Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
SM Dev (John)

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

The main reason I am hearing Teb and Bobo to keep the unlimited squad levels is so you can keep the 'asset' building of your 'smaller clubs' in place.

You buy a huge amount of young players for peanuts... their ratings go up slightly they can then be exchanged in two for one offers for better rating players and the process continues, who in turn can be swapped for better rated players in two for one offers. As youth players are continually added and go up a few ratings after playing a few more games in real life this process is contiuous.

This seems like a big flaw in the game making it very easy to play the game. Absolutely no scouting or targeting needs to go on. Buy 50 new youth players, wait a short period of time, exchange for better players, repeat.

As Fraser, Perry and Socratys have said a move to cap squad sizes still leaves room to bring in 20-30 properly scouted youth players, who will in time become first team players or sold on for a reasonable profit. NOT simply used as part of a easy asset building regime.

Paging squad sizes so 100's appear on a page is possible but is still

a) slower

B) less usable for people viewing squads

c) cannot be practically done on tactics page

I like the idea to reduce morale more on players who are 100th choice or an idea for a player to refuse to sign as he will be 15th choice CB in the youth squad never mind the senior squad!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Squad Sizes

I dont mind the squad cap as i do belive 100 is more than enough but i totaly disagree with the reasons being used for this cap.

Theres only 1 reason that is correct and should really be used and thats realism, thats the only legit reason imo.

For people saying at the moment its made for people who are to lazy to scout sorry but thats untrue. I dont scout i simply dont have the time because of all my work which takes up most my day and then my Family (3 kids) my day is gone. Not other peoples problems maybe not but why should people be saying i should be scouting? even if i had the time i wouldnt want to scout anyway it simply doesnt interest me. Is that my fault? no not at all We all like to do different things and going around on internet pages to see how many games some little 70 rated player has played simply doesnt appeal to me.

Perry you love to do the scouting and have been excellent at doing it, but doesnt appeal to most managers, and on top most people dont have to scout because they all get mentioned on the forum anyway by guys like Perry, Fraser, Dexter etc etc so how is that scouting when people are just buying who other guys have scouted?

I have built 2 amazing Grimsby teams and 1 Carlisle one of my grimsby teams who currently are sitting in Div 2 have an amazing squad I started with no player above 75 rated, 3million cash and a very small 10k stadium. I signed no old players i think the oldest player i have ever signed was 28 and the rest are mainly in there 21's.

Whats wrong with me coming on buying aload of lower rated brazilians, argentines, italians etc etc and then hope they get a rating increase? I think you will find alot of managers do this in real life they take gambles on players give them some matches and hope they make the grade if not they are moved on.

If it wasnt for the real life managers buying these guys and giving them games how would you even scout them in the first place? thats if it can even be classed as scouting, going onto some internet page checking how many matches a player has played for his club isnt really scouting just using someone else's data.

The fact is people can play football games however they like some like to scout, some dont, some simply dont have the time. who is to say those are the wrong ways of playing? I see no rules anyway on football games saying this is how you should play!.

The fact is apart from the last few months scouting wasnt that big a deal in SM, infact Perry was the only real person who did this at first. I have always checked out all the players 70-73 rated as those were the only ones i could afford at the time. and then just decided which to take a chance on. what is wrong with that? If it wasnt for my stadium i would have had Grimsby in Div 1 by now. how many others have taken a club that small from div 4 to div 2/1 ?

How many players did i actually scout in my 60 man squad? 1 i think. but 95% of the players i have signed have flew up in rating. I took a gamble on some before they even started getting mentioned on the forum but half the players i have i havnt seen mentioned on here at all.

I started with 3mil, but i now have loads of players worth more than that. some worth alot more.

MY agument isnt with the squad size as i doubt i will ever hit the 100 mark, although i do think it should be easier to get bids from unmanagable clubs for alot of my players, but i dont think people should be saying everyone should be scouting, if your not its because your lazy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Squad Sizes

The main reason I am hearing Teb and Bobo to keep the unlimited squad levels is so you can keep the 'asset' building of your 'smaller clubs' in place.

You buy a huge amount of young players for peanuts... their ratings go up slightly they can then be exchanged in two for one offers for better rating players and the process continues' date=' who in turn can be swapped for better rated players in two for one offers. As youth players are continually added and go up a few ratings after playing a few more games in real life this process is contiuous.[/quote']Sorry, but at best you have misheard my reasons if you believe this my motivation, at worst you have totally ignored my last few posts.

