Players signing with AI teams for less money makes FM unplayable.

[Four3Three]

Title says it all.  I'm playing FM23.

 

What the actual **** do I have to do to sign a player?  Offered a player who would be a 2.5 star player on my team 1.4/1.5 times as much money as the team he signed for.  Offered him "star player" status.. it's ludicrous.  

[turnip]

Players have their own reasons for wanting to sign for, or not sign for, specific clubs. If you get turned down, there's often a bit of blurb explaining why (e.g. "Frank Bobson said it was an easy decision to make as  he felt the squad at Doncaster Rovers was much stronger", or something like that). 

And just generally, the better the reputation of your manager and your club, the more likely it is a player will choose your club over another. 

 

Also, though, why would you offer a 2.5 star player (bang-average for your team) "Star Player" status? 

[scythian12]

As explained above, usually they simply go for the higher rep / stronger squad club.

Something you have not mentioned whether you removed any promises or clauses they were asking for. The transfer AI evaluates these clauses as well and puts a certain importance to them (I assume by pseudo-monetary value). I can easily imagine a low release clause or a shorter contract that has been agreed at the other club presents so much more flexibility for the player to be independent of the contracting club in his career choices and hence potential for higher earnings later down the line that it can make a lower salary in the short-term make it worth it.

Part of their wage demand algorithm is peeking at your open transfer / wage budget and asking for a certain portion of it, depending on their personality and prospective squad status. Now, this is not particularly well researched or supported, I have the personal impression sometimes they will also go for a lower rep club if the squad status and _wage budget portion_ (not absolute) salary is higher. So the other club had less money, yet shelled out more on him in relation to their budget, which indicates he would be a more important asset for them.

Edited August 30 by scythian12

[whatsupdoc]

Unplayable is a bit much... 

Signing good players has not been a problem for me. Occasionally I'll get beaten by a nonsense offer. More often by an offer with higher playing time but a lower wage. 

In either case it's easy enough to get someone else in.

[HUNT3R]

There are a lot of factors that goes into a player's decision making here. 

It will depend on things like how much money the club has and the standard of living in the area. The player will also take into consideration how much other players at the club (and compare it to their squad status and ability) are getting paid and the reputation of the club. 

Why are you offering Star Player status to a 2.5* player?

[Mobius]

3 minutes ago, HUNT3R said:

There are a lot of factors that goes into a player's decision making here. 

It will depend on things like how much money the club has and the standard of living in the area. The player will also take into consideration how much other players at the club (and compare it to their squad status and ability) are getting paid and the reputation of the club. 

I didn't realise the game went into that much complexity for transfers, that is pretty cool. I didn't even realise that standard of living of areas was coded into the game.

[Dagenham_Dave]

FM player can't sign whoever he wants as in-game player wants to join another team and the game is 'unplayable'. 

[scythian12]

3 hours ago, Mobius said:

I didn't realise the game went into that much complexity for transfers, that is pretty cool. I didn't even realise that standard of living of areas was coded into the game.

You have to take that FM quality of living index with a pinch of salt - Luton has 6/20 relative to other places in England, which is 5 too high.

Edited August 30 by scythian12

[turnip]

It's also true that Wolves have a small squad because they have to pay everyone at least 3x what any other Premier League team would, so the players would come to Wolverhampton

[bartex55]

I have seen this complaint many times, but in most cases it turns out to be a bug of incorrectly presented information. There is this message you get when a player rejects your offer and chooses another club instead. It gives you the details of the contract he accepted, but in fact it displays information about his old contract with his previous club. If you go to his profile, you can see his actual wages and it will probably be higher than what you offered.

[podunkboy]

I long ago accepted that I will only acquire about 20% of the players I want, the rest I give them a silly nickname and spend my virtual career making their lives miserable. If you can't accept that, buy the editor, transfer the player against their will to your club (and compensate the losing club adequately) and play on. It's your game, play it the way you want to, whether it's realistic or not. 

[NineCloudNine]

On 01/09/2024 at 21:05, podunkboy said:

I long ago accepted that I will only acquire about 20% of the players I want, the rest I give them a silly nickname and spend my virtual career making their lives miserable. If you can't accept that, buy the editor, transfer the player against their will to your club (and compensate the losing club adequately) and play on. It's your game, play it the way you want to, whether it's realistic or not. 

Getting around 20% of the players you want would make you a very good DoF in real life. I suspect only the very biggest clubs exceed that. 

[MrPompey]

On 29/08/2024 at 20:07, turnip said:

Players have their own reasons for wanting to sign for, or not sign for, specific clubs. If you get turned down, there's often a bit of blurb explaining why (e.g. "Frank Bobson said it was an easy decision to make as  he felt the squad at Doncaster Rovers was much stronger", or something like that). 

And just generally, the better the reputation of your manager and your club, the more likely it is a player will choose your club over another. 

 

Also, though, why would you offer a 2.5 star player (bang-average for your team) "Star Player" status? 

you are still unlikely to get an  player turning down a contract yet accepting a 50% lower wage from a similarly sized club, I agree with the OP that in many instances it just wouldnt happen irl

[NineCloudNine]

On 01/09/2024 at 16:27, bartex55 said:

I have seen this complaint many times, but in most cases it turns out to be a bug of incorrectly presented information. There is this message you get when a player rejects your offer and chooses another club instead. It gives you the details of the contract he accepted, but in fact it displays information about his old contract with his previous club. If you go to his profile, you can see his actual wages and it will probably be higher than what you offered.

Bumping this reply since it seems some people didn’t read it 👍🏻

[Sunstrikuuu]

On 29/08/2024 at 15:07, turnip said:

Players have their own reasons for wanting to sign for, or not sign for, specific clubs. If you get turned down, there's often a bit of blurb explaining why (e.g. "Frank Bobson said it was an easy decision to make as  he felt the squad at Doncaster Rovers was much stronger", or something like that).

A lot of those blurbs are dubious, to put it mildly.  Players sign for less money because the money was too good to turn down.  They sign contracts with teams to be closer to home that are actually further away, or for superior development opportunities with teams that have gluts of players in their position.  @Weston, I think, did a bunch of great work submitting bug reports related to these blurbs in 2023 or 2022.

 

On 01/09/2024 at 11:27, bartex55 said:

I have seen this complaint many times, but in most cases it turns out to be a bug of incorrectly presented information. There is this message you get when a player rejects your offer and chooses another club instead. It gives you the details of the contract he accepted, but in fact it displays information about his old contract with his previous club. If you go to his profile, you can see his actual wages and it will probably be higher than what you offered.

In most cases, but not all -- just the other day I had Franck Kessie reject my £90,000/week offer to take a £47,500/week offer; his previous contract was £550,000/week in the Saudi Pro League.

Edited September 3 by Sunstrikuuu

[XaW]

4 hours ago, Sunstrikuuu said:

just the other day I had Franck Kessie reject my £90,000/week offer to take a £47,500/week offer; his previous contract was £550,000/week in the Saudi Pro League.

What country are you in vs what country did he join? Players take tax percentage into consideration. Standard of living such can also impact things, in addition to how attractive the city the club is located is (London vs smaller cities for example).

Also, bonuses, if they gave lower weekly wage and massive bonuses that was likely to trigger, his wage might be higher.

Also also, playing time promise. Some players value this higher than wages.

So what was the comment on the signing, like the post you quoted? What did it say the reason was?

There are million factors other than just the weekly wage that decides where players go. If you or anyone else have see a transfer to another club you don't understand, even reading the signing message, then post them as potential bugs in the bug tracker and let SI take a look.