Would you say I strengthened this squad?

[v InterfectoR v]

I'm in my second season as Ajax and I sold a young player, (already filled a bug report but it appears it's not a bug which I find hard to believe) my keeper Jasper Cillessen wanted me to strengthen my squad and gave me 191 days in which to do so, now here comes July pre season and obviously my great squad is going to get a lot of on lookers after winning the league and finishing in the semi final of the Champions League.

The players sold were; Gino Peruzzi, he was signed the season for 3.9m before but had his transfer clause activated by Juventus for 10.5m.

Kolbeinn Sigþórsson; Wanted to leave for the illustrious Granada for some unknown reason, he ends up signing for Bologna for 6.25m, there's not much I can do with an unhappy player.

Ruben Ligeon; This was a fringe right back who wanted first team football and I tried but with Peruzzi and Van Rhijn in his way he had no chance, he was sold for 2m

The players I bought to strengthen were; Milik, he was on loan at the start of the game and he is unreal and had to be bought, he cost 4.2m

Niki Zimling another on loan player at the start, he cost 1.2m

Gregory Van der Wiel for 2.3m

Ivan Piris a left/right back who I got on loan

Kozak a striker from Villa who is also on loan

Angelo Henriquez from Manchester United also on loan

Flamini on a free.

I have, in my opinion strengthened my team in all areas I lost players in as well as LB position with Piris, now Cillessen has 20 days and still thinks I have not strengthened my team which in my honest opinion is ridiculous as I have not only strengthened it but also made a tidy profit in the process.

[Sunstrikuuu]

I wonder how loan players get counted.

[v InterfectoR v]

I wonder how loan players get counted.

This is my thinking and I feel as though they don't really get counted much at all when in fact they should. My club Everton last season strengthened in a few key positions through loans and I don't remember our players not thinking that.

So I just signed Jordan Ayew for 7.5m and he looks brilliant...but oh wait he's still not happy. If this isn't a bug then I think this will be my last purchase of FM.

Looks like my save is about to be ruined in 7 days.

So now my keeper wont speak to me, the board needed to have a meeting with me and every player is now against me, and yet the guy in the testing tells me this isn't a bug. My save is ruined now so this needs to be fixed.

[macca72]

I'm not sure you have strengthened the squad to be honest mate. Especially when you consider you got to CL semis.

You've recouped nearly £19m in player sales and spent £7.7m. The loan players may be good, but you'll be in the same boat next season when they go back.

I kind of agree you need to sign a couple more good players on full time deals.

EDIT: Noticed the Ayew piece, good signing. 1 won't be enough though. In terms of "bug", I think there are issues with the player interactions / reactions being over sensitive, but on this occasion I think you are, at least, partly responsible

[v InterfectoR v]

I'm not sure you have strengthened the squad to be honest mate. Especially when you consider you got to CL semis.

You've recouped nearly £19m in player sales and spent £7.7m. The loan players may be good, but you'll be in the same boat next season when they go back.

I kind of agree you need to sign a couple more good players on full time deals.

EDIT: Noticed the Ayew piece, good signing. 1 won't be enough though. In terms of "bug", I think there are issues with the player interactions / reactions being over sensitive, but on this occasion I think you are, at least, partly responsible

It's just too vague since you can't ask what part he wants strengthening since he just sits there with a ticking timebomb above his head, it's terrible in terms of gameplay as there's no way to tell what he wants without guessing.

This came about last season when I sold a youth player who was 17, it's not a bug though.. anyway I think I bought enough players in many positions to make that team much better and I'd keep playing if it didn't completely ruin my save.

[CityAndColour]

The way it's worded is a bit odd. Whether you think he's strengthened or not is a matter of opinion, but the "upset that his manager appears to be making no attempts to strengthen the squad" is a bit silly. Does he think you're deliberately signing lesser players or something?

[heddy]

It's stupid that the game decides if you have strengthen or not. It should be you/we that make that decision. If we fail we'll get sacked. That should be the decider, nothing else.

[macca72]

It's just too vague since you can't ask what part he wants strengthening since he just sits there with a ticking timebomb above his head, it's terrible in terms of gameplay as there's no way to tell what he wants without guessing.

