Jump to content

Development Schedule


Recommended Posts

To keep all of our community up-to-date on future developments within SM Worlds, this is the schedule of work over the coming months:

July

  • Match Engine
  • Game Worlds Economy
  • Squad sizes, Player hogging, Free Agents
  • Manager Activity, Inactive Managers, Transfer Offers
  • SMFA / Cheating
  • Soccer Wiki Improvements
  • UI Revamp

August

  • UI Revamp
  • Improved Game Feed

Remember that Soccer Manager is a game developed by football fans for football fans and our community helps drive the game forward with their ideas and feedback. Due to this all of the work scheduled above has been based on our communities feedback which has been summarised within this thread. This schedule of work isn't set in stone as the different modules of work may take longer than we anticipate and the order of which we work on them may change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Manager inactivity in my opinion should be if you mean logging in be reduced to 18 days if not shorter and GM Holiday mode (not sure what it is now) but 2 weeks used up to 2 times per year.

I honestly don't see a big problem with squad sizes i used to think there was and maybe there is to a extent but there's more than enough players to go around and player hogging is a touchy subject i'd like to know what you mean by this?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

there's more than enough players to go around

I agree there are plenty of players but most managers want to compete for honours and in a well populated Gold Championship there is an extreme shortage of quality players. Theres no balance to the the distribution of talent. Im glad they are looking at free agents. Theres one guy who has set up an under 21 German team in one of my game worlds and manipulated his squad so he wins near every auction for young german prospects. Thats all well and good for that manager but maybe a tad frustrating for the other 200+ managers. I thought SM had created a single player game where managers can buy who they want and to hell with everyone else. I thought Soccer Worlds was somewhere where managers can pit their wits against others on a level playing field.

I welcome any changes but fear they won't go far enough and all you 250 squad managers can rest easy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You should add financial fairplay and a restriction that only allows your clubs total value to be a maximum of 400m. This is a great way to help stop player hogging and I'll also explain on how it can help other teams in the league to strengthen. The player concerns method should be implemented into this idea and an example of that would be if a clubs total value was 500m, the chairman would transfer list a certain amount of your players in order of their value from cheapest to most expensive and then sell those players until your club value is down to 400m or lower. (He shouldn't transfer list the whole team, just enough players that will put your total club value to 400m or just below once all the players have been sold. And goalkeepers shouldn't be transfer listed when using this method.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does this mean you're finally going to start taking action against cheaters? I'm in a gameworld where 75 or so of the teams are controlled by one person. His main account has about 20 or so teams in other gameworlds, and every one of these 75 accounts have 4 or 5 other teams that are in the same gameworlds.

Talk about inactivity? We've had four total transfers among all 80 teams in this gameworld for the last five turns because he thankfully can't sell to himself (except for when a player demands a transfer, then he can sell his 5.6M valued Ashley Young for a whopping 22.0M and his Ranieri Sandro for 18.0M; why aren't transfers subject to SMFA when the player has demanded a transfer?)... but he won't sell to anyone else either. These 75 accounts go 28 or 29 days without logging in, but they always do right before they lose the team. I've reported him and his teams countless times and what do I receive?

"Thank you for bringing this matter to our attention.

We have now investigated and taken action against these accounts.

Please let us know if you have any further issues.

Regards

Soccer Manager"

What action are you taking against these accounts? None of them get removed and none of their reputations have decreased. I actually paid money all the way back in June of 2010 to reserve this team and I've put five years of work into building and maintaining it. We had a great group of managers in this world for years, but one by one they've all left because they can't put up with this cheater anymore. I don't want to give up on something I've put so much time into. How is it fair that this one guy can get away with this for so long?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Manager inactivity in my opinion should be if you mean logging in be reduced to 18 days if not shorter and GM Holiday mode (not sure what it is now) but 2 weeks used up to 2 times per year.

One of the keys to a good Game World is active managers. Therefore it doesn't do a Game World any good when a manager can log in once a month to keep control of their club. Therefore we will be reducing the 30 day required log in for non-Custom Game Worlds. I created a thread on this subject last week and we've also asked our community on twitter for their thoughts (we'll be doing the same on Facebook shortly). The general view is that 30 days is too long and that is should be reduced to either 14 or 21 days.

