Jump to content

Player Concerns (please read the Online Help if looking for help)


Guest SM Dev (Ste)

Recommended Posts

Re: Player Concerns

I only and only play my players if they are fit 100% , if they are not fit I dont see any reason why I should give them a place in the first 11 playing that day no matter if they are the highest rated players from my team 98 or 90 ( same like in RL ).

The way the league is scheduled is hard for players to be fit for 60% of the games without adding the games from the cup and the shield.

The concerns should not be based on the rating but on the fitness of each player :

... i do find it normal and real to see a player that is rated 93,fit 100% and missing the games to develop a concern and later a desire to leave the current club

...but if the player rated 98 wishes to play 60% of the games and he is not fit for all of them than thats fully wrong and we have a big problem.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 2.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Re: Player Concerns (please read the Online Help if looking for help)

Re: Player Concerns (please read the Online Help if looking for help) I think a nice feature would be to have the min number of games a player has to play within his profile. As alot of people who pl

Re: Player Concerns (please read the Online Help if looking for help) the only problems I can see with the new concerns are youth developing concerns eg under 21s and players supposedly developing c

Re: Player Concerns

Would it not be a better idea for players with concerns to reject new contracts when they come to the end of their current deal? Make the system be that if a player has a concern they will not sign, be they at the end of their deal or in the middle. In extreme cases players should yes put in transfer requests but only in teams with say 92/93/94 players being forced to sit on the bench.

I feel this solution mimics real-life as these superstars wouldn't be benched and would demand a transfer (a la Robinho). If however a player is concerned at a lesser level they may want that concern dealing with before they sign a new deal (such as Petrov at City).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Player Concerns

I wont comment yet ont he debate as a whole but a average of 92 for any squad is very high . . :)

Um not really. Player concerns is not really trying to stop people from having a squad of 21 with an average of 92. There would still be plenty of 90+ players to go around. Concerns are trying to stop the hogging with teams having players like terry etc.' date=' on the bench, and averages of like 95 with backup players of the same or basically the same rating

I only and only play my players if they are fit 100% , if they are not fit I dont see any reason why I should give them a place in the first 11 playing that day no matter if they are the highest rated players from my team 98 or 90 ( same like in RL ).

The way the league is scheduled is hard for players to be fit for 60% of the games without adding the games from the cup and the shield.

The concerns should not be based on the rating but on the fitness of each player :

... i do find it normal and real to see a player that is rated 93,fit 100% and missing the games to develop a concern and later a desire to leave the current club

...but if the player rated 98 wishes to play 60% of the games and he is not fit for all of them than thats fully wrong and we have a big problem.

Bro, if you wish to only play 100% players then you will get killed by player concerns. In real life, players don't not play jsut because they are 95% fit. Think of it this way. Not many people play the game the way you do, 100% fit players only. That means that they could get away with player hogging, and yet players like messi could play the same amount of games as players like hulk. This is what your suggesting should be ok, jsut because messi isn't 100% for every game. Also, didn't you realise that if they are below 60% then they are NMF, which means that if they are above 60% then they are match fit? A 98 rated player will be fit (bar injuries) for more than 60% of games. In real life, does messi play less than 60%? no, but he doesn't only play at 100%. How often is anyone at 100% fitness? You could even say that things like being tired, means you are fatigued, and thus not match fit because he isn't 100%.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Player Concerns

Um not really. Player concerns is not really trying to stop people from having a squad of 21 with an average of 92. There would still be plenty of 90+ players to go around. Concerns are trying to stop the hogging with teams having players like terry etc., on the bench, and averages of like 95 with backup players of the same or basically the same rating

Mate, player concerns isn't just about 90+ players its about all of them, no matter who you have in your team, from a 95 average to a 75 average all teams will get player concerns if they aren't managed correctly.

Actually I would say that 92 average is great, just look at Real Madrid, it would be close to impossible for any manager to keep the Madrid squad concern free, they have 11 mids, 9 of which will all think they are good enough to play how do you squeeze 9 into 4-5 spots for 60-70% of the seasons matches, then you have Madrid's forwards all 3 rated 93, what to do, all will think they should play 60-70% of matches yet only two will get the necessary time, and if you play 3 forwards what do you do with the midfield and Defence, and fitness. It will get extremely messy

I have been playing for 2 years now and have never even seen a starting 11 squad with 95 average and a full 11 90+ reserve team, honestly the best I have seen is 94 but only like 2 or 3 90+ players on the bench, and the rest of their players are low 80's high 70's.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Player Concerns

this debate is going round and round, like a merry go round. it is all circular reasoning. people who are against it post with the fear of losing their "star" player due to concerns, and people in support try to convince them that will not be the case if you can manage your team properly. but the bottom line is that this DOES discourage people from building massive squad, both, in terms of quantity as well as quality. if all 90+ rated players are concentrated in few teams, then why would people want to manage any ohter clubs in the game world.,....

