs from 15-20 years ago and things have changed.

 

You keep saying "In real life" when what you mean is "in my opinion" Reply with facts and evidence or why even bother.

 

Edited by Stubz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, enigmatic said:

But a similar newgen struggles to, because the game typically usually takes more than a point off a player's pace every season in his thirties which means any newgen who (like Aduriz) was never quick to start off with has pace down in the mid single digits much earlier than 37. (And of course for match engine reasons a 37 year old who's slowly declined to 5 pace is even less useful in FM La Liga than real life La Liga)

The big difference is that players who mature before the start of the game generally don't see researchers reduce their pace at quite that rate unless and until they reach their terminal decline phase, which is often quite late in the careers of players with regular football and injury luck. I'd say the researcher who thinks 37 year old Aduriz is barely any slower than 29 year old Aduriz is probably getting it right...     

I suspect one of the big problems is that the game doesn't model body types whereas IRL some of the slow-striding players (including many who were never especially quick) barely get any slower at all until their body just goes, whilst players who rely on bursts of leg speed see it slowly erode even if they're fit and playing. I also don't think there's any real backward looking element in FM's retirement model that considers whether a player has already lost a lot of speed (and in doing so, probably changed their running style to something less likely to further stress the body). I think the universal gradual decline in FM is a bigger problem than players suddenly falling off cliffs, which definitely happens to most players before 39 and sometimes does happen to player in their early thirties. I'm fine with the game killing off the Giggs-esque freaks who make it to 39 with decent pace pretty quickly.

Goalkeepers dropping agility is a particular bugbear of mine as well (though I've never been sure whether it matters as much to their shot-stopping ability as it sounds) since it tends to start to decline before the age generally considered a keeper's prime and then go very quickly, whereas IRL they're drilled to stay sprightly into their late thirties (injuries and professionalism permitting). It's not immobility that retires keepers so much as longer and more painful recovery time after matches, eventual decline in all their reactions and an unwillingness to sit on the bench forever.

 

I used Fabergas after his pace and physical stats died and got 6 or 7 out of 10 performances from him, its about role and roles exist to limit movement. Enganche for Fabregas. Cover roles for defenders.

 

And the attribute scores are relative to others. A GK might still be sprightly for his age but "declining".  He's not a 20 anymore because that leaves no room for someone to be better than him, which they surly will be. No 35 year Goalkeeper is as agile as a 25 year old. It defies biology.


And if all 32+ players are apparently suffering from this decline they still have relative stats to each other. So when 30+ year olds suffer that drop and they have 10 pace so did the 30+ defender they are up against. And their stats are declining relative to when the mid 20 year old peaks. You;re looking at individuals not the big picture. You're over simplifying an incredible complex balancing act.

 

"It's not immobility that retires keepers so much as longer and more painful recovery time after matches, eventual decline in all their reactions and an unwillingness to sit on the bench forever"

 

This is the problem with everyone in this comment thread, assumptions based on your own opinion. You can't know that and it sound like complete rubbish to me and to Petr Cech I would think.

Edited by Stubz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Stubz said:

I used Fabergas after his pace and physical stats died and got 6 or 7 out of 10 performances from him, its about role and roles exist to limit movement. Enchange for Fabregas. Cover roles for defenders.

Sure, I could probably use an ageing Fabregas in a top tier if I didn't have alternatives that could run and pass and maybe wasn't playing the best of opponents. I'm getting silly goals from a Peruvian Aduriz at the moment (unlike Aduriz his pace died, but I don't have alternatives and I dominate the rest of the game enough to put enough crosses in for a slow and talented poacher) and sometimes sub on other virtually immobile veterans because they can theoretically pass better than my first teamers. I wouldn't touch a slow defender but that's more about my formations than anything else. But in general slow players will underperform and fast players will overperform in the FM match engine; that's not the purpose of this thread but it's pretty obvious to anyone that's ever played the game.

 

13 hours ago, Stubz said:

And the attribute scores are relative to others. A GK might still be sprightly for his age but "declining".  He's not a 20 anymore because that leaves no room fore someone to be better than him, which they surly will be.

