Jump to content

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


Guest SM Dev (Ste)
 Share

Recommended Posts

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

We have introduced a new aspect to the game called ‘Player Concerns’.

Good idea in theory, but the forum is ablaze with people who aren't happy with the way it's being done at the moment.

Squad sizes need to be addressed for sure but it's real hard to avoid players becoming unhappy at the moment, which is sucking a lot of the fun out of the game for a lot of people. A salary cap (between £1m and £1.5m) or no squad allowed to exceed 50 players in total would solve the problem and not upset a lot of the managers, a win-win surely.

To reduce already stupidly sized 'super squads' take player contracts away from the managers and let the chairman (the game) deal with them and have players refuse to sign new contracts if they haven't played in a (to be decided) percentage of games based on their in squad capabilities, so an 85 skill point 25 year old wouldn't realistically expect to play every game in a squad with a shed load of 88-90s.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

Good idea in theory' date=' but the forum is ablaze with people who aren't happy with the way it's being done at the moment.[/quote']

How long before concerns start appearing? I've been playing around a season and a half and have never had a concern regarding lack of games. Both my teams have 'small-ish' squads of under 40 players though and I rotate every match.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

Ok...got a response back from SM.

Hi Ian' date='

Thank you for bringing this to our attention. We have now reviewed this ticket and believe that there is no reported bug.

This is due to the following:

1. Samir Nasri has only started 24 games and come on as a substitute on 7 occasions. With regards to substitutions, if a player comes on as a substitute then it will count as half an appearance irrespective of what minute they entered the match. Therefore Samir Nasri has only participated in [b']27.5 games out of a possible 41 games[/b] and not the figure that you have stated.

2. Luis Nani has only started 23 games and come on as a substitute on 3 occasions. With regards to substitutions, if a player comes on as a substitute then it will count as half an appearance irrespective of what minute they entered the match. Therefore Luis Nani has only participated in 24.5 games out of a possible 39 games and not the figure that you have stated.

We believe that confusion may have arisen in the way that you are calculating appearances. This is because in the Appearance column, the first figure is a players total appearances for the season and the figure in brackets is how many times out of that total they have appeared as a substitute.

For example, with Luis Nani, he has only featured in 14 league games this season, and in those games he has started 11 times and come on as a substitute on 3 occasions.

We hope that this has cleared any confusion that may have arisen regarding the lack of games concern and also explained why this is not a reported bug.

Regards

Soccer Manager

So, in other words, this is all WAD. It seems very harsh on fitness levels (you have to play your starters, even when they are not fully fit...and backups are going to want to move on to other clubs. More challenging by far than the old way.

I predict we will see a lot of player trading to get around the concerns...I'm not sure how I feel about all this.

:(

Particularly annoyed that Nasri would post a 67% playing time and still have a concern. Yet, its plausible from a strict reading of the FAQ.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

How long before concerns start appearing?

I think it's every 10 game turns that things get re-assessed but I could be wrong, so if at the end of game turn 10 your team has played 16 games then a top player would be happy if he played in 12 of them (give or take). I think that's how it works.

I'm not sure how they decide who will or won't develop concerns though

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

I can personally vouch that SM Dev (Ste) is reading this thread. How do I know you ask? Because he deleted a post which I made an hour or so ago where I was being honest about the current balls up and gave me an infraction for the privilege.

So, if they're reading it, why aren't we deemed worthy of a reply of some description or maybe a bit more of a detailed explanation to the nonsense which was said the other week re minor tweak?

So, they can punish members for being agitated by their lack of openness and being thoroughly peeved off by the way they have gone about this not to mention the lack of communication, BUT they can still come onto this thread and dish out infractions because they don't like what somebody has said???

Just about sums them up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

Just wanted to add my two-penneth with regards SM and whether it should mirror real life.

People have used Neymar as an example of a player who gets unhappy on SM when not playing enough games. It's an extreme example as he is a force of nature and highly hyped in real life, but I'll go with it.