I honestly don't see a big problem with squad sizes i used to think there was and maybe there is to a extent but there's more than enough players to go around and player hogging is a touchy subject i'd like to know what you mean by this?

There's more than enough players to go around in any Game World but there isn't enough players that managers really want to go around.

I agree there are plenty of players but most managers want to compete for honours and in a well populated Gold Championship there is an extreme shortage of quality players. Theres no balance to the the distribution of talent.

This is what we've come to the conclusion of and hence all of the debates over the years about player hogging and squad sizes.

Im glad they are looking at free agents. Theres one guy who has set up an under 21 German team in one of my game worlds and manipulated his squad so he wins near every auction for young german prospects. Thats all well and good for that manager but maybe a tad frustrating for the other 200+ managers. I thought SM had created a single player game where managers can buy who they want and to hell with everyone else. I thought Soccer Worlds was somewhere where managers can pit their wits against others on a level playing field.

Agree completely with this and we've had a lot of feedback along similar lines and that's why it's being visited so that we can improve this area of the transfer market.

QUOTE=Ima Wrongun;n5101549]I welcome any changes but fear they won't go far enough and all you 250 squad managers can rest easy.

I'd like a 60/70 max squad cap or less

There are numerous changes that can be implemented (which i'll touch on below) that you can implement which are more realistic and won't impose and official squad cap.

user interface which is NEVER popular around these parts lol

When is it ever popular for any website or game? However' date=' i'm going to propose that we give some people access to the new design first for feedback and once it goes live you'll have the option to change between new and old for a certain period of time.

Does this mean you're finally going to start taking action against cheaters? I'm in a gameworld where 75 or so of the teams are controlled by one person. His main account has about 20 or so teams in other gameworlds, and every one of these 75 accounts have 4 or 5 other teams that are in the same gameworlds.

Talk about inactivity? We've had four total transfers among all 80 teams in this gameworld for the last five turns because he thankfully can't sell to himself (except for when a player demands a transfer, then he can sell his 5.6M valued Ashley Young for a whopping 22.0M and his Ranieri Sandro for 18.0M; why aren't transfers subject to SMFA when the player has demanded a transfer?)... but he won't sell to anyone else either. These 75 accounts go 28 or 29 days without logging in, but they always do right before they lose the team. I've reported him and his teams countless times and what do I receive?

"Thank you for bringing this matter to our attention.

We have now investigated and taken action against these accounts.

Please let us know if you have any further issues.

Regards

Soccer Manager"

What action are you taking against these accounts? None of them get removed and none of their reputations have decreased. I actually paid money all the way back in June of 2010 to reserve this team and I've put five years of work into building and maintaining it. We had a great group of managers in this world for years, but one by one they've all left because they can't put up with this cheater anymore. I don't want to give up on something I've put so much time into. How is it fair that this one guy can get away with this for so long?

Drop me a PM with full details and i'll look into this asap.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm just going to elaborate on the following.

To keep all of our community up-to-date on future developments within SM Worlds' date=' this is the schedule of work over the coming months:

July

  • Squad sizes, Player hogging, Free Agents
  • SMFA / Cheating

We've been working on these areas for the past few weeks. Prior to that we've spent considerable time reading all of the feedback on the forum, twitter, via email etc. There's a lot of differing views on the subjects of squad sizes and player hogging and we've tried to take into account this when working on our proposed changes. We also believe that the changes we're making will also help to improve the SMFA and reduce cheating.

So what exactly are our changes?

  • Changing the player valuations:
    • A new formula which works out a player's value which generally makes the top end players worth more;
    • Age;
    • Position (new - forwards worth more);
    • Rating;
    • Potential rating (makes younger hotly tipped players worth more);
    • Morale (plays a big role, if your player has concerns it will significantly devalue them).

    [*]Increasing top players wages:

    • Should help reduce star hogging. Also combined with the morale it won't be worthwhile hogging them all as they will cost more to have in your squad and their value with decline if they develop concerns.