Attributes scored being relative to others is actually my issue with the agility declines for keepers (again, I have a solidly-performing 35 year old keeper with an agility of 6 in my "youth challenge", albeit not one facing too much penalty area pressue). What you end up with in FM is 35 year old keepers whose stats (in theory, at least) describe world class reflexes and the turning circle of a truck. What you actually tend to see in real life is late 30s old keepers who don't have the slightest problem turning in tighter circles than a teenage midfielder, but are just very slightly worse at it than when they were 25, just like their reflexes are very slightly slower (enough alone to be dropped from a top team) and if they've been benched or have minor vision issues creeping in then the handling/concentration/aerial abilities will also be a little down.

I don't expect my goalkeepers to have an agility of 20 (don't think I've ever had one that did) but I do expect them not to have agility drop from 14 to 6 whilst playing regularly in what is generally considered the prime years for professional goalkeepers.

 

13 hours ago, Stubz said:

No 35 year Goalkeeper is as agile as a 25 year old. It defies biology.

I think a Buffon or Cech or even Speroni would comfortably beat the average lower-level 25 year old in most tests of agility (unlike FM where they naturally decline to single digits). Recovery times might be a different matter...

 

13 hours ago, Stubz said:

And if all 32+ players are apparently suffering from this decline they still have relative stats to each other. So when 30+ year olds suffer that drop and they have 10 pace so did the 30+ defender they are up against. 

Unless you're managing a veteran's league, this is nonsense. When a 30 year old regular who has spent his career making languid strides around the pitch at 10 pace takes the same annual hit to his speed as a 32 year old sprinter with a knee injury and as a result ends up basically immobile, he's playing against teams of players mostly in their twenties, and suddenly he can't get near them despite supposedly being more intelligent. This actually happens to some slow-ish 30 year olds, but definitely not all of them.

 

13 hours ago, Stubz said:

This is the problem with everyone in this comment thread, assumptions based on your own opinion. You can't know that and it sound like complete rubbish to me and to Petr Cech I would think.

I suspect Petr Cech would agree with me that the reason he is retiring is much more "little bit worse at everything he used to be world class at, and training sessions hurt more" than the FM decline model's "better reflexes than at his peak but the turning circle of a fat guy in the Conference" approach to mid-30s keepers. (But we can't know that, it's just clearly the only completely uninformed opinion you value is your own.)

Edited by enigmatic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Stubz said:

No i haven't I've been addressing the OP which said "39 seems like a death sentence" and is about his 39 year old player retiring. and The OP was talking about PL football.

I feel like I need to point out you haven't actually addressed my points at all. Furthermore, you're misrepresenting my point at times. You're conflating the point about retirement in general (which I praised the way in which FM moves on players broadly speaking) and very rare circumstances in which players can find themselves still performing at the highest level well beyond an age they ought to be based on the norms in football.

I made a lengthy post in post 50 which I tagged you in to try and make it something you could perhaps address better but in summary:

- Players signing contracts they won't honour (Which turned out to be a bug and is under review)

- Players deciding their retirement while still performing at the highest level (this doesn't mean playing, it means performing in terms of goals, assists and average ratings)

- Player retirement feeling very unsatisfactory in the way in which it comes about

- - -

In many cases player decisions in the game are driven by certain metrics. For example, a conversation about a lack of playing time is triggered by metric of starts & played minutes. There's variance based on personality attributes and squad status so its not a universal truth like retiring by age 39. While a player can realise he's lost pace, a player shouldn't be aware his CA has dropped from 150 to 130 or whatever it may be. So my argument very much if you strip out the immersive, in the game at the moment element is that to me it feels like retirement should be sync'd with the rest of the games mechanisms that trigger player decisions.