Neymar in real life would probably expect to play in the majority of most games for pretty much any club on the planet - but in real life he is not a "90 rated player" - he'd probably be a 94. SM obviously can't give him that as things currently stand as he's growing and hasn't played in a competitive league yet. A better example might be Ballotelli. Mario has made 40 league appearances for Man City since 2010 - this is waaaaay below a 70% games ratio. He seems content at Man City to me, a massive club. Lukaku hasn't had a sniff at Chelsea, but seems content as he realises he's young and will likely get chances on loan. He knows his future is ahead of him - yet on SM he will now seemingly expect to play a serious number of games regardless of how amazing the first team is.

Throw into this the fact that SM differs from reality in a fundamental aspect. You HAVE to rotate your squad in SM to play the game effectively. It is not possible to field a fit team in league and cup games. So the game is forcing you into rotating anyway - but because of the percentage split it is virtually impossible to keep everyone content. If the match fitness/games per week were different then people would be content to have less players.

Concerns are a good idea but they've gone too far. They're not inkeeping with reality OR with the way you have to play SM (constant squad rotating, large squads and the fact that many players in reality are better than their rating - which is obviously growing). It really really needs knocking back a few steps.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

Just wanted to add my two-penneth with regards SM and whether it should mirror real life.

People have used Neymar as an example of a player who gets unhappy on SM when not playing enough games. It's an extreme example as he is a force of nature and highly hyped in real life' date=' but I'll go with it.

Neymar in real life would probably expect to play in the majority of most games for pretty much any club on the planet - but in real life he is not a "90 rated player" - he'd probably be a 94. SM obviously can't give him that as things currently stand as he's growing and hasn't played in a competitive league yet. A better example might be Ballotelli. Mario has made 40 league appearances for Man City since 2010 - this is waaaaay below a 70% games ratio. He seems content at Man City to me, a massive club. Lukaku hasn't had a sniff at Chelsea, but seems content as he realises he's young and will likely get chances on loan. He knows his future is ahead of him - yet on SM he will now seemingly expect to play a serious number of games regardless of how amazing the first team is.

Throw into this the fact that SM differs from reality in a fundamental aspect. You HAVE to rotate your squad in SM to play the game effectively. It is not possible to field a fit team in league and cup games. So the game is forcing you into rotating anyway - but because of the percentage split it is virtually impossible to keep everyone content. If the match fitness/games per week were different then people would be content to have less players.

Concerns are a good idea but they've gone too far. They're not inkeeping with reality OR with the way you have to play SM (constant squad rotating, large squads and the fact that many players in reality are better than their rating - which is obviously growing). It really really needs knocking back a few steps.[/quote']

This sums it up perfectly, well said....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

In real life the big boys (Barca, Man City etc) sign a few greedy players who only go there for the money and are perfectly happy to sit on the bench for most of the season and only get their boots dirty in important games as long as the cheques keep getting cashed.

This is one aspect of real football that the game can't really replicate as none of the other teams would get a look in when it comes to signing players and not many managers are up for that kind of challenge in the game.

They have to distant themselves from real life football as in most real world leagues you know pretty much who's going to be in the top 4 every season, and that wouldn't be good for business in the game.

Apart from skill points the game should be more arcade style fun to play, you've heard of the expression KISS I assume, it's the way forward.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

In real life the big boys (Barca' date=' Man City etc) sign a few greedy players who only go there for the money and are perfectly happy to sit on the bench for most of the season and only get their boots dirty in important games as long as the cheques keep getting cashed.

This is one aspect of real football that the game can't really replicate as none of the other teams would get a look in when it comes to signing players and not many managers are up for that kind of challenge in the game.

They have to distant themselves from real life football as in most real world leagues you know pretty much who's going to be in the top 4 every season, and that wouldn't be good for business in the game.

Apart from skill points the game should be more arcade style fun to play, you've heard of the expression KISS I assume, it's the way forward.[/quote']

Hmmm. I think I disagree, don't understand the point and then have no idea what you mean (but that's probably just me).

