Jump to content

Squad Sizes


Squad Sizes  

1 member has voted

  1. 1.

    • No
      232
    • Capped at 50
      202
    • Capped at 100
      123
    • Capped at 150
      18
    • Capped at 200
      32


Recommended Posts

Re: Squad Sizes

255 seems such a high number to me. I honestly cant see how it would affect a gameworld in a negative way by limiting it to 100 players. I'd love for someone to explain to me how' date=' I have an open mind![/quote']

the buying and selling of risers, a part of the game many people love, would be taken away.

also i made a thread stating why squads caps will not work read if you want.

basically squad cap of 100, 3 teams can still steal EVERY 90+ player and ruin the game.

squad cap of 50 is low as you can reasonably go, and even then if they managed to get all the good players 3 teams can effectively ruin a setup. concerns are better as they stop the large numbers of high rated players, not just cap the numbers regardless of rating :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Squad Sizes

Have you got a link to your thread?

There’s nothing to stop people buying all the 90 rated players currently. In fact a 255 squad cap means they can do it even more and with the high 80's rated players also. So using your theory ONE team can ruin a set-up currently! I haven’t seen this happen in any set-up, it’s not financially viable though of course finances don’t matter if you have 200 players and no need to buy another player.

I have seen managers buy up 200 youths though which I'd argue allows set-ups to be ruined because it allows people to mass buy players with little thought and effort. It requires no skill because they aren’t penalised for this wily nilly approach. I know 1000's of players are added daily but realistically how many of them will become highly rated worthy squad members? People will see every youth from the 4 big leagues have been bought and move on to a different set-up. I know more dedicated users will unearth gems etc but the general manager won’t be so studious so some game worlds will empty out.

Squad concerns don’t happen fast enough either, in my experience no one under 91 gets concerns for the most part so I can easily keep a large amount of players and deal with concerns before they force me to sell anyone. I’m looking at this as someone who can horde players not someone frustrated with bigger teams hording players.

I disagree having a limit of 100 would affect buying and selling risers. It would still allow plenty of purchases to make money. Looking at my teams I have no more than 70 players total for my biggest squad and 100 million in the bank. Besides, I thought SM wanted to make money worthwhile, how does allowing someone to buy 255 risers keep money valuable? I don’t remember the last time a team of mine had a financial injection!

I think one thing SM could do to improve things is if a team goes into the red financially is make them off load players. People don’t agree with sacking managers but I think this could be a good way to regulate clubs. Of course to do this they would have to improve the financial side of things because it would make managing a small club a nightmare. My Shorpe team now has a 23k seater stadium but my progress would have been hampered a lot when I started with 9k 8 seasons ago!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Squad Sizes

Have you got a link to your thread?

There’s nothing to stop people buying all the 90 rated players currently. In fact a 255 squad cap means they can do it even more and with the high 80's rated players also. So using your theory ONE team can ruin a set-up currently! I haven’t seen this happen in any set-up' date=' it’s not financially viable though of course finances don’t matter if you have 200 players and no need to buy another player.

I have seen managers buy up 200 youths though which I'd argue allows set-ups to be ruined because it allows people to mass buy players with little thought and effort. It requires no skill because they aren’t penalised for this wily nilly approach. I know 1000's of players are added daily but realistically how many of them will become highly rated worthy squad members? People will see every youth from the 4 big leagues have been bought and move on to a different set-up. I know more dedicated users will unearth gems etc but the general manager won’t be so studious so some game worlds will empty out.

Squad concerns don’t happen fast enough either, in my experience no one under 91 gets concerns for the most part so I can easily keep a large amount of players and deal with concerns before they force me to sell anyone. I’m looking at this as someone who can horde players not someone frustrated with bigger teams hording players.

I disagree having a limit of 100 would affect buying and selling risers. It would still allow plenty of purchases to make money. Looking at my teams I have no more than 70 players total for my biggest squad and 100 million in the bank. Besides, I thought SM wanted to make money worthwhile, how does allowing someone to buy 255 risers keep money valuable? I don’t remember the last time a team of mine had a financial injection!