we did see Robinho leave manC, Keane leave liverpool, and totenham, crouch leave liverpool didn't we... why because they were concerned of their future careers. it is fact.... and if it is real madrid we are talking about - what about owen, cassano, samuel, sneijder, baptista....they all left the club after a while because they were not getting enough playing time and spent much of the season on the bench,,,,,,

aitken makes a valid point. player concerns is not only for 90+ rated teams, it is for 75 rated teams too. a manager of bigger clubs should not see this as a prejudice against them - it is equally applicable to all the clubs in the game world. there will also be competition for places among players that are rated 72/73/74/75, who all think they deserve a place in the squad.....

.......and why don't we all just the accept this change, and move on.....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Player Concerns

Well said CCX.

I have the following DM/CMs Diarra, Busquets, Sandro, Banega, Lucas.

Most of them are in their early 20's age wise but seeing as I only play one at a time, you could argue this is why the concerns have been brought in.

Same with AM's. I have the likes of Pjanic, Jovetic, Granero, Pastore, Candreva, Canales, Lodeiro. They are all young and I could make an arguement they have all yet to meet their true potential but do I really need 7 AM's?

In the real game I should be forced to manage say or 4 and dump 3 or 4 to give another manager a chance. Its not so much its wrong to have so many but you can appreciate all the AM's have a potential to reach 90+

Should I be allowed to keep all 7 and prevent others in my gameworld buying any of them?

It is here to stay, some will have to work harder to keep their stars but we are all in the same boat. We have to be weened off the old way of thinking.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Player Concerns

It is here to stay' date=' some will have to work harder to keep their stars but we are all in the same boat. We have to be weened off the old way of thinking.[/quote']

i agree with CCX and prudster on their views on player concerns.

and soccerfan, if you can manage well, then keep all your DMs and AMs (which i think will be hard because it seems they all will develop concerns). the number of player you need really depends on the formation you use. you have 7 ams, so if u use, formation that use 3 ams, then you should be able to manage them pretty well. formations like 4132,4231,32221 etc will be helpful....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Player Concerns

Mate' date=' player concerns isn't just about 90+ players its about all of them, no matter who you have in your team, from a 95 average to a 75 average all teams will get player concerns if they aren't managed correctly.

Actually I would say that 92 average is great, just look at Real Madrid, it would be close to impossible for any manager to keep the Madrid squad concern free, they have 11 mids, 9 of which will all think they are good enough to play how do you squeeze 9 into 4-5 spots for 60-70% of the seasons matches, then you have Madrid's forwards all 3 rated 93, what to do, all will think they should play 60-70% of matches yet only two will get the necessary time, and if you play 3 forwards what do you do with the midfield and Defence, and fitness. It will get extremely messy

I have been playing for 2 years now and have never even seen a starting 11 squad with 95 average and a full 11 90+ reserve team, honestly the best I have seen is 94 but only like 2 or 3 90+ players on the bench, and the rest of their players are low 80's high 70's.[/quote']

Actually, i am yet to see anyone complain about someone having 100 75 rated players. Yes, it affects everyone, but the main reason it was brought in was to stop player hogging and star hogging. There are thousands of players rated less than 75, so nobody really cares how many of them you have, the problem is when teams have huge teams with not just high rated backup players, but a lot of 90+ backup players.

I have previously managed a barca that had cole, ferdinand, evra, terry, chiellini and several other defenders rated over 92. That was just the defence. My midfield an forward line were even worse. Then when you add the youth squad that included the likes of kjaer, lukaku etc., and the non backup players such as rolando, hulk and di maria. This is what most people who complained about massive squads are complaining about.

Actually, that real madrid team probably wouldn't be too hard to keep concern free. Just because a player is rated 90+ doesn't make them a star player. Because the likes of ronaldo and kaka are in that team, they are the stars. Players like VDV, diarra and gago, would probably be happy with just over 50% of the games, because there are stars ahead of them. Perhaps the forward line could be problematic, but i don't knwo if player concerns affect a player in that situation. E.g there are stars in the team, but they aren't in that players position. Also, once again, this team isn't very big. It looks to have about the same number as the barca squad. Maybe loan out a player or two and your set, however personally i would trade some of the low rated 90 players for higher rated players and the squad would still be manageable.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Player Concerns

Actually I would be the person who would complain about someone having 100 75 rated youngsters. When I started my Div 4 challenge I found a suitable team to manage, Bradford City in EC 1525, for the entire first season I couldn't get a decent riser due to the fact that there was this annoying little kid who managed Man City and basically brought every decent riser, and never sold them to other managers (still doesn't, and when you make an offer for a player he counters something beyond ridiculous) anyway he made me crazy but then one day he was off his game and I got a few decent risers and now days he almost doesn't even bother. So I am sure that a lot of people doing those sort of challenges have faced similar dilemma's, and would probably love to complain about it as such.