There are some greedy players, but to say that "the big boys (Barca, Man City etc) sign a few greedy players who only go there for the money and are perfectly happy to sit on the bench" is a little inaccurate. It also doesn't have any relevance to my point.

Reality vs SM. I don't feel the need for SM to be "real", but I think concerns are an attempt to make it more real and it fails on two accounts. 1) Players getting concerns in-game would be happy with their playing percentages in real life. 2) The current acceleration of player concerns does not "fit" with the typical way of playing SM - squad rotation, enough players to cope with match fitnesses and scouting/grooming. If they want it real, or they want a great game - it current lies between the two, hitting neither.

"Apart from skill points the game should be more arcade style fun to play, you've heard of the expression KISS I assume, it's the way forward"

I have absolutely no idea what this means - but I may just be a bit old?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

On the Buffon/Courtois scenario, which pages ago I mentioned was in my team, if I was to buy an relatively cheap 89-rated keeper, and never play him, would Courtois's concerns go down as he would then be the third choice keeper, and therefore not expected to play? By the time he was back at no concerns, I'd just sell the 89 keeper, and repeat this process until such times as Courtois was ready to be number 1.

Sounds like a really silly way to go about it if this is the only way round it. I'd see the point if Courtois was 90+, but he's still 88 and still officially in my youth team. I really don't want to be forced into selling him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

Quick update on my 'bug' regarding the 19/83 getting concerns for not playing.. I got auto responsed :(

Since then I have had Edin Dzeko go from a level 1 to a level 2 concern regarding not being played despite being involved with at some point in 42 out 52 games in all competitions I've played with my Man City team. Yup hardly what I'd call not playing :eek:

I now have 4 or so bugs listed, asking for responses as to why some players are going up in concern levels when they dont fit any 'known' criteria for it. I'm a Gold Manager, and out of those Bugs, at least 3 are over 72 hours old.

I'm all for sharing the wealth and whatnot, but when it is affecting players who are 1st choice, actual youth players who are no where near the first team in smaller squads ( 30 players or less), or are playing over this randomer 75% rule, then there are issues

It's not going well is it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

On the Buffon/Courtois scenario' date=' which pages ago I mentioned was in my team, if I was to buy an relatively cheap 89-rated keeper, and never play him, would Courtois's concerns go down as he would then be the third choice keeper, and therefore not expected to play? By the time he was back at no concerns, I'd just sell the 89 keeper, and repeat this process until such times as Courtois was ready to be number 1.

Sounds like a really silly way to go about it if this is the only way round it. I'd see the point if Courtois was 90+, but he's still 88 and still officially in my youth team. I really don't want to be forced into selling him.[/quote']

I don't think it makes any difference whether your keeper is 2nd, 3rd or 5th choice anymore. If he is rated 88 or higher he'll develop concerns.

In my Roma team I have Hart (92); Mandanda (91); De Gea (90); Szczesny (89) and Zieler (88) and they all have concerns except Hart. Although I'm sure he'll soon get concerned as I've been playing Mandanda lately to try and get rid of his concern.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

On the Buffon/Courtois scenario' date=' which pages ago I mentioned was in my team, if I was to buy an relatively cheap 89-rated keeper, and never play him, would Courtois's concerns go down as he would then be the third choice keeper, and therefore not expected to play? By the time he was back at no concerns, I'd just sell the 89 keeper, and repeat this process until such times as Courtois was ready to be number 1.

Sounds like a really silly way to go about it if this is the only way round it. I'd see the point if Courtois was 90+, but he's still 88 and still officially in my youth team. I really don't want to be forced into selling him.[/quote']

I must do that for my torino to keep zoet happy, however with courtois being 88, im not so sure.. if this was the case then the game is even more unbelievable :eek:

It's was never in doubt SM were viewing these posts and taking notes etc.. that's what scares me, i don't like SM like this.. its too harsh espcially regards prospect players.

if another manager in my setup has buffon and courtois, good for him.. it's not my priviledge to either have the luxury of buying buffon or courtois, the only people with problim like this is new players to the game/noob etc etc etc good managers will find a way to sign buffon or courtois using there management abilities.

