Jump to content

Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, smut said:

Sounds like I won't see 10 years playing this game.

SM have had very little respect for their paying customers it has been disgusting, their last lot of so called improvements made the game worse and now they are treating the game the same as the single player game, thinking that their customers are all 11 year olds.

All very sad to see those that invented the game are now so clueless about it.

That's disappointing to hear, what exactly do you not like in the proposed changes? And even if you believe they are all terrible, you can carry on in your current GW as it currently is.

We have the utmost respect for our users and that is why we are planning on investing £100ks and an entire development team in a year long project to redevelop the game.

Why exactly do you think it will be aimed at 11 year olds when the proposals make the game more in depth, add complexity and should enhance the entire game?

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 124
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Hi Steven, all this sounds promising. However (as others have pointed out) I do not agree a lot with the ratings change. The beauty about SM Worlds is that updates come from real world performances -

"personally I love the real world aspect of this game" The same for me, I would leave SM after 11 years, if we lost this aspect of Real Life/Real World and I think many others would. Also I

- more information needed around this. Think I speak for a lot of people when I say the beauty of SM Worlds is the Unique Selling Point (USP) of real-world changes of players. Now, if this is going to

Posted Images

33 minutes ago, smut said:

Sounds like I won't see 10 years playing this game.

SM have had very little respect for their paying customers it has been disgusting, their last lot of so called improvements made the game worse and now they are treating the game the same as the single player game, thinking that their customers are all 11 year olds.

All very sad to see those that invented the game are now so clueless about it.

Couldn’t agree more with the way they’ve went on with paying customers. Yeah he put hundreds into the game(mostly when I was younger) just to have game worlds ruined by people that are so sad to the point they pay for multiple gold memberships just to be able to cheat their way to the squad they want. No way to report them other than to submit a bug report which then gets closed ‘due to not being a bug’ and of course seeing as the multi accounters pay money, SM couldn’t care less. 
 

also why is the discord server private? I searched all over online and couldn’t find it, so I dm’d her royal highness ‘Roy Keane’ and got a reply typical of him and his arrogance and refusing to give me any info on it. Surely getting people into a discord server would work just aswell as the forums if not better

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, chris16 said:

That's disappointing to hear, what exactly do you not like in the proposed changes? And even if you believe they are all terrible, you can carry on in your current GW as it currently is.

We have the utmost respect for our users and that is why we are planning on investing £100ks and an entire development team in a year long project to redevelop the game.

Why exactly do you think it will be aimed at 11 year olds when the proposals make the game more in depth, add complexity and should enhance the entire game?

 

 

 

You can’t say you have the utmost respect for your customers when the game has gone ignored for 10 year. The leagues haven’t been updated n about 4 year. Just because someone now is putting time into responding to people on the forum doesn’t mean it can wipe away the previous years where the game and loyal customers has been neglected. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think there are some good ideas proposed. Squad cap, match engine and cheating definitely needs attention but there are also aspects that should be left alone. Too many tweaks and it becomes sm21 not sm worlds, not enough tweaks and long term managers may feel not enough is being done. Its a tricky job but hopefully sm will get the balance right 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don’t understand why some of you guys are moaning. You complained when there were no updates now you are complaining when there will be updates. It makes no sense.... the game is going to be more in depth and immersive. Much more challenging and more to think about it’s surely a good thing. Most importantly they have said old game worlds will remain the same if people don’t want the changes. You get the best of both worlds. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, chris16 said:

The +/- may be too heavy or it may be too weak. The exact number can be tweaked and changed to get the right balance in the new 'Beta' GWs and based on community feedback.

For example it might be good to have a higher range for younger players? who knows? lets see what you guys come up with.

 

Doesn't this mean a div 3/4/5 club will buy 10 85 rated players and will literally end up with 90s? 

I am very sceptical with the +/- 5 weighted rating.

Are there any alternatives in the thought process?

Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Fez17_1888 said:

You can’t say you have the utmost respect for your customers when the game has gone ignored for 10 year. The leagues haven’t been updated n about 4 year. Just because someone now is putting time into responding to people on the forum doesn’t mean it can wipe away the previous years where the game and loyal customers has been neglected. 

With all due respect, people at SM should print this and read it every morning before they start working. No change or improvement will wipe out all these years in which customer requests have been blatantly ignored and despised.

That said, I hope that from now on we can turn the page and work towards a future orientation all together, as a community. For my part, I promise that this is my last message complaining, and that any future input I give will be constructive and aimed at helping developers to do their work in the best possible way.

Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Nameless said:

Doesn't this mean a div 3/4/5 club will buy 10 85 rated players and will literally end up with 90s? 

I am very sceptical with the +/- 5 weighted rating.

Are there any alternatives in the thought process?

