Football Manager 2017 Official Feedback Thread

[Guest]

9 hours ago, kevgaleuk said:

Now had a chance to play the game for a few weeks and I have to say on the whole I am very impressed! I really like the new camera angle - hoping this is a pre-cursor to a kind of player cam angle / better TV angle / dug-out view as the view behind the goal can be a little limiting seeing the action in central midfield as you'd expect. Love the new pre-match warm-up, montage. Not won anything yet but wondering whether it extends to that type of scenario too

.....

Dugout camera angle... OH YEAH BABY ...That calls for realism.
And closeup tv angle for replays... Just need the commentators to feel the realism to the fullest.

 

[TacoCorp]

14 hours ago, Lambo95 said:

Has there been a new update today? My game is updating again but I can't see anything new anywhere 

I've been searching everywhere for information on today's update and I still can't find anything. Where does SI post this information? Even if it's "Nothing", it would be nice to at least be informed as such.

[stevemc]

My game updated last night too, but wasn't aware there was an update? Was it a hot fix?

[ianscousemac]

Just opened up steam and my game has downloaded a small update

[hluraven]

It's just a change to the adverts

[frank_olaf]

This is an issue I had in FM16 as and it is still there in FM17. I'm actually not sure if it is an issue or 'as designed' but I'd like to know if there is a work around for it.

When I set up a scouting assignment I always set the duration to 'ongoing', so for example, if I want my scout to scout the Toulon tournament every year I will set it up as ongoing. However, after he scouts the tournament the first year the scouting assignment stops and I need to restart it before the tournament starts the next year. I would assume, because I set the assignment to 'ongoing', the scout would use his initiative and start scouting the tournament again the next year. 

Is there a way to set this up?

Thanks.

[luka_zg]

It seems there is lot less idiotic long shot attempts on 17.2. Finally

[kevgaleuk]

One little gripe..... Overall the player conversations seem a little improved; slightly less flying off the handle.

I have however had 2 players, admittedly rotation players who are coming on as subs rather than starting get upset.. to the point I've had to say I'll sell them for the good of their careers. In truth both players would be back-ups next season as I am likely to get promotion but the main thing is the timing. In the game it is March so I can't sell them even if I wanted to. If it was November and a transfer window was imminent (i.e. less than a month) then it makes sense but to me this feels wrong. At the very least the conversation should be about being sold in the summer?

[ScottGooner]

Just something I find a little odd. The club I'm managing have just offered me a new contract. Now the oddity for me is that the DoF is the one in charge of offering me the new deal. Yet I could sack him if I wanted too, hire another DoF with rubbish stats and possibly get a much better deal from the club. 

Also with the offside being called after you(or the AI) have got the ball and are about to or have started a good counter attack, shouldn't advantage be played and the offside flag ignored by the Ref?

Aside from those two minor things, good job SI people. 

[Bigpapa42]

Ran a soak til 2022 last night to test a data file. Was looking thru the game world and noticed there were quite a few high quality regens that stayed in smaller leagues. Now this could be entirely down to a couple of factors - I used a Huge DB with a lot of players retained so even smaller nations will be getting regens in number, and I only had a few active leagues. But the best regen GK - with a CA of like 170 - was still with his Brazilian club. Using a scouting tool and sorting regens by CA, almost half of the top of the list were at clubs in smaller leagues. An awesome Chilean striker was still in Chile, one of the best Argentine regens was in Mexico. Was rather cool to have a ton of talent that wasn't just Hoovered up by the PSG's and Man City's of the game world.

[Wells]

Funny, my first team player who is valued 56M, I don't want to sell him unless for 70m.. yet Monaco came with 7m  upfront and 7m in 24 monthly installments total 14m... what a stupid offer..

Yet one of their poor player who is just rotation player is valued 12m... so just for curios, I bid and they need him for 90m.. 

I mean they need that whopping for a poor player, why will they come with such a stupid offer for a good player valued 56m? doesn't make any sense..

really, better fix these kind of transfers with AI, it is annoying.

[Cougar2010]

2 minutes ago, Wells said:

Funny, my first team player who is valued 56M, I don't want to sell him unless for 70m.. yet Monaco came with 7m  upfront and 7m in 24 monthly installments total 14m... what a stupid offer..