This came about last season when I sold a youth player who was 17, it's not a bug though.. anyway I think I bought enough players in many positions to make that team much better and I'd keep playing if it didn't completely ruin my save.

Totally agree, I had the same issue with Balanta complain that there was "no competition for places", but there's no option to understand where or why. That needs addressing 100%.

That said, I (personally) do not think that you have strengthened your squad. If you were to sign 3-4 players of equal or higher quality that the ones you sold, and the issue persisted, then it would be more clear cut that it's buggy.

[v InterfectoR v]

Totally agree, I had the same issue with Balanta complain that there was "no competition for places", but there's no option to understand where or why. That needs addressing 100%.

That said, I (personally) do not think that you have strengthened your squad. If you were to sign 3-4 players of equal or higher quality that the ones you sold, and the issue persisted, then it would be more clear cut that it's buggy.

The thing is Van Der Wiel is an international with champions league experience from PSG, he is far better than Peruzzi. Kozak, Henriquez and Ayew are three players replacing one striker. Flamini is a very experienced midfielder who can play many positions. In my opinion I have bought sufficient players for my current reputation and as far as my scouting goes these are the best players on the market.

[macca72]

The thing is Van Der Wiel is an international with champions league experience from PSG, he is far better than Peruzzi. Kozak, Henriquez and Ayew are three players replacing one striker. Flamini is a very experienced midfielder who can play many positions. In my opinion I have bought sufficient players for my current reputation and as far as my scouting goes these are the best players on the market.

I guess that's the beauty of football, we can all have our own opinions

[Joe.]

You can always ask your keeper to recommend a signing, or you can get rid of the keeper if you think he's unsettling your squad..

Why should you cave in to his requests if he's questioning your ability to make decent signings? It doesn't have to ruin your game - you can get rid of the issue without too much hassle.

[hluraven]

You haven't particularly strengthened IMO, although whether signing players already on loan counts on not might make a difference. I didn't seem to get any of the problems you're having as Ajax, although I sold Cillessen in the first window so if it's specific to him then I never experienced it.

[garrypelka]

I had a similar problem in a previous save (FM15) when I was Arsenal. Sold Ozil to Chelsea and Wilshere was unhappy. Said I would replace and although I didn't do so like for like, after a couple of weeks he came back saying he was happy now as I had bought some up and coming player (Rodriguez as LB I think). Perhaps it is the reputation (or potential) of the players coming in that makes the difference though I would agree that Ayew should be sufficient for a team such as Ajax.

I then had this issue in my current save where Victor Valdes was unhappy I sold a potential wonderkid (the kid was still only 18) though this time I said that he had to trust I had made the right decision. The next couple of weeks were spent fending off the player unrest so I sold Valdes and everyone was happy again. Not the most ideal situation but it sounds like you have enough money to buy a potentially better keeper that the one you have moaning.

[v InterfectoR v]

I had a similar problem in a previous save (FM15) when I was Arsenal. Sold Ozil to Chelsea and Wilshere was unhappy. Said I would replace and although I didn't do so like for like, after a couple of weeks he came back saying he was happy now as I had bought some up and coming player (Rodriguez as LB I think). Perhaps it is the reputation (or potential) of the players coming in that makes the difference though I would agree that Ayew should be sufficient for a team such as Ajax.

I then had this issue in my current save where Victor Valdes was unhappy I sold a potential wonderkid (the kid was still only 18) though this time I said that he had to trust I had made the right decision. The next couple of weeks were spent fending off the player unrest so I sold Valdes and everyone was happy again. Not the most ideal situation but it sounds like you have enough money to buy a potentially better keeper that the one you have moaning.

It's a shame because he is an amazing keeper for my level.

I think Si whether this is a bug or not needs to make these type of situation clear and obvious because right now it's as though I'm a manager with no voice since I can only ever select some pre determined answers which are mostly the same bar one.

[CarltonBanks]

It's clearly the games fault that you promised to strengthen the squad and then brought in loan players instead..

[v InterfectoR v]

It's clearly the games fault that you promised to strengthen the squad and then brought in loan players instead..

You didn't read the entire thread did you. I made key signings to all positions I sold in and then added more through loans.

[Neil Brock]

Bear in mind the player will look at their current ability as opposed to anything related to potential.