To focus on this one area though, yes, i buy players who will increase in value. Yes, I use these as make-weights in p/e. However, I do not simply buy large amounts of random players and buy them - I look into any player I buy first - so what I am doing is a perfectly legitimate means of asset building.

What is wrong in having a plan in place to develop my squad over a long period of time? With some of the tiny clubs I manage, this is the most effective means of ensuring long term wealth and a decent squad. In larger teams, particularly in WC's, it is the best way of ensuring a future without paying the stupid prices for an established superstar that gets thrown around.

I also find rating increases on of the most enjoyable aspects of the game, so clearly would rather have 100 players go up 5 points than 10 players go up 5 points.

This seems like a big flaw in the game making it very easy to play the game. Absolutely no scouting or targeting needs to go on. Buy 50 new youth players' date=' wait a short period of time, exchange for better players, repeat.[/quote']This doesnt seem a flaw at all to me. Managers want to improve their squad. It is not like I constantly rotate players on P/e in and out of my squad at no expense, there is a 20 turn limit and I am paying transfer fees and wages same as any other manager does on the players they choose to buy. Why is it not OK to buy a large number of players with a view to p/e, but is OK buy a smaller team of high rated players with a view to p/e these out?
As Fraser' date=' Perry and Socratys have said a move to cap squad sizes still leaves room to bring in 20-30 properly scouted youth players, who will in time become first team players or sold on for a reasonable profit. NOT simply used as part of a easy asset building regime.[/quote']I work hard to find players who are due an increase, trawling through masses of data to find underrated players. As mentioned I look into any player i sign first. I can name about 30 underrated players right now for Belgium and Holland that would not be random buys. I will be able to do the same next week, and the week after. Why can a large number not be 'properly scouted'? This is an unfair assumption you are making. Sure, not all people are this thorough, but if they want to make pointless signings, let them, same as we let people pick rubbish tactics and play a team of players who are 50% fit; it is surely their choice and they will learn from failure or success.
Paging squad sizes so 100's appear on a page is possible but is still

a) slower

B) less usable for people viewing squads

c) cannot be practically done on tactics page

How much slower? Seconds? Nano-seconds? I would be amazed if the speed improvement for managers hypothetically viewing rare large squads is enough to warrant the inconvenience for those managers who do have large squads. People on the forum are crying out for a reserve team as well as a youth team anyway' date=' neither of which should be on the tactics screen, and would nullify half the concerns around this too without inconveniencing people.
I like the idea to reduce morale more on players who are 100th choice or an idea for a player to refuse to sign as he will be 15th choice CB in the youth squad never mind the senior squad!!
Problem is how will I be able to sign a player who is due a 12 point increase if he refuses to sign based on the fact he sees a few players currently ahead of him. I would have to wait until after his increase, and wage and cost hike-up, and sign him then, when I may as well have not bothered scouting and bought an old duffer. But, i do agree that morale should be affected more if not playing, again this would be something any manager wanting a large squad (of any size) would have to weigh up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Squad Sizes

Ok, I've been keeping my eye on this debate for a while.

Im starting to see that 2 sides are emerging as in any debate, the gamers

who want to buy youth etc for wealth and future potential, and the developers who are trying to implement realism.

I agree with what john is trying to petray in his last post, as regards to

repeat process of buying 50 youth players and then exchanging or selling on

for larger values of cash. But this isnt necessarily a flaw as teb has stated,

its just obvious management criteria, as teb said, there is a 20 turn

limit anyway, and obviously managers do always want to improve

their squad wether it be 18 players or 88 players.

In earlier posts of mine I tried to put across the idea that basically SM boasts

its big 30 odd thousand player database and players are there to be bought

and sold respectively, and I do still stand by this, as people (as I've mentioned before) have spent seasons and seasons building the squad of

their dreams, wether it be full of young guns or wether it be full of

world class internationals.

Which leads me to Bobo's point..

