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)

Care to explain...?

What's wrong with having a 93 rated starter' date=' who can play in 65-70% of games, and a lower-rated backup at 90, who can cover if injured, and also take part in games when Marcelo must be rested.

Is it so unethical to want a decent backup, especially when competing on multiple fronts?

Why should Alba expect to play most games, regardless of his team? What you say goes against the help system, which states only the best players expect to play in the majority of games. So, I'm afraid your statement is incorrect, as Alba is not one of my best players (being rated 4 below the team average, 3 behind Marcelo).[/quote']

You can have a decent back-up, you just can't have the same decent back-up (Alba in this case) season after season as he'd eventually get fed up in real-life and concerns reflect that on SM.

It's very rare you'll get a top player who goes 2 seasons in real life playing only a handful of games and is happy about it, yet some of the folk on here expect the player to sit there season after season after season..... :confused::rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

But this all goes back to my post a couple of pages back.

It's hard to compare these examples from real-life to in-game as the logistics are so different.

To copy and paste:-

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)

You can have a decent back-up' date=' you just can't have the [i']same [/i]decent back-up (Alba in this case) season after season as he'd eventually get fed up in real-life and concerns reflect that on SM.

It's very rare you'll get a top player who goes 2 seasons in real life playing only a handful of games and is happy about it, yet some of the folk on here expect the player to sit there season after season after season..... :confused::rolleyes:

But he is playing a decent amount of games. The in-game help states that the best players (e.g Marcelo) should play the majority of games, the (low-rated) youths (e.g Digne) should play a handful of games, and those rated in between (e.g Alba) should play an amount in between.

Marcelo has participated in 76% of games, as he is among the best in my squad and should play in a majority of games. Alba has participated in 49% of games for my squad, as he is not among the best players in my squad (3 below Marcelo, 4 below the team average), and should not expect to play in the majority of games.

I don't see a problem with this, but apparently SM does :confused:. I'm only following their instructions from the in-game help, and using common-sense, to give both Alba and Marcelo a fair number of games based on their ratings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

But this all goes back to my post a couple of pages back.

It's hard to compare these examples from real-life to in-game as the logistics are so different.

To copy and paste:-

I see what you're saying on realism' date=' on the poll thread I had posted this:

I could understand the uproar if the player concern increase rate was artificially high, but people need to remember that most gameworlds are a 20 week season as opposed to a real-life 40 week season.

I've read people unhappy that concerns are going up 1 level every month but surely that would be about right?

Isn't it realistic to say that a player will increase in concern in real-life every 2 months if they are unhappy?

Think of it this way:

August: real-life season starts (SM season starts)

September:

October: "boss I'd like to play more" (Level 1 after 4 weeks/ 8 games)

November:

December: "boss I really need to be playing more" (Level 2 after 8 weeks/ 16 games)

January:

February: "boss I'm still not playing enough!" (Level 3 after 12 weeks/ 24 games)

March:

April: "boss if I don't play more then I want a move!" (Level 4 after 16 weeks/ 32 games)

May:

June: "right boss that's it I'm off!" (Level 5 after 20 weeks/ 38ish games)

The above was in response to saying concerns were increasing every 4 weeks.

But he is playing a decent amount of games. The in-game help states that the best players (e.g Marcelo) should play the majority of games' date=' the (low-rated) youths (e.g Digne) should play a handful of games, and those rated in between (e.g Alba) should play an amount in between.

Marcelo has participated in 76% of games, as he is among the best in my squad and should play in a majority of games. Alba has participated in 49% of games for my squad, as he is not among the best players in my squad (3 below Marcelo, 4 below the team average), and should not expect to play in the majority of games.

I don't see a problem with this, but apparently SM does :confused:. I'm only following their instructions from the in-game help, and using common-sense, to give both Alba and Marcelo a fair number of games based on their ratings.[/quote']

The help says:

By informing people of the exact number of games may enable people to play the system too effectively and therefore it is up to the managers to figure out. However, your best players will expect to play in approximately 65-70% games and your worse players will be happy just to play a handful of games, with those in between expecting a number of games in between.

Possibly Alba wants to play 50 -65%? Which I appreciate doesn't help as you'd then need to swap him in for Marcelo maybe on 75 minutes every game for a while and see if that helped.

The main thing I've noticed about concerns is that for my 93-average rated 1st XI my back-up 89's have started developing concerns which never used to happen.