I think one thing SM could do to improve things is if a team goes into the red financially is make them off load players. People don’t agree with sacking managers but I think this could be a good way to regulate clubs. Of course to do this they would have to improve the financial side of things because it would make managing a small club a nightmare. My Shorpe team now has a 23k seater stadium but my progress would have been hampered a lot when I started with 9k 8 seasons ago![/quote']

i agree concerns need to be upped a little, but using my logic you cannot have unlimited amounts of 90+.

for me eriksen, westermann and vermaleen got concerns.

with good man management you can get rid of these concerns.

concerns need to be increased SLIGHTLY but not too much i think, squads of 30 players are more than reasonable, and infact necessary on this game.

i know a team with kaka, de rossi, busquets, essien in centre midfield.

i think lack of game time should be upped OR unhappy with competition actually means something and isn't a joke. as i explained previously, it is the most pointless and poor excuse for a concern ever.

as to the link to my squad:

http://forum.soccermanager.com/showthread.php?t=75856

i still hear people calling for squad caps but nobody has answered my question on why they are pointless yet.

to summarise: concerns are the way forward.

up the level of lack of game time.

lack of opportunities or unhappy with competition needs to mean something :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Squad Sizes

I agree upped concerns will help but still think a cap of 50 would be beneficial to game worlds. In one of mine at the moment I have an awesome team:

Cesar, Cech, Hart,

Terry, toulalan, Sagna, Clichy, Juan, Mertesecker, song

Fabregas, Lampard, De Rossi, Busquets, Toure, Muller,

Forlan, Milito, Van Persie, Totti, Di Natale, Ollic

(Plus well known youth talents)

I started with a fresh Arsenal squad 2 years ago. I bought most of those players once teams went unmanaged in the set up with money made from risers. If I did have a squad limit then I couldn’t have bought so many risers to give me the money to buy those players thus other teams could have bought the players and the set-up would be more evenly spread with talent.

Reason 1 FOR squad cap: Prevents making money = more teams can be competitive in transfer market. One team cant out bid everyone else.

You argue with my above team that I dont need to buy anyone else and thus squad caps are useless but with a squad cap I couldnt have generated the money as quickly to buy these players.

Reason 2 FOR: Forces mangers to have to make informed decisions on squad, not just buy wily-nily

Whilst I have an awesome current squad the older players will eventually drop out of favour and need replacing. Not having a squad cap means I can generate money to my hearts content, hoard the upcoming youths and dump the oldies when they are past it. With a lowish cap I cant be quite so frugal with my decision making...

Reason 3 FOR: Prevents set-up going stale/Succeeds where concerns dont

Another reason is the hoarding of every new talent. In the same set-up the Barca manager has 200 youth players; He's buying every new player added to the data base for the top 4 leagues. This is spreading now as other managers are starting to copy (unless it’s the same manager which I can’t find proof for). Eventually every half decent top 4 league talent will be snapped up. This isn’t a complete nightmare because some managers will come and go and so players will become available again at some point. BUT with Barcelona it’s a problem because I can guarantee that if it becomes unmanaged the team will get a new manager on the team name alone within a day. Those players are effectively trapped.

In this case player concerns won’t help for about 2 years when some of the players become rated highly enough to warrant concerns (seems to be the 91 mark). Concerns will only work if they extend to youth players.

Summary:

Squad concerns are a positive move and need to improve. A new concern "too much competition" would be an improvement and prevent player hogging. I also think that squad caps offer a positive change on the game world as I've explained above.