SM does ot require much ability if anyone can build a 90/91 team ina few weeks, which is similar to your first XI because you gota drop xavi and villa to play ganso and meymar.

for me its just ridiculos easy/level game now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

Hmmm. I think I disagree' date=' don't understand the point and then have no idea what you mean (but that's probably just me).[/quote']

I wasn't particularly clear was I ;)

Let me try again.

It's a game and should have more emphasis on being fun to play and not get bogged down in too many rules and worrying whether it's realistic enough. When I first joined the game (about 18 months ago) I remember it being simpler and more fun, maybe it's just nostalgia I don't know. There was no player concerns and things kind of ticked along well enough, sure there were issues but nothing that couldn't be sorted with a little work.

Then I think the game got carried away with adding 'new and improved features' that have taken away a lot of the fun for me, but as I've previously stated I want to K (keep) I (it) S (simple) S (stupid), no offence :)

The only feature of the game that should be tied to the real world are the player stats, the rest should be based on in game data (things like attendances and stadium capacities etc).

Remove player concerns from the game and simply limit squad sizes to 50 max, that would do me.

In real life Man City etc have loads of players and some of them know they won't play much but are happy to sit on the bench and spend the money, for a few seasons at least. If the game wants to be realistic then the big named teams should be allowed to do this (have bigger squads and have their players not get too concerned about not playing) and the rest can fight over the scraps that the big clubs don't want, and be hit harder with player concerns (you wouldn't be too happy being on the bench at Norwich etc but if you were on £100k a week you'd probably put up with it at Real Madrid etc). To be even more like real life managers should maybe have to negotiate contracts with players, so if 2 teams meet the asking price for a player it then comes down to who will offer him the most money a week...it's just not as much fun this way, remember KISS? (Not the band).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

I can personally vouch that SM Dev (Ste) is reading this thread. How do I know you ask? Because he deleted a post which I made an hour or so ago where I was being honest about the current balls up and gave me an infraction for the privilege.

So' date=' if they're reading it, why aren't we deemed worthy of a reply of some description or maybe a bit more of a detailed explanation to the nonsense which was said the other week re minor tweak?

So, they can punish members for being agitated by their lack of openness and being thoroughly peeved off by the way they have gone about this not to mention the lack of communication, BUT they can still come onto this thread and dish out infractions because they don't like what somebody has said???

Just about sums them up.[/quote']

I think the problem is that the TPTB at SM can NEVER admit when they are wrong. As an example here is a post relating to a match engine bug that I made a thread for back in February:

I would like to draw a bug to other forumers attention. It has been clear to me for a number of weeks now that when you make an in-game tactical change' date=' eg moving a player designated CB/DM from CB in a 4-4-2 formation to DM in a 4-5-1, that player is, more often than not, marked down in his match rating as if he has played out of position. This also occurs when playing a F/W in both positions during a game.

I have ended up in the preposterous position of having a team dominate a game and all the players being rated between 8 and 10, except for the one who moved from Forward to Wing at 75 mins who received a 4 - despite scoring two goals and not being booked and being designated an F/W. It seems that the match engine is ignoring secondary designations and assuming that player is 'out of position' when he is moved 'in game'.

Has anybody else noticed this? If you've wondered why a player is consistently getting 4's or 5's when the rest of the team is getting higher ratings then the in-game tactical changes are a probable culprit.

BTW: I reported this 'bug' on the 26th January and was told it is being 'monitored' by a member of the technical staff. Meanwhile my players averages are being adversley affected for no valid reason. SM should either sort this out or do away with secondary designations during in-game play. Either way we deserve to be told.[/quote']

I eventually received a standard reply saying that there was no bug and the match engine is working correctly. Ticket closed, end of discussion. The thing is that there IS a bug and I'm still getting players who are designated F/W who score goals and have assists, don't get booked and end up on the winning side who get a rating of 4 simply because I moved them from a forward position to the wing for the last 15 minutes.