So my 2nd theory of the day is that the "tweak" has seen the gap widen between ratings and concerns - i.e if you have a 93 LB then previously a player would have to be a 92 or 91 to develop concerns, whereas now a 90 or a 89 will develop concerns too (although one would expect at a slower rate than the 92 or 91).

I also wondered if anyone has ever had a concern over "lack of opportunity"...?

I have never had this, so wondered if perhaps "lack of opportunity" and "lack of games" were basically being treated by SM as one and the same?

The help says:

Players that are not playing regularly will also assess if there is any opportunity to play in the future. If a player is the 5th choice left back then they will develop a concern that they will never have a chance to play for the club. This applies more to players that are at an age were they should be at their peak of the careers (25-30) and would like to be playing as opposed to younger or older players.

This would certainly seem to apply to the 5 GK's posts from earlier.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

Neymar is years away from his peak, this game is about having the best XI on any givin matchday, so if your a good manager you should have 4 strikers rated 91+ (standard setups/better teams) therefore signing neymar years ago was pointless, from a gaming perspective.

in essence all that happen is SM have taken away the abilty to have a strong team now, but at the same time sign the top prospects ages 16/17 and then LET them devolop till they reach at least near there peak.. neymar being 96*

I bought neymar for this reason, i not bought him to play him when he rated 88.. and have a weaker team on any giving matchday.

The issue is SM not allowing players to sign the top youths in competitve gameworlds and allow them to keep the players until a respectable time age24/92+, not like 88 youths getting unhappy,

if neymar started getting unhappy at rating 88..?? ANYONE who bought him and lost him/or had to play him will lose interest in the game on a matchday to matchday either by having to play weaker team or having to sell him.

all that happen here for top teams is that SM are forcing you to BUY the top players and not use the youth signing way of playing the game.

That for me is tragic.

i feel sorry for ayone with buffon on their team, trying to calculate buffons future demise/retirement with trying to sign a youth gk at the right time, and even if it works out well ur gk will be rated 89/90 id say at best...

SM seems to be feeling sorry for the numbers rather than what the game can offer somebody that signs up to SM, eventually the Noob will reach the same predictiment.. SM are lowering the standards, which considering it's not hard to build squads and challange an established side from the go only creates a no tier system.

When you create such a system then maybe you have a few wekaer teams, but many other teams are stronger so the chance that a noob to setup will win anytin/and leave is actually much higher.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

Im still waiting to see what happens on a bug related to concerns I created 14 days ago so 72 hours isnt very long.

Well the quickest one has been answered' date=' regarding Dzeko, which is something.

Seems that rotating the squad to deal with injuries, low health and stuff is not the done thing. Also dont play players as subs, because they will get concerns

Dzeko has played apart in 42 out 52 games, because the majority were subs appearences he has effectively played 26.5 games, which by my reckoning is still over half, just. However 75% rule means an increase in his concern level

Here is the answer from SM

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:

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.

Your player has made in total 42 appearances in which 31 were as substitutes.

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 your player has only made 26.5 appearances.

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.

So with a squad totalling 48, 23 first team (range 88-95) , 22 youth (70-89) and 3 on loan (83,84,85) I have 7 first teamers with concerns and 1 youth teamer with concerns.

In the grand scheme of thing, it isn't a massive squad, what with 2 rounds of cups in the domestic and Euro Games to play, I do a great deal of rotation, however this appears not to be the done thing as it actually means that players can never be happy.

This is even though I have a squad size that is about equal to that of say Man United (28 first teamers, 26 youth or thereabouts) Man City's actual squad works out about (32 first teamers, 24 youth)

I can understand if it is trying to mimic real life with the concerns, and take that perhaps 3 or 4 would get the hump not playing, but 7 including my 88 ressie keeper who has to oust Joe Hart.. is a bit insane.

It needs tweaking as it's impossible to keep players happy, in a squad size and skill level that would be akin to squads in real life

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

http://www.soccermanager.com/profile.php?cid=718645

The first Ajax is the one I pay most attention too' date=' so that's the one to look at although all 3 are fairly similar, Rotherham doesn't have quite as 'full' a squad.

That won't show loaned out players so i'll just list them:

De Gea, Coentrao, Alba, Van Der Wiel, Azpilicueta, Vertonghen, Subotic, M'Vila, Eriksen, Kagawa, Pastore, Hazard, Muniain, Marin, Alexis, Neymar, Reus and Falcao.