Players like VDV, diarra and gago, would probably be happy with just over 50% of the games, because there are stars ahead of them

How can you know this, you are just guessing. Personally with the things that have come out of player concerns to date, I would be suprised if these players didn't get concerns. Honestly I have seen some plain crazy concerns, such as 19 yr old 74 rated players concerned over "lack of games", in a team with 85 average first team.

Or better yet Robin Van Persie in one of my setups, was at Everton last season, they sold him after about 30 games to Sevilla. This season I brought him (round 12), he played 2 matches and then was injured for 3 weeks, so out of a possible 26 matches he was injured for 6 then he took another 2 turns to be match fit, so 18 matches he could play in and he played 17 out of the 18, and yet he has a level 1 concern regarding lack of games.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Player Concerns

Have a mate who uses my computer to play the game (different game world to me so no cheating going on!) who currently has a player complaining he is not getting enough games despite being out injured for a considerable time what exactly are you supposed to do in this situation?????

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Player Concerns

Actually I would be the person who would complain about someone having 100 75 rated youngsters. When I started my Div 4 challenge I found a suitable team to manage' date=' Bradford City in EC 1525, for the entire first season I couldn't get a decent riser due to the fact that there was this annoying little kid who managed Man City and basically brought every decent riser, and never sold them to other managers (still doesn't, and when you make an offer for a player he counters something beyond ridiculous) anyway he made me crazy but then one day he was off his game and I got a few decent risers and now days he almost doesn't even bother. So I am sure that a lot of people doing those sort of challenges have faced similar dilemma's, and would probably love to complain about it as such.

How can you know this, you are just guessing. Personally with the things that have come out of player concerns to date, I would be suprised if these players didn't get concerns. Honestly I have seen some plain crazy concerns, such as 19 yr old 74 rated players concerned over "lack of games", in a team with 85 average first team.

Or better yet Robin Van Persie in one of my setups, was at Everton last season, they sold him after about 30 games to Sevilla. This season I brought him (round 12), he played 2 matches and then was injured for 3 weeks, so out of a possible 26 matches he was injured for 6 then he took another 2 turns to be match fit, so 18 matches he could play in and he played 17 out of the 18, and yet he has a level 1 concern regarding lack of games.[/quote']

Ok well until now, i had never seen people complain about it, as usually the people who buy 100's of players just buy cheap players in the hope that they will rise. As for the man city thing, i think good on that manager. Perhaps not the bit about not selling the players once they had risen, but it sounds like your jsut a bit sour because he always got to the risers first. I very much doubt he bought EVERY riser, but i guess it would slow down a division 4 challenge. Yes true, player concerns are trying to stop him holding on to all these players, but i doubt Sm are ever going to do anything to stop him from buying them. It is his right, and if they take that away then i'm petty sure many people will leave.

You are right, i don't KNOW this. Nobody really KNOWS anything about player concerns. Except what SM have told us. I am basing all of my calculations off what SM have told us. And what they have told us is that player concerns is comparative. i.e. a 94 rated player is a star in one team and thus expects to player 75% of games. In another team, there is a 98 rated player and so the 94 rated player expects to play less. As for the 74 rated player having concerns, perhaps this is a bug, or the player expects to play maybe 1 game per season, and he didn't get a game the previous season.

As for the RVP matter, i don;t know if Sevilla was external but if they were then he would have played 0 games for them, meaning he was way down on his quota. Also add the two games he didn't play due to NMF, which i don't think counts as injury. Divide this by 38 games in a season and you get about 63%. That is why he has a level one concern. However, if you feel you're being harshly dealt with then send SM a ticket. Personally, I think you'd be wasting yours, and their time.

Also, jsut as a question, what are you trying to argue? In your previous post, you seem to have given point for both liking and disliking player concerns. Previously you seemed to be talking about low rated player concerns, but i wasn't disagreeing with you. I simply said that most of the complaints before player concerns, was that people were hogging high rated players, and that is why it was primarily brought in. It fixing the lower rated hogging is a bonus, which has to come in to make it fair for everyone.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Player Concerns

Honestly I have seen some plain crazy concerns' date=' such as 19 yr old 74 rated players concerned over "lack of games", in a team with 85 average first team. [/quote']

may be you didn't give him a single game the whole season. i mean, though rated only 75, he would want to play, may be one game or two. use such players in your cup games. sm have mentioned clearly that low rated/youth players will be quite happy with a couple of starts per season, but if your 19 year old wants to play more than 3/4 games, then we have a problem. (my own team will be in deep "you-know-what"). give him 1 or 2 starts and if his concern doesn't go away, send a ticket.