Let's say it was as follows (none of these CA's are real fwiw, just to illustrate this point):

You sold Gino Peruzzi (CA 159), Sigþórsson (CA147), Ligeon (CA 140).

Now from the players you signed, you need at least three players with equal or better than CA's that those three. That's CA and not PA.

So let's say Milik has a CA of 139 but a PA of 199, he's not seen as strengthening by the squad by your unhappy player. He wants a better squad right now, not months or even years down the line.

I'm not sure how it works with loan signings, I'd need to check that. But just wanted to give you an insight into the thought process behind this. I logged an issue similar to this how it isn't particularly clear and it's something we can look into for the future.

Edit: Just to clarify, loan signings do count, but again the CA ruling would still be in effect. So if you signed eight 130 CA players to replace one 140 CA player, you've not strictly 'strengthened' the squad - albeit the wording could probably do with improving.

[Jean-Luc]

Thanks for the clarification, Neil.

Very helpful.

[CityAndColour]

Bear in mind the player will look at their current ability as opposed to anything related to potential.

Could the wording be changed then?

Thinking the manager hasn't strengthened the squad because he doesn't rate the players brought in and thinking the manager isn't making any attempt to strengthen the squad would appear to be two different things.

[macca72]

Bear in mind the player will look at their current ability as opposed to anything related to potential.

Let's say it was as follows (none of these CA's are real fwiw, just to illustrate this point):

You sold Gino Peruzzi (CA 159), Sigþórsson (CA147), Ligeon (CA 140).

Now from the players you signed, you need at least three players with equal or better than CA's that those three. That's CA and not PA.

So let's say Milik has a CA of 139 but a PA of 199, he's not seen as strengthening by the squad by your unhappy player. He wants a better squad right now, not months or even years down the line.

I'm not sure how it works with loan signings, I'd need to check that. But just wanted to give you an insight into the thought process behind this. I logged an issue similar to this how it isn't particularly clear and it's something we can look into for the future.

Edit: Just to clarify, loan signings do count, but again the CA ruling would still be in effect. So if you signed eight 130 CA players to replace one 140 CA player, you've not strictly 'strengthened' the squad - albeit the wording could probably do with improving.

That helps a lot. Thanks

[Neil Brock]

Could the wording be changed then?

Thinking the manager hasn't strengthened the squad because he doesn't rate the players brought in and thinking the manager isn't making any attempt to strengthen the squad would appear to be two different things.

Yeah we'll look to potentially change the wording or add a some text if we can (it's not easy to do because everything we add has then to be translated, so we just can't just add everything in that we want), but the jist would be that the player understands you've signed players but doesn't think they're up to scratch. Cheers.

[jc1]

I think the fact your keeper gave you an ultimatum of 191 days to get it sorted or else is a laugh, personally I'd do as I wished and stuck the keeper on the transfer list and told him it had nowt to do with him.

[YOUNGSTEVE]

Bear in mind the player will look at their current ability as opposed to anything related to potential.

Let's say it was as follows (none of these CA's are real fwiw, just to illustrate this point):

You sold Gino Peruzzi (CA 159), Sigþórsson (CA147), Ligeon (CA 140).

Now from the players you signed, you need at least three players with equal or better than CA's that those three. That's CA and not PA.

So let's say Milik has a CA of 139 but a PA of 199, he's not seen as strengthening by the squad by your unhappy player. He wants a better squad right now, not months or even years down the line.

I'm not sure how it works with loan signings, I'd need to check that. But just wanted to give you an insight into the thought process behind this. I logged an issue similar to this how it isn't particularly clear and it's something we can look into for the future.

Edit: Just to clarify, loan signings do count, but again the CA ruling would still be in effect. So if you signed eight 130 CA players to replace one 140 CA player, you've not strictly 'strengthened' the squad - albeit the wording could probably do with improving.

Surely it should depend on whether the CA of the squad has improved not individual players. If the 8 players you quote have improved the squads CA by 100, surely you would have strengthened the squad, whether any were better than the player sold or not.

[jozza800]

Surely it should depend on whether the CA of the squad has improved not individual players. If the 8 players you quote have improved the squads CA by 100, surely you would have strengthened the squad, whether any were better than the player sold or not.

Wonder if Liverpool fans would agree...

[Miravlix]

Huh!