Yet one of their poor player who is just rotation player is valued 12m... so just for curios, I bid and they need him for 90m.. 

really, better fix these kind of transfers with AI, it is annoying.

This is not annoying, it is not frustrating, it is 100% a lack of understanding on your part.

You have a player who is valued at £56m and you want £70m for him - What is the asking price you've set? Anything less than £100m is the wrong answer.  You always, always set an asking price higher than you want to give yourself room to drop down because you always, always expect the buyer to knock you down.

On the other side of the coin you make a bid & the other team don't really want to sell so they quote you a high price.  Here the problem is you A) don't take the hint & B) think its set in stone.  From that point you negotiate that price down, if the other team won't budge on price then they don't want to sell which is their right and you need to accept that they don't want to sell.

[Wells]

Look like I said I don't want to sell the player, he isn't transfer listed.. I will sell only if I get a reasonable offer that is what I said, I haven't set asking price and I don't need to set.. use common sense, why did they come with 14m? look at the difference.. I could understand if they could come with something around 35-50m, but 14m and the fact they need 90m for much poorer player.. doesn't make any sense.

Im not going to argue on this, I posted here it is because of feedback and for the good of the game, if the game is 100% fine for you it isn't for others.

[Bigpapa42]

They are offering way below face value because player valuation is always relative and either they can't afford more (unlikely) or they are making an offer they know will get rejected in hopes it unsettles the player and leads to him forcing a move. The latter is simply a smart (if manipulative) strategy that most FM players have used at some point. hand in hand with using the media, it can be very effective to unsettle a transfer target.

[Wells]

1 minute ago, Bigpapa42 said:

They are offering way below face value because player valuation is always relative and either they can't afford more (unlikely) or they are making an offer they know will get rejected in hopes it unsettles the player and leads to him forcing a move. The latter is simply a smart (if manipulative) strategy that most FM players have used at some point. hand in hand with using the media, it can be very effective to unsettle a transfer target.

That is not the case unfortunately, because im a bigger club than them in 2023 using (Arsenal) and have won recently the quadruple, the player is still happy (morale is superb) despite rejecting multiple offers from them.

[Cougar2010]

12 minutes ago, Wells said:

Look like I said I don't want to sell the player, he isn't transfer listed.. I will sell only if I get a reasonable offer that is what I said, I haven't set asking price and I don't need to set.. use common sense, why did they come with 14m? look at the difference.. I could understand if they could come with something around 35-50m, but 14m and the fact they need 90m for much poorer player.. doesn't make any sense.

Im not going to argue on this, I posted here it is because of feedback and for the good of the game, if the game is 100% fine for you it isn't for others.

Whether you want to sell or not other clubs are allowed to make offers.

The other club either think its a reasonable offer based on the information they have or its the max of what they are allowed to spend.  If you set asking prices you give other clubs more information as to what is acceptable, you still might get some offers that aren't acceptable but you have the right to decline them.

The other club were also potentially trying to unsettle your player which again is part of the game.

The transfer system overall works fairly well and the users who complain about it are mostly those who are out of sync with it.  If you made the effort to understand it you would be happier with it.

[Bigpapa42]

8 minutes ago, Wells said:

That is not the case unfortunately, because im a bigger club than them in 2023 using (Arsenal) and have won recently the quadruple, the player is still happy (morale is superb) despite rejecting multiple offers from them.

I didn't say anything about whether it worked, or who is the bigger club. Its a way of the AI trying to get their target player for a lower price. Same as having them declare interest thru the media. That's why it happens.

[santy001]

Some Brexit Feedback:

Had a relatively hard Brexit in my game, all EU players would need work permits. Scotland didn't leave. Bosman rule was cancelled.

The way in which the dynamics of the transfer system changed were absolutely fantastic however. The transfer market has shifted its focus from fringe premier league EU players, or from players from other EU sides to the kind of players they can afford the wages for - which is fringe youngsters. Offering big % cuts of future profits as a baseline on their transfer offers has been a little different as I haven't even had to negotiate them and youngsters who probably would have normally fallen by the wayside are now being bought. Every player I released has been picked up by a club, and loan offers are coming more from clubs who are likely to actually be worthwhile development opportunities. 

Looks like it will actually be a massive benefit to the development of English talent in this save. 