- - -

Ultimately though it has to be said your point about the lack of players of this age currently playing is an irrelevance because by its very nature its such an unlikely thing to happen. Yet, from time to time, rarely it does happen. I have further reinforced and altered my point over the course of the thread as I was able to get more insight from the likes of Seb, even stating quite clearly that the ultimate end product - Aduriz retiring during that season was the right decision. But it was the right decision for the wrong reasons, which is not a good way for it to be reflected in game. It lacks accuracy and authenticity. I've been pretty open about the fact that while I feel there should be some way for the extremely rare, edge case scenario players to carry on that the big element that truly could do with addressing is just how retirement comes about for players. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 ore fa, Stubz ha scritto:

No i haven't I've been addressing the OP which said "39 seems like a death sentence" and is about his 39 year old player retiring. and The OP was talking about PL football.

The OP simply pointed out that a still very competitive 39yo striker was forced to retire despite him still being able to perform at a high level.

And 39 may be an adequate death sentence for 99% of players at top level, but it's not far-fetched to say that the sentence in FM comes much earlier for newgen players who don't have the "advantage" of starting in the game in their early 30s much "healthier" than any FM-generated counterpart could ever get.

 

2 ore fa, Stubz ha scritto:

And I listed the over 38s, 36s  and over 34s. There's 16 players over 34 who have played PL football this season. I think that's a pretty conclusive stat that 34-39 retirement is highly likely, if not a certainty for every player in the league.

Again: EPL is NOT the be-all-end-all of football... despite what the English media have kept on pushing for years.

 

2 ore fa, Stubz ha scritto:

And I searched the European completions to check for players at small but successful European clubs. Same trends.

I'll come up with some datas myself because I don't think you've searched deep enough. Not with the "if it's not EPL = retirement" logic.

 

2 ore fa, Stubz ha scritto:

Until someone provides evidence supporting that the game is unrealistic in its treatment of older players (including real life vs an explored save, not just guesses and confirmation bias) I don't need to say anything else, all the actual evidence and not presumptions are in my posts, all I see in others is wannabe know-it-alls thinking their human memory and presumptions are worth more than SIs 20 years of research and my 10 minutes of fact checking.

What evidence, pal?

The fact that rich and spoiled EPL clubs can afford to get rid of 33yo who are "too old" or "too slow" or simply "not fancy anymore" for the coolest league on Earth doesn't mean there's no room for aging players...

Or is one Cristiano Ronaldo a pathetic has-been ready to hang up his boots?

 

2 ore fa, Stubz ha scritto:

And what about lower league football? he didn't ask about lower league football, and I provided stats for that too. You haven't  provided anything to dispute the games version of events just what your perceptions of world football are. Have you got a lower league save to show us that players don't go above 32? Have you looked at any stats? Or are you just strawmaning me?

The problem here is you all have fuzzy memories and warm nostalgia hugs from 15-20 years ago and things have changed.

You keep saying "In real life" when what you mean is "in my opinion" Reply with facts and evidence or why even bother.

 

So much attitude for such little data...

Again, turn Sky off and understand there's life beyond (and below) the shiny lights of the Premier League...

Our memory may be fuzzy and warm, but your cold approach hasn't brought much more to the table either besides "oh well, if EPL clubs keep on selling or releasing their old players, FM is right to cut the legs out from under almost every player in FM around age 32-33".

Who's the strawman here?

For the Nth time (before I'll come up with some data, although I'm getting tired of running soak tests and test runs in a game I've purchased to enjoy, not to beta-test): in FM, most newgens don't have the chance to ever reach their EPL expiration date compared to real life.
Which is why some EPL rejects can keep on playing in real life, whereas in FM they usually retire

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Serie A: 60 players 34 or older (14 GK)

< 1980: 2 (1 GK)
1980: 1
1981: 6 (1 GK)
1982: 7 (2 GK)
1983: 12 (5 GK)
1984: 15 (1 GK)
1985: 17 (4 GK)

(Serie B: 41 players, 9 GK. Serie C 110)


Ligue 1: 32 players (5 GK)

< 1980: 2 (1 GK)
1980: 1
1981: 0
1982: 5 (1 GK)
1983: 9 (2 GK)
1984: 3
1985: 12 (1 GK)

 

Bundesliga: 30 players (9 GK)

< 1980: 2 (1 GK)
1980: 0
1981: 0
1982: 1
1983: 5 (2 GK)
1984: 8 (3 GK)
1985: 14 (3 GK)