If a cap is to be introduced I can't see how it can ever deem fair to ALL

soccer managers on the game if it was only to be applied to new created

setups/teams. I understand Sam's point here, hes obviously got plenty

of bulging squads that hes spent time on creating (such as myself) and didnt

want to have to end up selling half of it due to a cap, but if it was to be

introduced, it would have to apply for every manager of every team

otherwise complaints would be flooding in that manager X of Man Utd

in a WC has a squad of 100 players and Im struggling with 18.. etc.

The only way I could see this work for both ways (which has been discussed

throughout this thread), for both managers who want masses of players

in a squad, OR a team full of world class internationals, is obviously the

wage cap. This way, both a squad with internationals littered throughout

or a squad full of youngsters would both get what they want, just with

lesser numbers of either.

I do think a wage cap would work, but capping the squad numbers doesnt

really seem the answer in my opinion, and it seems a lot of people are opting

against the idea, because of the simple reason for fear of losing an already

created team. Its a hard situation, but a good debate as to what should

actually happen, and even though the more i see john and ste post I sort

of start to realise what they are trying to say, and likewise the forum

members. Its hard for SM to accomodate for both the people who are FOR

and AGAINST, but there has to be compromise as to where they can satisfy

both sides, and as of yet, apart from the wage cap I cant really see any

other way.

My only other argument is, even managers that dont use the forum are

now getting to grips with the scouting side of the game, and Im missing

out on young starlets to other managers who are obviosuly doing their

own scouting without aid of the forum, which is great IMO. So I have to say

that ALL managers are going this way, and all it is doing to the game by

being able to have bigger squads, is improve transfer activity and I dont

think there is any harm in this at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Squad Sizes

this is dragging on and on and getting nowhere now so i'm posting one last time on it.

first off

bobo

maybe your aim in soccer manager is to build "the ultimate squad". my aim is to try and create a succesful football team. i dont need 100+ players to do that (actually...i'd probably need 1000... :o just kidding...). people's aims are different but i thought that most people would rather create a team that is succesful as their main aim.

teb

they'd lose millions? surely most of these teams that are over 100 if given the choice could sell back their players they dont need to SM and receive a proper valuation for each thus not being out of pocket. although i do agree that with the benefit of hindsight the squad cap would have been in place at the very beginning of SM. i agree that this is a stumbling block to introducing it now however.

another worrying aspect of these large squads is i've noticed that a lot of them stock pile players rated 86-89, aged 19-23. these players are the kind of players that many managers in the lower divisions would cry out for. now i agree that it's first come first served. nothing wrong with that. i do it myself. i also agree that a good squad should have some good young players round about this bracket waiting to burst through. but some squads over 100 players have plenty of 90's in the first team. 50-60 in youth squad and a further 20 or so youngsters in the above mentioned bracket. if the squad level was capped then possibly these managers wouldnt be able to purchase so many of these players and managers of lower league clubs would get the chance to grab these players and further improve their first team and also their chances of success.

also, the players mentioned in the above bracket aren't anywhere near as plentiful as youths and think that a lot of these managers definitely use minesweeping tactics to find these players before purchasing them..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Squad Sizes

teb

they'd lose millions? surely most of these teams that are over 100 if given the choice could sell back their players they dont need to SM and receive a proper valuation for each thus not being out of pocket.

Agreed but atm you have no chance of selling these players. As i said in another post if we was able to sell players easier then i belive theres nothing at all wrong with a squad cap.

another worrying aspect of these large squads is i've noticed that a lot of them stock pile players rated 86-89' date=' aged 19-23. these players are the kind of players that many managers in the lower divisions would cry out for. now i agree that it's first come first served. nothing wrong with that. i do it myself. i also agree that a good squad should have some good young players round about this bracket waiting to burst through. but some squads over 100 players have plenty of 90's in the first team. 50-60 in youth squad and a further 20 or so youngsters in the above mentioned bracket. if the squad level was capped then possibly these managers wouldnt be able to purchase so many of these players and managers of lower league clubs would get the chance to grab these players and further improve their first team and also their chances of success.

also, the players mentioned in the above bracket aren't anywhere near as plentiful as youths and think that a lot of these managers definitely use minesweeping tactics to find these players before purchasing them..[/quote']

Yeah totaly agree with that and thats what i main problem was when disgussing it on the other thread, OAP/ star thingy one

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Squad Sizes

I think to fix everything, 1st the unmanagable should bid loads more for players because money goes over to them and never returns leaving most the leagues broke untill end of season.