Have a mate who uses my computer to play the game (different game world to me so no cheating going on!) who currently has a player complaining he is not getting enough games despite being out injured for a considerable time what exactly are you supposed to do in this situation?????

who is the player? is the player your regular member of your starting 11? or a "high-rated" backup player? or a riser/youth? the only thing you can do is give him games - start him in the starting 11. then the concern will gradually go away....

I have a 46 sized squad and I have 8 player concerns where as a manager with a massive 122 sized squad in the same setup has less than 20 player concerns' date=' completely unrealistic.[/quote']

i don't think player concern depends solely on the number of players in the squad - but also on the quality of the players in the squad. and may be the another manager knows how to manage his team better than you do - hence less number of concerns.......:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Player Concerns

As for the man city thing, i think good on that manager. Perhaps not the bit about not selling the players once they had risen, but it sounds like your just a bit sour because he always got to the risers first. I very much doubt he bought EVERY riser, but i guess it would slow down a division 4 challenge. Yes true, player concerns are trying to stop him holding on to all these players, but i doubt Sm are ever going to do anything to stop him from buying them. It is his right, and if they take that away then I'm petty sure many people will leave.

I also believe good on him, now, but when I first started Bradford City was the 3rd team I managed, I didn't know about the forum, so Man City was just raking in the risers. By the time I found out how to get risers, it was near the end of the season I had also somehow ventured onto the forum, and found Andyowls Argentinian risers thread, I managed to get 2 Argentine risers and a Brazilian. Anyway I wasn't sour because he brought all the risers, it was because I didn't have the financial muscle to outbid, even if I found them first and bid he would almost always out bid me.

You are right, i don't KNOW this. Nobody really KNOWS anything about player concerns. Except what SM have told us. I am basing all of my calculations off what SM have told us. And what they have told us is that player concerns is comparative. i.e. a 94 rated player is a star in one team and thus expects to player 75% of games. In another team, there is a 98 rated player and so the 94 rated player expects to play less. As for the 74 rated player having concerns, perhaps this is a bug, or the player expects to play maybe 1 game per season, and he didn't get a game the previous season.

I can't honestly believe that a 94 rated player will want to play less then a 98 rated player, I believe that anything over 92 is a star player, you would be hard pressed to find a player on SM who is rated 92, that isn't internationally recognised and that when his name is mentioned people know a fair bit about that player.

As for the RVP matter, i don;t know if Sevilla was external but if they were then he would have played 0 games for them, meaning he was way down on his quota. Also add the two games he didn't play due to NMF, which i don't think counts as injury. Divide this by 38 games in a season and you get about 63%. That is why he has a level one concern. However, if you feel you're being harshly dealt with then send SM a ticket. Personally, I think you'd be wasting yours, and their time.

This leaves me wondering, if external clubs don't play players but there stats from them do, ie. 0 games for the season, how will a level 5 concerned player ever reduce that concern to level 1, because I would sell at level 4, he would go to an external club, he wouldn't play and he would go to level 5, his transfer ban is now finished, I buy him back and he still has a level 5 concern or does that disappear or go back to level 4.

Also, just as a question, what are you trying to argue? In your previous post, you seem to have given point for both liking and disliking player concerns. Previously you seemed to be talking about low rated player concerns, but i wasn't disagreeing with you. I simply said that most of the complaints before player concerns, was that people were hogging high rated players, and that is why it was primarily brought in. It fixing the lower rated hogging is a bonus, which has to come in to make it fair for everyone.

I am not arguing for or against player concerns, I have accepted that they are here to stay, but I am trying to iron out the finer points of concerns and how they affect our teams, I am also mainly arguing mis-information, no offence to you, Prudster, but I haven't seen it written anywhere that players rated at 94 will rollover for a player rated 98, in fact as you have done the maths for Robin Van Persie (93), which was at 63% of games played for a season (minus injury time) but he has David Villa (96) ahead of him in the pecking order, which if your information were correct RVP would have accepted the meagre 63% of matches played

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Player Concerns

may be you didn't give him a single game the whole season. i mean, though rated only 75, he would want to play, may be one game or two. use such players in your cup games. SM have mentioned clearly that low rated/youth players will be quite happy with a couple of starts per season, but if your 19 year old wants to play more than 3/4 games, then we have a problem. (my own team will be in deep "you-know-what"). give him 1 or 2 starts and if his concern doesn't go away, send a ticket.