This may not seem particularly important to most people but I think it does shed a new light on the current 'concerns' debacle where I am now convinced that the system has suffered a critical failure as a result of the recent 'tweak' and SM are either in denial that anything is wrong or, more likely, trying to bluff it out until they can find a fix. After all something similar happened to RBS recently and they have much greater resources at their disposal.

C'mon SM, time to own up to your customers and put all concern activity on hold until you can fix the problem that is staring you in the face. Surely you can see by now that this is a public relations disaster and you're rapidly losing the goodwill of your most loyal customers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

With regards the match-engine, there's not a whole lot SM can proberly do tbh, i could be wrong but i wouldn't say so. considering its always been the same..

player concerns i want to know why so many players are getting concerns ther're only 15/20 managers for most setups in the game, i can't see why everyone has to lose there 2nd choice/best youth players.. for me it make no sense.

if someone can tell me how it makes sense.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

With regards the match-engine' date=' there's not a whole lot SM can proberly do tbh, i could be wrong but i wouldn't say so. considering its always been the same..

player concerns i want to know why so many players are getting concerns ther're only 15/20 managers for most setups in the game, i can't see why everyone has to lose there 2nd choice/best youth players.. for me it make no sense.

if someone can tell me how it makes sense.....[/quote']

I come in peace :)

Just a theory; if concerns have been accelerated in some gameworlds to an unrealistic degree the obvious motivation for SM to do it would be to free up more players and make the gameworld more attractive for any potential new managers.

The posts I've seen from forumers who I know are in the fuller gameworlds don't seem to be experiencing the accelerated concerns - is it possible that if a gameworld drops below a pre-set limit then "accelerated concerns" kick-in to keep the gameworld active and stop all the best talent sitting with 15/20 teams?

Not sure if there's a pattern there?

Shels - in EC1 (100% full gameworld for those of you unaware) you have just 2 players with concerns (both only level 1) from a main squad of 50 and in GC10 (fairly full for an older GC) only 2 concerns (also only level 1) from a main squad of 33 which, from what you are saying, is very low compared to some of your other teams - is there any kind of pattern that you can see yourself where the emptier the gameworld the greater the frequency/ severity concerns develop...?

It's just a theory, but it would explain why (in general) the more established forumers who are in the older, fuller gameworlds don't seem to be having as much of a problem with this as those of you in the newer, emptier gameworlds.... :confused:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

I come in peace :)

Just a theory; if concerns have been accelerated in some gameworlds to an unrealistic degree the obvious motivation for SM to do it would be to free up more players and make the gameworld more attractive for any potential new managers.

The posts I've seen from forumers who I know are in the fuller gameworlds don't seem to be experiencing the accelerated concerns - is it possible that if a gameworld drops below a pre-set limit then "accelerated concerns" kick-in to keep the gameworld active and stop all the best talent sitting with 15/20 teams?

Not sure if there's a pattern there?

Shels - in EC1 (100% full gameworld for those of you unaware) you have just 2 players with concerns (both only level 1) from a main squad of 50 and in GC10 (fairly full for an older GC) only 2 concerns (also only level 1) from a main squad of 33 which' date=' from what you are saying, is very low compared to some of your other teams - is there any kind of pattern that you can see yourself where the emptier the gameworld the greater the frequency/ severity concerns develop...?

It's just a theory, but it would explain why (in general) the more established forumers who are in the older, fuller gameworlds don't seem to be having as much of a problem with this as those of you in the newer, emptier gameworlds.... :confused:[/quote']

I think your theory could well be right. I only play in forum standard/custom setups which is mostly full and haven't had any drastic changes in player concerns.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

In my Roma team I have Hart (92); Mandanda (91); De Gea (90); Szczesny (89) and Zieler (88) and they all have concerns except Hart. Although I'm sure he'll soon get concerned as I've been playing Mandanda lately to try and get rid of his concern.