I agree with you. And what about GKs? Basically. following your reasoning, any first-choice GK will have a +5 in the end.

I believe this could be an interesting feature, but +-2/3 would be enough. Or better, these factors could compete for another value, instead of rating (shape, or whatever) that would concretely affect the player performance.

Rating-wise, however, I believe that the most urgent and important improvement would be a more consistent, reliable and frequent review of player ratings.

Link to post
Share on other sites

"Utmost respect for our users" - Really?? Wow! Whilst yous have chased the money for the single player game, SM Worlds has turned into a shell of what it once was. We don't hear anything from yous for years, ignore all requests for help to eradicate the breeding ground for cheats and suddenly you want our input?? No hint of an apology to those who have stuck by this multiplayer game and we now learn that a select few from a closed shop have ideas on how to improve the game and we have to give our opinions?? Im sorry but respect needs to be earned. Im writing this with a serious heavy heart but as a player who has been here since 2007 and piled hundreds of pounds into SM over that time i am finally giving a voice to the countless amount of Managers who have quit in disgust over several years. Once that has been acknowledged by the developers then maybe i will give a constructive opinion on the proposed changes. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The +/- 5 rating screams of trying to cut costs/time spent doing ratings based on real life, rather than trying to improve the game. I don’t see how +/- 5 rating improves the game.

So basically the plan is to code +/- 5 rating into the game, saving the company the manual labour of  doing rating changes based on irl performance, which I assume is time consuming & requires various resources & thats why you came up with the +/- 5 idea.  However the current ratings model is your USP, don’t change it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would say suggest other things as well:

1) Regarding injuries and suspensions, all players (including goalkeepers) are able to get injured/suspended. 

2) For matches, allow us to choose which kit colour for our team and for the opponents so that when we watch the game there's no kit conflict.

3) For cup matches/knockout matches, fix the extra time and penalties so that they actually show it (currently, when a game goes past 90 minutes, it's a blank pitch with no match showed).

4) In GameWorlds with divisions, make it possible to have a different number of teams in each division instead having the same number of clubs per division.

5) Include more international teams so that there can also be continental tournaments.

6) Turn the youth team into a youth/reserve team, or have a youth team and a reserve team, with a minimum and maximum number of players.

 

 

Thanks, and keep up the great work

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been in the soccermanager world for more than 8 years and I have around 170 players in my squad between senior and junior players. I am aware that it can be quite a large number but it is the interesting thing about signing, since the rest of the coaches do not mind signing players, especially youth. I would just like to know what the new squad size limit will be for each team and if this change could affect my players and probably lose them or remain in my squad. Thank you and I hope you have a lot of wisdom to implement the changes.

Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, dnina10 said:

I would say suggest other things as well:

1) Regarding injuries and suspensions, all players (including goalkeepers) are able to get injured/suspended. 

2) For matches, allow us to choose which kit colour for our team and for the opponents so that when we watch the game there's no kit conflict.

3) For cup matches/knockout matches, fix the extra time and penalties so that they actually show it (currently, when a game goes past 90 minutes, it's a blank pitch with no match showed).

4) In GameWorlds with divisions, make it possible to have a different number of teams in each division instead having the same number of clubs per division.

5) Include more international teams so that there can also be continental tournaments.

6) Turn the youth team into a youth/reserve team, or have a youth team and a reserve team, with a minimum and maximum number of players.

 

 

Thanks, and keep up the great work

All good ideas, thanks. We will add them to our list.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't change the SM Risers-method. Would be stupid if I have for example Sergino Dest for 85 in GW 1 and 87 in GW 2. What's the logic of that. 

+ 5 / - 5, please no... 

I also love the link to the real football. To be honest if that's going away I'm afraid I will lose interest to play this game. 

8 hours ago, Kieran_S91 said:

Judging by most comments I think we all would like to know when this update is looking likely too arrive? 

I like a lot of the points made in the opening posts but hope it gets put through proper tests to make sure it all works before it’s implemented.

Glad to see concerns getting revamped. It’s easy for a player to get a concern in game but ridiculously hard to get the concern down/off.

To be honest that's also a link to real football. So for me no problem the concerns are difficult to get down. 

Probably in 8 - 9 years got just 2 players in level 5. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand testing a new match engine or the +5/-5 will take time but surely new Custom Setup features like squad caps, only sign African/British/South American players rather than just from one country, only sign a certain amount of foreign players, you have to sell a player once he reaches a certain rating etc etc should be added as soon as possible. The more options you have the better. Also things Marek mentioned about lowering the 30 day log in for standard worlds and custom owners being able to remove managers should also be added as soon as possible as they will immediately have a positive effect on the game.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I play in a gameworld that is public but know 95%+ of the managers personally. Will all the changes be forced on current gameworlds? I pay for Gold Membership and have done for some time now so would kind of like a say in the matter. I understand that SM Worlds can be seen as a little outdated in some aspects but it has bits to it that no other football game has.