The scrapping of the bosman felt a little unusual however. Not good or bad, just strange. I was able to get a transfer deal worth nearly £9m for a 31 year old, out of contract, Matteo Darmian. 

 

[kevgaleuk]

1 hour ago, Bigpapa42 said:

They are offering way below face value because player valuation is always relative and either they can't afford more (unlikely) or they are making an offer they know will get rejected in hopes it unsettles the player and leads to him forcing a move. The latter is simply a smart (if manipulative) strategy that most FM players have used at some point. hand in hand with using the media, it can be very effective to unsettle a transfer target.

Having read 000's of these back and forth arguments I think this is the one that highlights the only issue in the whole thing for me. Totally agree with those that say value being relative and they're under no agreement to sell and I also agree that the AI will offer stuff. I think sometimes both the offers they make are stupidly low which would be okay if there was an option to send a picture of someone crying with laughter back to them because lets face it even as a tactic can you imagine the person in control of transfers at spurs submitting a 14m offer for Aguero for example...? Or Man Utd sending an 8m offer for stones when he was there...?

 

BUT my only concern is the inability for managers to not have unsettled players. I like the fact that the new version does have the ability to negotiate a minimum sale price if you reject an offer and state that the finances are wrong but I don't know if this is always the case; if its not then it might not be a fair playing field because I would guess based on my experience of playing the game human players get upset more regularly than those playing for clubs you make offers to (I don't know if there are game stats on that and I'll happily be wrong!) - for clarity I say this seeing my players getting upset and NOT seeing AI clubs players getting upset to the same frequency...

[Bigpapa42]

3 minutes ago, kevgaleuk said:

Having read 000's of these back and forth arguments I think this is the one that highlights the only issue in the whole thing for me. Totally agree with those that say value being relative and they're under no agreement to sell and I also agree that the AI will offer stuff. I think sometimes both the offers they make are stupidly low which would be okay if there was an option to send a picture of someone crying with laughter back to them because lets face it even as a tactic can you imagine the person in control of transfers at spurs submitting a 14m offer for Aguero for example...? Or Man Utd sending an 8m offer for stones when he was there...?

I don't think it happens tons, but it does seem like it happens sometimes. don't know if its true, but a podcast I listen to recently talked about an Arsenal player (Bellerin, I believe) and a rather "cursory" offer from a rival club last summer. Which apparently elicited a communicated response from Arsenal that was two words, the second of which was "OFF".

[Wells]

@kevgaleuk Unsettling AI players will work if you use a big club, while using Arsenal I have unsettled many players from SLB, Sporting and best example, I got Laporte for free.. but it wont work everytime, mainly I think it depends on some hidden attributes, how loyal a player is to their club, also agents play a key role there, as some of them prefer their clients to remain at their club.

[JensenS]

Found the solution - had to negotiate twice to be allowed to send my players on loan - it works fine

(Since the update. I cant seem to send my players to my feeder/affiliated clubs?

Anyone else experienced this?

Btw: from a 1.bundesliga to a 2. bundesliga team.)

[vamcj]

Did SI give a position on the bug in the scout system and a possible hotfix?

[Guest]

The bugs forum is always the best place to go when checking for an SI response on a particular issue, I assume you're referring to either or both of the following issues which Ben has commented on.

 

[vamcj]

15 minutes ago, Barside said:

The bugs forum is always the best place to go when checking for an SI response on a particular issue, I assume you're referring to either or both of the following issues which Ben has commented on.

 

Yes, tks.

[Koennn]

Since the patch I've noticed (or at least I think I do) that goalkeepers come out more often to claim a ball that drifts in the area during set pieces. In previous years it always bugged me that a goalkeeper would not come off his line to grab a ball while in real life you see goalkeepers try to get to the ball pretty often. Good job.

[iAlwaysWin]

Still far to easy to shut teams out or get shut out urself, i have left it sometimes till the 80 mins and we finally get that goal and then the flood gates open, but it seems to be the same pattern all the time, like does any team actually wanna attack in this god damn game unless your barcelona or something.

