Jump to content

CAFC28

Members
  • Posts

    153
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Everything posted by CAFC28

  1. I think they're phasing the old interface out slowly - it used to work perfectly on my iPad, but in the last few weeks I've been unable to set tactics as the "swap player" functionality has mysteriously disappeared from the old interface. If I switch to the new interface, it all works but is so slow, clunky, unintuitive and hard to find anything that I'd rather boot up my laptop and use the old interface on there.
  2. They've already got your money, why on earth do you expect them to care?
  3. It's De Gea. It's also not the first time I've heard people mention shipping lots of goals with him in goal. My last match I dominated, 64% possession, 8 shots on target, 0 goals (against Petr Cech, who seems to be a freaking brick wall), and I lost 1-0 - opponent had 1 shot on target, which the scored. Freak results happen every so often, but you seem to get a lot more with De Gea in goal
  4. Decided to go through my loan list and clear out a few to reduce numbers, but realised I don't really know enough about some of these players as prospects any more - always the problem with grabbing them very early and then not following them (hard to find the energy to make the effort with the current state of the game ) Some of these were viewed as future first teamers, or even given a chance by managers who have now departed, so if anyone knows about the state of these "future prospects" I'd be really grateful if you'd share your wisdom Axel Tuanzebe - Man Utd Glen Kamara - Arsenal Daniel Barlaser - Newcastle Riccardo Calder - Aston Villa Roberto Nunez - Atletico Madrid/Atletico B Tyler Robers - West Brom Marvin Ducksch - Dortmund/Dortmund B Marcel Sobottak - Dusseldorf (buy-back clause for Schalke) David Henen - Everton
  5. Given that quite a lot of players have been missed across the big leagues, I reckon they'll probably leave some of them until after the Euro's, rather than bother having to look at them twice in the space of a few months. I know it's a long shot, as some "big names" have been reviewed already, but I hope that's the case, because if it's not, this has to be one of the laziest, most inconsistent and frankly farked up review session I've seen in all my time on SM. If, for example, Hazard plays well at the Euro's, they could try and justify him staying rather than dropping.
  6. Oh good god, how could I forget - the interface! The god awful, useless, laggy, slow loading, annoying, designed by a 3 year old with some clipart and crayons new interface. That they push and push and push almost every login. "Hey, we've designed a new interface, check it out" "OK, GOT IT"
  7. Changes I can think of off the top of my head: Automatic stadium increase - clubs with smaller stadiums that do well now get an automatic increase in stadium size. Smaller the stadium, larger the increase. Eg, My Charlton team started with 27000, over 2-3 seasons of winning D1, is now up to about 42000. However, finance wise, small clubs are still seen as small clubs - merchandising and other income doesn't appear to increase to match big clubs. Finances - general changes to income from winning cups and leagues, seem to be larger, however player salaries were also increased quite massively, so the prize money only offsets a high wage squad if you win Player values were also changed, believe 120k is now the cheapest, not 8k, and high rated players gained quite a bit of value. Young players and players with "potential" (no idea who decides this though) are often valued more highly than "normal" players of the same age and rating. Concerns - changed very recently, now impossible to keep a lot of high rated players happy, as they all expect to play at least 80% of the matches. Snuck in with no warning, so people ended up with 10-15 L1 concerns from nowhere over the course of a few days. Designed to stop hogging all the high rated players, good idea but just implemented badly and with no warning. Doubly bad as players with concerns now have a lower value, so many squads were looking at selling off players with concerns for a lower value. Match engine - changed around Dec '15, generally observed as another f'up, now tactics seem to mean nothing and it's generally all down to the highest rated team winning all the time. May have been silently tweaked again recently as tactics do seem to have a little more of an effect again, but in general higher rated teams seem to win most of the time. Ratings - think these were probably messed up when you left, but there's no schedule any more, seems to be almost random at times, small clusters of a league get done but lots and lots of players are missed out. Half-ar$ed, basically, like a lot of SM stuff. Couple of good nagging threads where overlooked players are listed, but it's a bit like pi$$ing into the wind. SM admin - we think they've visited the Bermuda Triangle. Very few responses to anything any more, bug tickets and cheating reports in game get the standard canned response, announcements about changes now seem to be done via Twitter and some blog, rather than through the forum or game interface. Anyone got anything else to add, not sure if I've missed anything else major out. Unfortunately, as you can see, most changes aren't looked upon too favourably. It's the secrecy and hidden tweaks that annoy players most, there's no transparency to any changes or updates any more, so most things come as a surprise, and no-one really enjoys the kind of surprises SM have been dishing out recently