Suggestion: Nominating squads

I think that having to nominate a squad for the season could be a good move - it could allow players of rating say 85-90 to develop concerns of not being at least a squad player as opposed to players who only worry about being in the first team when they hit 90. Perhaps a first team squad and a reserve/youth team squad would cover a decent amount of scenarios for most managers?

i'm tired now¬!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Squad Sizes

the limitation of risers is indeed an exellent proposal and something i am for actually. first good argument ive heard for ages !

the only problem is this:

if you want a squad cap, your taking something out of the game that some people think is key to their enjoyment.

half of this forum is about scouting, risers and talents etc. so some people would be bored if this was taken away by a squad cap.

im all for it, you would have to proritise talents so every team can have their fair share.

i think its a option in custom setups, is it not?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Squad Sizes

There's the age-old trap once again that long detailed response Danny failed to consider and that is LOWER LEAGUE teams. You talk purely in relation to the bigger teams, there's plenty of us lower league managers too! Without going over this much discussed point too much more. I have a highly successful Exeter team with the likes of Gomez and Robinho, every turn I'm losing loads of cash. I have a poor stadium so the only way to accommodate such players is through the purchasing of risers, merely to keep my head above water let alone improving the team. If you are going to hamper the purchasing of risers you are basically putting a limit on the level of improvement which can be made to smaller teams, which is unfair and in a simulation game there should never be a cap on ambition for any team.

Until there are other alternatives to sustaining super-star squads for the lower league teams (i.e. greater developing of the stadium issue and/or greater TV revenue, much like Football Manager on the PC) then the lack of a cap has to remain otherwise there's basically nominal revenue and will in turn alienate a huge percentage of the SM population!

Both the issues we've raised are discussed at length previously however, I haven't seen a new point on this thread for a good year or so!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Squad Sizes

I havent spoke about lower league management but have had experience of it. I still have my very first SM team - Shorpe! I dragged them from division 4 to divison 1. They have a similar starting staduim capacity as Exeters 9k. 3 years later my capacity is 24k. Its still not enough to cover finances but you still dont need 200 risers. In fact never at any point have I gone far over 100 at a push. I have about 60 in the squad now and nearly half could be sold tomorrow if I needed to cap my squad or make cash.

I agree though that stadium improvements need improving. I generally finish 2nd in the league and win a cup each year. Established in the top league for 5 seasons, a 2k seat improvement is a abit of a slap in the face! You should be able to get up to a 40k seater after staying in the top division for a few seasons.

It would still be relatively manageable to buy and sell risers in a squad of 50 even in lower league management. 30 first teams and 20 risers is still a lot of scope for profit.

Squad limits wouldnt kill lower league management and it wouldnt kill buying and selling risers. It would slow the cash build up in set ups so cash might actually be more worthwhile. It would prevent 1 club buying all the risers in one set up and thus force managers to be more considerate of their choices.

I'm still convinced squad limits would be beneficial without really hearing any good arguments against them. I think Im running out of steam on this issue now.. what will be will be! Perhaps custom set-ups could have squad limit options (I'm assuming they currently dont). It might be interesting to see how they would affect an actual gameworld.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Squad Sizes

I havent spoke about lower league management but have had experience of it. I still have my very first SM team - Shorpe! I dragged them from division 4 to divison 1. They have a similar starting staduim capacity as Exeters 9k. 3 years later my capacity is 24k. Its still not enough to cover finances but you still dont need 200 risers. In fact never at any point have I gone far over 100 at a push. I have about 60 in the squad now and nearly half could be sold tomorrow if I needed to cap my squad or make cash.

I agree though that stadium improvements need improving. I generally finish 2nd in the league and win a cup each year. Established in the top league for 5 seasons' date=' a 2k seat improvement is a abit of a slap in the face! You should be able to get up to a 40k seater after staying in the top division for a few seasons.

It would still be relatively manageable to buy and sell risers in a squad of 50 even in lower league management. 30 first teams and 20 risers is still a lot of scope for profit.

Squad limits wouldnt kill lower league management and it wouldnt kill buying and selling risers. It would slow the cash build up in set ups so cash might actually be more worthwhile. It would prevent 1 club buying all the risers in one set up and thus force managers to be more considerate of their choices.