    [*]Changing how much you can bid for players:

    • All clubs value players the same;
    • Smaller range to bid for as players values are more accurate;
    • Everyone values free agent the same;
    • Made part exchange transfers simpler by both Chairman valuing the players the same (so no need for the bit where it tells you what both Chairman value the transfer at);
    • A club's balance is the only thing that allows you to bid more for players.

    [*]Concerns:

    • Removed the ability to buy off concerns;
    • As morale effects their value you will receive significantly less when selling them.

You feedback on this would be appreciated.

I'm also going to look into the possibility of creating a new Game World where we can invite some managers to come and test the changes prior to it going live.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are managers in the same custom game world as me that only log in every 3 - 4 weeks. Why can't custom game worlds manager activity be lowered to 14 as well?

It's up to the Game World owner what they set the required log in to and if they wanted they could set it to 14 days for example.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm just going to elaborate on the following.

[*]Changing how much you can bid for players:

  • All clubs value players the same;
  • Smaller range to bid for as players values are more accurate;
  • Everyone values free agent the same;
  • Made part exchange transfers simpler by both Chairman valuing the players the same (so no need for the bit where it tells you what both Chairman value the transfer at);
  • A club's balance is the only thing that allows you to bid more for players.

Oh Crikey. You decided to grind the transfer market to a halt in the end. No worries. I was thinking of leaving anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Theres a lot of feedback in here, some of it better thought out than other parts, so Im going to run through my own opinion as a long term player on some of it.

I also want the maximum amount of days a manager can be inactive to be reduced to 14 days. And what will you do to fix player hogging?

Covered this elsewhere' date=' but 14 is too short. People on holiday may well struggle to get logged in while away. Someone countered this with a comment along the lines of you can access the internet practically anywhere and on mobile so no excuse, but that argument doesnt stand up at all when a lot of places either have very poor internet or charge to use it. If youre going to go down a route of a 14 day log in then youd need to give holiday mode coverage to everyone for at least 20 days per calendar year. Yes we all know some people log in periodically just to keep their team and its annoying, but you cant just make a change like that, to that sort of time frame, most people have at least two weeks holiday a year and its not fair on them.

Options here for me are 21 days log in or holiday mode for all.

I'd like a 60/70 max squad cap or less

Covered elsewhere more times than I can count, but thats too low. If a manager has a squad of anywhere near 100 players or more you can all but guarantee hes losing money every week and will be in debt sooner or later. Now while that might not help you managers looking at his squad thinking I want some of those players, its not fair hes player hogging keep in mind hes unlikely to be able to outbid you for new star players coming in the game. If a manager has a squad of over 100 players then hes either been with that team for a long time (in which case he deserves all the players and stars he has), or hes bought a lot of average players (in which case hell be losing money very quickly as his player ratings start to drop). In either case, if that managed has spotted a player no else did, or he won the bidding war then hes entitled to his players.

I do think current caps of 250 are too high though. 100-150 is probably more balanced, especially bearing in mind a squad at around 100 players works out roughly at 1.5 million wages per week.

Does this mean you're finally going to start taking action against cheaters? I'm in a gameworld where 75 or so of the teams are controlled by one person. His main account has about 20 or so teams in other gameworlds' date=' and every one of these 75 accounts have 4 or 5 other teams that are in the same gameworlds.

Talk about inactivity? We've had four total transfers among all 80 teams in this gameworld for the last five turns because he thankfully can't sell to himself (except for when a player demands a transfer, then he can sell his 5.6M valued Ashley Young for a whopping 22.0M and his Ranieri Sandro for 18.0M; why aren't transfers subject to SMFA when the player has demanded a transfer?)... but he won't sell to anyone else either. These 75 accounts go 28 or 29 days without logging in, but they always do right before they lose the team. I've reported him and his teams countless times and what do I receive?