The real-life ratings are something that I, and everyone I know love about the game, they force managers into being proactive with their players and keep them on their toes, as well as inviting constant transfer negototiations between everyone. I love finding a gem and beaitng my mates to the signing and watching them rise, but it seems this +/- idea completely takes away from that.

Kylian Mbappe is arguably the most sought after player on the whole game, amazing rating and really young, but this change could somehow dictate that a much lesser player becomes more desirable than him because Mbappe isn't on form and someone else is. I understand that form must be taken into consideration but it should be via the likes of; moral, fitness and overall team performance (like it is currently), and then maybe contracts, player's role within their team, etc. Things that it seems the manager has more control over.

I aim to buy young talent and watch them grow. I love the rating changes for the big 5 leagues that tend to happen twice a year. I think the things people want is consistency above anything else. Let your customers know when the changes are going to happen, how long they're going to take, how many teams are to be done that day. At the moments it's more of a guessing game.

Concerns and loans are another factor for improvement. They seems far too rigid, a player will become concerned due to gametime and being loaned out, and there's currently no way aorund it when in actuality it doesn't always work like this.

In one game world I have a large squad whereby I loan my friends players in lower divisions to help them out. By loaning out players under the new changes I am risking them going down ratings?! 

I really fear that if you take away certain aspects of this game you will drive away a huge proportion of people who currently love the game despite its inconsistencies.

The game is simple, it requires as little or as much time as you want. Streamline it, modernise it, but don't change the selling points that made people play it in the first place.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just would like to add the point injuries and suspensions to gk should also be added as it clearly is missing right now. Also, believe frequency of injuries will be reduced as the current ones are too unrealistic.

 I’m quite excited tbh to check out the game with in-depth options esp tactically. Also, the match engine is too outdated for 2020. A freekick after a card almost never goes in and so on. Hopefully, this gets resilved

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, thorgan lesar said:

To be honest that's also a link to real football. So for me no problem the concerns are difficult to get down. 

Probably in 8 - 9 years got just 2 players in level 5. 

Agree it’s realistic but only to a certain extent.

If a player has a level 4 concern it shouldn’t take multiple seasons of constantly playing the player to get that concern completely off.

In real life if a player is concerned about his game time he wouldn’t still be concerned after continually playing for 2/3 seasons would he?

Ive had players take over half a season to get a level 1 concern off, I would go as far as saying that a player in real life wouldn’t still be concerned about his game time after playing 10+ games in a row.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Been discussing with my friends who played SM with me since 2008. They are all seems skeptic about this reboot.

First of all, we want to keep the game simple. We have been playing SM for leisure and don't want to spend more than 30 minutes per day for a game. There is a reason we play SM worlds, not other football managers game. Please don't make SM worlds and SM21 similar. Keep the game unique to each other.

We are very skeptical with the Club Facilities part. I think it will make SM complicated, time-consuming and similar to other football management game.

We are really looking forward with improvement of the cheating report. Please make it a priority with the improvement of concern that could combat player hoarders.

I don't understand the negative reaction about dynamic rating. I think it is a great addition. In real life, we can see that a lot of low-rated players having a great form and benching the higher-rated player. Or new players need time to settle to the new club/tactics.

I think +/- 5 is fair. But I scared every long-term manager will get the players +5 anyway and it becomes redundant. Make +5 very hard to achieve like having 10 rating for 5 game in a row + 100% morale + 100% chemistry + 100% condition. In addition, make morale and chemistry hard to get to 100%. Currently it is too easy to improve morale, just give 2 years contract every season, and in season 3 we get 100% morale. And I think player form should have the highest weight for the flexible rating to add more unpredictability.

My suggestion:

Form: -3 to +2 (baseline set to 6); to get negative form is somewhat rare

Morale: -1 to +1 (baseline set to 50)

Condition: -2 to 0 (baseline at 100%)

Chemistry/training add the other 2.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all,

First time posting here but have played SM Worlds for over 6 years with friends who have been on for longer than that. We, like many in this forum, have invested daily time, group chats, 1am-phone-calls-for-transfer-deals and SM Worlds has been something we've all enjoyed through all of that time (even with the bugs and broken aspects).

It's pleasing to see changes being proposed and I tend to agree with the consensus - a timeline is needed and careful steps have to be taken with regards to the player rating flexibility. From my understanding you guys seem to be focusing on punishing player hoarders - is that a fair assessment? If so - THANK YOU.