I'm still convinced squad limits would be beneficial without really hearing any good arguments against them. I think Im running out of steam on this issue now.. what will be will be! Perhaps custom set-ups could have squad limit options (I'm assuming they currently dont). It might be interesting to see how they would affect an actual gameworld.[/quote']

My understanding is the max. stadium improvement anyone can expect would be the average capacity of your division, so 40k is optimistic, I've never heard of anyone else get such an improvement. You're looking at below 30k still in an English Championship (by all means if anyone has had a different experience, shoot me down :P) So this needs drastic improvement, the whole revenue issue does for smaller teams.

A squad of 50 will be enough?! Are you serious? I'm losing about 2/3/4mil a turn! (not exactly sure but not less) That would barely be the tip of the iceberg. I very much doubt that 20 risers would enable a working profit, let alone give me any scope for improving my team (after every transfer cycle I do deals when the TBs are up, by the time I get round to each cycle the first thing I need to do is sell off a number of players just to get even and to enable the submitting of offers as I'm in so much debt. 20 risers, where's the scope?) Such a plan would mean that I doubt I could ever make another transfer again as debts would get unmanageable in the TB time.

Not sure you've thought that one through...Whilst I maintain a top division Exeter/Shorpe should not be any less likely to sign Messi than a Chelsea, such a course would definitely prevent this. 50 is a ludicrous limit to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Squad Sizes

My understanding is the max. stadium improvement anyone can expect would be the average capacity of your division' date=' so 40k is optimistic, I've never heard of anyone else get such an improvement. You're looking at below 30k still in an English Championship (by all means if anyone has had a different experience, shoot me down :P) So this needs drastic improvement, the whole revenue issue does for smaller teams.

A squad of 50 will be enough?! [b']Are you serious? I'm losing about 2/3/4mil a turn! (not exactly sure but not less)[/b] That would barely be the tip of the iceberg. I very much doubt that 20 risers would enable a working profit, let alone give me any scope for improving my team (after every transfer cycle I do deals when the TBs are up, by the time I get round to each cycle the first thing I need to do is sell off a number of players just to get even and to enable the submitting of offers as I'm in so much debt. 20 risers, where's the scope?) Such a plan would mean that I doubt I could ever make another transfer again as debts would get unmanageable in the TB time.

Not sure you've thought that one through...Whilst I maintain a top division Exeter/Shorpe should not be any less likely to sign Messi than a Chelsea, such a course would definitely prevent this. 50 is a ludicrous limit to me.

Are you sure about that? I have a team currently with:

1* 98 rated player

2*97 rated players

3*96 rated players

3*95 rated players

3* 94 rated players

3*93 rated players

3*92 rated players

1*91 rated player

4*90 rated players

...and a whole host of rated 87-89

So basically 22 players rated 90 or above (2 whole teams in essence) and a first XI essentially of players rated 94 and above. Yet my wages for this side are £1.56m. Most of these are nor risers and are on a wage equivalent to their value. My takings for a home game with my Huddersfield town team are £1.2m. So even if my Huddersfield had the above players (i.e essentially Messi, Xavi, Iniesta, Ribery, Pique, Vidic, Julio Cesar, Robben, Ferdinand, Rooney and Torres and then a great back up team and reserves), I would basically be losing a maximum of around £1.8m over the basis of two turns (home and away game). All that with almost the ultimate team in this game - the more real position is that I'm highly unlikely to assemble a club with such riches in an EC.