 

Premier League: 34 (14 GK)

< 1980: 1 GK
1980: 3 (2 GK)
1981: 3 (2 GK)
1982: 3 (2 GK)
1983: 6 (4 GK)
1984: 6 (2 GK)
1985: 12 (1 GK)

 

Championship: 58 players (17 GK)

< 1980: 1 GK
1980: 1
1981: 2
1982: 6 (3 GK)
1983: 8 (1 GK)
1984: 19 (6 GK)
1985: 21 (6 GK)

League One: 38 players, 4 GK
League Two: 65 players, 12 GK

La Liga: 33 players (8 GK)

< 1980: 0
1980: 1
1981: 6 (2 GK)
1982: 2
1983: 3 (1 GK)
1984: 10 (3 GK)
1985: 11 (2 GK)

 

Russia 39 players (7 GK)
Portugal 31 players (7 GK)
Belgium 25 players (6 GK)
Ukraine 14 players (3 GK)
Turkey 49 players (9 GK)
Netherlands 18 players (7 GK)
Austria 13 players (3 GK)
Greece 25 players (3 GK)
Denmark 17 players (2 GK)
Switzerland 18 players (6 GK)

 

Soooo... I guess our data kind differ a bit... Looks like there are more 35 year olders alive and kicking around Europe's top leagues (unsurprisingly, second-tier nations tend to be more "selling nations", with notable exceptions in Russia and Turkey, where they love their old geezers).

Now all I need is a FM19 save some years into the future to see how many newgens are still useful at a top level in their mid-30s... Wanna bet they'll be fewer and all coming down from high CA and PA, unlike say, good old Sergio Pellissier or Hilton...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's keep it constructive guys. The aim here isn't to prove me/SI or any other member of the forum right or wrong, it's simply to discuss a perceived issue and work out if there is something there for us to investigate that will consequently improve the game. It then comes down to us/me to make the call on how to approach any issue with regards to the overall balance of the system.

There are some examples of players that might not be recreated by our model and that is certainly something we are aware of. However, and this is the most important part for me, these are the overwhelming minority. To satisfy this 1% we risk unbalancing the other 99%. I'm reminded of a bug we had previously where some players simply would not retire, we had a Frank Lampard playing into his 90s and various other players defying their age. For me that is a much bigger issue than newgen X not making it to 38.

We tweak both progression and decline constantly, with the goal of recreating reality perfectly. I hope you'd agree that over the past couple of versions the early stages of a player's development have improved massively, but this must be done in baby steps to ensure that the overall balance is maintained. With this discussion our approach will not differ, any perceived issue must be considered not only on its own merits but on the knock-ons it will inevitably cause. If anyone has some solid data/examples please do get them posted in our bugs area and we'll investigate with the above in mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Seb Wassell what kind of mechanisms work as triggers in the game for retirement at the moment? I know ambition, professionalism and such play a part but when in my case Aritz Aduriz decides in November he's going to retire - why then?

Is it something like a process in which each month a background process runs of "Should I retire?" with a calculation that inevitably reaches 100% on yes either due to age or period of time without a club, or is it a once per season check and to avoid overwhelming the in game processing so its staggered across the season as to when players make this decision?

How the Aduriz retirement panned out - it was the right decision. It just came at the wrong time. Part of me thinks perhaps they should be suppressed until later in the season, but then presumably the game would just end up with an old-age version of the historical issue of youth intake day, becoming retirement day when say on 30th March for European leagues, a whole raft of retirements popping up in game. The best I can ultimately offer is that as someone who frequently does play the game on this end of the spectrum it doesn't feel as satisfying as perhaps it could when it comes to the "delivery" as such of the retirement decision even when just looking at other elements (player status and player interaction) in the game already. 

- - -

Ultimately I can appreciate that it's not really testable to have something that works for the extreme cases that in all likelihood only human managers as opposed to AI will bring about. After all, in nearly 3000 hours across the last 3 FM titles, I've got less than 10 examples I can recall and only 1 with any kind of save game to look at. It's not really a feature or key element the game of football is based upon, and of course there's the cast iron point of how can something be developed that can't realistically be tested.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 ore fa, Seb Wassell ha scritto:

Let's keep it constructive guys. The aim here isn't to prove me/SI or any other member of the forum right or wrong, it's simply to discuss a perceived issue and work out if there is something there for us to investigate that will consequently improve the game.