  8. Been through this before, chairman wouldn't sell the highest value/rated, they'd sell a player with enough value to cover the debt. Would also suck even more fun out of the game. Small clubs already struggle to be successful with the financial side of the game against them, and have to run in the red to be competitive. Sorry, but if you end the season in the black after receiving your money for final position, then your not running in the red... If your still in the red after that, then the chairman should resolve it. If we're going for realism, how many clubs run in the red until season end in real leagues? Success payments need to be increased here then, so you can "do a Leicester" and not end up dying of debt because your small club done good is still stuck on an unchanged small club income, regardless of success. Sorry, lots of more important things to resolve before this.
  9. I want to manage a virtual football team on an online game. I didn't realise I'd need an advanced maths certificate just to work out how to keep my players happy. Fine, hogging needs to be dealt with, but having to work out, in advance, how many games each player needs to play just to keep them free of concerns is utter shullbit. Do we really think Mourinho/Guardiola/van gaal sit down in July with a list of all their players and a fixture calendar and count it all out? Where the hell has all the fun gone in this game? It used to be amazing with the anticipation of risers, and trying to outsmart people tactically. Now you never know if anyone will rise, let alone when, and tactics are out the window with a higher rated team winning everything - as long as you can keep them all happy! ARGH!!!
  10. Last season, concerns hadn't been tweaked (they were actually turned off at one point, apparently) and were nowhere near as harsh as they are now, so it was much easier to keep a high rated team happier. Also, no-one is questioning higher rated players/superstars playing more often, but then fitness needs to be tweaked to allow this to happen. In real life ronaldo can play three times a week and not have any problems. Here, twice a week is about manageable if there's a three-four day gap between matches. Certainly in the EC's you get fixture pileup with cup matches and league matches barely two days apart, making it impossible to start a fit first-11 in both matches, regardless of whether the players think they should play or not. Wanting to play 85+% of matches is one thing, but in the current game, it's not possible if you want to start players at 95% fitness or higher.
  11. The forum is more permanent, and I believe shows up on Google searches. Twitter is comparatively more temporary, and tweets can be deleted more easily to remove evidence. Not that I think that's how SM would roll at all... subterfuge, sneakiness... just saying, that's the difference between the platforms. Read into it what you will.
  12. Yes, squads like that are the main reason for this change, I don't think anyone is disputing that "super squads" (hogging) are one of the biggest killers of open game worlds and something needed to be done. The issue most people have is that the change was unannounced and snuck in the back door, giving no-one any time to adjust squads if they wanted to. Concerns drop player value, so it's a double hit. I know you'll have no sympathy and say it's their own fault for hogging, but just chucking in major changes alienates the player base. Open discussion and announced changes give people time to adapt, or at least takes away the grounds for complaints.
  13. The match engine has changed between your post and the previous one. It's supposed to be a lot more detrimental to play players out of position now, even a yellow marker. I've always played everyone at green when possible so can't say how negative being out of position is, but seeing how other changes work here, it'll probably mean that 91+ players aren't affected, anyone under 91 probably plays with their laces tied together, or has their leg chopped off.
  14. With warning, I would have made an effort to reshape the team, offload some players and replace with some lower rated players if needed. It's a quiet game world so I've been lucky enough to build up a strong squad. No problem offloading some, even though they'll sit at unmanaged/external. Instead, now they've all got concerns from nowhere and the biggest ass of it all is that they've had millions wiped off their value, so now not only do I suffer concerns from nowhere that could have been managed with fair warning, I now take a huge financial loss to resolve it as well. Fracking awesome.