I would love to know/see this squad with which you are losing 2/3/4m per turn :eek: . Perhaps you have more players than you need?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Squad Sizes

Are you sure about that? I have a team currently with:

1* 98 rated player

2*97 rated players

3*96 rated players

3*95 rated players

3* 94 rated players

3*93 rated players

3*92 rated players

1*91 rated player

4*90 rated players

...and a whole host of rated 87-89

So basically 22 players rated 90 or above (2 whole teams in essence) and a first XI essentially of players rated 94 and above. Yet my wages for this side are £1.56m. Most of these are nor risers and are on a wage equivalent to their value. My takings for a home game with my Huddersfield town team are £1.2m. So even if my Huddersfield had the above players (i.e essentially Messi' date=' Xavi, Iniesta, Ribery, Pique, Vidic, Julio Cesar, Robben, Ferdinand, Rooney and Torres and then a great back up team and reserves), I would basically be losing a maximum of around £1.8m over the basis of two turns (home and away game). All that with almost the ultimate team in this game - the more real position is that I'm highly unlikely to assemble a club with such riches in an EC.

I would love to know/see this squad with which you are losing 2/3/4m per turn :eek: . Perhaps you have more players than you need?[/quote']

Did you build that team never going beyond a squad of 50? Is that your team from the very start?

The last 4 turns I have lost= 2.8m, 2.6m, 2.8m, 2.6m, so in a 10wk transfer ban 'cycle' that's close to 30mil debt I have to deal with before transfers. Maybe an extreme case but to be fair it's not a competitive set-up (my best players are Lucho, Gomez and Robinho and have 24 90 rated players so as you can see I far from have a monopoly on the talent) so the only way I can manufacture a degree of interest in this inactive set-up is through extreme ambition!

I have undoubtedly got more players than I 'need' in terms of your standards I expect but it is not all about starting XI. I have 233 players to enable me to compete with the likes of Chelsea and Manchester Utd in the transfer market, i.e. players to sell to get me out of debt, players to sell for a decent transfer pot once I'm out of the red and players to use in p/ex for external clubs. Many are transfer banned also atm so I'm kind of in the middle of my 'transfer cycle' this number will reduce hopefully, depending on what risers I pick up when I have funds. You've got your super-star squad, I haven't I'm trying to develop the best possible team I can so I'm further back the development line than you, it's easy for you to say you don't need all these players to sustain your squad but you've got the finished article, so one I'm still trying to improve and build (my team, averages 91-92 and I want to improve this substantially if possible) and two my running costs as a result are much higher. My current stadium capacity is still only 9k also so I suspect you have me beaten there too which further enables you to get by with 50. If you need 50 it's obvious I need far more for my aspirations.

I don't want to just muddle through, picking up a couple decent players in a season, in such an inactive set-up that would be an absolute bore, it's all about ultimate ambition. I appreciate I'm an extreme case (although again if we were severely capped in what we could do well such set-ups would have EVEN less interest) but even less extreme cases still need greater scope to improve and build a competitive team than just a squad of 50 allows, that is simple.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Squad Sizes

Did you build that team never going beyond a squad of 50? Is that your team from the very start?

The last 4 turns I have lost= 2.8m' date=' 2.6m, 2.8m, 2.6m, so in a 10wk transfer ban 'cycle' that's close to 30mil debt I have to deal with before transfers. Maybe an extreme case but to be fair it's not a competitive set-up (my best players are Lucho, Gomez and Robinho and have 24 90 rated players so as you can see I far from have a monopoly on the talent) so the only way I can manufacture a degree of interest in this inactive set-up is through extreme ambition!

I have undoubtedly got more players than I 'need' in terms of your standards I expect but it is not all about starting XI. I have 233 players to enable me to compete with the likes of Chelsea and Manchester Utd in the transfer market, i.e. players to sell to get me out of debt, players to sell for a decent transfer pot once I'm out of the red and players to use in p/ex for external clubs. Many are transfer banned also atm so I'm kind of in the middle of my 'transfer cycle' this number will reduce hopefully, depending on what risers I pick up when I have funds. You've got your super-star squad, I haven't I'm trying to develop the best possible team I can so I'm further back the development line than you, it's easy for you to say you don't need all these players to sustain your squad but you've got the finished article, so one I'm still trying to improve and build (my team, averages 91-92 and I want to improve this substantially if possible) and two my running costs as a result are much higher. My current stadium capacity is still only 9k also so I suspect you have me beaten there too which further enables you to get by with 50. If you need 50 it's obvious I need far more for my aspirations.

