Middle_Finger

One sided player concern

37 posts in this topic

I am starting these thread to be visible with my point and hope others will join in with their ideas too.

In one of my game world(GW) Fernando Torres developed concern because he hasn't played enough and his rating is 90. Here's the problem my other 2 strikers are Suarez(97) and Aguero(95). That should be taken in to account too! Additionally a players age should be considered as well just like in real life (IRL). 

Torres is 32 y/o whereas both Suarez and Aguero are 29 and 27 respectively. Just taking rating into account is very absurd. 

By these rule, my third choice striker should be a 88 rated or below player. And if one of Suarez or Aguero gets injured, my team will be considerably lightweight.

To conclude, while calculating a players concern for less game time two things should be considered -

a) the players age 

b). rating of his colleagues in his position in the team.

Just taking a players rating is simply not fair or the exact account.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Simple solution is add player contracts as it would cut player hogging and keep concerns in check e.g this player (Torres) is backup. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes that's one way. But I think SMs method of calculating concern should be looked at. For say atm it only takes account of the concerned players rating and the avg. rating of the whole squad. 

But it should not be that. For say, I have Suarez and aguero because I sacrificed getting a good defender. My defenders are 87-91. So Torres shouldn't be measured with them. But only Suarez and aguero and maybe any other player in his position. 

By measuring concern on avg rating it means Torres (90) is being put together with Sidibe(86) who is a wing back. It makes no sense, they both play in completely different position. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If your team is successful, (routinely making Champion's League), that should be taken into account.

 

Look at Claudio Pizarro, all those years he sat on the bench at Bayern, because he liked trophies and money. He's hardly a unique case.

 

My biggest issue with the current SM design philosophy is that it tries to punish players for being good, which has never ended well for any game studio, ever. On top of it, in this case, being a very unrealistic reflection of how players react.

Middle_Finger and lunastorta like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Steven X said:

If your team is successful, (routinely making Champion's League), that should be taken into account.

 

Look at Claudio Pizarro, all those years he sat on the bench at Bayern, because he liked trophies and money. He's hardly a unique case.

 

My biggest issue with the current SM design philosophy is that it tries to punish players for being good, which has never ended well for any game studio, ever. On top of it, in this case, being a very unrealistic reflection of how players react.

You know what would work...

 if when signing a player once a bid is accepted there was a process by where you explain the player role to him before he signs, I. E.  signing as a starter, a backup player, a future prospect, squad competition player... etc....

Weather or not the bid is successful could be based in that response, obviously if a player agreed to sign on as a backup player then he wouldn't get concerns (well at least for 5+ SM seasons) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/5/2016 at 4:58 AM, tupac_healy said:

You know what would work...

 if when signing a player once a bid is accepted there was a process by where you explain the player role to him before he signs, I. E.  signing as a starter, a backup player, a future prospect, squad competition player... etc....

Weather or not the bid is successful could be based in that response, obviously if a player agreed to sign on as a backup player then he wouldn't get concerns (well at least for 5+ SM seasons) 

You do make an interesting suggestion. But I fear it will just kill the "player concern" option and I do not think SM would like that.

I was thinking more in line of once we make an offer for a player, after few hours we should get a message saying "the player expects to play 40% of the games, in a season. ACCEPT/DECLINE" considering everything ( i.e. the age of the player I am buying, avg age and ratings of players already in the team, in this case Suarez 97, 29y/o and aguero 95, 27y/o). 

At current mechanics in SM it would make no difference to my team if i had Torres or Lacazette. Both are 90 and their age doesn't matter.

tupac_healy likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/10/2016 at 4:17 PM, Dannyb01y said:

How many games has he played for you out of how many league games played?

Do you ever actually use him? There is only a finite number of highly rated players in the game..

With this thread I am trying to establish that age and the ratings of players in similar position should be considered and not just the ratings. 

As mentioned above my first two strikers are Suarez(97) and aguero(95). So a 32 y/o rated 90 makes a fair 3rd choice striker. If it was lacazette or morata, 25 y/o and 23 y/o (both rated 90) developed concern, it was understandable. But Torres develops concern at the same speed as other younger 90 rated player.

I also feel SM takes the value of overall team to establish concern. This is also unfair and unrealistic as Torres a striker should not compete with a defender or midfielder. 

