Jump to content

Managers who ignore Transfer Bids


Recommended Posts

I bid for a player of a rival manager about 2 weeks ago, and I still don't know if it will be rejected or not.

I look at the guy's profile and he only has 2 clubs.

This is beyond frustrating. Just give me a clue or something! Don't just ignore it! If you don't want to sell him, then reject the bid! Not too much to ask is it?

(and no, he hasn't been offline, he practically signs in every other day)

Would be nice if SM made some rule where bids get automatically accepted if a manager doesn't bother to respond after 10-14 days.

Of course there's always one who has to disagree but it would be nice if you could understand why I get really annoyed by things like this.

Cheers

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Managers who ignore Transfer Bids

I bid for a player of a rival manager about 2 weeks ago' date=' and I still don't know if it will be rejected or not.

I look at the guy's profile and he only has 2 clubs.

This is beyond frustrating. Just give me a clue or something! Don't just ignore it! If you don't want to sell him, then reject the bid! Not too much to ask is it?

(and no, he hasn't been offline, he practically signs in every other day)

Would be nice if SM made some rule where bids get automatically accepted if a manager doesn't bother to respond after 10-14 days.

Of course there's always one who has to disagree but it would be nice if you could understand why I get really annoyed by things like this.

Cheers[/quote']

Then assume he doesn't want to do the deal, and turn your attention elsewhere. Simple.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Managers who ignore Transfer Bids

Nobody's going to be happy with this rule. Really unrealistic idea. If you want to sign someone that bad then join some empty gws and buy anyone you like. You just CAN'T force someone to sell their players.

If I didn't want to sell a player, I would reject the bid. I wouldn't be ignorant and just leave another manager hanging for 2 weeks though, that's the point.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Managers who ignore Transfer Bids

I'm against this idea' date=' does it actually matter if someone responds to your bid for not?

This idea would make this game more unrealistic.

[/font']

"does it actually matter if someone responds to your bid for not?"

Are you for real? Yeah, it kinda does matter if you're trying to sign them and you have no idea where you stand because someone doesn't have the decency to give you an indication, when it takes literally seconds to do so.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Managers who ignore Transfer Bids

Here's a suggestion for a couple of changes that could resolve this issue:

Change the length of time a bid will sit "open" with the manager to 3 days. You can tell if they don't log on, so can tell if it's ignored or they're inactive. You then don't have to sit there for 10-14 days wondering. AI bids are dealt with within 24 hours so 3 days seems a reasonable/fair time frame for interaction with a human.

Here's the kicker - every time a bid is ignored and left to expire after three days, the player loses some morale, call it uncertainty over their future and becoming unsettled. You could possibly go so far as to say that after a certain amount of ignored bids the player gets a concern, based on becoming unsettled by the ignored bids.

However, and here's where any punishment system like this falls down - trolls/griefers:

Player A has Messi, Ronaldo, Iniesta, etc

Player B is an ass.

Player B routinely makes rubbish bids for Player A's best players which Player A is fed up with rejecting. However, now he has to deal with the prospect of wasting time rejecting the bids or having his team demolished by morale and concerns, all because someone decides to be an ass. Imagine if Player B is friends with more managers in the GW and gets a little gang of asses together...

And that is probably exactly why there is nothing in place to punish ignoring bids.

Just cut the time frame the bids sits open with the manager before it is automatically rejected.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Managers who ignore Transfer Bids

Here's a suggestion for a couple of changes that could resolve this issue:

Change the length of time a bid will sit "open" with the manager to 3 days. You can tell if they don't log on' date=' so can tell if it's ignored or they're inactive. You then don't have to sit there for 10-14 days wondering. AI bids are dealt with within 24 hours so 3 days seems a reasonable/fair time frame for interaction with a human.

Here's the kicker - every time a bid is ignored and left to expire after three days, the player loses some morale, call it uncertainty over their future and becoming unsettled. You could possibly go so far as to say that after a certain amount of ignored bids the player gets a concern, based on becoming unsettled by the ignored bids.

However, and here's where any punishment system like this falls down - trolls/griefers:

Player A has Messi, Ronaldo, Iniesta, etc

Player B is an ass.