I know you'll come straight out with 'player hogging' which is a fair point. But I bought most of the 'youth' players without competition and even some of the higher rated ones when they were cheap/lower rated.[/quote']

I'm not for the players concerns...but team's whit more than 200 players! is go to far for me.I do it also but stop whit 50-70 players,and bring it back to max.60/50 players now.

I have team's from 40 to 70 players max....in all these porto's team's no 90+ players,only hulk ,moutinho are 91.in my 15 others team's before from my younger brother who do not more play,have there quit 10 team's.

In my account team's like barca,city,bayer muchen there I have these players from the orginal team...and buy or sell only the old and bad players for me to a other from the same or better ranking,all the others that I buy are young future talent players from 70 to 87 some 88/89 but the are than the second in line for back-up play al most 20 to 30 game's a season+a lot als sub's every game I chance 3 hiyh players for these young on the 75 min if I win ...and I win not always but a lot, too till now these are happy.

who's is not happy are my frist 11 who play almost every game that I undestand not have 2 to 8 players in some team's ,and most of these have there concerns after a injuried for some weeks,where there before have play more than 85%,count all cup's+smfa in.

also in my 10 porto's team,and a other 5 on a second account(have already quit 10 team's is a bit too much)

my gk are helton or particio rui-, courtois in some ( 4/5 team's I think)

leali nicole 75, kadu 75 not more.

helton is 34 years, courtois play all cup's+smfa+1/3 of the legaal game's too till now no concerns whit my GK. only in one world where i have buy vivianio for in place helton, have courtois there sinds he was 86,now this season have i buy akinfeev for in place viviano he is for sale but is drop from 11.8m value where i have buy him for 12.7m in a unmanagend team,after buy akinfeev is drop too 5.8 m...so i lose twice,in real life that will not happed so you will now be punished twice!he is for sale,but lost too much.

now these two have concerns courtois+vivianio where courtois play before all cup's+smfa+1/3 of the legaal game's, his concerns is started the day after akinfeev is put in my team! if that makes a difference, though in other worlds he is satisfied.

you find my frist 15 team's other Taison Barcellos ,the other 5 team's are also porto's before 15 team's but i have only left 7 day's for gold manager

(is the account of my brother who is 12 years younger than me, and giving up before he could really play, was paid for 1 year, what should you do ... no team is or was in the same world in fact both are linked to the same e-mail address one on my name the other on his name whit one head e-mail adress...so no worry's there)

have already quit 10 team's but I'm not going to extend more and stop that account...I have my.the other account where I have 19 days credit., I stand for a dilema I will extend yes or no, see every day stop managers, new managers come in, although the better team's are free, like manchester united,chelsea, city ,muchen, napoli , barca, real in some for weeks now,these are way beter than my...but I like to bead the big team's whit a "normal team" but whit now worthless managers, who not stay quit if the lose 2 game's,although the have the better team...and

a lot of unmanged team's

There is no more fun in my world's, where there used to be 30-45 managers, now just under half more or less,

or I must find another world, but then I must my team let down, where I' have played several times champion,whit all the team's,have built up with good players and not all good players given the size of my team just these that I really wanted which is in my style of play fit.

so i have also some concerns not in all my world's but must are young players and the frist 11 who where injuried before...and that is not far ,not if the play almost every game before the get there injuried, have post a empl. from tabanou in this thread.

I also waiting for an answer .... but given the circumstances, SM will not now and never not give one right answer ,after weeks now whit no answer!

so look out for my team's who they want ,the come free in 19 day's in the standard champion world, but not the strongest good talent in players as I can with this team's championship play then you also.

thanks and no thanks too SM...so honest, and now official this game

to bring in whit the many useless stuff on the internet

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

You're very constructive today as that's your second post within an hour that has added to this excellent debate. Pray' date=' tell me, you've said you're not wasting your time debating this subject, but yet you keep posting on this excellent thread - how does that work?

I'm also struggling to understand how you can fully debate this when you aren't posting either a link to your squads or letting us know the clubs and Game worlds that you're in?

It's easy enough to say "I have a first team squad of 22 and a quarter of them now have concerns" without posting any other details. I'd hazard a guess and say that the majority of those 22 players have very similar ratings (which will be your first team and your cup team) and that's why you're encountering problems.

Please prove me wrong but again I'd hazard a guess ad say I'm right or pretty much close to it.[/quote']

Sorry.....who are you to tell me how I should debate any topic?

