Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Remove and ban cheaters!! Sick and tired of putting in tickets to get the answer of "insufficient evidence"  Especially when I've sent two emails to SM and also provided enough evidence in game when it's balantly obvious the guy has 7-10 games making transfers all within another. 

Even quoted SM own "Code of conduct" in the ticket and explained each point. Still not enough evidence lol. 

Nice to know rules are there to be broken broken

Picture below is a few ideas from managers in my GW. Who are also fed up of cheaters 

 

 

Screenshot_20201017-203333.png

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

11 hours ago, RieceM96 said:

Remove and ban cheaters!! Sick and tired of putting in tickets to get the answer of "insufficient evidence"  Especially when I've sent two emails to SM and also provided enough evidence in game when it's balantly obvious the guy has 7-10 games making transfers all within another. 

Even quoted SM own "Code of conduct" in the ticket and explained each point. Still not enough evidence lol. 

Nice to know rules are there to be broken broken

Picture below is a few ideas from managers in my GW. Who are also fed up of cheaters 

 

 

Screenshot_20201017-203333.png

I am with you and all in in getting cheats off good GWs. 

But the suggestions you have come up with is not executable at all. 

The 10 managers you mentioned it creates a "cartel". They will have all the power and might go wrong for personal reason(s). 

For say a legitimate new manager joins a standard GW and does weird deal as he is starting off and getting used to it he might get the boot.

That's SM's loss since they have lost a customer who might start hating the game and spread false bad of mouth.

Secondly, it's hard to get rid of cheats since they will always find a way. That's there only aim, to cause disharmony in a good competitive GW. I do not understand such mind set but there are people of that ilk. 

Even billion dollar industries like FB and Twitter can't help and stop fake profiles. So it's a tough one.

Finally, we play the game and it's easy for us to detect cheats and multiple accounts. Whereas, SM is just reliant on IP address and may be couple more things.

Having said all that I would like to see SM do more than what they are doing now to get rid of cheats and multiple accounts.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If theres a top 10 or even more if its a big GW then they should just be able to make a poll and then atleast 50% of the GW vote yes before someone gets automatically removed.

Or how about theres a poll or vote button after each transfer rather than the illegal one on the all transfer page. Then in brackets it will show 5 people thinks its illegal. So if the GW needs 40 votes than it could show (5/40). Even if someone tries to misuse the function by clicking on each transfer youd still need lots of people to vote before anything happens.

Maybe a GW thats older than 2 years could get a automatic reputation increase. Lets say you need a 80 and higher reputation to join. That will stop cheats making lots of new accounts in just a couple of days. Some cheats will have higher reputations already but atleast youd stop some of them rather than none at all.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Fez17_1888 said:

Love how active the OP is on this topic, must be taking the weekend off. As if the previous 5 year letting the game rot wasn’t enough. 

Chris will only be paid for certain hours so when he isn't working he won't be on the forum, having said that, you will find posts somewhere from 2016 from SM Dev's saying about their intention to improve things and what did we want to happen.

Nothing ever happened and they soon stopped looking at the forum, same old SM, no respect at all for it's customers, so waiting a few days for replies is an improvement.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I like all these inputs about polls, votes and consensus to fight back cheaters and promote improvements in the game. I would love to see them, but I guess SM would never do something like that, too democratic an approach. (Please prove me wrong)

Regarding ratings again, I'm more and more convinced that a fluctuating rating is far from being a good idea. It would ruin the basic (and winning, imo) idea behind this game. Someone here suggested the insertion of a "confidence" value that would go along rating, shape, morale, and that would reflect all those aspects related to how well a player is doing in that gameworld, hence affecting his performance. I'm all in favour of this kind of addition, rather than messing with the current rating system.

 

PS: please focus on more RATING REVIEWS, better RATING REVIEWS, more consistent RATING REVIEWS!

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, gyanthecat said:

I like all these inputs about polls, votes and consensus to fight back cheaters and promote improvements in the game. I would love to see them, but I guess SM would never do something like that, too democratic an approach. (Please prove me wrong)

Regarding ratings again, I'm more and more convinced that a fluctuating rating is far from being a good idea. It would ruin the basic (and winning, imo) idea behind this game. Someone here suggested the insertion of a "confidence" value that would go along rating, shape, morale, and that would reflect all those aspects related to how well a player is doing in that gameworld, hence affecting his performance. I'm all in favour of this kind of addition, rather than messing with the current rating system.

 

PS: please focus on more RATING REVIEWS, better RATING REVIEWS, more consistent RATING REVIEWS!

I think the ratings system has become past it's sell by date, they don't need to add frills to it but restart it in the same basic way.