I think I've been trying to be constructive in bringing up actual figures to counter a counterpoint consisting of "you're making stuff up because you remember all the old farts playing into their 40s".

Unfortunately I don't have time or inclination (or a powerful computer) to run a very detailed soak test 30 seasons into the future to see how many newgens have retired before their 35th birthday and how many are still crawling around the pitch with Acc/Pace <5.

But it's becoming a matter of principle, so who knows...

 

Quote

There are some examples of players that might not be recreated by our model and that is certainly something we are aware of.

So you are aware that usually a player with speed =<12 at age 28 is going to become completely useless around age 32 due to his lack of movement being an insurmountable obstacle for most positions?

So far, and yes I know it's anecdotal evidence, the only players whose decline is reasonably gentle are those with high physical stats, but it's just a matter of "the taller they are, the slower they shrink", while the decline ratio still looks quite consistent and steady.

 

I'm not asking much though... Just 1-2 usable veterans who, despite being slow, aren't geriatric patients at around 35.

 

Quote

However, and this is the most important part for me, these are the overwhelming minority. To satisfy this 1% we risk unbalancing the other 99%. I'm reminded of a bug we had previously where some players simply would not retire, we had a Frank Lampard playing into his 90s and various other players defying their age. For me that is a much bigger issue than newgen X not making it to 38.

That used to be an issue some iterations back. ANd it was as frustrating, as you'd get plenty of immobile veterans still wasting spots in Starting XIs at top clubs.

But that hasn't happened in years, while FM has become "no game for old men".

 

Quote

We tweak both progression and decline constantly, with the goal of recreating reality perfectly. I hope you'd agree that over the past couple of versions the early stages of a player's development have improved massively, but this must be done in baby steps to ensure that the overall balance is maintained. With this discussion our approach will not differ, any perceived issue must be considered not only on its own merits but on the knock-ons it will inevitably cause. If anyone has some solid data/examples please do get them posted in our bugs area and we'll investigate with the above in mind.

I see players develop at a more realistic rate now, even the very talented ones (no more 17yo starting CL finals for Real or Barça in their first or second season with the senior team).

Now it takes time and work to nurture good talents, which is good. I hope we'll have the option to do a similar job preserving the final years of our aging veterans. It's quite frustrating sitting and watch former Key Players regressing to pathetic backups within the short span of one season, two tops.

Again, I'm not even that fussed about Messi or CR7's eventual, slow, decline. But about John Doe, former League One top star, now aged 34 and ready to collect his unemploymenty cheque

Edited by RBKalle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's interesting to see such debate about old players when I've always thought it pretty clear that the main unrealistic issue with FM is the overpopulation of strong young players. In reality, having a teenager or 20 year-old in your starting lineup is a big deal and topic for discussion. Once newgens kickoff and integrate in FM it seems uncommon not to have a few in each lineup all the time. I'd be interested to see the stats of how age skews down more because of the minimum decreasing than the maximum decreasing.

There are at least two in-depth threads about this here and here, mostly dealing with the CA and PA spread than appearance averages, but they're closely linked when suddenly younger players become (perhaps unrealistically) stronger.

Edited by Weston

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 ore fa, Weston ha scritto:

It's interesting to see such debate about old players when I've always thought it pretty clear that the main unrealistic issue with FM is the overpopulation of strong young players. In reality, having a teenager or 20 year-old in your starting lineup is a big deal and topic for discussion. Once newgens kickoff and integrate in FM it seems uncommon not to have a few in each lineup all the time. I'd be interested to see the stats of how age skews down more because of the minimum decreasing than the maximum decreasing.

There are at least two in-depth threads about this here and here, mostly dealing with the CA and PA spread than appearance averages, but they're closely linked when suddenly younger players become (perhaps unrealistically) stronger.