Player B routinely makes rubbish bids for Player A's best players which Player A is fed up with rejecting. However, now he has to deal with the prospect of wasting time rejecting the bids or having his team demolished by morale and concerns, all because someone decides to be an ass. Imagine if Player B is friends with more managers in the GW and gets a little gang of asses together...

And that is probably exactly why there is nothing in place to punish ignoring bids.

Just cut the time frame the bids sits open with the manager before it is automatically rejected.[/quote']

best post. Fully agree

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Managers who ignore Transfer Bids

Routinely I respond straight away to bids, but now and again after I have silly bids on players i.e. 4M for a 90 or being offered an 87 for 25M I ignore it to stop another bid being made.

Why not introduce a block transfer bid option, say for 28days to stop the griefers. Automatically accepting bids would be an awful idea otherwise people would target less active accounts and strip clubs out even worse than they are now.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Managers who ignore Transfer Bids

after reading CAFC28 & mistermalcolm inputs, this is where the "unavailable" option on a players comes in. In another thread topic, it was raise that every player has value. Many then suggested discussing it over private messaging. So it goes back again and how about a ridiculous bid for players?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Managers who ignore Transfer Bids

Here's a suggestion for a couple of changes that could resolve this issue:

Change the length of time a bid will sit "open" with the manager to 3 days. You can tell if they don't log on' date=' so can tell if it's ignored or they're inactive. You then don't have to sit there for 10-14 days wondering. AI bids are dealt with within 24 hours so 3 days seems a reasonable/fair time frame for interaction with a human.

Here's the kicker - every time a bid is ignored and left to expire after three days, the player loses some morale, call it uncertainty over their future and becoming unsettled. You could possibly go so far as to say that after a certain amount of ignored bids the player gets a concern, based on becoming unsettled by the ignored bids.

However, and here's where any punishment system like this falls down - trolls/griefers:

Player A has Messi, Ronaldo, Iniesta, etc

Player B is an ass.

Player B routinely makes rubbish bids for Player A's best players which Player A is fed up with rejecting. However, now he has to deal with the prospect of wasting time rejecting the bids or having his team demolished by morale and concerns, all because someone decides to be an ass. Imagine if Player B is friends with more managers in the GW and gets a little gang of asses together...

And that is probably exactly why there is nothing in place to punish ignoring bids.

Just cut the time frame the bids sits open with the manager before it is automatically rejected.[/quote']

Fantastic post, thank you! It's a shame that one or two in here refused to see where I was coming from, and instead had to resort to being a smart ass, as opposed to actually giving helpful feedback.

Once again sir, cheers.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

Re: Managers who ignore Transfer Bids

Then assume he doesn't want to do the deal' date=' and turn your attention elsewhere. Simple.[/quote']

No. It isn't that simple.

Firstly, because you prioritise transfer targets.

Secondly, because what happens if other managers ignore your bids, meaning you can't move on.

So....SM should:

a) find a way to punish ignorant managers who don't respond immediately to transfer bids.

B) remove the "unavailable" status to prevent ignorant managers from affecting the freedom of the market. Managers should be allowed to bid for anyone.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Riferimento: Managers who ignore Transfer Bids

ratboy' date=' I've had managers who proposed to me ridiculous deal, like Robben (21.5M) for only 22M or Del Piero + Riquelme + some money.

I really have to answer? Come'on.[/quote']

Yes, you do. It takes seconds. And is polite to do so.

How do managers learn to assess valuations if managers don't cooperate.

And who is to say that you decide relative valuations? When a manager is bidding, he or she might be making what they consider a decent bid.

Managers should be given 3 strikes. Log in and out three times without acknowledging a bid.....and SM sells the player automatically.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Riferimento: Managers who ignore Transfer Bids

Yes' date=' you do. It takes seconds. And is polite to do so.

How do managers learn to assess valuations if managers don't cooperate.

And who is to say that you decide relative valuations? When a manager is bidding, he or she might be making what they consider a decent bid.

Managers should be given 3 strikes. Log in and out three times without acknowledging a bid.....and SM sells the player automatically.[/quote']

It takes seconds per bid, maybe, but can take a while with lots of different bids to go through which is where the problem comes in. Perhaps you would advocate a change to allow only one bid per player at a time, or even one bid in to a team at a time? Then perhaps your "DONT IGNORE ME OR WE'LL SELL YOUR PLAYER ANYWAY" stance would be a touch less extreme.