I don't want to just muddle through, picking up a couple decent players in a season, in such an inactive set-up that would be an absolute bore, it's all about ultimate ambition. I appreciate I'm an extreme case (although again if we were severely capped in what we could do well such set-ups would have EVEN less interest) but even less extreme cases still need greater scope to improve and build a competitive team than just a squad of 50 allows, that is simple.[/quote']

To be honest, I was not getting at the squad cap issue as I don't agree with a cap of 50 either (I was more astounded by your astronomical wage bill). I'm surprised your stadium capacity is only 9k and if you're in Division 1, I would be questioning SM on that as you should have a capacity of around 20K in any EC in the top division (assuming the likes of Man U, Arsenal, Man C, Liverpool etc haven't all been relegated). If it's a custom gameworld it may be different, but then probably other teams in your gameworld also have lower attendances/capacities presumably (and you all have the same balancing the books challenge).

I have taken a few teams through the divisions (Bradford, Huddersfield from Div 4, Hereford from Div 5 in a GC) to the top division and I can honestly say I've never needed more than 50-60 players risers or otherwise to make ends meet. I currently have a Bradford (first XI average 93) with Pique, Mascherano, Busquets, Toulalan, L. Gonzalez, Arshavin, Milito, Mata, T.Silva etc etc with a total squad size of 43. Off these 28 form the basis of my first team (24 of them are rated 90+). The other 15 are risers and I make a loss of roughly 1m over 2 turns. Extrapolated over the season it works out to be around 20m give or take. The 15 risers, are sufficient for me to rotate and gain a profit (recoup the 20 million and some) by simply recycling them twice a season with other risers. I haven't factored in prize money and am able to improve my squad season on season (just bought Mascherano). I have a very similar picture with a Huddersfield side. Gate receipts there are 400K less, but I still have managed with a squad size of 72 (at its peak) and the side continues to improve season on season.

I totally agree with your point, that once in the first division, you should have an equal chance of signing Messi as Chelsea, Arsenal etc. I therefore understand the need for larger squads with lots of risers. But I just feel that currently we can go overboard with the risers. In many cases, it's simply a case that perhaps the appropriate stadium expansion hasn't been applied. I would argue that anyone with a stadium size of around 20K can have a team of Messi, Iniesta etc and still manage without the need for a squad of more than 60-80. Prudent purchase of a few select risers can generate 100 million + quite easily and to be honest, there is enough risers to go around, even in the most competitive of gameworlds.

PS There are some teams (not saying yours but others I've seen) where managers are buying risers without factoring in the 20 turns wages they will be paying where the profit margin is so small (or they may even be making a loss), it's hardly worth the effort. Add to that, if you have risers all in the same position, their sell-on vlaue will significantly reduce also in many cases. It's better to be more select always in my opinion :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Squad Sizes

In one of my team i have 33 first team players (Where i have 4 players transfer listed from the first team)

And i have 62 youth team players (Where i have 7 players transfer listed from the youth team)

So when i get rid off the players i have transfer listed i will have a total of

84 players (29 first team players and 55 youth team players)

But for now i have 95 players...

If there schould be a limit it schould be 100 players...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Squad Sizes

To be honest' date=' I was not getting at the squad cap issue as I don't agree with a cap of 50 either (I was more astounded by your astronomical wage bill). I'm surprised your stadium capacity is only 9k and if you're in Division 1, I would be questioning SM on that as you should have a capacity of around 20K in any EC in the top division (assuming the likes of Man U, Arsenal, Man C, Liverpool etc haven't all been relegated). If it's a custom gameworld it may be different, but then probably other teams in your gameworld also have lower attendances/capacities presumably (and you all have the same balancing the books challenge).