[Michael Zorc]

On 12/17/2016 at 02:10, Preveza said:

I feel the exact same way my friend. Wont be touching the game until they hopefully fix this over the next couple patches. Game breaking to see the gaps due to poor winger positioning 

 

On 12/18/2016 at 10:09, michelco said:

Can we expect the bug of wingers defending too wide to be fixed in coming patches for FM17? I won't be buying the game until it is fixed. 

I cannot understand that they did not catch this bug before the release, it took me 5 mins of playing the demo to realize something was awfully wrong. 

 

On 12/18/2016 at 23:39, Wells said:

Gotta fix the wide midfielders staying too wide in defensive shape, unrealistic really..

My only wish for Christmas this year is that this gets fixed to allow those of us that want more compact defending from wide midfielders to somehow achieve it...whether it's the default movement or something that can be altered with instructions. This is one of the biggest disasters I've encountered playing a recent version of FM and it ruins the experience, so much so that I can't play FM17 and had to revert to FM16, which is something I can't remember doing very often in my 20+ years of playing the series (since CM Italia 94/95 Update).

Defending from throw-ins also needs it's own set of instructions in the set-piece creator, to allow us more managerial influence over what happens from these situations, as the defending here is also quite often a complete shambles - and has been for numerous versions of FM.

[Viking]

I think the game feels more sluggish a fter the latest patch.

[Guest]

On 20/12/2016 at 15:39, Cougar2010 said:

This is not annoying, it is not frustrating, it is 100% a lack of understanding on your part.

You have a player who is valued at £56m and you want £70m for him - What is the asking price you've set? Anything less than £100m is the wrong answer.  You always, always set an asking price higher than you want to give yourself room to drop down because you always, always expect the buyer to knock you down.

On the other side of the coin you make a bid & the other team don't really want to sell so they quote you a high price.  Here the problem is you A) don't take the hint & B) think its set in stone.  From that point you negotiate that price down, if the other team won't budge on price then they don't want to sell which is their right and you need to accept that they don't want to sell.

When I was working on Transfers & Contracts I'd have logged this bid as a bug, an openning offer at 25% of the player's assumed value is not negotiating. 

[phnompenhandy]

On 21/12/2016 at 00:18, santy001 said:

Some Brexit Feedback:

Had a relatively hard Brexit in my game, all EU players would need work permits. Scotland didn't leave. Bosman rule was cancelled.

The way in which the dynamics of the transfer system changed were absolutely fantastic however. The transfer market has shifted its focus from fringe premier league EU players, or from players from other EU sides to the kind of players they can afford the wages for - which is fringe youngsters. Offering big % cuts of future profits as a baseline on their transfer offers has been a little different as I haven't even had to negotiate them and youngsters who probably would have normally fallen by the wayside are now being bought. Every player I released has been picked up by a club, and loan offers are coming more from clubs who are likely to actually be worthwhile development opportunities. 

Looks like it will actually be a massive benefit to the development of English talent in this save. 

The scrapping of the bosman felt a little unusual however. Not good or bad, just strange. I was able to get a transfer deal worth nearly £9m for a 31 year old, out of contract, Matteo Darmian. 

 

Fascinating. I'm mightily relieved to have gotten my Brexit notice and find it's a softie, but I'm very curious as to how others find the Hard Brexit effects. Maybe a separate thread is needed to tabulate the different Brexit experiences (not to moan about its existence - that debate has passed on now).

[Dagenham_Dave]

I got a soft Brexit when I played, but I'm now unable to offer players in England pre-contracts anymore. Foreign players are fine, but you used to be able to offer a pre-contract to a player in England a month before his contract ran out. The current pre-season I'm in is the first I've been unable to do this. I've had to wait until the contract has actually expired. And the players who go onto rolling month to month contracts after their main one runs out also can't be approached to sign. Not sure if that's how it's supposed to work. 

[Guest]

That's close to how it to worked before the Bosmon rule so there is some logic in going back to that system but it does seem unlikley & is worth raising in the bugs section as a possible issue.

[santy001]

30 minutes ago, Dagenham_Dave said:

I got a soft Brexit when I played, but I'm now unable to offer players in England pre-contracts anymore. Foreign players are fine, but you used to be able to offer a pre-contract to a player in England a month before his contract ran out. The current pre-season I'm in is the first I've been unable to do this. I've had to wait until the contract has actually expired. And the players who go onto rolling month to month contracts after their main one runs out also can't be approached to sign. Not sure if that's how it's supposed to work. 