[/quote']

Ok, Joseph I dont want to insult you here in anyway, but what youre saying doesnt sound plausible, unless its someone dedicated with an axe to grind. 20 accounts with 4-5 teams each means over 80-100 teams, theres no way a person could actively manage like this. I dont doubt this manager has multiple accounts as the deals youve mentioned are ridiculous, but 75? Thered be no point, theres not much you can do with 75 teams you cant do with 5 even if manipulating the transfer market. Also, in order to have that many teams he would need to have 75 different accounts as you cant have more than one team in the same game world. Can you imagine the amount of work logging in and out of 75 accounts would take.

Also, Im sorry to say, it sounds like this game worlds is a dead one if theres just 5 teams left with active managers which is always a shame.

I'm just going to elaborate on the following.

We've been working on these areas for the past few weeks. Prior to that we've spent considerable time reading all of the feedback on the forum' date=' twitter, via email etc. There's a lot of differing views on the subjects of squad sizes and player hogging and we've tried to take into account this when working on our proposed changes. We also believe that the changes we're making will also help to improve the SMFA and reduce cheating.

So what exactly are our changes?

[list']

[*]Changing the player valuations:

  • A new formula which works out a player's value which generally makes the top end players worth more;
  • Age;
  • Position (new - forwards worth more);
  • Rating;
  • Potential rating (makes younger hotly tipped players worth more);
  • Morale (plays a big role, if your player has concerns it will significantly devalue them).

[*]Increasing top players wages:

  • Should help reduce star hogging. Also combined with the morale it won't be worthwhile hogging them all as they will cost more to have in your squad and their value with decline if they develop concerns.

[*]Changing how much you can bid for players:

  • All clubs value players the same;
  • Smaller range to bid for as players values are more accurate;
  • Everyone values free agent the same;
  • Made part exchange transfers simpler by both Chairman valuing the players the same (so no need for the bit where it tells you what both Chairman value the transfer at);
  • A club's balance is the only thing that allows you to bid more for players.

[*]Concerns:

  • Removed the ability to buy off concerns;
  • As morale effects their value you will receive significantly less when selling them.

You feedback on this would be appreciated.

I'm also going to look into the possibility of creating a new Game World where we can invite some managers to come and test the changes prior to it going live.

Now to work through Stevens comments.

  • Changing the player valuations: - Yep sounds good, will be interested to see how thats going to work so will reserve any judgment until then.
  • A new formula which works out a player's value which generally makes the top end players worth more; - Ok, similar here, but would point out that top end players do tend to be considerably more expensive anyway, especially when also young.
  • Potential rating (makes younger hotly tipped players worth more); - Now this is interesting. This would mean someone has to decide which players could be stars and is different to what we normally see. I can see how this is done in Football Manager for example, the game knows exactly what the players top end potential is, but how can you do that with real life players? Theres no way to really know.
  • Morale (plays a big role, if your player has concerns it will significantly devalue them);- Not sure about this but it could work, will depend on how its implemented I think.
  • Increasing top players wages: -Ok, this seems fair enough, itll impact the bigger teams more so I can see the logic here as itll help balance the playing field with the smaller teams. Is it also worth reducing the lower end wages as well? Not many league 2 players get £3000 in real life.
  • All clubs value players the same; -Yep seems fair enough, this will means that the first team to spot a potential star and put their maximum bid in will win, which is entirely fair in my eyes.
  • Made part exchange transfers simpler by both Chairman valuing the players the same (so no need for the bit where it tells you what both Chairman value the transfer at); - This was badly needed and long overdue. Pleased to see that one in here as its one of the main reasons internal deals are dead in a lot of game worlds.

I'm also going to look into the possibility of creating a new Game World where we can invite some managers to come and test the changes prior to it going live Id be interested in this. Itll be like the old game world testing place we had before. Cant remember the name of it now.

You should add financial fairplay and a restriction that only allows your clubs total value to be a maximum of 400m. This is a great way to help stop player hogging and I'll also explain on how it can help other teams in the league to strengthen. The player concerns method should be implemented into this idea and an example of that would be if a clubs total value was 500m' date=' the chairman would transfer list a certain amount of your players in order of their value from cheapest to most expensive and then sell those players until your club value is down to 400m or lower. (He shouldn't transfer list the whole team, just enough players that will put your total club value to 400m or just below once all the players have been sold. And goalkeepers shouldn't be transfer listed when using this method.)[/quote']

I dont think this is a good idea. I can easily get a team to 400 million, does that mean I should just rest on my laurels now and not try and improve my side? Id be against any sort of squad value cap, its only going to penalise those managers that are good at the game. It may have some value in custom game worlds, but not the basic championship game worlds.