Then should be a squad cap put into place of say 100 players, for people who have over 100 players should be allowed to release some and get the value of that player in exchange. yes there going to rake up a bit of cash doing that but why shouldnt they? they have broken no rules and built there teams proplery they should get at least the value of these players back. not just stuck with 120+ players and have to get rid of them the normal way or recieve nothing for them.

I still think theres alot more things that should have been added / improved what people have been asking for before the squad cap thing which came out of the blue though

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Squad Sizes

Agreed but atm you have no chance of selling these players. As i said in another post if we was able to sell players easier then i belive theres nothing at all wrong with a squad cap.

i meant that SM would buy back the players by pm'ing and taking a list of the players and giving the manager the value of that player and then putting them on as free agents or possibly to unmanaged clubs in that setup that would then make the unmanaged clubs more appealing for prospective new managers. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Squad Sizes

i meant that SM would buy back the players by pm'ing and taking a list of the players and giving the manager the value of that player and then putting them on as free agents or possibly to unmanaged clubs in that setup that would then make the unmanaged clubs more appealing for prospective new managers. :)

Yeah Good idea, would solve the problem with the people who have more than 100 players.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Squad Sizes

I think to fix everything' date=' 1st the unmanagable should bid loads more for players because money goes over to them and never returns leaving most the leagues broke untill end of season.

Then should be a squad cap put into place of say 100 players, for people who have over 100 players should be allowed to release some and get the value of that player in exchange. yes there going to rake up a bit of cash doing that but why shouldnt they? they have broken no rules and built there teams proplery they should get at least the value of these players back. not just stuck with 120+ players and have to get rid of them the normal way or recieve nothing for them.

I still think theres alot more things that should have been added / improved what people have been asking for before the squad cap thing which came out of the blue though[/quote']I agree with a lot of what this and your last few posts said.

Fraser, I think that the problem with selling off players or releasing them before they have blossomed is that it defeats the object of what managers with large squads were quite fairly trying to achieve, and have paid out for in fees and wages. Therefore I think if the cap happens, which I still don't think it should, then squads should get some sort of compensation over the amount of the value of the player, otherwise what have they been paying out for? Besides, the worry is not merely financial - why should a manager have to sell up before he can buy again if his money is in good order?

Main things I would like would be stadium increases, would mean successful clubs like some I have would not turn to buying players solely for profit as much. Also, greater unmanaged club activity as Nells suggested, meaning that free agents don't stay that way (would also solve the problem of not being able to buy a player as the squad they are in is less than 18 players strong) and that there is less opportunity for people to supposedly buy up all the young players, as some people bizarrely seem concerned about. Would also be good if players who have only played a VERY small percentage of games refused to sign contracts and were available at cost once contract expires, and on a rolling contract, which might put off the higher level 'hogging' such as Fraser described. I also think an overdraft limit needs to be put in place to eliminate any risk of manager's ruining their team for other people in the long term, with players being auto transfer listed and bids being auto accepted if above cost when a club is X amount in debt (higher leagues allowed more debt as prize money will be greater).

I think these need to be in place for all types of setups for a good few 'seasons' before a cap can be considered. With those in place, am not sure it would even be necessary but would mean the large squads that exist wouldnt get punished and that the choice, which I think is one of the main reasons for not having a squad cap, is not taken from managers when it comes to buying who they want.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Squad Sizes

I have to say aswell I agree with Teb on what setup has anyone ever managed to buy up all the tallent? most go onto the free agent list at first and you can onlt buy 1 at a time (2 days) so that would take some doing getting all of them, plus the free agents list last time i could get onto it. I cant seem to anymore, was always like 15+ pages anyway.

Plus the thousands and thousands of players at unamanged / unmanagable clubs there are to go at. Ive never ever found a problem were im stuck for players to buy unless im looking for players above 90.

As i said earlier the only problem with 100+ players i belive is realism as teams do not own that many in real life. But if were going to make things more realsitic i think there are a few other things which need doing first especially the fact teams with like 10% fitness on all there players keep winning matches and getting less injuries than me and my players are always at 100%.

I think i could make a list of things (not my personal idea's) but which definatly should be added or looked at before a squad cap.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Squad Sizes

Also if a wage cap was ever added i would probably retire because it would totaly ruin being a smaller club with a low stadium, if you based the wage cap on stadium income then teams like grimsby would have no chance.