I mentioned in my post that the bosman rule was scrapped in the UK. Quite likely it was scrapped in the UK, but obviously that has no bearing on EU teams. Its an unorthodox one, but I wasn't knocking about in the days before bosman (well I was, but I don't really remember those days) but aren't players defaulting to the possession of their clubs meaning even once a contract is over the club still owns the players registration. 

[Cougar2010]

2 hours ago, Barside said:

When I was working on Transfers & Contracts I'd have logged this bid as a bug, an openning offer at 25% of the player's assumed value is not negotiating. 

There is no rule though that states what an opening offer must be IRL.

I can walk into any place that regularly negotiates on items even services and make an offer.  It might get laughed at, it might not but I am free to make that offer.

Within FM and game play terms the club clearly feel the player would be interested in joining them if they can agree a price so it looks like they are either trying to unsettle a player or from previous threads the more likely answer seems to be that is the max they can bid.

If you stopped that sort of offer what difference would it make to the game play for the user?  It would speed things up a little but tbh its not the sort of thing you see all the time from my experience but it does happen from time to time.  Users should never feel frustrated by this sort of offer as they have the tools and right to decline the bids.  The slight negative of getting rid of these offers is that it reduces the transfer activity in a time when we want to see it increased and it takes a little of the ability for a club to unsettle a player (ie they have to have enough to make a minimum bid before trying to unsettle a player).

Overall would this benefit the experience for the user or make it worse? Personally I think its negligible but I would like to think that if you limit the AI offers by making some sort of min/max limit you also have to do that for the human users as well to make it a level playing field.

[hluraven]

1 hour ago, Dagenham_Dave said:

I got a soft Brexit when I played, but I'm now unable to offer players in England pre-contracts anymore. Foreign players are fine, but you used to be able to offer a pre-contract to a player in England a month before his contract ran out. The current pre-season I'm in is the first I've been unable to do this. I've had to wait until the contract has actually expired. And the players who go onto rolling month to month contracts after their main one runs out also can't be approached to sign. Not sure if that's how it's supposed to work. 

Good timing, I've just had the identical Brexit, with no noticeable change except for the pre-contract offers being removed for UK (I think - not just English) based players.

Not a big deal for me at the moment as I was in Conference South at the time, but many players down at that level are on rolling contracts, I would assume they should be approachable as they are free to terminate their contracts at any time if they wish - ie to join another club.

The bit about not being able to approach in the final month is fine, but I'm not sure about the inability to offer to those on rolling contracts, that seems like an omission to me.

[kevgaleuk]

Stockpiling players - just had an interesting one where I got a media question based on the huge volume of young players I have loaned out this year. In it the media was suggesting we might be doing a chelsea and stockpiling the best youngsters. The truth is with the exception of maybe 5 players the rest were ALL from my own academy i.e. not purchased. I wonder whether there needs to be a slight split in that scenario 1 for lots of purchased and subsequently loaned out (i.e. the chelsea model) and those where you're simply adding to your own youngsters development with proper first team football? Just a thought

 

Second one - training reports. I still get the odd message for mid-20's players saying how first team football is aiding their development? They've played well over 200 games (in my most recent example) that statement is just wrong. Perhaps the higher quality of football (now playing in the English premier league) is more accurate?

 

Also - when players are unhappy with training the coach says changing the training to something more suitable would help? OK to what? At least give me some options (that I am free to ignore) and even better some input from the player themselves seeing as they are the unhappy one?

[RobertPage]

This is a situation which is quite frustrating. It happens a hell of a lot.

It's came from an opposition corner, my team has cleared the ball and my winger who i have on the edge of the box has picked it up and has loads of space and only one defender ahead of him. You can see in the image that there is a player supporting behind, 2 on the wing with others joining also. Nothing wrong with any of that. The problem is how the attacker behaves continuously. They always run until they get tackled.  Never look to drag the defender wide to play through a team mate. never slow the play down to wait for a team mate. I don't expect every situation like this to result in a goal, but the way it's played out is something you see at kids level. Not the fact that this happens (it's totally acceptable that a player looks to beat a defender 1 v 1) but it's the same result too often

[kevgaleuk]

I really like that the youth manager now gives you the option to move players you might want in the first team there before games in the week however i'd love to be able to set up a meeting (a bit like getting the training (or other reports) weekly) to decide who I want in the various squads - i.e. a build on who i'm allowing to play U23 matches but also who I want leaving out of U23 or U18 matches to allow them to be available for first team selection

In some ways this could act like "make available for..." in reverse. I don't need to move my 16 year old from the U18's for a cup game I simply tell the manager of that team not to select him...