The fact of the matter is I'm not debating, I'm voicing my concerns.

So.....

  • If you're struggling to understand any of my posts - I don't care
  • Hazard any guess you wish - I don't care

You've been on here 2mins and already I've taken a disliking to you.

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...?[/b']

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:

Shels just giving this a bump in case you missed it, wondered if it held true for your teams?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

Sorry.....who are you to tell me how I should debate any topic?

The fact of the matter is I'm not debating' date=' I'm voicing my concerns.

So.....

[list']

[*]If you're struggling to understand any of my posts - I don't care

[*]Hazard any guess you wish - I don't care

You've been on here 2mins and already I've taken a disliking to you.

Once again thanks for your constructive post as it's adding to this debate nicely. I believe your failure to post either links to your squads or even state which game worlds you're in highlights that you'd be shot down in your anti concerns stance. Other people aren't afraid and in doing so it's creating discusion and helping this debate.

What have you actually added to this debate today? You "demand answers from SM" but yet fail to add anything constructive that will help them or anyone else debating this subject.

I suppose it's a bit like saying I don't like product x but don't give the company a valid reason why. Some other people also state they don't like product x but try and explain why and also debate sensibly with those that like it. I can't see you getting asked to join any focus groups.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

Shels just giving this a bump in case you missed it' date=' wondered if it held true for your teams?[/quote']

It's more than likely that in emptier game worlds managers have very good squads as they can sign players easily and in most cases with little competition. They start to stockpile these players, their "future stars" start to go up in rating and are never in a position when they need to sell.

Obviously this will lead to a situation were the manager starts to get a lot of concerns and instead of standing back and saying "ah, I've got 6 keepers rated 88-91, that's why most are unhappy", they decide to bury their head in the sand and complain that it's a bug or unfair as they've bought them and should be allowed to keep them.

In the busier game worlds, the opposite happens as they're more competitive and it's harder to sign "star names" or "future prospects. Most of the squads in these game worlds are probably balanced and you might come across one or two "super squads" but not many.

Obviously in these game worlds you probably won't see a lot of concerns re lack of games and the only ones you'll most likely see will be related to wages.

I'm quite surprised no one has mentioned this so far! It's not rocket science to work this out and come to this conclusion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

Yes' date=' you may have purchased those players when they first came onto the database or when they started getting more attention but the fact remains you don't need half of them and you could easily sell them and still be competitive within your game world.

As I have said previously I have played this game by the rules for five and a half years, buying and selling hundreds of players in this Roma team. The issue is not how many players I have but how concerns have changed. All you're doing is putting up a smokescreen.

You still haven't given a good reason (apart from I bought them when they were added / low rated) of why you still have 5 quality keepers in your squad or numerous quality players for each position?

Who the hell says that I have to give you a reason? Good or otherwise.

Do you really need that many players as you can't play them all and not all of the younger players will turn into the next big thing?

Most of my enjoyment in playing the game is scouting young players and seeing their ratings rise and subsequently integrating them into my teams. I also enjoy loaning out players to help other managers in the setup. Any that don't meet the above criteria get sold. Your issue seems to be the size of my squads which is my business not yours.

Anyone can easily look at your squad and come to two conclusions:

1. I'm not surprised you've got lots of concerns.

Everyone is getting lots of concerns because the system has been changed Sherlock.

2. He's player hogging.

I find that term offensive and you've used it in every post to me today. For the last time:

1. I like to buy and sell players within the rules of the game.

2. I built up my Roma team from nothing into a great young team. How dare you denigrate my efforts.

You've got to make choices now concerns are here. Do you really need Darren Fletcher when you've got some very good youngsters coming through? These are the choices you have to make and part of this game is to make these choices.

You are going to make yourself very unpopular around here if you don't stop lecturing people by stating the bleeding obvious. Maybe you should take the time to read the whole of this thread before you jump in at the deep end. Then you might see that a number of us have been debating the issue of concerns since they were implemented. THe fact is that the rules have changed very recently and I have think you have got a nerve admonishing me for playing the game by the rules that I signed up to.

I can already tell that you're one of those unlikeable people that feign a veneer of politeness that masks a vicious streak of hostility. Once again response in red.