To be specific, the team I am talking about my defenders are 87-89, that's the sacrifice I made to have a formidable attack. So torres' rating should only be compared with other strikers in the team and not overall squad value.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I appreciate what you're saying but if you're never playing Torres he should be getting concerns. Yes in real life old players are happy to bench warm but in SM there are only a finite number of forwards rated 90+ so if someone never uses them its hoarding.

Its to keep the game worlds competitive and alive. Otherwise someone could buy all the old high rated players and never use them without getting concerns.

On the flip side you can sometimes pick up a bargain from a hoarder manager who isn't good at balancing play time. Personally I keep 22 players happy rotating and using 3 subs every game.

I personally find its the average team rating that seems to matter most rather than individual ratings for chances of winning a match.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nah man! You are not gripping the essence of this thread. I gave example about striker coz that's how it affecting me. It can be applied to any player in any position. 

Secondly, having 25 players is not player hoarding.

Finally, the way you explained thats not how SM works. If there's no good strikers irl the value of a striker in SM doesn't go considerably high. At the same time it doesn't determine the concern level too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand your points but they essentially counter act the aim of concerns for players rated 90+ which keeps games worlds interesting because managers have to use players or lose them. The system is reasonable lenient as it is.

 

Having 25 players isn't hoarding, having 25 players over 90 rated would be, that was my point. That's what concerns aim to prevent.

RoyalAguila likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Middle finger is a massive player hogger. He failed to give the full story. Torres was his 7th choice striker and played 1 game in 2 seasons. According to him that's enough for 32 year old blah blah. 

RoyalAguila likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that the problem with this is the way SM works: you need a squad of 20+ good players to be competitive in the league, cup and shield, simply because of the way fitness works. However, that would inevitably lead to concerns (I've done the math, trust me :) ), if you have 20 90+ players.

Middle_Finger likes this

Share this post


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

I think that the problem with this is the way SM works: you need a squad of 20+ good players to be competitive in the league, cup and shield, simply because of the way fitness works. However, that would inevitably lead to concerns (I've done the math, trust me :) ), if you have 20 90+ players.

True. But recently in another gw a team was winning with 50-66 fitness levels. So I assume fitness means very little after SMs recent "improvement". 

I wonder if anyone who works for SM actually plays the game. The flaws are so blatantly clear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I am a bit of a player hogger but I manage concerns of squads with about 21 90+ rated players pretty well. I've never lost a player to concerns. That's why I think they're ok as they are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well Danny then I assume you are too good a manager. For me if I go out of a cup/shield early its inevitable for concerns to grow. I managed concern level pretty well but since last month its gone all awry for me.

Share this post


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

Well Danny then I assume you are too good a manager. For me if I go out of a cup/shield early its inevitable for concerns to grow. I managed concern level pretty well but since last month its gone all awry for me.

I'm quite an active manager and pay attention to appearances, generally I give 90 rated players at least 20 appearances a season. I use 3 substitutions every match and try to get as far in cups as possible which helps a lot. It doesn't help that Torres is inflexible position wise. A winger who can also play up front would be easier to slot into your team. I guess if you really like Torres that doesn't help.

Middle_Finger likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And once again, this incredibly broken system rears it's head. Saed Kolasinac bumps from 87 to 89 and INSTANTLY gains a concern as if he had always been 89. His value is now INSTANTLY less than what it is because of this absurd nonsense that players with concerns now have their transfer value gimped.

 

Lowest rated starter in my team is a 90.

 

So now I can play a guy that doesn't actually belong in the squad, or sell him at a gimped value. What a great way to reward players that actually know something about the sport!

 

This system is totally broken and the entire thing needs to be scrapped completely. Stop pandering to a vocal minority of two dozen people on the forums that think having a good bench is a criminal offense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/23/2016 at 9:20 PM, Steven X said:

And once again, this incredibly broken system rears it's head. Saed Kolasinac bumps from 87 to 89 and INSTANTLY gains a concern as if he had always been 89. His value is now INSTANTLY less than what it is because of this absurd nonsense that players with concerns now have their transfer value gimped.

 

Lowest rated starter in my team is a 90.

 

So now I can play a guy that doesn't actually belong in the squad, or sell him at a gimped value. What a great way to reward players that actually know something about the sport!