I have taken a few teams through the divisions (Bradford, Huddersfield from Div 4, Hereford from Div 5 in a GC) to the top division and I can honestly say I've never needed more than 50-60 players risers or otherwise to make ends meet. I currently have a Bradford (first XI average 93) with Pique, Mascherano, Busquets, Toulalan, L. Gonzalez, Arshavin, Milito, Mata, T.Silva etc etc with a total squad size of 43. Off these 28 form the basis of my first team (24 of them are rated 90+). The other 15 are risers and I make a loss of roughly 1m over 2 turns. Extrapolated over the season it works out to be around 20m give or take. The 15 risers, are sufficient for me to rotate and gain a profit (recoup the 20 million and some) by simply recycling them twice a season with other risers. I haven't factored in prize money and am able to improve my squad season on season (just bought Mascherano). I have a very similar picture with a Huddersfield side. Gate receipts there are 400K less, but I still have managed with a squad size of 72 (at its peak) and the side continues to improve season on season.

I totally agree with your point, that once in the first division, you should have an equal chance of signing Messi as Chelsea, Arsenal etc. I therefore understand the need for larger squads with lots of risers. But I just feel that currently we can go overboard with the risers. In many cases, it's simply a case that perhaps the appropriate stadium expansion hasn't been applied. I would argue that anyone with a stadium size of around 20K can have a team of Messi, Iniesta etc and still manage without the need for a squad of more than 60-80. Prudent purchase of a few select risers can generate 100 million + quite easily and to be honest, there is enough risers to go around, even in the most competitive of gameworlds.

PS There are some teams (not saying yours but others I've seen) where managers are buying risers without factoring in the 20 turns wages they will be paying where the profit margin is so small (or they may even be making a loss), it's hardly worth the effort. Add to that, if you have risers all in the same position, their sell-on vlaue will significantly reduce also in many cases. It's better to be more select always in my opinion :)[/quote']

I'm not in division one, I'm in division 3! (second season coming to an end) Lol but such is the extreme level of progression my points remain, albeit I appreciate stadium expansion should occur later on me (I don't expect that currently) but I still think this issue needs big improvements (along with TV revenue again for division one maybe) I understand I'm not the best example but the fundamentals remain (the set-up started competitive then lost a few managers so I found other ways to keep myself occupied, tbh this is why I have a super squad as this is what keeps me interested in such game-worlds, i.e. scouting, hence why I have recently found 'forum set-ups' to join which are more competitive but another point altogether...although highlights many of the other factors at play and which SM have to fight, squad limits is a complicated think intrinsically linked to many aspects of the game)

Ok maybe I misunderstood when you talked about your squad size, 50 does sound extreme low though. You're correct even with a 255 limit, I could find another 100 risers at least on top of that, so the opportunity is there for all, it's a level playing field at the end of the day. I'd also agree maybe we can go over-board but SM lacks many features for those of us from a 'managerial game background' scouting and risers provide something other games do not, so in a business sense it doesn't make sense to limit it's extent MASSIVELY.

Regarding that last paragraph, totally! To combat this I even use two lowly rated risers to purchase higher rated guys from externals I know I won't play and may not even be a riser themselves but his value will be more than their's combined should I decide to sell for cash and/or 'condenses' the value into one player, enabling better player-exchange scope, whilst also reducing squad size/wage bill (as I said I know I'm a very extreme case, again shown by such strategies) Like-wise players which don't rise and have have no value in relation to their wage is released asap. So I have figured all this into my thinking yet still lose the numbers I previously mentioned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Squad Sizes

Have to say regarding DLOs team that I think to be loosing that much per turn you must have too many players in your "super squad" (would love a screen shot or a list to compare!). Even with 20 91-95 rated players my wage is £1.35 million per week and I bought about ten risers today! I think I lose 400k per 2 turns but no where near a few million. With my elite squad my wage bill is £1.6m 7 x 96-98 players, 16 x 90-95 players (37 players total).