Last time I had improving/strengthen team issues, I found out it's all about the contract and because I signed the World Class players on cheap contracts, I got a riot, reloaded and signed a crap player, but on a first team/key player contract, everyone was happy. (Couldn't change the super players, since they were signed before the save)

Maybe CA counts too, but without the right squad status, you could sign Naymar and no one would think you improved the squad.

[v InterfectoR v]

Bear in mind the player will look at their current ability as opposed to anything related to potential.

Let's say it was as follows (none of these CA's are real fwiw, just to illustrate this point):

You sold Gino Peruzzi (CA 159), Sigþórsson (CA147), Ligeon (CA 140).

Now from the players you signed, you need at least three players with equal or better than CA's that those three. That's CA and not PA.

So let's say Milik has a CA of 139 but a PA of 199, he's not seen as strengthening by the squad by your unhappy player. He wants a better squad right now, not months or even years down the line.

I'm not sure how it works with loan signings, I'd need to check that. But just wanted to give you an insight into the thought process behind this. I logged an issue similar to this how it isn't particularly clear and it's something we can look into for the future.

Edit: Just to clarify, loan signings do count, but again the CA ruling would still be in effect. So if you signed eight 130 CA players to replace one 140 CA player, you've not strictly 'strengthened' the squad - albeit the wording could probably do with improving.

I agree with the wording as a lot of the conversations I have with players give me a really vague promise text prompt and that's it. I have also just checked the players CA/PA and it's very interesting..

Huh!

Last time I had improving/strengthen team issues, I found out it's all about the contract and because I signed the World Class players on cheap contracts, I got a riot, reloaded and signed a crap player, but on a first team/key player contract, everyone was happy. (Couldn't change the super players, since they were signed before the save)

Maybe CA counts too, but without the right squad status, you could sign Neymar and no one would think you improved the squad.

This guy makes the point I'm trying to make where I feel that I've signed enough players to feel I strengthened my squad significantly.

The kid who was sold in the first place, this clearly runs off PA

Leon Bergsma CA 82 PA -7

These players were sold;

Peruzzi CA 130 PA 150

Ligeon CA 115 PA 130

Replaced with these players

Van Der Wiel CA 136 PA 145

Van Der Wiel has +6 on Peruzzi for CA.

Piris CA 126 PA 132

Piris +11 over Ligeon

This player was also sold

Sigþórsson CA128 PA 132

Replaced by these players

Milik 121 PA -8

Jordan Ayew CA 126 PA 150

Kozak CA 122 PA 132

Henriquez CA 123 PA -8

The CA here completely outweighs what was lost.

These two players were bought to strengthen the midfield

Flamini CA 143 PA 150

Zimling CA 132 PA 134

If we have to sign players who are the same CA to the players who we just sold just to appease the players then surely that isn't a very good system. I wouldn't mind if I had signed 4 strikers with a CA of 60-70 but these players are very close to Sigþórsson's CA and yet the keeper still flipped out.

How are we supposed to know what players to sign without complete trial and error since CA/PA are hidden in the editor?

[v InterfectoR v]

No feedback on that post?

[HUNT3R]

That's why you have scouts and coaches. Sign higher rated players.

Sigþórsson has a higher CA than any of the 4 you listed. CA doesn't outweigh anything. 128 CA is the highest. Him being sold and not adequately replaced seems to be the issue here, correct?

--- Your promise was to strengthen. Signing players with the same (or lower in this case) ability isn't strengthening anything.

[v InterfectoR v]

That's why you have scouts and coaches. Sign higher rated players.

Sigþórsson has a higher CA than any of the 4 you listed. CA doesn't outweigh anything. 128 CA is the highest. Him being sold and not adequately replaced seems to be the issue here, correct?

--- Your promise was to strengthen. Signing players with the same (or lower in this case) ability isn't strengthening anything.

I don't agree. If I sign 4 players of very similar CA then it should count for something, yet the player turns around and says "You didn't even try and strengthen". The current system is too vague and I think that's where the problem stems.

[HUNT3R]

I don't agree. If I sign 4 players of very similar CA then it should count for something, yet the player turns around and says "You didn't even try and strengthen". The current system is too vague and I think that's where the problem stems.

Because you didn't strengthen. You didn't buy better players.