BTW: You seem to be asking people to give more information about themselves perhaps you should do the same. You say that you took over Sampdoria in WC 87 and left because other managers wouldn't sell you players. When did you take over that team and for how long? I think this is relevant because I checked that teams history and they have been unmanaged since March when a manager had them for all of five games. Was that you? Prior to that they had a manager for six weeks in Oct/Nov 2011 and prior to that no manager for about 2 years. So it would seem that either you're not very persistent or a liar. Either way definitely not someone who should be attacking a manager who has been a member of that setup for 652 games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

Shels just giving this a bump in case you missed it' date=' wondered if it held true for your teams?[/quote']

It's more than likely that in emptier game worlds managers have very good squads as they can sign players easily and in most cases with little competition. They start to stockpile these players, their "future stars" start to go up in rating and are never in a position when they need to sell.

Obviously this will lead to a situation were the manager starts to get a lot of concerns and instead of standing back and saying "ah, I've got 6 keepers rated 88-91, that's why most are unhappy", they decide to bury their head in the sand and complain that it's a bug or unfair as they've bought them and should be allowed to keep them.

In the busier game worlds, the opposite happens as they're more competitive and it's harder to sign "star names" or "future prospects. Most of the squads in these game worlds are probably balanced and you might come across one or two "super squads" but not many.

Obviously in these game worlds you probably won't see a lot of concerns re lack of games and the only ones you'll most likely see will be related to wages.

I'm quite surprised no one has mentioned this so far! It's not rocket science to work this out and come to this conclusion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

Once again thanks for your constructive post as it's adding to this debate nicely. I believe your failure to post either links to your squads or even state which game worlds you're in highlights that you'd be shot down in your anti concerns stance. Other people aren't afraid and in doing so it's creating discusion and helping this debate.

What have you actually added to this debate today? You "demand answers from SM" but yet fail to add anything constructive that will help them or anyone else debating this subject.

I suppose it's a bit like saying I don't like product x but don't give the company a valid reason why. Some other people also state they don't like product x but try and explain why and also debate sensibly with those that like it. I can't see you getting asked to join any focus groups.

When you're in a position in which you've sent in tickets to SM and emailed the SMDev's and received the usual automated response, you become slightly bored of debating.

The player concern system in its entirety is not the hot topic that's at debate at present. The clear change in the frequency and criteria behind player concerns is the topic that everyone wants answers on right now.

So you can debate all you like, and 'hazard a guess' on why players are becoming so concerned, so rapidly. But you're not actually adding anything to the debate that's not already been said.

I'm fairly certain that what the forum members want is an honest response from SM that brings clarity to the shift in player concern frequency and its criteria.

So unless you can answer the above; what exactly are you adding apart from a trail of arrogant and hostile comments?

My response is not adding to the debate as it's directed specifically at you in response to your quizzing of my posts.

When/If a member of the SM team asks to view my squad then I will supply them with the details. But I’m not going to simply bow to your demands as your opinion is of no concern to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

It's more than likely that in emptier game worlds managers have very good squads as they can sign players easily and in most cases with little competition. They start to stockpile these players' date=' their "future stars" start to go up in rating and are never in a position when they need to sell.

Obviously this will lead to a situation were the manager starts to get a lot of concerns and instead of standing back and saying "ah, I've got 6 keepers rated 88-91, that's why most are unhappy", they decide to bury their head in the sand and complain that it's a bug or unfair as they've bought them and should be allowed to keep them.

In the busier game worlds, the opposite happens as they're more competitive and it's harder to sign "star names" or "future prospects. Most of the squads in these game worlds are probably balanced and you might come across one or two "super squads" but not many.

Obviously in these game worlds you probably won't see a lot of concerns re lack of games and the only ones you'll most likely see will be related to wages.

I'm quite surprised no one has mentioned this so far! It's not rocket science to work this out and come to this conclusion.[/quote']

You seem to be very knowledgeable for someone who only joined the forum 24 hours ago:rolleyes:

Mmm, I'm beginning to smell a rat. Time to 'fess up TeaCosy are you a Dev(il) in disguise?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

You seem to be very knowledgeable for someone who only joined the forum 24 hours ago:rolleyes:

Mmm' date=' I'm beginning to smell a rat. Time to 'fess up TeaCosy are you a Dev(il) in disguise?[/quote']

That had already crossed my mind due to the nature of his responses as they are so insistent on seeing evidence and the fact that beneath his avatar it states 'Senior Member'

Also, the player concern thread is highly unlikely to be the first thread you post on if you don't have any issues with the player concern system.