I go into around 4mil debt every season but always gets cleared at the end of the season, plus around 2mil for more deals which i do wisely 1 in 1 out etc, or 1 in 2 out. My wage bill is high but my debt is always under control, if i had a wage cap in the first place i could never ever have built the team i have.

Maybe not many things need changing, instead of limiting good managers like Bobo, Teb, Myself etc as we already have tons of limits (some of which are very unrealistic) because of the idiot cheats. We would be getting punished even more and limited just because of the managers who cant manage there team properly.

Maybe we should just punish the managers harshly who are the ones ruining the clubs

if you look at the limits we are already under due to some stupid managers / cheats.

1. Very hard sometimes to get transfers through, even if you follow the guidelines.

2. Say i was managing liverpool because i wouldnt want players like Warnock and i had no cash so i couldnt bid using him in exchange but i had say bid 1 million under his value. in real life liverpool would accept this offer, we however cannot. because of the chairman.

3. Only can bid for 1 free agent per turn, which is pretty unrealsitc really, same goes with only being able to bid for 1 player from the same club per turn even when they are unmanagable.

4. even before i got my curret loan error thing, i couldnt loan out 82 rated players even if my team was full of 85's and i had ten 82's on the bench. if a few lower rated players kept my squad average below 78 then this couldnt happen

Dont get me wrong i totaly understand why those limits and restrictions are there and cheating and stuff has reduced massivly because of it. So we need them in place, just wanted to use those for examples as to good managers getting punished for others

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Squad Sizes

totally agree.

wage cap would kill smaller clubs.

best to implement receivership as an option and also punishing teams still in red before start of next season if not already in receivership.

Yeah i mentioned to stegore i think clubs should be punished if there still in debt after the end of season injections because if youre still in debt after that youre only going to go even further into debt and have no chance or recovery

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Squad Sizes

i agree.

what bemuses me about the squad cap, is that SM are trying to solve something perceived as unrealistic, by adding an unrealistic option - the squad size cap.

what they need to be doing is looking at the things that occur in real life that actually stops clubs from having excessive amounts of players in the first place.

For instance, go ask some real life chairmans why they dont have vast squads, the answer wouldnt be a cap. It would be the concern over morale, it would be the concern over entering into too much debt, many of which we have just mentioned over the last few posts.

Put these things in place, and a squad cap won't be necessary, as there will be natural and more realistic barriers in place that means nobody WANTS a vast squad anyway. The only way to create true realism is to add realistic parameters/gameplay guidelines like this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Squad Sizes

Paging squad sizes so 100's appear on a page is possible but is still

a) slower

B) less usable for people viewing squads

c) cannot be practically done on tactics page

Could'nt it be done to change the youth team to a reserve team so you can put anyone in there. and have a cap on the main team say 20 players. so on the tactics page there would only be 20 players or whatever number is decided to load up.

At the moment all the players i put in my youth squad still apear on the tactics page, were as it would probably be better if they never, this would also solve the problem of managers not knowing if they can play those players in there main 11 or not, as some have asked on the forum, but there are probably thousands playing who don't use the forum who have no idea. if you can or cant.

So to get different players into your main squad you would do as normal and just do it from your squad page or reserve team page were you could also send players that are inj / sus. and have the 60 players per page, page 1,2,3 etc. This means you have to load different pages but with a limit of 60 per page it would surely be faster than a page with 100 results.

I don't mind the squad cap but if its not 100% definite as more seem to hate it then like it then just thought i would give a few more idea's

But in all i do agree with SM, i think 100 players is more than enough, just need to find a way to sort out the guys who already have over 100 players, but if SM are definitly going ahead with the cap then maybe we could change the discussion over to how to sort that out instead

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Squad Sizes

I don't mind the squad cap but if its not 100% definite as more seem to hate it then like it then just thought i would give a few more idea's

But in all i do agree with SM' date=' i think 100 players is more than enough, just need to find a way to sort out the guys who already have over 100 players, but if SM are definitly going ahead with the cap then maybe we could change the discussion over to how to sort that out instead[/quote']

I honestly think though and everything i have read from the S/M SIDE from the start of Johns opening thread on the subject up to this point ,that ALL ideas AGAINST HAS BEEN TOTALLY POINTLESS ,so even though great valid ideas son ,totally wasted im afraid.