It wasn't my squad, it was an unmanaged Div 3 team. Personally I just give them 1/2 starts and heaps of sub appearances. But I don't beleive that giving them 1 or 2 starts will make the concern disappear, it will take time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Player Concerns

I also believe good on him' date=' now, but when I first started Bradford City was the 3rd team I managed, I didn't know about the forum, so Man City was just raking in the risers. By the time I found out how to get risers, it was near the end of the season I had also somehow ventured onto the forum, and found Andyowls Argentinian risers thread, I managed to get 2 Argentine risers and a Brazilian. Anyway I wasn't sour because he brought all the risers, it was because I didn't have the financial muscle to outbid, even if I found them first and bid he would almost always out bid me.

I can't honestly believe that a 94 rated player will want to play less then a 98 rated player, I believe that anything over 92 is a star player, you would be hard pressed to find a player on SM who is rated 92, that isn't internationally recognised and that when his name is mentioned people know a fair bit about that player.

This leaves me wondering, if external clubs don't play players but there stats from them do, ie. 0 games for the season, how will a level 5 concerned player ever reduce that concern to level 1, because I would sell at level 4, he would go to an external club, he wouldn't play and he would go to level 5, his transfer ban is now finished, I buy him back and he still has a level 5 concern or does that disappear or go back to level 4.

I am not arguing for or against player concerns, I have accepted that they are here to stay, but I am trying to iron out the finer points of concerns and how they affect our teams, I am also mainly arguing mis-information, no offence to you, Prudster, but I haven't seen it written anywhere that players rated at 94 will rollover for a player rated 98, in fact as you have done the maths for Robin Van Persie (93), which was at 63% of games played for a season (minus injury time) but he has David Villa (96) ahead of him in the pecking order, which if your information were correct RVP would have accepted the meagre 63% of matches played[/quote']

Ok well it sounded like you were just sour cos he got them all first :P. I don't understand how a 94 player would expect to play the same amount as a 98 rated player. Lets jsut say your two forwards were rated 98 and 97, then obviously a 94 rated player would expect to play less than them. Because having 3 high rated players is not player hogging, and yes you would probably be hard pressed to get all three the right % of games, but this is not what player concerns is trying to stop.

Mate, do you know how players get into the 90's? You basically have to play for the national team. Yet you will be recognised even if you aren't on the national team, so of course 92+ rated players will be internationally recognised. If your team average is 95, how is a 92 rated player a star? It is all comparative. Otherwise, if a team with no players rated over 81 bring in a player rated 89, he is by no means a star by your reasoning, but he is a star in that team and would expect to play around 75%.

Actually, RVP may not necessarily accept 63%. SM have said, the star player will wish to play around 75%. RVP may be a star in your team, even though David Villa is ahead of him. OR, because there is only one player ahead of him, he may expect to play between 63% and 75%, as nobody knows the exact numbers. I doubt just because there is one player ahead of RVP he would want less than 63% playing time. Yes, he would probably expect to play less, but i would think because he is either still a star in your team, or is jsut off a star, he would expect to still play a large proportion of games.

Mate, i'm not quite sure if you've understood properly. Basically nothing is written about player concerns. The reason being, if we knew everything, then we could jsut play a player for his exact amount of games and then we don't have to play him again. Nobody knows the exact numbers, everything i am saying, is based off what SM have told us. "Within your squad the higher rated players expect to play the majority of games and as the ratings get worse they expect to play less and less games" This tells me that because 98 is higher than 94, the 98 expects to play more games. By the way, that quote is taken directly from SM help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Player Concerns

"Within your squad the higher rated players expect to play the majority of games and as the ratings get worse they expect to play less and less games" This tells me that because 98 is higher than 94, the 98 expects to play more games. By the way, that quote is taken directly from SM help.

Yeah I have read the SM help, and I understand that if we where told everything about concerns people could exploit that, but I can't see SM differentiating between a 98 and 94 rated player so greatly, even if they play on the same team. For me the passage "Within your squad the higher rated players expect to play the majority of games" means that the highest rated player in each position expects to play 75% of the matches, not just the 98, 97, 92, 85, 80 or whatever, not just the couple of higher rated players.

In my setup Man Utd, has Xavi, Ibra, Rooney, Ronaldo etc, but his Gk's are Kuszczak and Rensing, but does that mean that because Ibra Xavi and co are more highly rated Rensing and Kuszczak don't expect to play 75% of the matches.

Same with an original Barcelona, if they play 4-3-3 Wingers, even though they have Xavi and Ineista, neither player can play defensive mid, thus in the DM position Yaya Toure is the star player, thus he will be expecting 75% of the games, while Keita or Busquets should be slight more happy with a lesser amount of games, but definately not only 25%, which is all they will be able to get.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Player Concerns

Yeah I have read the SM help' date=' and I understand that if we where told everything about concerns people could exploit that, but I can't see SM differentiating between a 98 and 94 rated player so greatly, even if they play on the same team. For me the passage "Within your squad the higher rated players expect to play the majority of games" means that the highest rated player in each position expects to play 75% of the matches, not just the 98, 97, 92, 85, 80 or whatever, not just the couple of higher rated players.