I can't believe that no one else has spotted this or they have and chose to ignore it. Does no one else see anything wrong with this? Why does anyone need 5 quality keepers? If someone can explain why other than to prevent other managers having those players, then I'd like to know the reason? I can understand having Hart as No1 and Zieler or Szczesny as No2, but to have all 5 is what I would class as player hogging.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

I can't believe that no one else has spotted this or they have and chose to ignore it. Does no one else see anything wrong with this? Why does anyone need 5 quality keepers? If someone can explain why other than to prevent other managers having those players' date=' then I'd like to know the reason? I can understand having Hart as No1 and Zieler or Szczesny as No2, but to have all 5 is what I would class as player hogging.[/quote']

Yeah, that's a fair point - but let's say he just had Hart and Szczesny...

Well one of them would still have concerns and need to be sold as things stand?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

I can't believe that no one else has spotted this or they have and chose to ignore it. Does no one else see anything wrong with this? Why does anyone need 5 quality keepers? If someone can explain why other than to prevent other managers having those players' date=' then I'd like to know the reason? I can understand having Hart as No1 and Zieler or Szczesny as No2, but to have all 5 is what I would class as player hogging.[/quote']

I knew that would leave me open to criticism. I signed Hart when he was rated 78, before he was established in the Man City team, when Mandanda was my No1 keeper. I signed Szczesny when he was rated 76 because I saw how quality he was when he was loaned out to Brentford. I signed De Gea when he was rated 75 because I had followed him in Spain and I signed Zieler when he was rated 82 from an external. Other managers had the chance to sign those players so why is it a problem that my scouting was better than theirs when these players were still undeveloped talents?

When Hart was not my No 1 keeper he was loaned out to two clubs in my setup. Likewise Szczesny and Zieler have been out on loan this season and De Gea, until he got uprated to 90, has been out on loan for all of the three prior seasons. I have been trying to offload Mandanda as a makeweight in part exchange deals for most of the season with no takers.

So to recap: Hart is my No 1 because he is the best young keeper in the world. Mandanda is expendable but nobody wants him. De Gea, Szczesny and Zieler will probably all leave in the next six months as a result of escalated concerns but as I have already stated previously, it doesn't matter because goalkeepers never get injured and never lose fitness.

Any manager could have signed any of those players as they were all on the database when I picked them up. As and when they improved I made them available to other managers in the setup as loans. You might class this as "player hogging" but frankly I fail to see what I have done wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

The posts I've seen from forumers who I know are in the fuller gameworlds don't seem to be experiencing the accelerated concerns - is it possible that if a gameworld drops below a pre-set limit then "accelerated concerns" kick-in to keep the gameworld active and stop all the best talent sitting with 15/20 teams?

I don't think your theory holds water. I have a Roma team in WC87 where 46 of the 80 clubs are currently managed and concerns seem to be just as rampant as in less populated gameworlds. Although I have to say that concerns in WC1 are fairly manageable for my Juventus team at the moment but of course that setup is fully subscribed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

I knew that would leave me open to criticism. I signed Hart when he was rated 78' date=' before he was established in the Man City team, when Mandanda was my No1 keeper. I signed Szczesny when he was rated 76 because I saw how quality he was when he was loaned out to Brentford. I signed De Gea when he was rated 75 because I had followed him in Spain and I signed Zieler when he was rated 82 from an external. Other managers had the chance to sign those players so why is it a problem that my scouting was better than theirs when these players were still undeveloped talents?

When Hart was not my No 1 keeper he was loaned out to two clubs in my setup. Likewise Szczesny and Zieler have been out on loan this season and De Gea, until he got uprated to 90, has been out on loan for all of the three prior seasons. I have been trying to offload Mandanda as a makeweight in part exchange deals for most of the season with no takers.

So to recap: Hart is my No 1 because he is the best young keeper in the world. Mandanda is expendable but nobody wants him. De Gea, Szczesny and Zieler will probably all leave in the next six months as a result of escalated concerns but as I have already stated previously, it doesn't matter because goalkeepers never get injured and never lose fitness.

