Dannyb01y

Have player concerns been changed?

176 posts in this topic

Transparency and discussion usually leads to a lot more patience from a player base.

 

Good speech.

SM staff read the forum? Listen the users?

 

I see this list:

 

http://forum.soccermanager.com/index.php?app=members&module=list

 

26 admin, only Steven login but his last post is dated 08 March 2016

Allan is a forum member joined as admin forum.

 

We need more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, try with another example, you have the key to give me a right opinion.

Today I have new concern level 1 for Muller (95)

 

6ourmueelfuh.jpg

 

Within your squad:

  • the highest rated players expect to play in approximately 85% of games;
  • players that would expect to be in your first choice line-up and those rated 90 or above, will expect to play in approximately 75% of games;
  • players that would expect to be a substitute if you selected your first choice line-up and those rated 89 or above, will expect to play in approximately 30-40% of games.
  • the rest of the players within your squad will only expect to play a few (if any) games.
  • Goalkeepers are worked out slightly differently, with your highest rated and those 88 or above expecting to play in approximately 90% of games.

 

Müller is a world class player (93+) so he needs to play at least 85% of games

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Müller is a world class player (93+) so he needs to play at least 85% of games

 

But I don't see this voice in the rules. Where is written?

 

The highest rank.

The highest ranks are:

- Messi 99

- Ronaldo 99

- Iniesta 96

- Robben 96

- Neymar 96

|

|

|

V

Muller

 

 

 

players that would expect to be in your first choice line-up and those rated 90 or above, will expect to play in approximately 75% of games;

 

ergo: 75%

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is being said that "All games where fitness can be lost are counted in the maximum number of games a player can play so you have to include Cup games too.", but I have additional question.

 

When players get suspended due to red/yellow cards or get injured for weeks/months, will those matches be substracted from the maximum number of games a player can play?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is being said that "All games where fitness can be lost are counted in the maximum number of games a player can play so you have to include Cup games too.", but I have additional question.

When players get suspended due to red/yellow cards or get injured for weeks/months, will those matches be substracted from the maximum number of games a player can play?

Lol... Obviously those games won't be counted as the player can't play even if he'd want to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lol... Obviously those games won't be counted as the player can't play even if he'd want to.

Yes, it is obvious when you think about it, but is the code itself designed in such way? :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I recently saw 2 players develop a concern (after MD 32 around 18 April). So far, nothing out of the ordinary and because the squad size remains around 25 players it's something that can be managed. However 11 days later (after MD 36) there are now 9 players that have concerns (the first 2 players both have a level 2 concern as well). If this was done to limit player hogging, the cure is worse than the disease.

 

Hard to tell why this is going on (players from the same squad):

 

- Messi didn't develop a concern while playing in over 85% of matches according to the old method yet when counting all games where a player can lose fitness to decide the maximum number of games a player could potentially play ... Messi would have only played in 74,49% (instead of over 85%)

- C.Ronaldo also didn't develop a concern while only playing a little over 79% of the matches => 83% due to injury (NOT counting all games where a player can lose fitness to decide the maximum number of games a player could potentially play ... the cup matches would add another 13 games to the 36 league matches and he would have only been involved in 58% => 62% due to injury)

- Neymar DID develop a concern ... over 85% according to the old method but that number drops to 64,29% according to the new method ... do you need to increase this to over 75% or do the top 3 of your squad (e.g. Messi, C.Ronaldo and Neymar) have to play over 85% of matches when in the same squad?

- some players developed a concern while playing in most of the matches that they weren't loaned out (well over 50% with parent club while being one of the lowest ranked players in the squad)

- other players developed a concern while playing in over 40% of matches (around 50%) according to the new method, e.g. Isco (one of the lowest rated players in the squad/21 players with a higher rating including James, KDB, Koke, et al.)

 

PS saw teams with 100s of players loaned out ... none of these players developed a concern ... it's not limiting that kind of player hogging.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the big flaw in counting league and cup games is that a player cant play in every game and keep a reasonable match fitness. Therefore you need a cup team of 11 players, OK 10 because goalies don't lose fitness enough to worry so that's still 21 players needed to be competitive in all competitions. The maths has shown you cant keep more than 15 players happy in a season IF YOU USE 3 SUBS EVERY game and that's just calculating league games. Including cup games and HAVING TO ROTATE  match fitness makes it even more difficult.