If Im reading this correctly Manchester United will now be able to bid as much as Chesterfield for new free agents. That sounds catestrophic to me. 9 times out of ten Manchester United teams dont need new talent. Theyve usually plenty of talent to trade for new young talent. The old system just needed slight tinkering as some teams were manipulating their squads to make sure they win every player. Maybe you could limit the number of free agents bought in any 30 day period. Or base chairman values based on the size of the squad and average rating with an advantage to those who keep there squad to a sensible number.

Why is this catastrophic? If the Manchester boss spots a player coming in he has as much right as anyone else has to bid on that player. It seems to me that youre missing the point of this game, when starting a new league you pick a top team because you want to start with the best squads and make them even better, you start in the middle leagues because your after some challenge but want a decent squad to start with, or you start with the bottom teams and see what you can do to get them up with the elite by wheeling and dealing. The fact that top teams have sold their players and bought other talent is utterly irrelevant, the only thing that should determine how much a team can bid for a players is their capital. Caps on how many free agents you can buy per month is just making things needlessly complicated.

Personally I always start at the bottom and work my way up, and Ive done so in some of the most difficult leagues in this game, fully populated by forumers that all know what theyre doing. Thats where the challenge is, and Id have no problems with another manager coming in over the top of me for the next big star, its what happens in real life.

Didn't see it here anywhere but is the new match engine still on for this month Steven? That's another thing that is in desperate need of its update.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Covered elsewhere more times than I can count' date=' but that’s too low. If a manager has a squad of anywhere near 100 players or more you can all but guarantee he’s losing money every week and will be in debt sooner or later. Now while that might not help you managers looking at his squad thinking ‘‘I want some of those players, it’s not fair he’s player hogging’’ keep in mind he’s unlikely to be able to outbid you for new star players coming in the game. If a manager has a squad of over 100 players then he’s either been with that team for a long time (in which case he deserves all the players and stars he has), or he’s bought a lot of average players (in which case he’ll be losing money very quickly as his player ratings start to drop). In either case, if that managed has spotted a player no else did, or he won the bidding war then he’s entitled to his players.

I do think current caps of 250 are too high though. 100-150 is probably more balanced, especially bearing in mind a squad at around 100 players works out roughly at 1.5 million wages per week.[/quote']

I can assure you it's very easy to earn lot of money. My squad is composed by 54 players (31 loaned out) and I can increase balance of about 30M per year. With about 100 players squad I probably increase less than 30M but I'd increase balance yet. There is a little trick without cheating to bypass need of money doing defender transfer market. I'd cut squad cap to not allow some mangers to catch all promising players excluding others. It's not a money problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is this catastrophic? If the Manchester boss spots a player coming in he has as much right as anyone else has to bid on that player. It seems to me that you’re missing the point of this game' date=' when starting a new league you pick a top team because you want to start with the best squads and make them even better, you start in the middle leagues because your after some challenge but want a decent squad to start with, or you start with the bottom teams and see what you can do to get them up with the elite by wheeling and dealing. The fact that top teams have sold their players and bought other talent is utterly irrelevant, the only thing that should determine how much a team can bid for a players is their capital. Caps on how many free agents you can buy per month is just making things needlessly complicated.

Personally I always start at the bottom and work my way up, and I’ve done so in some of the most difficult leagues in this game, fully populated by forumers that all know what they’re doing. That’s where the challenge is, and I’d have no problems with another manager coming in over the top of me for the next big star, it’s what happens in real life.