In my setup Man Utd, has Xavi, Ibra, Rooney, Ronaldo etc, but his Gk's are Kuszczak and Rensing, but does that mean that because Ibra Xavi and co are more highly rated Rensing and Kuszczak don't expect to play 75% of the matches.

Same with an original Barcelona, if they play 4-3-3 Wingers, even though they have Xavi and Ineista, neither player can play defensive mid, thus in the DM position Yaya Toure is the star player, thus he will be expecting 75% of the games, while Keita or Busquets should be slight more happy with a lesser amount of games, but definately not only 25%, which is all they will be able to get.[/quote']

Actually i reckon SM would differentiate 98 and 94 rated players quite differently. It all depends on how many players are between the two players that determine how big a difference it is. Personally i would think it doesn't depend on position. Like if a team plays a formation with no wingers, and they buy a winger rated 75, would he expect to play 75% because he is the only winger? Perhaps it goes by sections. Like forwards, midfielders, defenders (including gk), because that way it doesn't matter what formation you play, they will all get concerns equally. But ultimately, these are jsut guesses, i do not know for sure.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Player Concerns

This is what I would prefer SM used their time to fix, especially over player concerns, Chelsea

CECH, Petr

ABIDAL, Éric - NMF

DANI ALVES, Silva - NMF

TERRY, John - NMF, INJ

CANNAVARO, Fabio - NMF

ESSIEN, Michael - NMF

LAMPARD, Frank - NMF

DE ROSSI, Daniele - Unh

VAN DER VAART, Rafael

RIBERY, Franck - Unh

ROBINHO, Souza - NMF

RONALDINHO, Assis Moreira - NMF

LISANDRO, López

DROGBA, Didier

IRELAND, Danny

CRESSWELL, Aaron

WHITE, Aidan

HOWELLS, Jake

CLYNE, Nathaniel - Unh

SHELLEY, Danny

MORRIS, Aaron

SPENCE, Jordan - Unh

UDOH, Kingsley - Unh

KELLY, Martin

EYJOLFSSON, Hólmar

KIERNAN, Robert

Now how is it that with this squad Chelsea are sitting second in the league, despite never changing their team, this is highly unrealistic, the players fitnesses range from 100% (ie never played) all the way down to 10%, in real life at 10% fitness you aren't playing sport your digging your grave.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Player Concerns

This is what I would prefer SM used their time to fix' date=' especially over player concerns, Chelsea

CECH, Petr

ABIDAL, Éric - NMF

DANI ALVES, Silva - NMF

TERRY, John - NMF, INJ

CANNAVARO, Fabio - NMF

ESSIEN, Michael - NMF

LAMPARD, Frank - NMF

DE ROSSI, Daniele - Unh

VAN DER VAART, Rafael

RIBERY, Franck - Unh

ROBINHO, Souza - NMF

RONALDINHO, Assis Moreira - NMF

LISANDRO, López

DROGBA, Didier

IRELAND, Danny

CRESSWELL, Aaron

WHITE, Aidan

HOWELLS, Jake

CLYNE, Nathaniel - Unh

SHELLEY, Danny

MORRIS, Aaron

SPENCE, Jordan - Unh

UDOH, Kingsley - Unh

KELLY, Martin

EYJOLFSSON, Hólmar

KIERNAN, Robert

Now how is it that with this squad Chelsea are sitting second in the league, despite never changing their team, this is highly unrealistic, the players fitnesses range from 100% (ie never played) all the way down to 10%, in real life at 10% fitness you aren't playing sport your digging your grave.

Actually, player concerns was more important in my opinion. Without player concerns, whole game worlds became unplayable for anyone except the one or two dominant managers. What you have shown us above is simply a case of SM not being hard enough on unfit players. Honestly i don't know why SM is lenient on cases like this, personally i think they should lose every game. This however, is a pretty rare case. I have seen it before, but it was not as destructive as what player concerns is fixing.

Also, did you change the subject because you ran out of points? :P

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Player Concerns

Actually i reckon SM would differentiate 98 and 94 rated players quite differently. It all depends on how many players are between the two players that determine how big a difference it is. Personally i would think it doesn't depend on position. Like if a team plays a formation with no wingers, and they buy a winger rated 75, would he expect to play 75% because he is the only winger? Perhaps it goes by sections. Like forwards, midfielders, defenders (including gk), because that way it doesn't matter what formation you play, they will all get concerns equally. But ultimately, these are just guesses, i do not know for sure.