A very interesting topic, which IMO is also linked to this one.

It's almost pointless to micromanage an older player's physical decline to preserve 1 extra point for a bit longer when it's relatively easy to scoop up a youngster who can waltz into your first team from the get-go.

In my current FM19 save I've already given up on two original db prospects because my scouts found two hotter prospects in Africa. Net profit 2.5M now, plus whatever I'll get for those good 4* strikers in one or two years when they'll become the strongest players in the league and better clubs will come knocking.
Not to mention a handful of ok academy alumni who'll come in handy either way.

Edited by RBKalle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 08/02/2019 at 14:20, Seb Wassell said:

@XaW Cheers for the data.

Obviously whilst in percentage terms 4 > 15 is quite a large change, in real terms it is not. It would only take a handful for the balance to swing the other way. As you can understand with these things we need to be careful what tweaks we make, a 'tiny' rebalance could actually have much larger consequences in real terms. Goalkeepers is certainly an avenue to explore though, thank you for that example.

Overall your above observations match our internal data, showing a balance that I am currently satisfied with. Of course this does not mean we won't be looking to further refine this in the future.

Could I suggest on the goalkeeper point that it might be a question not just of player development but also of transfer and squadbuilding logic? In real life the goalkeepers in that 33-37 age probably aren't technically the best backups their teams could find at PL level. But they make up for that through their experience and consistency, which are very, very important for a keeper who might not play for 12 months and then have a huge match at zero notice. They also tend to be some of the more level heads in a changing room, or the "dynamics" in FM, without playing regularly enough for the quality to be so important. In FM it feels like these factors don't weight enough into the decision making compared to raw ability.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Spurs08 said:

Could I suggest on the goalkeeper point that it might be a question not just of player development but also of transfer and squadbuilding logic? In real life the goalkeepers in that 33-37 age probably aren't technically the best backups their teams could find at PL level. But they make up for that through their experience and consistency, which are very, very important for a keeper who might not play for 12 months and then have a huge match at zero notice. They also tend to be some of the more level heads in a changing room, or the "dynamics" in FM, without playing regularly enough for the quality to be so important. In FM it feels like these factors don't weight enough into the decision making compared to raw ability.

I think this is a fair point. Think FM tends to be quite good at making older players not want starts and suspect their mentality behind the scenes is also better, but that doesn't mean that AI managers are smart enough to sign them for that reason.

But I also think the agility declines look weird (even if they have surprisingly little impact in the ME). I'm happy with keepers declining in their thirties, but I think it's usually later and more evenly than the FM model

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have raised this issue with the guys at FM countless times to the point where I now find it pointless, I also made the point that even if a player retires what seems too early they should be left in the free agent catagory incase a manager tries to tempt them out of retirement, its a bit of a joke that the guys at FM feel they know who would retire at 31,32,33 even when they still get regular games and 1-2 years left on their contract, it would be interesting to ask those particular players their thoughts on wether they would retire so early in real life (unless they picked up a career ending injury of course).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know this one is staff (I'd have to dig through old saves to find an example of a player doing it), but I've just had yet another contracted person decide to retire in the middle of their current deal instead of waiting for it to run out. Even if this were to happen, shouldn't they have to buy out the remainder of the contract to leave?

Screen Shot 2019-02-09 at 3.22.16 PM.png

Screen Shot 2019-02-09 at 3.22.12 PM.png

Edited by Weston

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, cainy1982 said:

I have raised this issue with the guys at FM countless times to the point where I now find it pointless, I also made the point that even if a player retires what seems too early they should be left in the free agent catagory incase a manager tries to tempt them out of retirement, its a bit of a joke that the guys at FM feel they know who would retire at 31,32,33 even when they still get regular games and 1-2 years left on their contract, it would be interesting to ask those particular players their thoughts on wether they would retire so early in real life (unless they picked up a career ending injury of course).

Pretty sure that most pros don't have the choice of "retiring" in the middle of their contract and then going and getting a new contract somewhere else as a free agent...