Very suspicious!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

I've been fiddling about with numbers tonight and it is possible to have a 22 man squad and keep 17 of them playing in at least 7 games out of 10, which I think is the criteria for keeping players happy and not concerned.

The above is true if;

5 Of the 22 are young or won't develop concerns based on lack of appearances, and you make 3 subs per game whether you want to or not (this is in the belief that a player subbed on counts as half an appearance).

You have to alter your formation about 4 or 5 times in a 10 game cycle to allow all of the 17 to reach the magic figure of 7 out of 10.

I'm no math expert but I managed to make it work this way.

I kind of feel like it isn't as much fun having to do this as it is more of a math challenge and you HAVE TO change your formation several times otherwise it won't work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

I've been fiddling about with numbers tonight and it is possible to have a 22 man squad and keep 17 of them playing in at least 7 games out of 10' date=' which I think is the criteria for keeping players happy and not concerned.

The above is true if;

5 Of the 22 are young or won't develop concerns based on lack of appearances, and you make 3 subs per game whether you want to or not (this is in the belief that a player subbed on counts as half an appearance).

You have to alter your formation about 4 or 5 times in a 10 game cycle to allow all of the 17 to reach the magic figure of 7 out of 10.

I'm no math expert but I managed to make it work this way.

I kind of feel like it isn't as much fun having to do this as it is more of a math challenge and you HAVE TO change your formation several times otherwise it won't work.[/quote']

You can get it to 19 players playing 70% of games by my calculations, where I assumed a minimum of 38 league games, 2 cup games and 6 European games.

I've been told European games are free so if you play one european game and then miss one league game you are calculated to have played 1/1. The game adds one to the top of the fraction but not the bottom.

Step 1: Assuming the goalkeeper plays all games (because rotating goalkeepers can't get them both to 70%), there are 10 spots on the field for every game.

This means a player can start 10/18 x 46 games in a 19 man squad.

Step 2: Using the subs, of which there are 3 every game, you can increase this number.

The player must be on the bench 8/18 x 46 times considering how many he starts in step 1. Every match you must selet 3 subs out of 8 so a player will make 3/8 x 8/18 x 46 sub appearances. Half this to get the number of games he is considered to have played to get 3/16 x 8/18 x 46.

Step 3: How many games played? Add the two results to get the layer's total number of games played: (3/16 x 8/18 x 46) + 10/18 x 46. This comes to a total of 29 and 7/18.

Now a player can only play a whole number of games so we take the number as 29. Since European games a free the total number of games in a season can be taken as 40. 29/40 is more than 70% so all 18 outfield players and the goalkeeper are kept happy.

Also, that extra 7/18 of a game x 18 players = 7 "extra games" that can be used to make up for mistakes in the rotation. Any extra progress in Europe can be used to give other players games and try to keep them happy.

So there you go. If you never ever want to ever get concerns, then only have a first team squad of 19 B)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

When you're in a position in which you've sent in tickets to SM and emailed the SMDev's and received the usual automated response' date=' you become slightly bored of debating.

The player concern system in its entirety is not the hot topic that's at debate at present. The clear change in the frequency and criteria behind player concerns is the topic that everyone wants answers on right now.

So you can debate all you like, and 'hazard a guess' on why players are becoming so concerned, so rapidly. But you're not actually adding anything to the debate that's not already been said.

I'm fairly certain that what the forum members want is an honest response from SM that brings clarity to the shift in player concern frequency and its criteria.

So unless you can answer the above; what exactly are you adding apart from a trail of arrogant and hostile comments?

My response is not adding to the debate as it's directed specifically at you in response to your quizzing of my posts.

When/If a member of the SM team asks to view my squad then I will supply them with the details. But I’m not going to simply bow to your demands as your opinion is of no concern to me.[/quote']

I am entitled to my opinion just as you are to yours. Whether you agree or disagree with me doesn't mean I'm right or wrong just as your opinion my be right or wrong. If my opinion is of no concern to you then that is your perogative and I respect your choice. All it means is that I won't debate with you and if you are to quote me then all that I ask is that you respect my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

I can already tell that you're one of those unlikeable people that feign a veneer of politeness that masks a vicious streak of hostility. Once again response in red.

Once again many thanks for taking the time to respond and debate sensibly with me.

I don't think anyone has said that you have bought any of your 5 excellent keepers outside of the rules of the game? In fact you could actually go out (if you had the funds) and buy several more 88+ rated keepers.