[Seb Wassell]

59 minutes ago, kevgaleuk said:

Stockpiling players - just had an interesting one where I got a media question based on the huge volume of young players I have loaned out this year. In it the media was suggesting we might be doing a chelsea and stockpiling the best youngsters. The truth is with the exception of maybe 5 players the rest were ALL from my own academy i.e. not purchased. I wonder whether there needs to be a slight split in that scenario 1 for lots of purchased and subsequently loaned out (i.e. the chelsea model) and those where you're simply adding to your own youngsters development with proper first team football? Just a thought

 

Second one - training reports. I still get the odd message for mid-20's players saying how first team football is aiding their development? They've played well over 200 games (in my most recent example) that statement is just wrong. Perhaps the higher quality of football (now playing in the English premier league) is more accurate?

 

Also - when players are unhappy with training the coach says changing the training to something more suitable would help? OK to what? At least give me some options (that I am free to ignore) and even better some input from the player themselves seeing as they are the unhappy one?

Hey kevgaleuk,

On your second point - I would say that no matter how many games a player has played their development will be aided by continuing to feature in competitive matches. Even a player that has played 200+ matches will stall if they stop playing.

If you have any examples for your third point please do upload them to our FTP and we can take a look for you.

Cheers,
Seb.

[kevgaleuk]

18 minutes ago, Seb Wassell said:

Hey kevgaleuk,

On your second point - I would say that no matter how many games a player has played their development will be aided by continuing to feature in competitive matches. Even a player that has played 200+ matches will stall if they stop playing.

If you have any examples for your third point please do upload them to our FTP and we can take a look for you.

Cheers,
Seb.

I'll take a screenshot the next time or I can upload the game - if I can find the link to how to do so!

 

On the second point - completely agree with that - however this is a player (in the case I was highlighting) who is my first choice left winger, not been out injured has probably been playing 80-90% of all games I play. I think what is driving it is my promotion and the better class of football - so my point was more about perhaps it should say something along those lines rather than just he's developing because he is playing...

[Guest]

3 hours ago, Cougar2010 said:

There is no rule though that states what an opening offer must be IRL.

I can walk into any place that regularly negotiates on items even services and make an offer.  It might get laughed at, it might not but I am free to make that offer.

Within FM and game play terms the club clearly feel the player would be interested in joining them if they can agree a price so it looks like they are either trying to unsettle a player or from previous threads the more likely answer seems to be that is the max they can bid.

If you stopped that sort of offer what difference would it make to the game play for the user?  It would speed things up a little but tbh its not the sort of thing you see all the time from my experience but it does happen from time to time.  Users should never feel frustrated by this sort of offer as they have the tools and right to decline the bids.  The slight negative of getting rid of these offers is that it reduces the transfer activity in a time when we want to see it increased and it takes a little of the ability for a club to unsettle a player (ie they have to have enough to make a minimum bid before trying to unsettle a player).

Overall would this benefit the experience for the user or make it worse? Personally I think its negligible but I would like to think that if you limit the AI offers by making some sort of min/max limit you also have to do that for the human users as well to make it a level playing field.

No idea what benefit it could bring as the bid that you decided was an example of fair negotiating has no additional context detailing the before, during & after stages. I have no idea why you think there cannot be anything wrong with it, there are potential issues for the user & the AI when it comes to thses type of low-ball opening offers & to just dismiss them as part of the process is short-sighted.

[Double0Seven]

Is this a bug? Im playing a 4-1-4-1, I moved one player from MC to AMC then moved him back but my tactical familiraty went down after I moved him back to 4-1-4-1. I didnt change formation yet my team suddenly loses familarity?

[Wells]

@Barside Couldn't say it better.. I mean I won't go and bid 14m for Hazard, doesn't make any sense.. so, the AI should also make sensible offers, at least near players value if not.