 

4 minutes ago, Weston said:

I know this one is staff (I'd have to dig through old saves to find an example of a player doing it), but I've just had yet another person contracted decide to retire in the middle of their current deal instead of waiting for it to run out. Even if this were to happen, shouldn't they have to buy out the remainder of the contract to leave?

Screen Shot 2019-02-09 at 3.22.16 PM.png

Screen Shot 2019-02-09 at 3.22.12 PM.png

Pretty sure most people do have the right to retire without buying out their contracts, even more so for non-players

Edited by enigmatic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, enigmatic said:

Pretty sure that most pros don't have the choice of "retiring" in the middle of their contract and then going and getting a new contract somewhere else as a free agent...

I never suggested they go somewhere else as a free agent, I made the point that they retire from playing altogether.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, cainy1982 said:

I have raised this issue with the guys at FM countless times to the point where I now find it pointless, I also made the point that even if a player retires what seems too early they should be left in the free agent catagory incase a manager tries to tempt them out of retirement, its a bit of a joke that the guys at FM feel they know who would retire at 31,32,33 even when they still get regular games and 1-2 years left on their contract, it would be interesting to ask those particular players their thoughts on wether they would retire so early in real life (unless they picked up a career ending injury of course).

 

8 minutes ago, enigmatic said:

Pretty sure that most pros don't have the choice of "retiring" in the middle of their contract and then going and getting a new contract somewhere else as a free agent...

I did think it was a nice touch that FM left Cassano in the game after he retired, unretired, retired, unretired, etc.

 

9 minutes ago, enigmatic said:

Pretty sure most people do have the right to retire without buying out their contracts, even more so for non-players

Good to know - I was genuinely unsure. In any case it does seem that perhaps FM should get a bit better about players signing new contracts and then deciding to give up the game entirely a short while later. i get that that can happen, but still seems a bit off, both staff and player.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, cainy1982 said:

I never suggested they go somewhere else as a free agent, I made the point that they retire from playing altogether.

you did literally use the words "left in the free agent category"....

 

5 minutes ago, Weston said:

I did think it was a nice touch that FM left Cassano in the game after he retired, unretired, retired, unretired, etc.

I think Scholes' unretirement was better. :D As was his manager's for that matter...

 

6 minutes ago, Weston said:

Good to know - I was genuinely unsure. In any case it does seem that perhaps FM should get a bit better about players signing new contracts and then deciding to give up the game entirely a short while later. i get that that can happen, but still seems a bit off, both staff and player.

I think that santy's right and usually when people change their mind within months of signing a contract it's injury that influences them (or "family reasons", especially with 60+ year old staff). Although, of course, there is always Cassano ;) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Weston said:

It's interesting to see such debate about old players when I've always thought it pretty clear that the main unrealistic issue with FM is the overpopulation of strong young players. In reality, having a teenager or 20 year-old in your starting lineup is a big deal and topic for discussion. Once newgens kickoff and integrate in FM it seems uncommon not to have a few in each lineup all the time. I'd be interested to see the stats of how age skews down more because of the minimum decreasing than the maximum decreasing.

There are at least two in-depth threads about this here and here, mostly dealing with the CA and PA spread than appearance averages, but they're closely linked when suddenly younger players become (perhaps unrealistically) stronger.

Discussion threads are great for discussing, but in terms of actually highlighting something that may be a bug? Not so great. Not because anyone from SI is ignorant of what's going on here, just because firstly it's very subject to the posters opinion and secondly because its not something SI can actually go and see. 

The first thing I made on this matter for me was a bug post, ultimately it's going to need examples of your point in a save game SI can step into on their side. But you're referring to an issue that probably takes what 2-3 years to come about and is very difficult for you to identify in advance to then document it. 

SI will look into it so perhaps you need to come up with a method that lets you capture save games demonstrating this. Tough, but if you splinter off a save every summer, then when you see them emerge you should have a couple of snapshots of the last couple of years to show this shift. 