It's generally considered that the seller is the one that sets the value, as they have the asset?

People have already given many good reasons why your three strikes and sold idea is really, really bad but you won't give up on it.

You seem stuck on the idea that it's ignorant managers who don't respond to bids who should be punished, but nothing to stop the ignorant managers who consistently put in ** bids in the first place.

Try and come up with a fair and balanced idea to encourage people to respond to bids, but also something to address the other side as well...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Riferimento: Managers who ignore Transfer Bids

There hasn't been a single decent reason against the 3 strikes etc etc. And clearly, my original suggestion was to provoke ideas.

Feel free (anyone) to point one out.

I am extremely interested in discussing this with others and open to different suggestions, ideas, alterations. Such as single bids you said.

It is very clear that SM has a moribund transfer market; it wasn't me who originally pointed this out.

But every time solutions are suggested, they are shouted down. Normally by those with a vested interest in maintaining the current system. And those who do so fail to offer any balanced, rational alternatives besides bleating how unfair change would be.

It did make me smile at your belief that it is extreme to sell a player after 3 strikes........I am not sure how you would view "random transfer requests" which I would also advocate to improve SM ;)

Let me reiterate....the whole system needs reform, not wholesale perhaps....a series of measures that frees up transfers

It takes seconds per bid' date=' maybe, but can take a while with lots of different bids to go through which is where the problem comes in. Perhaps you would advocate a change to allow only one bid per player at a time, or even one bid in to a team at a time? Then perhaps your "DONT IGNORE ME OR WE'LL SELL YOUR PLAYER ANYWAY" stance would be a touch less extreme.

It's generally considered that the seller is the one that sets the value, as they have the asset?

People have already given many good reasons why your three strikes and sold idea is really, really bad but you won't give up on it.

You seem stuck on the idea that it's ignorant managers who don't respond to bids who should be punished, but nothing to stop the ignorant managers who consistently put in ** bids in the first place.

Try and come up with a fair and balanced idea to encourage people to respond to bids, but also something to address the other side as well...[/quote']

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Riferimento: Managers who ignore Transfer Bids

There hasn't been a single decent reason against the 3 strikes etc etc. And clearly' date=' my original suggestion was to provoke ideas.

Feel free (anyone) to point one out.

I am extremely interested in discussing this with others and open to different suggestions, ideas, alterations. Such as single bids you said.

It is very clear that SM has a moribund transfer market; it wasn't me who originally pointed this out.

But every time solutions are suggested, they are shouted down. Normally by those with a vested interest in maintaining the current system. And those who do so fail to offer any balanced, rational alternatives besides bleating how unfair change would be.

It did make me smile at your belief that it is extreme to sell a player after 3 strikes........I am not sure how you would view "random transfer requests" which I would also advocate to improve SM ;)

Let me reiterate....the whole system needs reform, not wholesale perhaps....a series of measures that frees up transfers[/quote']

Let's go back to ignorance for a minute - I consider it extremely ignorant to just send in a blind bid to another manager with no communication first. It's discourteous to not even communicate with that manager to discuss the sale.

Perhaps if that were done first, to form the basis of a relationship, you would be less likely to have a bid ignored.

Of course, you will always have rude managers who ignore all forms of communication, be it PM's, bids, what have you, but by at least first attempting to open the lines of communication you aren't as likely to be labelled to as equally rude/ignorant.

It is neither fair nor a viable solution to get the market moving again to suggest someone should lose any player simply by not responding to a bid. All it would take is a collective of trouble makers to decide to target the team with the best players and continuously bombard them with bids in an effort to strip any team of their assets or hound the manager out of the game world.

The one solution you have in place to prevent this kind of griefing is the unavailable system, which you would also have removed... It's not a viable solution to get the markets moving.

Unfortunately, I believe the basic setup of the game actually restricts the market, because everyone is after the same players in every game world. Once you have the best 95-99 players in your team, and have hoarded all the youth prospects, why would you need to bother buying/selling for the next 4-5 years? You can't improve your team, and are waiting for the prospects to increase their rating.

If the players improved independently depending on in game form, training, etc, you would have a much more liquid market because the assets would vary from world to world instead of being static.