Didn't see it here anywhere but is the new match engine still on for this month Steven? That's another thing that is in desperate need of its update.[/quote']

Its catastrophic in a gold championship sense surely. These changes are yet another hurdle for new managers to jump at a time where game worlds are becoming deserts. Non gold aren't really affected by these changes to me. I work my way up from the bottom. Theres nothing in the changes for me. Something about star hogging. I honestly didn't know that was going on. Player hogging yes. Big style. I guess player hogging is something they'll return to when gold subscription falls even more. Its good to see SM does listen to its gold customers who predominantly are Man Utd and Real Madrid owners. So long as these Man Utd and Real Madrid owners can elicit pleasure from pummelling AI teams week in week out its all good in the hood. The also rans don't have much of a voice round these parts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’d be against any sort of squad value cap' date=' its only going to penalise those managers that are good at the game. It may have some value in custom game worlds, but not the basic championship game worlds.

[/quote']

I disagree. A squad cap would disadvantage those that are poor at the game. Surely success isn't gauged by the size of your commodities portfolio. For people who stick at this long term it seems like a stock market exercise. It could be a route to go down in fairness. A sort of Soccerdaq. This is becoming less a Soccer management game now. I've lost count of the people who tell me the only way to succeed on here is to have a 100+ player portfolio to succeed. You just can't get the dividends with under 100 apparently. I guess I am missing the point. I saw Soccer Manager on the door thinking I fancied a bit of that. Be like those footie manager sims. Tactics n the odd transfer or two. Turned out I was missing the point. I don't know how I'm going to square my teams at the shareholders meeting. They are lacking in sizeable dividends. Is it any wonder though that people grow disenchanted. I don't really want 100+ players in a squad but if I don't I disadvantage myself.

First come first served fair? So say SM put the free agents up at 3 AM in the morning and Mr Tottenham Hotspur can't make it to be first because he's gone to a funeral. Is that fair? Me and you obviously think its fair but how does that work for everyone else?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I disagree. A squad cap would disadvantage those that are poor at the game. Surely success isn't gauged by the size of your commodities portfolio. For people who stick at this long term it seems like a stock market exercise. It could be a route to go down in fairness. A sort of Soccerdaq. This is becoming less a Soccer management game now. I've lost count of the people who tell me the only way to succeed on here is to have a 100+ player portfolio to succeed. You just can't get the dividends with under 100 apparently. I guess I am missing the point. I saw Soccer Manager on the door thinking I fancied a bit of that. Be like those footie manager sims. Tactics n the odd transfer or two. Turned out I was missing the point. I don't know how I'm going to square my teams at the shareholders meeting. They are lacking in sizeable dividends. Is it any wonder though that people grow disenchanted. I don't really want 100+ players in a squad but if I don't I disadvantage myself.

First come first served fair? So say SM put the free agents up at 3 AM in the morning and Mr Tottenham Hotspur can't make it to be first because he's gone to a funeral. Is that fair? Me and you obviously think its fair but how does that work for everyone else?

We clearly don’t think along the same lines on some key topics as I’m not seeing your point here at all and I’m not sure why a squad value cap of 400 million would be a disadvantage to those that are poor at the game. I doubt there’d be many poor managers out there that ever get to a squad value of that sort of amount in any sort of competitive game world unless they were starting with a big side and had no competition for players.

Talking about squad caps, I don’t agree with those that say you must have 100+ players, you clearly don’t and can build excellent teams with less than half of that number. One of the things I think is a problem is that because the game engine is so horrendously poor people turn to scouting for stars and risers to keep it interesting because the tactics side of the game is a lottery.

Regarding buying players, yes I think first come first served is the right way to do it. I’m sorry, but if manager X misses a player coming on to the database and other managers bid first then that’s no one’s fault but their own. That’s assuming the first managers bid the maximum they can, which is almost never the case. There’s simply no other way to do it, leaving it so lower league teams can bid significantly more doesn’t work. I’ve just watched a manager pay a total of 15.4 million for two 78 rated players that didn’t improve his side, then quit a month later, is that fair? Managers that do their research and wait for star players coming onto the database, or go in for risers, have every right to bid on those players no matter which team they are. The fact that bigger teams have more resource than smaller teams to bid on those players is irrelevant.

Link to comment
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...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...