One proposal which I think would really benefit the player ratings is if the flexibility only has the power to move by +/- 3 rather than +/- 5. I also think the process of updating the base rating needs to be done on a more regular basis - top 5 leagues should be 3 or 4 times a year and all other leagues should be twice a year. You clearly have a dedicated audience base who are prepared to help with this - @Sir Rahul as one example!

Another crucial area would be to give GameWorld owners the opportunity to manage blatant cheating. I had an open GW which I had to make private because of one individual who went on to own 5 or 6 clubs- it was blatant and SM admin overturned the transfers, but left him in the GW. I'm now losing the opportunity to have genuine managers take over because the league is application only. It seems nearly every large GW has cheaters involved, and paying customers should have the ability to manage this more effectively.

Overall it's great to see changes and I think it's a step in the right direction.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

What am I missing here? The proposed update/change will happen in 9-12 months. Since it's SM let's say 15 months.

Until then we are stuck with the current gameplay, bugs, cheats, match engines, etc. 

12 months means 3/4 seasons for a 38 league matches and even more seasons for smaller GWs. 

We were told a update will happen on the 15th anniversary (some time during September). In mid October SM comes up with ideas that will take effect in 9-12 months (15-18 my guess) time. 

SM intentionally/unintentionally averted this quite cleverly. Is there no temporary solutions for 12 months to at the very least improve the match engines? 

As always I am very sure no admin will answer me. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Appreciate the reply to my query. I think the +/- system 'could' work, happy to see how it's implemented, however the bigger issue is that base ratings have to be reviewed more often (and to a schedule).

An 87 rated Antonio Rukavina should not be able to play like a 92 rated player. Rukavina and 87 rated Reece James are not the same.

Or Sebastian Giovinco. Somehow still 90 rated. Got his 90 in 2012, hardly played for Juve in 2013-14 and 2014-15 - kept his 90 - then left to play four years in Toronto and now been in Saudi since 2018. 

He was excellent in MLS no doubt but should have dropped. Is it fair if he can perform the same level as a 90 rated Thorgan Hazard or 90 rated Erling Haaland?

Imo this is already an issue but +/- 5 would make it worse. Point being there are many 86+ players in minor leagues that keep their ratings for years because the league is never reviewed. Smart managers will exploit that when the solution is just to drop them.

I'm mostly fine with whatever other proposed changes there are - as long as the old UI stays. For me ratings are the biggest part my interest in the game - they help me know a lot more about footballers. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Suggestions for a rating schedule:

Dec-Jan: PL, La Liga, Serie A, Bundesliga, Ligue 1

Feb: Championship (+ League 1, 2) and other second tier Top 5 leagues

March-April: Eredivisie, Liga Nos, Super Lig, Belgium Jupiler

May-June: PL, La Liga, Serie A, Bundesliga, Ligue 1

July-August: Greece, Austria, Russia, Ukraine, Switzerland, Poland, Croatia, Czech Republic, Scotland

September-October-Nov: Mexico, Argentina, Brazil, (other South American leagues), MLS, Australia, China, Japan, (other Asian leagues), MIDDLE EAST

---

Outlandish? I don't think so. If reviews aren't dragged out this can be achieved. Of course a lot of non-European leagues run by calendar year, so you'd allocate those reviews to Sep-Nov.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Sir Rahul said:

An 87 rated Antonio Rukavina should not be able to play like a 92 rated player. Rukavina and 87 rated Reece James are not the same.

This one is different topic to flexible rating.

But I can give you an example that +5 make sense. 85-rated Bastoni played like 90 rated player and benching Godin/Skriniar (92).

I believe +/- 5 is fair.

If you argue that Rukavina and James shouldn't be rated the same, It's the base rating that needs to be overhauled. And I agree with it. There are 59 numbers below 60, why don't SM stretch it's rating?

It's like old FIFA and PES. I'm kinda annoyed that old PES gave 50 GK skills for outfielder, meanwhile FIFA gave 10 for them. There are 49 numbers "wasted" ffs 😅

Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Nameless said:

What am I missing here? The proposed update/change will happen in 9-12 months. Since it's SM let's say 15 months.

Until then we are stuck with the current gameplay, bugs, cheats, match engines, etc. 

12 months means 3/4 seasons for a 38 league matches and even more seasons for smaller GWs. 

We were told a update will happen on the 15th anniversary (some time during September). In mid October SM comes up with ideas that will take effect in 9-12 months (15-18 my guess) time. 

SM intentionally/unintentionally averted this quite cleverly. Is there no temporary solutions for 12 months to at the very least improve the match engines? 

As always I am very sure no admin will answer me. 

"Timeline wise this will take 9-12 months to complete" was what I said, NOT "will happen in 9-12 months"

Along that way changes will be happening.

 

 

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...