But really how impossible would it be to have a squad, without a player who can play wing, either as a primary or secondary position, but this isn't only limited to wing, but all positions, not only that but if say you don't play a formation with wingers and you buy a winger, AI should be intelligent enough to recognise that player doesn't have a position and thus there is no need for him to play 75% of the matches.

Logically it has to be done in relation to positions, whether Field positions eg. GK, DEF, MID and ATT, or individual positions eg GK, CB, DM, AM, Fwd etc, otherwise you could seemingly bypass the concerns system by filling your squad with 89 rated players and 1 94 rated player, which should mean he will want 75% + games whilst the rest of the squad, due to the fact they aren't star players, will only need 50% ish of the total matches played.

Actually, player concerns was more important in my opinion. Without player concerns, whole game worlds became unplayable for anyone except the one or two dominant managers. What you have shown us above is simply a case of SM not being hard enough on unfit players. Honestly i don't know why SM is lenient on cases like this, personally i think they should lose every game. This however, is a pretty rare case. I have seen it before, but it was not as destructive as what player concerns is fixing.

In a way, but as is, the Chelsea manager isn't showing any managerial skills and yet is benefiting, while managers who have played for years and spent the time to build up a good squad, have actually shown a lot of managerial skill will be punished due to a jealous few. With the way SM is going they will have to change the name from SM (soccermanager) to PA (Players Agent), in a few months the players will be concerned about the type of coffee they drink and will be asking for you to wipe their bottoms for them.

Also, did you change the subject because you ran out of points?

Actually I didn't even recognise that you had replied to my earlier post, we must have been writing at the same time. Anyway I haven't run out of fight yet

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Player Concerns

But really how impossible would it be to have a squad' date=' without a player who can play wing, either as a primary or secondary position, but this isn't only limited to wing, but all positions, not only that but if say you don't play a formation with wingers and you buy a winger, AI should be intelligent enough to recognise that player doesn't have a position and thus there is no need for him to play 75% of the matches. [/quote']

Actually, not really impossible at all. Good wingers can be hard to come by in some game worlds, so people jsut use formations that don't use wingers. Alternatively, they use rm/lm. Um have you seen how unsophisticated some parts of SM are? I very much doubt it would be able tot tell that. Also, player concerns won't know if you will play a winger formation in tha future, so i very much doubt it does it by individual player positions.

Logically it has to be done in relation to positions' date=' whether Field positions eg. GK, DEF, MID and ATT, or individual positions eg GK, CB, DM, AM, Fwd etc, otherwise you could seemingly bypass the concerns system by filling your squad with 89 rated players and 1 94 rated player, which should mean he will want 75% + games whilst the rest of the squad, due to the fact they aren't star players, will only need 50% ish of the total matches played.[/quote']

Actually, i think if you have 1 94 rated player, and the rest 89, then the 89's would be considered stars as well. In real life, teams don't jsut have one star, except maybe the bad ones. So the 89 rated players would probably expect to play jsut a few games less than the 94 rated player because there is only one player better than them.

In a way' date=' but as is, the Chelsea manager isn't showing any managerial skills and yet is benefiting, while managers who have played for years and spent the time to build up a good squad, have actually shown a lot of managerial skill will be punished due to a jealous few. With the way SM is going they will have to change the name from SM (soccermanager) to PA (Players Agent), in a few months the players will be concerned about the type of coffee they drink and will be asking for you to wipe their bottoms for them.[/quote']

Yes, but the chelsea manager seems to have luck on his side atm. When this luck passes, he will drop down the table, and the managers who work hard and sue good tactics will rise. Perhaps the chelsea manager has good tactics set, because tactics will win a game even with all NMF.

Actually I didn't even recognise that you had replied to my earlier post' date=' we must have been writing at the same time. Anyway I haven't run out of fight yet[/quote']

Hahahaha, ok. good luck :P

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Player Concerns

Actually, not really impossible at all. Good wingers can be hard to come by in some game worlds, so people jsut use formations that don't use wingers. Alternatively, they use rm/lm. Um have you seen how unsophisticated some parts of SM are? I very much doubt it would be able tot tell that. Also, player concerns won't know if you will play a winger formation in tha future, so i very much doubt it does it by individual player positions.

It doesn't have to know the future, only the present. Say you have Hazard Wing/AM rated 87, you are playing 3-5-2, so he doesn't have a position, but being rated 87 he expects to play 30% (random number) of the matches. You then decide to change your formation to 4-3-3 Wingers, now Hazard has a valid claim to being in the first team due to his primary position being available and he is the highest rated winger in the squad, so now he should rightly expects to play 50% of the matches (once again random number).