Any manager could have signed any of those players as they were all on the database when I picked them up. As and when they improved I made them available to other managers in the setup as loans. You might class this as "player hogging" but frankly I fail to see what I have done wrong.[/quote']

I've not said you've done anything wrong, but surely you must understand why player concerns were introduced back in November 2009? When Joe Hart started to rise in rating and eventually supassed Steve Mandanda, why did you keep hold of the latter as you didn't need him anymore? If I joined your Game World would you sell me one of your 5 excellent keepers for cash? The answer would probably be no but I can loan him or possibly have him in a part exchange offer (which wouldn't work as I'd have no one to offer in return). Now use this scenario in the same Game World, but this time I'm trying to get players for other positions from similar squads to yours. The outcome would be exactly the same. What happens then? The answer is I leave the Game World as in my opinion no one will sell me anyone for cash even though I have money to spend and you have surplus players. That is a problem which surely is trying to be addressed via concerns?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

I don't think your theory holds water. I have a Roma team in WC87 where 46 of the 80 clubs are currently managed and concerns seem to be just as rampant as in less populated gameworlds. Although I have to say that concerns in WC1 are fairly manageable for my Juventus team at the moment but of course that setup is fully subscribed.

I'm sorry for singling you out but no one else seems to have said what Game World they're in. I'm not sure if this is intentional or not but I think it it because if they did then they'd be shot down!

For example let's look at Roma in WC 87:

If you have Joe Hart as your No1' date=' then why do you need all 4 of Dsvid de Gea, Wojciech Szczesny, Thinaut Courtois and Ron-Robert Zieler? I need a keeper at my Sampdoria as my No1 is Ulrich Rame and I've money to burn as I've go over 250M. All of these keepers would improve my side but all bar one are set as "unavailable". Do you really need them more than me? Could you make one available so that I can start to build my Sampdoria? If the answer is no, then could I possibly buy Bernd Leno?[/font']

I'm also in need of a decent LB as I've currently got Gianluigi Bianco and Pietro Accardi. Would you sell me either Luis Filipe, Alex Sandro, Davide Santon or Serge Aurier for cash as surely you don't need them as you have Marcelo and Jordi Alba?

My fowards aren't any good either and I need to strengthen that area to. I see that you have Edinson Cavani, Giuseppe Rossi, Radamel Falcao, Alvaro Negredo and Danny Welbeck. Due to this would you sell me either Daniel Sturridge, Jimmy Briand, Bas Dost, Fabio Borini, Welliton, Stephan El Shaarawy, Maicon or Yildrim for cash as surely you don't need them?

I think the last position that I need to strengthen is my central midfield (with someone who can play either CM or DM). Could I purchase either Oriol Romeu, Tom Cleverley, Nicolas N'Koulou, Jordan Henderson, Jack Wilshere, Cristian Eriksen, Thiago, Sandro or Phil Jones for cash as you surely don't need them as you already have Ever Banega, Yoann Gorcuff, Fernando, Darren Fletcher, Nuri Sahin, Artuo Vidal, Yann M'Vila and Sami Khedira?

Actually I've haut resigned from your Game World as I've already had several offers turned down by managers with similar squads. Anyone else see mangers joining their Game World ad then leaving within a short space of time? Could be due to this or I suppose another reason.

Could this be one of the reasons why concerns are in place? I would class the above squad as player hogging and surely as a manager you now have to decide who to sell and who to keep. Make an informed choice of which of your players will cut it and be the next [insert name] and which will just be another average player.

I'll apologise again for using your squad but Is this the reason (as I mentioned earlier) why people have forgotten to say which Game World they're in or even post a link to their squad?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

I'm sorry for singling you out but no one else seems to have said what Game World they're in. I'm not sure if this is intentional or not but I think it it because if they did then they'd be shot down!

For example let's look at Roma in WC 87:

If you have Joe Hart as your No1' date=' then why do you need all 4 of Dsvid de Gea, Wojciech Szczesny, Thinaut Courtois and Ron-Robert Zieler?[/b'] I need a keeper at my Sampdoria as my No1 is Ulrich Rame and I've money to burn as I've go over 250M. All of these keepers would improve my side but all bar one are set as "unavailable". Do you really need them more than me? Could you make one available so that I can start to build my Sampdoria? If the answer is no, then could I possibly buy Bernd Leno?