60-99 is no longer useful, 10-99 would be of more help, the jump between 87 to 88 for example is one that can be argued about for a lot of players and I feel that at times an 87 and a half is needed, this is where extending the range would give a more realistic look.

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

I think the ratings system has become past it's sell by date, they don't need to add frills to it but restart it in the same basic way.

60-99 is no longer useful, 10-99 would be of more help, the jump between 87 to 88 for example is one that can be argued about for a lot of players and I feel that at times an 87 and a half is needed, this is where extending the range would give a more realistic look.

I agree on this. Extending the rating range would make it a lot more accurate, but would require a greater effort by SM (and much more consistency).

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Nameless said:

I am with you and all in in getting cheats off good GWs. 

But the suggestions you have come up with is not executable at all. 

The 10 managers you mentioned it creates a "cartel". They will have all the power and might go wrong for personal reason(s). 

For say a legitimate new manager joins a standard GW and does weird deal as he is starting off and getting used to it he might get the boot.

That's SM's loss since they have lost a customer who might start hating the game and spread false bad of mouth.

Secondly, it's hard to get rid of cheats since they will always find a way. That's there only aim, to cause disharmony in a good competitive GW. I do not understand such mind set but there are people of that ilk. 

Even billion dollar industries like FB and Twitter can't help and stop fake profiles. So it's a tough one.

Finally, we play the game and it's easy for us to detect cheats and multiple accounts. Whereas, SM is just reliant on IP address and may be couple more things.

Having said all that I would like to see SM do more than what they are doing now to get rid of cheats and multiple accounts.

Its more to preserve GW who were here long before you

Link to post
Share on other sites

1- Squad cap. Add this option at least for custom worlds! I am the admin of 2 gameworlds and hoarding is ruining them completely! And its not real! Real teams have around 30 players on the first team! Make it fully customisable!

2 - Stadium size.. In competitive leagues teams with small stadiums are prejudicated. So IF they get a top 5 or top 3 position in the end, the process to upgrade the stadium should be more efective! This is very important.

3 - Match engine, tactics etc This is critical too.. And would bring new life to the game

 

4 - Enforce the complete customization of custom game worlds. Sacking managers is a dangerous option, it has two sides to it.. 

 

Real life ratings updated regularly and the possibility to invest in players like we invest in forex, making this almost like a financial market for football, with the added and VERY IMPORTANT aspect of beeing able to manage your "actives"(players) in an online football game, winning trophies! This is superb and has so much potential! Dont waste this wonderful project like it has been in the last years...

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/19/2020 at 7:56 AM, -JMH- said:

Its more to preserve GW who were here long before you

I am sorry when you said "you" did you mean particularly me or in general? If it's me how do you know since when I have been playing SM?

And if it's not me, the recommended solutions are not enforceable at all. 

If you didn't like what I said just move on and don't get personal and spam this much needed thread. 

You seriously showed how the "old" players think they are owed everything and nothing else matters (Metallica). Create your custom GWs and just get the people you want. Not that difficult is it?

Link to post
Share on other sites

@chris16

 

I've played since 11 December 2007 

I absolutely love the game and can't wait for some of the updates mentioned 

I've spent hundreds and hundreds on SMW

Do you need to spend 100 of thousands when the game isn't far off perfect imo 

My proposals

 

* bring  back the old interface 

* a few years ago you had a rating Schedule of set leagues on set dates can this be brought back ? 

* being able to see your squads average rating matchday Squad not just your opponents 

* Match Engine is the biggest issue for me no goals from corners or free kicks after a player has been booked/Sent off - Introduce Extra time - get rid of the 6 max goals 1 team can score in a game as we've seen irl teams score more than 6 

* I've seen teams where the aim is top 4 but finished 16th - could you introduce managers being sacked as they are irl after a poor season or.poor start 

*manager/Player of the month awards awarded each month 

* kit choice on matchdays 

*stadium building / Expansion is a great idea 

*think the rating in GWS is a brill idea but only by + or - 2 as you could end up with Phil Jones being rated higher than mbappe 🤣

*if your performing extremely well with a lower league club a big club offers you a new managerial post as irl 

*all clubs/Managers have to submit 25 players as irl for League/Europe Comps and can't use anymore players 

*Squad Caps 

I have 95 clubs so spend an awful lot of time on smw would hate to see more people leave 

I really don't think the game needs to much to be back where it was a few years ago 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ratings should just be left as they are, solely based on real life performance. SM is the only management game that I know of that doesn't base it off of in game team's performance/their pre-determined potential.

The only rating tweak needed, would be leagues being done a little more often. Or Man U and Chelsea players stop getting unwarranted hype increases. 