Actually, i think if you have 1 94 rated player, and the rest 89, then the 89's would be considered stars as well. In real life, teams don't jsut have one star, except maybe the bad ones. So the 89 rated players would probably expect to play jsut a few games less than the 94 rated player because there is only one player better than them.

But a few posts back you stated that because Barcelona has Xavi and Ineista, Yaya Toure isn't a star and as such wouldn't expect as many games, yet now you are saying that because this random team only has 1, 94 rated star, the rest of the players are also stars. Which is it, the highest rated player is the star and anyone a few points under isn't or because there is only one star the rest are also stars.

Yes, but the chelsea manager seems to have luck on his side atm. When this luck passes, he will drop down the table, and the managers who work hard and sue good tactics will rise. Perhaps the chelsea manager has good tactics set, because tactics will win a game even with all NMF.

Hopefully his luck runs out soon the seasons already more than halfway through, he plays 4-3-3 Wingers, normal everything, no boxes ticked

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Player Concerns

It doesn't have to know the future' date=' only the present. Say you have Hazard Wing/AM rated 87, you are playing 3-5-2, so he doesn't have a position, but being rated 87 he expects to play 30% (random number) of the matches. You then decide to change your formation to 4-3-3 Wingers, now Hazard has a valid claim to being in the first team due to his primary position being available and he is the highest rated winger in the squad, so now he should rightly expects to play 50% of the matches (once again random number).[/quote']

Yeah but SM says nothing about formation having anything to do with player concerns. Think about it this way. In real life, if a player isn't playing because the formation doesn't need him, would that stop him from wanting a transfer? No, he would more likely want a transfer. I am pretty sure that formation has no effect on a player wanting to play more or less games.

But a few posts back you stated that because Barcelona has Xavi and Ineista' date=' Yaya Toure isn't a star and as such wouldn't expect as many games, yet now you are saying that because this random team only has 1, 94 rated star, the rest of the players are also stars. Which is it, the highest rated player is the star and anyone a few points under isn't or because there is only one star the rest are also stars.[/quote']

Yeah but in the barca team, there were stars in every position. In this random team, the next step down from the star was the 89 rated players. Which was everyone. Thats why it is better to have some players high and some players low, because if you have all 89 rated players, they all expect to play the same amount of games. Like i said before, it is all comparative. In the barca team, a 92 rated player is maybe 7th or 8th highest. But in this random team, the second highest is the 89 rated players. Therefore they are not necessarily 'stars', but they expect only a few games below the stars. This means that even though they aren't stars, they might as well be because they expect to play a large proportion of games.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Player Concerns

I'm probably a bit late for this point but oh well :P

I don't think the game should differentiate a lot between 98 and 94 rated players. Imagine a real-life situation where Robinho can't get on the field because he has Ribery, Ronaldo and Messi ahead of him. Robinho's going to want a lot of games given his stature (rating) and if he isn't getting them he's going to want to move.

On the other hand I don't know in the slightest how SM have programmed player concerns. It may be a blanket thing where the highest rated players have to play x percent of games, players say 3/4 ratings below are happy to play 100-x percent of games and the remainder are happy to play once or twice filling in for injuries or suspensions.

If this is the case (in my opinion more likely as the same programming can cover the entire database) then the scenario above will be allowed to happen provided the team is managed well. In my opinion I don't think the above should be allowed to happen as it is clearly star-hogging so I hope the programming is more sophisticated and recognises players of say 93 and upwards as stars who need to play the proposed 60-75% of games.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Player Concerns

That must be the stupidest reply I've ever seen on this forum. You don't know me' date=' you don't him, but you're saying he is a better manger than me? :confused:

I have been playing SM long enough to know what I'm doing. He obviously isn't managing his team very well because he isn't playing loads of his players. The most you can play in any one game using all subs is 14 and he has over 100 so if SM had actually made the player concerns feature realistic a lot of his players would be concerned about their "lack of opportuinites".

The quality of the players doesn't matter. The fact that a lot of his players aren't good enough for his first team doesn't mean they shouldn't get concerns. Like I have already said, the guy has 21 CBs in his team, no one in real life would want to be 10th choice CB let alone 20th.[/quote']

dude sm is changing, and no matter how long you have been playing this - you don't seem to have a clue to counter the player concern feature - the feature which tests your squad management skill to the fullest.

and

i can't believe you still haven't understood it. here it goes : "higher rated players will be more concerned than lower rated players." see - this is makes player quality relevant. got it.

and

you are right. i don't know u and the other manager. but i know that the other manager isn't posting here with the fear of losing his players. he obviously has a plan to tackle the concerns (which you obviously don't) . may be you should send him private message seeking help. just ask him - how does he do it? how has he been able to keep concerns so low? who knows - he might just help you.:P

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...