As I said earlier, I bought all of those goalkeepers when they were lowly rated but available on the database. Yes, you could have loaned any of them, except Hart, until SM changed the concern system. Now they will develop a concern if I loan them out - that is why they are unavailable. Yes you can buy Leno.

I'm also in need of a decent LB as I've currently got Gianluigi Bianco and Pietro Accardi. Would you sell me either Luis Filipe, Alex Sandro, Davide Santon or Serge Aurier for cash as surely you don't need them as you have Marcelo and Jordi Alba?

Yes, this is a trading club. I buy young talented players and sell them at a profit, or in part exchange to buy the likes of Marcelo. Jordi Alba was bought as a lowly rated player and was supposed to be my backup player but will probably have to be sold if I want to keep Marcelo.

My fowards aren't any good either and I need to strengthen that area to. I see that you have Edinson Cavani, Giuseppe Rossi, Radamel Falcao, Alvaro Negredo and Danny Welbeck. Due to this would you sell me either Daniel Sturridge, Jimmy Briand, Bas Dost, Fabio Borini, Welliton, Stephan El Shaarawy, Maicon or Yildrim for cash as surely you don't need them?

Yes, as stated above, all the players mentioned (in bold) would be available for the right offer. The likelihood is that I will probably end up losing two or three of the others as a result of concerns. Players that it took me a lot of effort to get.

I think the last position that I need to strengthen is my central midfield (with someone who can play either CM or DM). Could I purchase either Oriol Romeu, Tom Cleverley, Nicolas N'Koulou, Jordan Henderson, Jack Wilshere, Cristian Eriksen, Thiago, Sandro or Phil Jones for cash as you surely don't need them as you already have Ever Banega, Yoann Gorcuff, Fernando, Darren Fletcher, Nuri Sahin, Artuo Vidal, Yann M'Vila and Sami Khedira?

Again, for the right offer you can have any of those highlighted. THe issue for me is that I'll probably end up losing Banega, Gourcuff, Fernando, Fletcher and Vidal as well - if I want to keep Sahin, M'Vila and Khedira

Actually I've haut resigned from your Game World as I've already had several offers turned down by managers with similar squads. Anyone else see mangers joining their Game World ad then leaving within a short space of time? Could be due to this or I suppose another reason.

Well as far as I know you haven't approached me (I check my private messages every day) to buy any player so I think your argument is disingenuos.

Could this be one of the reasons why concerns are in place? I would class the above squad as player hogging and surely as a manager you now have to decide who to sell and who to keep. Make an informed choice of which of your players will cut it and be the next [insert name] and which will just be another average player.

I have never had an issue with concerns up to now. In fact if you look back a year or so in this thread you will see that I have been one of the most vociferous advocates of the system. The problem I have now is that SM, in their infinite wisdom, have made significant changes without any prior consultation with their customer base. You might consider a manager that uses his knowledge of the game to build the best possible squad, all the time trading and loaning out players to other managers, to be guilty of player hogging but in my defence I would say that when I took over that team it was extremely nondescipt. Over the course of five years I have built a good young squad with a first team average of 92 - which is still nowhere near being the highest rated in the setup. My highest rated players are: Muller (93); Marcelo (93); Falcao (92); Cavani 92); Rossi (92); Khedira (92); Hummels (92) and Hart (92). As you can see not a single superstar among them. As for your constant accusation of "player hogging": correct me if I'm wrong but what concerns was supposed resolve was STAR hogging - the 'squad limit' deals with the issue of "player hogging".

I'll apologise again for using your squad but Is this the reason (as I mentioned earlier) why people have forgotten to say which Game World they're in or even post a link to their squad?

Damn right you should apologise for singling me out when all I've done is play the game honestly and within the rules. If the rules have changed then I'll have to deal with that and I don't need you to come on here sermonising.

Response in red.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...