[v InterfectoR v]

Because you didn't strengthen. You didn't buy better players.

I still don't agree, if the game doesn't account the fact you replaced 1 players with 4 slightly less good players then that is not my problem that is the game inability to determine strength. The game doesn't account for PA in any way which is also a bit of a problem because that shows strength for years as well as right now.

The system in place right now seems extremely simple and vague as at not one point does the game tell me anything what the player wants other than 'strengthen the squad' as you cannot speak to the player about the issue, now if there was a way for him to say

"Look Mate the players you have brought it I don't feel they're good enough right now as Sigborsson had a good current abilit"

I can see your point, Sigborsson was a good player and I'll bring in somebody just as good or better

I have brought 4 players in and I personally feel through my knowledge of the game that they are ready to take on a major role and eclipse anything Sigborsson done for us

I think you're being unreasonable, you should get on with your job

Could you suggest a player who you would think could do a better job than Sigborsson?

These options fit with the game and would make it slightly easier to tell what the robotic and stiff players think when they flip out on you for selling a young player, which is what this is all over..

[CityAndColour]

Because you didn't strengthen. You didn't buy better players.

Which isn't what the player says.

[v InterfectoR v]

Well, he didn't try to buy better players, did he?

Yes I did Hunter, you can see evidence of this in the thread.

[HUNT3R]

Yes I did Hunter, you can see evidence of this in the thread.

I see none. Why were they better? What did you base it on?

[v InterfectoR v]

I see none. Why were they better? What did you base it on?

I agree with the wording as a lot of the conversations I have with players give me a really vague promise text prompt and that's it. I have also just checked the players CA/PA and it's very interesting..

This guy makes the point I'm trying to make where I feel that I've signed enough players to feel I strengthened my squad significantly.

The kid who was sold in the first place, this clearly runs off PA

Leon Bergsma CA 82 PA -7

These players were sold;

Peruzzi CA 130 PA 150

Ligeon CA 115 PA 130

Replaced with these players

Van Der Wiel CA 136 PA 145

Van Der Wiel has +6 on Peruzzi for CA.

Piris CA 126 PA 132

Piris +11 over Ligeon

This player was also sold

Sigþórsson CA128 PA 132

Replaced by these players

Milik 121 PA -8

Jordan Ayew CA 126 PA 150

Kozak CA 122 PA 132

Henriquez CA 123 PA -8

The CA here completely outweighs what was lost.

These two players were bought to strengthen the midfield

Flamini CA 143 PA 150

Zimling CA 132 PA 134

If we have to sign players who are the same CA to the players who we just sold just to appease the players then surely that isn't a very good system. I wouldn't mind if I had signed 4 strikers with a CA of 60-70 but these players are very close to Sigþórsson's CA and yet the keeper still flipped out.

How are we supposed to know what players to sign without complete trial and error since CA/PA are hidden in the editor?

There you go.

[HUNT3R]

Sigþórsson CA128 PA 132

Replaced by these players

Milik 121 PA -8

Jordan Ayew CA 126 PA 150

Kozak CA 122 PA 132

Henriquez CA 123 PA -8

There you go.

What did you base it one before you knew these values?

[v InterfectoR v]

Sigþórsson CA128 PA 132

Replaced by these players

Milik 121 PA -8

Jordan Ayew CA 126 PA 150

Kozak CA 122 PA 132

Henriquez CA 123 PA -8

There you go.

What did you base it one before you knew these values?

I based it on their in game stats and performances.

Milik was on loan here and had; 26 app; 20 goals; 6 assists; 5 PoM; 7.37. His stats for overall are incredible for league and cup.

Ayew was signed because he has amazing stats for this level

Kozak has strong stats for this level and was a good loan option

Henriquez can be an absolutely quality player

Sigborssons stats aren't even that good, he's effective but nowhere near the player the game seems to be making him out to be.

[CarltonBanks]

It's really not that difficult. You promised to STRENGTHEN the squad. similar or lower CA is not strengthening, at best it's more akin to shoring up.

You did not buy a better player, which is what you promised.

[BoxToBox]

Would you say I strengthened this squad?

No.

You've added depth, though.

[v InterfectoR v]

It's clearly the games fault that you promised to strengthen the squad and then brought in loan players instead..