[Cougar2010]

53 minutes ago, Barside said:

No idea what benefit it could bring as the bid that you decided was an example of fair negotiating has no additional context detailing the before, during & after stages. I have no idea why you think there cannot be anything wrong with it, there are potential issues for the user & the AI when it comes to thses type of low-ball opening offers & to just dismiss them as part of the process is short-sighted.

Its not short sighted to recognise that IRL a bid can be of any value, a potential buyer is free choose how much is offered and the seller has the right to accept or reject that offer.

I also recognised that it is most likely happening due to the buying club not being able to bid anymore due to budget restrictions.

Within FM a human user is free to make an offer of their choosing which leads to the points that are being discussed:

A) Should the AI be limited in the offers it can make - Would this benefit the user experience or not? and How would it affect the transfer market as a whole?

B) If the AI is limited should a human user be limited as well to level the playing field?

 

Overall like many areas of FM its not a black & white situation its more down to opinion as to whether its acceptable behaviour or not.

 

EDIT

There are also a few sides to the discussion where it works both ways and I'll give an example from my current save to show this:

A few seasons ago Moss were in the Norwegian 2nd Division as a semi pro club, pretty much all players were on a one year part time contract when I got a 16yo ST through in the youth intake (2*CA, 4/5*PA).  When he turned 17yo he signed a two year part time contract and the bids started coming in from the bigger clubs.  His value hovered between £10k & £20k reflecting the two year contract and I stuck an asking price of £1m on him to stave off interest.  With the club breaking even with a little help from the board I wasn't under any pressure to sell him and he was already a rotation first team player with potential to be a star for the club and help them get promoted.  I rejected several offers of between £10k & £20k (+% of next sale) before the board went over my head and accepted a cash offer of £100k.

Now on one side of the fence the AI club made an offer there which was only 10% of my asking price.  If AI managers are coded to not make that low type of offer then the user could simply set high asking prices for every players and never receive any bids which they have to reject.

The next step would be to say that the coding should reflect value & not asking price but if you do that what is the point of having an asking price in the game and it wouldn't stop the low offers for players that users value much higher than the player value.

 

On the other side of the fence the discussion would revolve around should a club be making an offer which is five times the top end of what other players in the division are selling for but again if you limit what an AI manager can offer then its only fair that you limit a human user as well.

 

 

[doIT49]

Someone spoke about reputation of the clubs and transfers. Well, I have an example. I promoted with Leeds United in the 1st season and I tried to buy Jon Toral for free. He asked for a ridicolous wage. 3 mil per year with bonus and all of that. I offered him 1.8 mil/year but he rejected me instantly and after 3 days he signed with Middlesbrough from championship for 800k/year. How is this fair? I'm in the Premier League ffs.

[Double0Seven]

Gonna try again, no one stumbled upon the tactical familiraty bug? 

[Guest]

2 hours ago, Wells said:

@Barside Couldn't say it better.. I mean I won't go and bid 14m for Hazard, doesn't make any sense.. so, the AI should also make sensible offers, at least near players value if not.

If you have a save before the bid is made it's worth posting in the bugs forum, if the AI is trying to unsettle the player it may be an example of a poor attempt that could help make that aspect less open to exploit while if they have offered close to the maximum they can afford or are willing to pay then they probably shoudl focus they attention to more realistic/attainable targets.

Main thing is for the SI team to take a look at the full picture behind the offer.

[phnompenhandy]

3 hours ago, Double0Seven said:

Is this a bug? Im playing a 4-1-4-1, I moved one player from MC to AMC then moved him back but my tactical familiraty went down after I moved him back to 4-1-4-1. I didnt change formation yet my team suddenly loses familarity?

I use a 4-2-3-1 where a couple of players regularly float from MC (AP) to AMC (AP) with no loss of TF. Maybe something else you do with TI?

[kevgaleuk]

6 hours ago, Seb Wassell said:

Hey kevgaleuk,

On your second point - I would say that no matter how many games a player has played their development will be aided by continuing to feature in competitive matches. Even a player that has played 200+ matches will stall if they stop playing.

If you have any examples for your third point please do upload them to our FTP and we can take a look for you.

Cheers,
Seb.

Screenshot...