Would you actually need several more keepers of this quality? No. However there's nothing stopping you buying them.

There is an aspect of the game though called player concerns. Now as I have already mentioned there's nothing stopping you buying more 88+ rated keepers. However if you do so then they'll likely to develop concerns as you have already found out with your 5 excellent keepers.

What you or any other manager in this position has to do is decide which of those they want to keep and which they want to move on. For example you might decide to keep Joe Hart as your No1 and have Bernd Leno as your No2. You'd then sell Steve Mandanda, David de Gea, Wojciech Szczesny, Thinaut Courtois and Rob-Robert Zieler.

Obviously you don't have to make this choice but if you don't then you're more than likely lose them to concerns. Isn't that what part of management is about, making informed choices?

I'm sorry if you don't like the term "player hogging" but I'm struggling to find another way to describe a team that has Joe Hart, Steve Mandanda, David de Gea, Wojciech Szcesny, Thinaut Coirtois, Ron-Robert Zieler and Bernd Leno?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

Shels just giving this a bump in case you missed it' date=' wondered if it held true for your teams?[/quote']

I never answered because it's irrelivent to the situation, & as i said previously in posts i would not do so.

My united in EC1 is a team that i had not logd into more than once every 3 or so weeks for months/years, so the fact i had 2 concerns show something, making managers decide between an 88 rated gk, or buffon on one team & on another (whatever the circumstances, no problims despite lack of management)

However i will answer your question, for your own comfort so that as you have truth and knowledge in this situation we face.

if players Concerns are less frequent in fuller setups it's because there's a more even distribution of players rated 88+ on teams, many here fail to realise or seem/want to aknowledge is that buying youths (part of the game) is being eroded before our very eyes because any decent manager in a standard setup should have at least 2 sets of top players in their squad, resulting in any youth like courtois/neymar can't be an asset to a well manged team, and thus must be sold.

This is the fabric of SM, one of many fabrics..

If your a good manager at this GAME then why can't you have the abilty to have the best team now, and the best team, if you invested for the future?

Taking this abilty to sign youths knowing you can still have them when they reach 88/90 in 4/5 years away id say effects 100% of the 30% of people who voted on that poll arguing that players concerns were still ok.

Most noobs come into a setup & buy GOOD players, they want now players, they dont want youths.. but Due to SM's new policy we must give them these players so as to keep our best players, and also now there's no point buying piazon when he's added for the same reason.

No point playing for me if i can't play the game buying youths etc..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

It's more than likely that in emptier game worlds managers have very good squads as they can sign players easily and in most cases with little competition. They start to stockpile these players' date=' their "future stars" start to go up in rating and are never in a position when they need to sell.

Obviously this will lead to a situation were the manager starts to get a lot of concerns and instead of standing back and saying "ah, I've got 6 keepers rated 88-91, that's why most are unhappy", they decide to bury their head in the sand and complain that it's a bug or unfair as they've bought them and should be allowed to keep them.

In the busier game worlds, the opposite happens as they're more competitive and it's harder to sign "star names" or "future prospects. Most of the squads in these game worlds are probably balanced and you might come across one or two "super squads" but not many.

Obviously in these game worlds you probably won't see a lot of concerns re lack of games and the only ones you'll most likely see will be related to wages.

I'm quite surprised no one has mentioned this so far! It's not rocket science to work this out and come to this conclusion.[/quote']

Your argument is well and fine for managers who have indeed hogged players and have more than 60 players. However, you must also acknowledge that its no fault of theirs if the gameworld is inactive and they gain access to all the talent that they want to keep.

Secondly, some managers who do not hog players but impose a self-limit on their teams are punished by this inconsistent concern issue as they have worked hard to scout and seek out only the brightest talents while also willing to loan these young stars out. In this case, these reasonable managers will surely feel that they are being treated unfairly and will gain concerns about their investment in the game.

Furthermore, the concerns issue may not have been applied consistently across all gameworlds. I have a major problem with this concerns in one of my teams but not so much problem with my other team. More unhappily, the team which has been impacted more heavily in the team that i have spent a year and a half to build up painstaking. Do i not have a right to feel unhappy about it?

Regards,

Roy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

Once again many thanks for taking the time to respond and debate sensibly with me.

I don't think anyone has said that you have bought any of your 5 excellent keepers outside of the rules of the game? In fact you could actually go out (if you had the funds) and buy several more 88+ rated keepers.