It's really not that difficult. You promised to STRENGTHEN the squad. similar or lower CA is not strengthening, at best it's more akin to shoring up.

You did not buy a better player, which is what you promised.

I did strengthen the squad and if you really have a little look above you'll see it I've put forward more than enough information to show that it has been strengthened.

[CarltonBanks]

I did strengthen the squad and if you really have a little look above you'll see it I've put forward more than enough information to show that it has been strengthened.

No, you haven't. You seem to think that your incorrect opinion on the issue is how the game works/should work, and it's not. You've been given more than enough information and advice from a member of the staff here, that you ignore.

Unless I missed the part where you signed 1 or more players with a higher CA than ones you sold, you have not given any information to show it was strengthened.

[v InterfectoR v]

No, you haven't. You seem to think that your incorrect opinion on the issue is how the game works/should work, and it's not. You've been given more than enough information and advice from a member of the staff here, that you ignore.

Unless I missed the part where you signed 1 or more players with a higher CA than ones you sold, you have not given any information to show it was strengthened.

Incorrect opinion.

The information from Brook was a great start and started the thoughts about CA/PA ect, it's a discussion and I can see you're a bit flippant from your replies and that's fine but I'm more inclined to listen to Brooks replies than yours or others who reply with one sentence replies.

[CarltonBanks]

Incorrect opinion.

The information from Brook was a great start and started the thoughts about CA/PA ect, it's a discussion and I can see you're a bit flippant from your replies and that's fine but I'm more inclined to listen to Brooks replies than yours or others who reply with one sentence replies.

He told you exactly ​what I just told you.

[Gandy]

You've strengthened in depth, not immediate quality.

[CityAndColour]

I can see it from the OP's point of view, and IMO is an inflexibility of the PA system.

If I am a player, I would think permanently signing someone who scored 20 in 25 games was strengthening the squad, and I'd be pretty pleased. But the game (and subsequently the player complaining) just looks at the CA and determines the squad hasn't been strengthened. Am I right in thinking that if you sold a striker with a CA of 135 who scored 10 goals and replaced him with someone with a CA of 130 who scored 30 goals, the game would streat it as not strengthening the squad?

I'd also say PA should be taken into account when the CA is so similar. A 126/150 player coming in for a 128/132 player is clearly strengthening to me, as you're bringing in someone who is just about as good and has a much higher ceiling.

[CarltonBanks]

There's no doubt that PA and possibly even stats/form should play a part, but unfortunately they don't.

[HUNT3R]

I agree with your point about similar CA but higher PA, the wording should be changed to make it clearer that the complaining player is expecting players who are better already to come in.

This is also why I asked what he used as a determining factor to decide whether these players were better - get some ideas of what people look for and to get some discussion going.

[hluraven]

It may be vague, and it may not be what you expected, but it is right to say that you did not strengthen. You replaced a player with 4 worse players. Your goalie is upset because he wants to win now, not that you improved potential ability.

The bigger problem for me is how much you could sell Sigthorsson and Ligeon for, unrealistically high amounts.

[Äktsjon Männ]

What was the original discussion with the player like? Because when I had this it was about some useless 19 year old and the option I chose was that I'd replace the player with someone much better. Yet when checking afterwards the game had interpreted this as a promise to 'significantly strengthen the squad'. Which is bs. I promised to replace a player with no chance of ever getting a game with someone better, which isn't hard. Disregarding the fact that the whole premise is stupid, the game twisting a conversation into something completely different is either a broken mechanic or a deliberate RNG hit to screw the player in order to add some artificial difficulty. Which is what most of the NOW EXPANDED!tm player interaction seems to really be about.

[fuhrerul]

the talk about improving the squad based on CA is wrong! the user doesnt know CA( teoretically) so improving a squad should be based on star rating for his position, match stats because a striker with a CA of 122 but with att of 15-16 in key areas(finishing, composure, off the ball) and 20 goals last season is an improvement over a striker with 130 CA but with max 14 in key areas(finishing, composure, off the ball) and 10 goals last season.

also on the op situation: he had milik on loan and he signed him permanently, this counts as an improvement or not because he was there last season also( i'm guessing the game doesn't count this as an improvement but if u have a player on loan, he does extremely good and u sign him permanently then it should count at least as a small improvement)