 

Stopping doing small leagues is pointless. Why stop people from creating those game worlds? Vast majority of players don't want every one of their worlds to be 80 or 100 players. Variety is the spice of life. This idea needs a full 180, and the creation of small leagues should still be on the cards. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would like to bring an experience to light. This pissed me off real bad and I was very close to leaving the GW.

Background: It's a standard GW with 34th season running.

Experience: I was offered a player by a manager. I didn't have the money so sold another good player to external to raise the money.

Accepted the bid but later SMFA blocked the deal. 

So I was out of a player and I didn't get the offered player for whatever reason which is still a mystery. 

As you can see the GW is quite old and there's no player available to purchase from external.

SM really screwed me big time. If it was the problem with the other manager I would like SM to put a red mark (or any marker) indicating those managers are on the "blacklist" and then the risk is totally on us if we want to deal with them or not. 

As said I was in double jeopardy because I played by the rule and fairly. 

And if another manager(s) complained (which I doubt in this instance), it's happening a lot. If someone doesn't like a deal they will report it. I was offered the deal after I first put a bid in. 

I hope SM looks into this two instances specially with the double jeopardy one.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/15/2020 at 2:25 PM, chris16 said:

We will develop it as quickly as we can!

We wont be discarding any current GWs, we just wont be making any more smaller ones ourselves. Users will be able to create them either via Custom or Standard options in the shop.

 

10 hours ago, EJ_Styles said:

Ratings should just be left as they are, solely based on real life performance. SM is the only management game that I know of that doesn't base it off of in game team's performance/their pre-determined potential.

The only rating tweak needed, would be leagues being done a little more often. Or Man U and Chelsea players stop getting unwarranted hype increases. 

 

Stopping doing small leagues is pointless. Why stop people from creating those game worlds? Vast majority of players don't want every one of their worlds to be 80 or 100 players. Variety is the spice of life. This idea needs a full 180, and the creation of small leagues should still be on the cards. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/20/2020 at 1:33 PM, Nameless said:

I am sorry when you said "you" did you mean particularly me or in general? If it's me how do you know since when I have been playing SM?

And if it's not me, the recommended solutions are not enforceable at all. 

If you didn't like what I said just move on and don't get personal and spam this much needed thread. 

You seriously showed how the "old" players think they are owed everything and nothing else matters (Metallica). Create your custom GWs and just get the people you want. Not that difficult is it?

You , me, anyone in general. Some managers have been trying to keep public GWs alive for 10years+ so we have a good idea of what's enforceable and what isn't. Feel free to join GW ID 63666 if you can get a space currently 2 jobs on offer but 114 clubs strong.

The Top 10 Managers would be nigh on impossible to cheat in GWs that are well over 50% full. And the suggestions i have added in detail on previous pages include the facility to put it to a vote. So you would need a massive collusion to manipulate any such system.

Already you have overlooked existing systems in place, IE the ability to report deals. These would still exist. Public GWs need an owner or some kind of governance to be bale to remove persistent offenders

No 'customer' would be lost, these in question are free gameworlds to play and open to anyone.

This is looking at very long term GWs with managers with over 1000 games played, several on these very boards.

Welcome to add your suggestions/solutions to expand on why it would not be achieveable

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 suggestion i have

Please stop allowing Accounts to have the ability to change Usernames and/or manager names

Persistent cheats change them up to try to avoid recognition / try to rejoin after a ban

Add a name history if an outright ban is not possible

Need to be able to keep track of who is disruptive / a cheat

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, -JMH- said:

1 suggestion i have

Please stop allowing Accounts to have the ability to change Usernames and/or manager names

Persistent cheats change them up to try to avoid recognition / try to rejoin after a ban

Add a name history if an outright ban is not possible

Need to be able to keep track of who is disruptive / a cheat

YES!

At least don't give option to change usernames. I think it should be unique to make cheating report easier.

I have a situation in a GW that the cheater change his manager names into manager names within the GW. It was so confusing, he used 3 accounts and all of them has the same manager name with other legit (and vocal) managers

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can see that squad limits make sense, especially in custom gameworlds where there is currently no way to enforce the cap that the creator perhaps wanted to set in the first place, but I'm a bit concerned about what is going to happen over all. Different people play the game in different ways, and some players play differently in different gameworlds. Managers who are using a strategy of about twenty-two players for the matchday and then a few risers to build transfer money will probably have lower squad size than managers who are signing long-term prospects with a view to watching them grow into the team, because in the latter case the manager isn't going to be selling players as much.

I would be interested to know what squad size people think is reasonable.

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...