  15. 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.
  16. Most people don't have an issue with a concerns system, what the issue is, CONSTANTLY, is that we have to work it out for ourselves. Work out that something has changed when our squads are affected. Work out how to modify the management of our team to compensate for these changes, and how to repair damage that's been done that could possibly have been avoided if we were given the common courtesy of a change notification, full explanation, and time to adjust BEFORE the change is implemented. It's not the utterly incompetent way that SM is run and developed that causes people to leave so much as the fact it's a constantly (d)evolving mess of secret and untested changes, with little regard to any effect to the general player population. It's like we're on a live beta server... Transparency and discussion usually leads to a lot more patience from a player base.
  17. This is ludicrous, there's no balance between fitness and matches a player can reasonably play, and the matches considered when looking at concerns. No player can play every match, but it seems some want to. To be honest, most players struggle fitness wise to play two, miss one, play two, miss one, but they seem to want that for concerns, especially high rated players. There also doesn't seem to be any consideration for injuries - one player was out for a long injury but has developed a concern for lack of games despite playing pretty much 10 out of the 12 he was fit for. Seriously losing interest in battling the ever changing (and never explained!) rules on this "game". Coupled with the increased injuries and cards in matches recently (another bug??), and now concerns, it's impossible to manage any form of squad.
  18. I've just read the blog, especially the bit about concerns. What a crock of crap. Sounds like he's only ever managed a large club with good base finances, and never had to tackle a small team with limited income. Why would anyone loan out a 80+ player over 22? Of course there's no point for development, when in-game match time or performance doesn't affect player rating in any way. The answer must be player hogging, of course. It would appear that the thought of buying in and holding risers to sell off later never crosses his mind. 20 first team players with an average rating of 93 means he's got a pretty well stacked team in terms of ratings. Not everyone can assemble a team that good in an active game world, and not many teams can now afford the wages of a team that good. Certainly most of the small teams dragged up over the years to the top flight can't manage it on base finances, they'd need to be pretty hot on buying and selling risers to keep in the black. Have a balanced squad with low rated players as well as superstars? Stick an 83 rated player in defence, and an 86 on the wing, to complement his 96 rated strikers? Not everyone can have a pair of 96+ rated strikers, and risk a weaker defence in the hope their 89-90 rated strikers can make up for it. Believe it or not SM, most people are lucky (in active/competetive GW's) to build up a team with an average of 89-90. No wonder this game is going down the pan, all of their changes and tweaks seem to be based on their limited experience of managing big teams with small, high rated squads. Income from merchandise, TV revenue and gate receipts from the huge stadiums easily covers the wages of their smaller squads, so they automatically assume that everything's fine, or needs tweaking down. As someone who's dragged a small team up from Div 3 to the top over 6 years, finances are really tight with a strong squad. First team of 24 players, avg 91, is costing me a couple of million a week. The only way to stay in the black is "hogging" and selling risers. It used to be fun, with a regular rating schedule. Now we can go almost two game seasons before anyone rises (much longer if they're not playing in one of the big leagues), meaning this revenue stream is highly unreliable. The stadium capacity increases helped a lot, but the TV revenue and merchandising never seems to increase, regardless of team success. Result? Small teams are now incrementally difficult to take to the top - the better your team, the harder it is. I also run a Newcastle team in a different GW, taken from D2 to D1 with an average rating of 89. OK, wages are lower, but other income is so much higher, at one point I was making £1m+ every home game. Result? Even if I eventually manage to build the team up to the same avg rating level as my smaller team, I'll never take as much of a financial hit, even with much less success. Perhaps SM should actually try and play all facets of their game for several years to get a better idea of how the game runs for everyone? Screwing around with fundamental system mechanics because your big teams are OK, without a thought for the overall effects on everyone else, is a great way to annoy long term players. /rant sorry
  19. So, had to log in to SM this morning. NEVER have to log in. Surprise surprise, upon logging in I'm forced to the new interface. I don't appear to have any option to switch back to the old one. If it still exists, would some kind soul mind posting the link to it again? Having a job finding it on the forums at the moment. Thanks Edit: found it, page back (lol) and it still works http://soccermanager.com/my-home.php?setinterface=1