Just everyone read at what has been said from start to finish up to now ,the decision had already been made before first thread,sorry If S/M disagree but it has.

When my son told me about this thread and when i first answered on it i thought S/M were trying to get a positive feed back on the idea / suggestion of a squad cap of forum members knowing as in anything you try there will always be people for it,against it and some who dont give a hoot.

Then as in all debatable discussions they can look at the positives and negatives that come from it and take a forward move in the right direction with what they deemed positives.

Now im afraid we have been falesly led that what we had to say was open to a good deabatable discussion ,everyone that has been for the capping by S/M has had what they had to say on the subject backed up by S/M AS SOME REASONS WHY THEY ARE DOING IT,though S/M keep changing goalpoasts on their reasons why.

Yet all others reason against have virtually been shunned/dismissed out of hand and even had the audacity to be told dont belong under this section.

"POPPYCOCK "

When you introduce something like this its bound to have a domino affect on a lot of different things about the game even though its not solely on the size of squad.

Now as for the latter " Squad size " this is what really this thread should be about ,S/M should have stood tall and come clean and straight out and stated that they are going to put a limit on Size of squads from so and so date and wanted a debate on the limit .To say different would be nonsical with the backing S/M are giving on having one .

Now dont all think im against a capping because it affects me ,far from it ,i have about 22 teams and not one would be over 60,most are 20-30.

I dont think in all honesty any will ever reach 100 when it set as will prove the case.

So why am i making an issue you may ask.

Easy i agree with most that theres a lot more that could be done elswhere in S/M before this,if it needs to be done at all ,after all other things that have been suggested would have a knock on affect with some of the big squads

so they would have to take a different outlook on there managment of there squad as a normal process anyway.

All the reasons given for and against can easily be done to peoples satisfaction without the capping system,which why more and more i am led to believe its more for tech reasons than the actual managable factor.

Forget Scouting for youngsters i dont class that ,it should be your preference not made to do it,yes for some its their enjoyment just like mine is more stats and formations etc.

But at the same time this is not everyones cup of tea.

We all have our own reasons in what we like see and get addicted to S/M.

In fact if you capped squads at 100 how does that make a big difference in making it better for peoples scouting and stopping other managers having carte-blanche on all prospects,

just stop and reflect on what your saying ,you can have 30 main squad and 70 places for the rest ,does that stop someone with the finance from blanketing 70 players straight of free agents ,because thats were most get them at 10k a time etc.

No it dosnt so they can still snap 70 up ,so does capping stop this ,no it just stops them getting few more,so correct the problem at the main source ,restrict the ammount you can buy at a time etc from free agents .

Anyway gone on to long for you all me think,like i said dosnt affect me in long run ,but all problems clearly looked at with open mind can be solved without this idea,but thats why i will finish saying you have made a mountain out of molehill John though you say not,

This was being done before opening thread ,way all replies from S/M have been made is proof of the pudding,so please next time S/M stand tall and come straight out with what your doing ,its your game and its still the best there is ,so you lads cant have done a bad job in first place .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Squad Sizes

Having read the last dozen posts we seem to be getting somewhere with this massive thread!!

I agree with 90% of what has been said recently.

1) The cap needs to be added, as a maximum level that people should never really be at or need to be at.

2) Stadium increases need to be added as successful teams get promoted. (The problem with this however could be everyones stadium ends up at 100,000 after 50 seasons. So has to be done carefully!)

3) Unmanaged clubs need to be more active. (We are currently working on this)

4) Players who are not playing become more unhappy, on a sliding scale ie 70 rated youth at Man Utd not effected, 95 rated star really cheesed off. (This currently happens but could amplify the effect)

5) Wage cap introduced based on stadium size (But first step 2 needs to be implemented to bring setups into balance.)

The cap will only be introduced when steps 2 and 3 have been implemented and have been running for a significant period of time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Squad Sizes

Having read the last dozen posts we seem to be getting somewhere with this massive thread!!

I agree with 90% of what has been said recently.

1) The cap needs to be added' date=' as a maximum level that people should never really be at or need to be at.

2) Stadium increases need to be added as successful teams get promoted. (The problem with this however could be everyones stadium ends up at 100,000 after 50 seasons. So has to be done carefully!)