It can be tough though, it's taken me 3 actual years to reach the point where I felt I had hit the point I'd seen my perceived issue enough to go ahead with making a bug post about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, cainy1982 said:

I have raised this issue with the guys at FM countless times to the point where I now find it pointless, I also made the point that even if a player retires what seems too early they should be left in the free agent catagory incase a manager tries to tempt them out of retirement, its a bit of a joke that the guys at FM feel they know who would retire at 31,32,33 even when they still get regular games and 1-2 years left on their contract, it would be interesting to ask those particular players their thoughts on wether they would retire so early in real life (unless they picked up a career ending injury of course).

You posted a Feature Request in 2017, which is appreciated, but since then you don't seem to have commented or posted a bug on the subject? I think saying you have raised this countless times, you find it pointless and that it's a bit of a joke is hyperbole and simply not true.

How would you approach retirements? Note we cannot leave players hanging around on frees indefinitely as the DB size would expand to the point that your PC may struggle to handle the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Weston said:

I know this one is staff (I'd have to dig through old saves to find an example of a player doing it), but I've just had yet another contracted person decide to retire in the middle of their current deal instead of waiting for it to run out. Even if this were to happen, shouldn't they have to buy out the remainder of the contract to leave?

Screen Shot 2019-02-09 at 3.22.16 PM.png

Screen Shot 2019-02-09 at 3.22.12 PM.png

This issue is under review by our transfers & contracts team. Could you add your example please?

You do not have to buy out the remainder of your contract.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Weston said:

It's interesting to see such debate about old players when I've always thought it pretty clear that the main unrealistic issue with FM is the overpopulation of strong young players. In reality, having a teenager or 20 year-old in your starting lineup is a big deal and topic for discussion. Once newgens kickoff and integrate in FM it seems uncommon not to have a few in each lineup all the time. I'd be interested to see the stats of how age skews down more because of the minimum decreasing than the maximum decreasing.

There are at least two in-depth threads about this here and here, mostly dealing with the CA and PA spread than appearance averages, but they're closely linked when suddenly younger players become (perhaps unrealistically) stronger.

This is an area that I believe we have added more variety and realism to over the past couple of FMs. That doesn't mean it's perfect though, grab some examples, head over to the bugs forum and I'll certainly take a look.

It is worth noting however that this sometimes does come as a result of the human's actions. The human User often "games" the system a little and as such we see more unrealistic results when the human is involved as opposed to the AI only. The human tends to bias their transfer policy towards hoovering up all of the very young, very talented newgens before the AI whilst simultaneously gaming the progression system to mini/max development. We've tried to address this somewhat with Mentoring this year (although the new training module actually allows even more control in other areas). Of course if we provide you with the tools then using them to your advantage is absolutely valid, it just needs to be taken into account when judging an "AI-only" progression system. 

Edit - in reference to those posts I'd also just like to add the following:

CA is the key here, please focus on that rather than PA. We are interested in the current ability of players in future gameworlds, not how many could/should/would have made it. It is also not a good comparison with the starting DB as researchers cull PA as players age. For a true comparison you would need to take every player in the starting DB and check their PA in the version of FM in which they were first introduced. In that data set you would see a massive spike in 170-200 PAs, but similar to many newgens with high PAs they simply didn't make it in CA terms.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/02/2019 at 12:23, Seb Wassell said:

You posted a Feature Request in 2017, which is appreciated, but since then you don't seem to have commented or posted a bug on the subject? I think saying you have raised this countless times, you find it pointless and that it's a bit of a joke is hyperbole and simply not true.

How would you approach retirements? Note we cannot leave players hanging around on frees indefinitely as the DB size would expand to the point that your PC may struggle to handle the game.

I didn't say leave them as a free agent indefinately, when they reach 35-36 I have no issue with players hanging up their boots for good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 09/02/2019 at 22:06, enigmatic said:

you did literally use the words "left in the free agent category"....

The ones as you so helpfully put "left in the free agent category" are the players who's contracts have expired

I think Scholes' unretirement was better. :D As was his manager's for that matter...

 

I think that santy's right and usually when people change their mind within months of signing a contract it's injury that influences them (or "family reasons", especially with 60+ year old staff). Although, of course, there is always Cassano ;) 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does any one know if in FM19 we have the option to ask players to reconsider retirement from international soccer?
As their club head coach.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...