  20. You know what chaps, we're all aware of what really makes the football world go round, and we've all carefully skirted around it or ignored it - money. What made Chelsea and Man City big time players from tiny teams they were? Money. Why do barca and real have so many good players but the rest of the teams have very few star players? They get all the cash. Why are PSG and Monaco attracting big names? Money. Hell, we all know why players are going to China now - money! Chinese billionaires bankrolling the latest fad in the country. EPL happens to have the best (and probably fairest) payout of all the big leagues. It's the only reason big names play in the prem now. If Spain allocated its money as fairly as the EPL you'd have a better balance. When, not if, the money bubble in football bursts, it'll be a different game. And that's when, if English football doesn't adapt, it'll get totally left behind on the global stage. It's only the money that keeps it near the top. I think it'd be beneath the French league without it. Barca and real have a pedigree, like the two or three top teams in each country, and I think there will always be "big" teams in each league, but without the gulf in finances to keep them way above the rest, there'll be much better balance. Great for the fans, great for the game in general. Money is the root of all problems in the game, end of. And that's me done being off topic
  21. Lack of opportunities is about right - he's got no opportunity to play in your first team because there are so many other players in the same position. If I was him, looking at your team and the competition for the same spots, I'd have concerns about my chances too. Lack of opportunities is different to lack of games.
  22. Apples and oranges, honestly. The play styles are quite different between the leagues, and if you notice more often than not players who are rated quite highly (RL, not game) often struggle for a while to adapt to the different styles of play. It's unfortunate that the EPL style doesn't often do too well in Europe (counts for club and international competitions), but I don't think that's down to the players as much as the managerial styles and lack of adaptability. There's less technical ability and more physical ability in the EPL, Spain is the complete opposite, technical ability counts for a lot more. The pace of the EPL is much faster as well, less build up and more direct. I think it's the main reason most English players don't do well in Europe either, it's too far away from the style they've been brought up with. It takes players like Bale, McManaman, Beckham - with sufficient technical ability, that most English players don't possess or focus on - to do well in places like Spain. Spain has only recently had a 3rd team capable of hanging with Real and Barca, and that's down to the manager and team ethos rather than the combined talents of the players. In a way, Leicester has done something similar this season, but even before then you had 4-5 teams capable of winning the league, rather than it just being a two horse race like Spain. You can't always judge what's best purely on the players. If all of the top talent in Spain was spread around a little more, and more teams realistically had a chance of winning the title, I think it would make La Liga far more entertaining. As it is, it's always going to come down to one of two teams for most of the honours in Spain. You take away Simeone and I think AM would slip away again. EPL is more entertaining purely because it's more open, and IMHO just makes it a better league to watch. The unexpected rise of Leicester this season has been fantastic, something every neutral can enjoy and appreciate. I can't see something like that happening in Spain, ever. End of the day, what's best is subjective. If you like fancy tricks, appreciate deadly accurate passing and well timed movement, you'll like La Liga. If you like fast, physical, direct football, you'll probably like EPL more. If you like to know results have been paid for before the matches, Serie A is definitely for you
  23. Quite a tough one really - if you close their account, they'll just make another one. It's a shame that manage rep means so little in this game, so starting a new account with low rep doesn't have any effect at all, especially on someone who's desperate enough to cheat that they create 30 accounts. It should have been set up a long time ago that you need high manager rep to manage the bigger clubs, problem is that would have affected their revenue stream with new players unable to jump straight in to bayern, barca, real, etc, so no point paying to reserve clubs. That's the problem when you put money ahead of the basics, there's never been a solid foundation or set of rules to enforce at even the lowest level to prevent this kind of abuse. It encourages short term thinking - get a big club, buy the highest rated players, lose all your games because you have the managerial nous of a salty slug, quit club, start over at the next available big club. If it had been set up to encourage long term commitment - start small, learn the game, maybe even build a small club into a big one over years rather than weeks - you'd get people invested in the game, more willing to pay to enjoy a balanced, fair game with likeminded people, and less likely to attract cheats because they can't just jump in and grab the big clubs and best players straight away. I honestly think that the setup of the game actually encourages cheating for people looking for a quick way to build a strong team. The fact that there's sod all in the way of punishment doesn't help though.