 

This system is totally broken and the entire thing needs to be scrapped completely. Stop pandering to a vocal minority of two dozen people on the forums that think having a good bench is a criminal offense.

Exactly, this is ridiculous !! Players value starts decreasing as soon as the concern level hits "level 1". SM is making things complicated for no reason and trying to choose our squad for us. 

Whats the point of constantly winning and having money if one cannot have 20-30 good players? Hence the better squad than the rest !! 

SM should just simply put squad limit and save us all with such nonsense !!

lunastorta likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 23/12/2016 at 4:20 PM, Steven X said:

And once again, this incredibly broken system rears it's head. Saed Kolasinac bumps from 87 to 89 and INSTANTLY gains a concern as if he had always been 89. His value is now INSTANTLY less than what it is because of this absurd nonsense that players with concerns now have their transfer value gimped.

 

Lowest rated starter in my team is a 90.

 

So now I can play a guy that doesn't actually belong in the squad, or sell him at a gimped value. What a great way to reward players that actually know something about the sport!

 

This system is totally broken and the entire thing needs to be scrapped completely. Stop pandering to a vocal minority of two dozen people on the forums that think having a good bench is a criminal offense.

 

Player concerns are fair and square, as IRL top players usually do get annoyed if they don't play regularly.

However tweaking is needed: 

-this calculation scenario has to be fixed. If a certain player reachs 88+ for gk and 89+ for outfield players, the player should request his new % of needed game from that moment on and not be retroactive, so that the manager can increase the play time of said player as needed without being penalized unfairly (as the player rating before wasn't in the range to request that play time in the first place, so the check of %  games should be calculated from the next game and forward).

-Make concerns faster and harsher: why 5 levels of concerns? There should be only 3 levels - concerned, very concerned and request transfer. In case of multiple different concerns of a player, a request transfer should be handled as soon as the total amount is 5. Concerns are way too slow - it takes way too much time for a top player that doesn't play regularly to request a transfer: if a top player doesn't play regularly for a whole SM season, he should request a transfer at end season.

If any DEV is reading this: please sort it out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2016-12-4 at 10:47 PM, Steven X said:

My biggest issue with the current SM design philosophy is that it tries to punish players for being good, which has never ended well for any game studio, ever. On top of it, in this case, being a very unrealistic reflection of how players react.

Exactly. I have a spent 4 years building a club that you would drool over. I buy almost a dozen youths every season. I win trophy after trophy and I sell the youths that don't grow to my desires or stagnate. By doing so, I have amassed a club with 22 First Squad players averaging 94 and a youth team of over 60 players - 20 of who are 89 and 90 rated.

But I get concerns. For the past 6 season's we've won a trophy every season but it looks like I'll have to sell some of my brightest young talent to some 41 Reputation manage of Leicester City.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2016-12-23 at 3:20 PM, Steven X said:

And once again, this incredibly broken system rears it's head. Saed Kolasinac bumps from 87 to 89 and INSTANTLY gains a concern as if he had always been 89. His value is now INSTANTLY less than what it is because of this absurd nonsense that players with concerns now have their transfer value gimped.

 

Lowest rated starter in my team is a 90.

 

So now I can play a guy that doesn't actually belong in the squad, or sell him at a gimped value. What a great way to reward players that actually know something about the sport!

 

This system is totally broken and the entire thing needs to be scrapped completely. Stop pandering to a vocal minority of two dozen people on the forums that think having a good bench is a criminal offense.

FOR GOD SAKE THANK YOU. I WILL SPAM DOWN THIS FORUM TILL PEOPLE REALISE IT IS NOT WRONG TO BUILD A GOOD TEAM. 

I BOUGHT YOUNG PLAYERS YEEEARS AGO BEFORE ANYONE EVEN KNEW OF THEM AND NOW I HAVE TO SELL THEM THE SECOND THEY SHOW THEIR WORTH BECAUSE OF A RETARDED CONCERN SYSTEM.

SEVEN YEARS, SEVEN YEARS I HAVE PLAYED SOCCERMANAGER AND I HAVE NEVER BEEN CLOSER TO LEAVING THAN I AM NOW.

Someone will join my GameWorld, see my team, ignore the fact that my best players were bought over 4 years and 11 SEASONS and will complain and call me a player hoarder.


Yes, I like to buy good high potential young players? So what??? 

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