However, you want a discussion on how to improve the market, so let's see what we can come up with:

1) two squads per team, max 25 per squad - primary, and youth/reserve. End of hoarding, more movement of youth as players develop and people look to manage a team rather than just buy up everyone they can with a high rating.

2) caveat to 1 - the entire finance model has to be reworked to allow any size club the ability to compete financially based on game success rather than life success. This is to counter the large stadiums of the big club giving a massive income, and the obvious benefits to squad size, and allowing a well managed club the ability to generate sufficient income to maintain a squad of 50 players of good rating.

3) player contracts must be given some value - eg chairman doesn't automatically renew just because a player has a rating increase. Managers must MANAGE the contracts themselves, if not renewed by a manager, the player leaves on a free. Again, will help to cut down squad sizes as manual contract renewal for 100+ players will be a pain.

4) unhappy players above L2 will not renew a contract. Buying off concerns has to be removed. Concerns rates adjusted - higher rated players develop concerns faster (higher expectations to play) but conversely younger players develop concerns more slowly as do lower rated players.

5) fitness and form affects ratings, thereby giving slightly lower rated players more viability, thus increasing the pool of 'desirable' players - eg an 88 rated player consistently gaining 9-10 ratings would gain 1-2 rating points on a temporary basis (until form drops consistently down below 9-10).

Players playing poorly will also drop ratings - having all the high rated players, and playing them out of position just to avoid concerns might now cause them to drop in rating a thus be less valuable all within one team.

5b) Player ratings also scale depending on fitness, a player who is

NMF could lose up to 5 rating points, on a sliding scale from 90%). Older players lose fitness faster, and recover more slowly. Why? It may mean you want to consider selling on some of those 32+ year old 91+ rated players from your now-limited squad rather than have a fitness (and therefore rating) fluctuation to worry about.

It could also mean lower rated youngsters are more viable for their fitness and rating consistency whereas they were overlooked before for their lower ratings.

Ultimately, the limited pool of desirable talent is what makes the market static, in my opinion. Everyone wants the same players. Limiting how many you can own, and adding fluctuations to the ratings, both positively and negatively, will help add some flow to the market, I think.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Managers who ignore Transfer Bids

No. It isn't that simple.

a) find a way to punish ignorant managers who don't respond immediately to transfer bids.

B) remove the "unavailable" status to prevent ignorant managers from affecting the freedom of the market. Managers should be allowed to bid for anyone.

Not all managers are in the game to transfer all the time... Maybe they prefer keeping original squads' date=' their favorite players & waiting for players to develop. Punishing them is just a strange idea.

Removing '[b']Unavailable - Contact the manager if you wish to negotiate a deal.[/b]' would just result in alot more bids ignored.

If anything I would prefer another option added ' Unavailable - Don't even bother contacting the manager' to stop annoying pms all the time for a player you have no intention to sell.

I only have a few clubs so not an issue but anyone over 5 or 6 its perfectly understandable no to respond to bids sometimes.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Riferimento: Managers who ignore Transfer Bids

Yes' date=' you do. It takes seconds. And is polite to do so.

How do managers learn to assess valuations if managers don't cooperate.

And who is to say that you decide relative valuations? When a manager is bidding, he or she might be making what they consider a decent bid.

[b']Managers should be given 3 strikes. Log in and out three times without acknowledging a bid.....and SM sells the player automatically.[/b]

Are you sniffing pritsticks? How will that make things any better? It's ridiculous

Dont know why you keep banging on about the unavailable status, I've got a perfect example as to why it should be kept, I've got Diego Costa in a gameworld and a manager keeps bidding on him with the same bid every single time I reject it, even when I messaged him about it, so he's obviously doing it to try and get to me. So I've set Costa as unavailable.

Don't see what your problem is with unavailable, as numerous people have pointed out before you get some pathetic bids from managers (some new, some experienced) and it gets boring. It says 'Unavailable, contact manager to negotiate a deal' for a reason. It takes seconds to decline a bid but it takes second to send the manager a transfer enquiry aswell. If they're pig ignorant like alot of the managers are then there's not alot you can do about it. Believe me I've had hundreds of incidents where I've sent a PM and being ignored so I know what it feels like

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.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...