 

Yes you can field young players who wont develop concerns but the senior players will still expect to play those cup matches where you're forced to either tire out your players or rotate and risk concerns.. 

 

If managers can't keep the minimum squad size happy then theres is a fault in the game play parameters. Its up to SM to fix this unless they want to kill their own game off quicker than they have done the forums... no one will play a manager game for very long when they lose half the team every year. I certainly won't hang around long if after 7 years of playing I can't keep a competitive team happy.

Blondo and CAFC28 like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Raised Level 1 concern for 16 players in a week:

 

22 april : 6

26 april : 5

29 april : 5

 

Why this "control" it did not happen in a single date and instead was spread over several days in a week?

This thing is going only in a game world. Others GW  I do not have this kind of mess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I certainly won't hang around long if after 7 years of playing I can't keep a competitive team happy.

Whole post is spot on but the last part especially. Just had a 2nd round of concerns hit my team, now 15+ out of 24, can't be bothered to manage something that's so poorly implemented and thought out.

I've been on this game pretty much daily for the past 6 years, even if only to check messages, and I'm now on the verge of quitting because the direction this game has been taken by poor development has actually made it more of a chore than a joy.

I used to get excited about picking up prospects, building a team, waiting for rises to see if I'd bought the right players.

What a farking mess this place is now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, I generally don't comment on concerns because they were pretty realistic in game-scenarios. But these new rules are ridiculous.

 

 

As an example one of My Liverpool team has played 26 League matches and 10 cup matches until now.

May I remind you if a player starts a previous League match, his fitness is never good enough to start in the Cup match.

 

Still 3 of my Starting 11 players come on as subs in the Cups and 3 reserves in the league. My starting 11 is around 93 rated and reserve 11 90-91 rated.

 

According to the new rules my starting 11 players expect to play around 85% of all matches. For now that would be 36*0.85=30.6 matches and the reserves would want to play around 70% matches (36*0.70=25.2 matches).

 

Currently, highest matches played for my starting 11 (26 + 0.5 *10 = 31 matches for 3 players) and for reserves  (10 + 26 *0.5 =23 matches for 3 players).

 

And hence if we ignore the kids in my squad, out of the squad of 20 players, 17 of them has developed concerns in the last week.

 

 

Well done SM. Does a 4 year old make these decisions for you?

If you don't want us to play the game, just say it clearly. The new interface and this concern system are very roundabout ways of kicking us out.

I have been playing these game for over 6 years now and these kind of moronic decisions are seriously irritating me.

robsoar and Dannyb01y like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to update you guys I've received replies on twitter:

 

it's a simple case of play them more or move them on and do player hog.

 

 

 

I asked if they'd read the thread to which they replied:

 

yes we have thanks and some of the complaints are very laughable as show poor mismanagement and player hogging by some.

 

 

So not sure why they didn't reply here but make of that what you will.

 

I'm off to enjoy the rest of the long bank holiday weekend. :)

lunastorta likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

im actually surpised at that if they are direct quotes. I mean the sentiment aside that is not very professional replies.

 

Would be nice if they would give a mathematical breakdown so that discourse could be had. I agree some examples i read on here are truly what this is meant for like teh Ronaldo becnhed one and others but there are some pretty serious cases of people playing 22 man squads and managing them well and having issues. I do believe there needs to be a rework albeit slight. I think they have done the right thing by trying to eliminate the problem,, but sometimes being overzealous can also cause complications. I applaud the direction, I personall would just like to have full disclosure on the concerns calculation and then we can all A) play by the rules by knowing them or B) Detect any imbalances legitimately and hopefully work with SM for a tweak.

lunastorta likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been playing Worlds since 2007 and I can't remember any system as unfair as this in regards to Concerns. I understand the need to try and combat one or two teams controlling loads of players but are we going to have a situation whereby players are changing teams every SM season? I think we need to make more of a fuss about this to the powers that be

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've enjoyed the game for years. Yet the most recent change is another one that makes it less enjoyable. I used to rotate my squad intuitively instead of looking at it as a math problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now