Would you actually need several more keepers of this quality? No. However there's nothing stopping you buying them.

There is an aspect of the game though called player concerns. Now as I have already mentioned there's nothing stopping you buying more 88+ rated keepers. However if you do so then they'll likely to develop concerns as you have already found out with your 5 excellent keepers.

What you or any other manager in this position has to do is decide which of those they want to keep and which they want to move on. For example you might decide to keep Joe Hart as your No1 and have Bernd Leno as your No2. You'd then sell Steve Mandanda' date=' David de Gea, Wojciech Szczesny, Thinaut Courtois and Rob-Robert Zieler.

Obviously you don't have to make this choice but if you don't then you're more than likely lose them to concerns. Isn't that what part of management is about, making informed choices?

I'm sorry if you don't like the term "player hogging" but I'm struggling to find another way to describe a team that has Joe Hart, Steve Mandanda, David de Gea, Wojciech Szcesny, Thinaut Coirtois, Ron-Robert Zieler and Bernd Leno?[/quote']

I'm not totally against player concerns and I would be even less against them if they worked decently.

But: it's way to easy to say that player concerns are great because they don't allow teams to keep 7 fantastic goalkeepers.

I'd like to see a response like the one we had above about the 7 goalkeepers, explaining why player concerns are great when they don't allow you to keep just the second goalkeeper; when they don't allow you to keep one very old starter and one young substitute who will take his place in a near future (like the Buffon-Courtois example some did); when they make you choose between losing for almost nothing a 18-year-old 84-rated defender and being forced to play a ridiculously low rated player for 70% of your matches; when they force you to use the calculator to juggle between a team of only 19 players, reducing all your managerial role to a maths game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

You can get it to 19 players playing 70% of games by my calculations' date=' where I assumed a minimum of 38 league games, 2 cup games and 6 European games.[/quote']

That's some top brain work there! :)

So this appears to mean that the game wants us all to have between 17 and 19 top quality players at most as any more would result in concerns creeping in, I don't like it when my players develop concerns but I'm not sure I can be bothered to do all the hard work of making sure they keep a smile on their faces, isn't this meant to be a game, and aren't games meant to be fun?

The Euro game freebee thing is great, if you are in Europe but not so great if you aren't (not all game worlds take all their Euro teams from in game world teams)

I'm just not sure that the player concerns way of doing things is the right way forward, not as it is being handled right now.

I like to build a squad of 24-25 89-91 raters (I'm happy to not have Messi or Ronaldo etc) and be able to rotate them around the game schedule and maintain my competitiveness in games. All my first team players play at least 10 games a season so I'm not just hoarding them (am I?) With the player concerns rule I can't do this as easily as before. Ok, I said it (I can't do it as easily as before) and the new rules will force managers to log in more often and rotate their teams regularly, but I still hanker after the old days of it not being such a pain to play, and does the game have to beat us with a stick to play by their imposed rules?

Large squads also mean large wage bills so they have to move players on in order to sign even more players. Maybe if Player Exchange deals between managed and external teams was dropped then they'd have to sell big names to buy big names.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

I'm sorry if you don't like the term "player hogging" but I'm struggling to find another way to describe a team that has Joe Hart' date=' Steve Mandanda, David de Gea, Wojciech Szcesny, Thinaut Coirtois, Ron-Robert Zieler and Bernd Leno?[/quote']

In the team you're talking about, Roma WC87, I do not have Steve Mandanda - he is in my Roma team WC 117. Joe Hart is my first choice keeper and David De Gea is my backup who, along with Szczesny, Courtois, Zieler and Leno used to be my youth team keepers, who were all signed when rated in the 70's and have all been on the loan list and available in the setup for other teams.

For example:

De Gea played 11 league games on loan for Werder Bremen in season 13; 38 games on loan for Udinese in season 14; 28 games on loan for River Plate in season 15 and 12 games back home for Roma last season. The new season has just started so he hasn't played any games yet.

Szczesny went out on loan in season 15 to Spurs where he started 6 league games and has made one start back at his home club this season.

Zieler Went out on loan to Corinthians last season and made 12 league starts.

Courtois Was loan listed last season but no one made a bid for him and he played two sub appearances for his home club.

Leno Was loan listed last season but no one wanted him.

Right, I'm done explaining myself to you until you explain your blatant lie about being the manager of Sampdoria in WC 87:

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.

Well?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...