  24. Heh... Use the new interface, get a bonus reprieve in the number of active managers required to keep the GW open. A mistake, or poor attempt at getting people to use the new interface?
  25. It was a bit quiet over lunch at work, so I had a play around with some formations and positions. During this, I noticed something a little odd with the way AM's and M's are treated in certain formations where they essentially play in exactly the same place on the pitch. Perceived role isn't important (eg, whether you think a 442 is defensive and 352 attacking, and therefore relevant to suitability of AM or M position in midfield places) - surely it's up to the manager to decide if a formation is to be played offensively or defensively, and therefore whether or not a wide midfield position is suited to an attacking or defensively minded player? We all know that the positional tweaks were made purely because the 352 was overused and abused, and rather than look at why it was so consistently good in the match engine and tweak it, just bork the positioning so not as many people can use it. However, I think it looks inconsistent and a little ridiculous that you can play your AM in the wide positions with no penalty, but they can't play in the same place in other formations. In each of the following formations there are inexplicable variations in whether an AM or M can occupy one of the central positions just ahead of the centre line that I would refer to as we look at it on the tactics screen as Midfield Right (MR), Midfield Centre Right (MCR), Midfield Centre (MC), Midfield Centre Left (MCL), Midfield Left (ML). Lets start with the 442 variations. 442A - Positions: MR, MCR, MCL, ML. M(RL) and AM(RL) can both play MR and ML. M(RLC) can play at MCR and MCL, but AM(RLC) cannot. 442B - Positions: MR, CMD (defensive), CMA (attacking), ML. M(RL) and AM(RL) can both play MR and ML. 442C - Positions: MCR, CMD, CMA, MCL M(RLC) can play in MCR and MCL, AM(RLC) cannot. 4411 - Positions: MR, MCR, MCL, ML. Same as 442A - M(RL) and AM(RL) can both play MR and ML. M(RLC) can play at MCR and MCL, but AM(RLC) cannot. 4312 - Positions: MCR, MC, MCL. Again, AM(RLC) cannot play in the MCR and MCL positions. 451A/B - Positions: MR, MCR, CMA/CMD, MCL, ML. Both M(RL) and AM(RL) can play in the MR/ML positions, but AM(RLC) cannot play in MCR/MCL. 352 - Positions: MR, MCR, CMD, MCL, ML. AM(RLC) cannot play in any of the midfield positions. M(RLC) can play anywhere. 343, 3412, 3421 - Positions: MR, MCR, MCL, ML. Same as 352 - AM(RLC) cannot play in any of the midfield positions. M(RLC) can play anywhere. 32221 - Positions: MR, DMCR, DMCL, ML. AM(RLC) cannot play in MR/ML positions. Why is there this obscure and inexplicable discrepancy between using an AM and an M in the same position across the different formations? Why can't AM(RL) play in the wide positions in some formations, but not in the exact same position in other formations? Why can't an AM© play in the MCR/MCL position? Especially when they can play in the MR/ML position in the same formation? An AM is an attacking midfielder. MIDfielder. They should be able to play in middle of the pitch, regardless of whether it's central or wide. It just denotes the manager opting for a more aggressive style rather than defensive. It just smacks of half-arsed attempts to "fix" issues like 352 by randomly borking certain positions in some formations without any thought for consistency.
×
×
  • Create New...