3) Unmanaged clubs need to be more active. (We are currently working on this)

4) Players who are not playing become more unhappy, on a sliding scale ie 70 rated youth at Man Utd not effected, 95 rated star really cheesed off. (This currently happens but could amplify the effect)

5) Wage cap introduced based on stadium size (But first step 2 needs to be implemented to bring setups into balance.)

The cap will only be introduced when steps 2 and 3 have been implemented.[/quote']

1 - dont mine either way on that one still. i will never hit 100 players.

2 - stadium upgrades would be an excellent addition and really help as a smaller club, i still belive it should somehow be based on promotions / relegations / current stadium size. I dont think teams like Man Utd / Barca etc should be able to increase there stadium. its already easy enough as it is as those clubs.

3 - The most important thing ive always wanted as long as those clubs still bid for the 75+ rated players and not just the high ones as there the ones the lower clubs start with.

4 - Brilliant idea and would make SM become miles more realistic and would put an end more or less to star hogging.

5 - Still totaly dislike that idea, People who manage there teams should not have this cap, I'm guessing stadium building is for gold / customs only so were would that leave people like me and Nav, Fraser and co in EC3. The only thing i could think of would be to let stadium building be for gold members only but they do have the option to build there stadium in normal setups, this would even make more people want gold probably.

But if a wage cap is put on in normal setups without the ability to build stadiums that would make it totaly impossible and totaly boring to be a lower club. Grimsby default starting team sends you into debt even without signing anyone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Squad Sizes

The cap will only be introduced when steps 2 and 3 have been implemented.
Pleased to hear that' date=' although would prefer it to read 'when steps 2, 3 and 4 have been implemented' as I think the cap may not even be necessary as would further put people off having huge squads, and I will never be a fan of it (as I think all are aware, but seems I am beating my head against a brick wall with this as the decision long since made :) ). I also would prefer to see receivership come into play before any squad cap, in place of number 5 (the wage cap) as this would be far more flexible and playable and fun imo, and would benefit all sizes of clubs more.

Alan, i agreed on all point but one, which is your last:

its your game and its still the best there is ,so you lads cant have done a bad job in first place
Reason I disagree is that as SM becomes bigger business, which I think it is and will continue to do so, they need to start listening to their customers more and realising that the players are what will keep this game going. I am not sure the idea of the squad cap and the way the idea was presented is exemplary of SM being aware of this.... but I admit part of me is saying this in the hope that SM give me a job as 'PR and Customer Care rep' for the game :D

Neller JNR, agree with all you said there, except number 1 of course. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Squad Sizes

Ps. We also know that this not the most serious problem in SM far from it.

We have a list of ideas and improvements as long as this thread that will keep us busy till xmas!

BUT the longer we leave this problem the worse it will get. As stated in a previous post it may only affect a few 100 managers at the moment but the longer we leave squads without a cap more and more teams will get 100+ squads. At least if we introduce a cap now (next month) it will upset less people than doing it in a years time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Squad Sizes

Actually just changed my mind on stadiums it should cost so much per 1k seats, but the more you get the more it costs and when you get to a certain amount say 80k it costs an absolute fortune (and i mean fortune :) )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Squad Sizes

A wage cap is just an idea. We did have one at the very start of SM precisely to stop people buying every best player on the game and therefore dominating a setup but also to stop club debt.

Stadium increases would have to be made setup wide (not just custom/gold). And would be most likely done by the chairman at the end of a season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Squad Sizes

i think stadium ideas are easily solved, i mentioned this on the debt thread and many times in the past, just work it on a similar system to prize money only staggered so that poor performances means a negative impact on 'money' (ie a decrease in stadium size) and worked out over 2 or 3 season's of performances rather than just one (clubs stadiums dont change each season in reality after all). It needs to stay out of manager's hands for sure. As for the problem of all clubs having 100k stadiums, I think SM could just set a finite SM fan population, which could never be exceeded, meaning that if one club gains X amount of fans, other clubs lose fans totalling X between them having not played as well, for instance.

I prefer a wage cap to a squad cap as at least a wage cap is realistic (as it happens in real life) and would effectively cause a squad cap anyway, without actually dictating to people that they could not have X amount of people. But, i think the receivership idea supercedes both, as allows more flexibility and time to managers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

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

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

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

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

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

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...