My highest wage for Shorpe is 63,150 per turn for 94 Forlan. 95 Pique is on £46,500 though I bought him a few seasons ago.

You should check to see if any players will accept lower wages with new contracts (this worked for me even in a new set-up with an Arsenal team so worth a shot). Also I think Im right in thinking that if you leave a players contract to run out it will auto renew at lower than the players 'expected wage'.

Also I think this exchanging 2 players for 1 higher rated player might be increasing your wages dramatically.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Squad Sizes

Have to say regarding DLOs team that I think to be loosing that much per turn you must have too many players in your "super squad" (would love a screen shot or a list to compare!). Even with 20 91-95 rated players my wage is £1.35 million per week and I bought about ten risers today! I think I lose 400k per 2 turns but no where near a few million. With my elite squad my wage bill is £1.6m 7 x 96-98 players' date=' 16 x 90-95 players (37 players total).

My highest wage for Shorpe is 63,150 per turn for 94 Forlan. 95 Pique is on £46,500 though I bought him a few seasons ago.

You should check to see if any players will accept lower wages with new contracts (this worked for me even in a new set-up with an Arsenal team so worth a shot). Also I think Im right in thinking that if you leave a players contract to run out it will auto renew at lower than the players 'expected wage'.

[b']Also I think this exchanging 2 players for 1 higher rated player might be increasing your wages dramatically[/b].

Lol firstly quoting me 'super-squad' makes me sound arrogant, I mean purely only in terms of size not quality or anything more than that :P

One slightly higher wage replacing two? :confused: it's cheaper in most cases, whilst regardless it will be worth it due to the greater value of selling said player over the two far lowered valued players in the end. I don't have any concerns with the debt as I can wipe it when TBs are up easily. Therefore the suggestions regarding wages will be inconsequential and won't improve things a lot for me but that's fine it won't be an issue but that's because of plenty of risers!

I've said I only have a 9k stadium and with 233 players why is it so hard to understand my operating lost? But I need far more than a squad of 50 to make any kind of impression.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Squad Sizes

Too true! The whole thread is getting unbelievably stale. There is a squad cap' date=' it's 255, get over it.[/quote']

I dont think it hurts to carry on the conversation. If people are bored of it fair enough, they dont have to read the thread or post if thery dont have any further useful input.

I thinks its better people keep using the thread than making a new one every 5 minutes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Squad Sizes

What needs to happen is someone has to go back through and find all the relevant points, both the pro's and con's, then delete everything else and let people start the discussion again, that way they can see the points that have been raised and if they can think of something new and useful add it, otherwise the same points with the same retorts are going to be continually raised and rebuked

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Squad Sizes

What needs to happen is someone has to go back through and find all the relevant points' date=' both the pro's and con's, then delete everything else and let people start the discussion again, that way they can see the points that have been raised and if they can think of something new and useful add it, otherwise the same points with the same retorts are going to be continually raised and rebuked[/quote']

i think people just need to move on.

concerns are here to stay so lets have a sensible discussion about them.

squad caps have been explained not to work.

it is like arguing if free agents should be able to be searched for individually, or maybe going back to the transfer system where they all went through at 6am.

move on people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Squad Sizes

What needs to happen is someone has to go back through and find all the relevant points' date=' both the pro's and con's, then delete everything else and let people start the discussion again, that way they can see the points that have been raised and if they can think of something new and useful add it, otherwise the same points with the same retorts are going to be continually raised and rebuked[/quote']

Absolutely agree 100%. Most people who have 'contributed' to this thread just see the title and decide to vote on the poll then chuck their opinion in without ever going back to read previous posts. Even though if they did read the history of the thread they would probably find their comments are redundant.

Squad sizes is a red herring. The only way to control 'star hogging', which is the real issue, is through regular wage inflation and player concerns.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...