[[Uruguay] Data Issues]

I noticed today that we no longer have the Clubs' nicknames in the game. Weren't they there in previous FMs?

Considering recent events, I assume that some can be seen as problematic (looking at you, Liverpool), is that the reason not to have them all in game?

[[Uruguay] Data Issues]

On 27/12/2020 at 16:40, Kaniko Ramone said:

I guess it's Santiago Martínez? Or maybe Santiago Ostolaza?

That was Santiago Martínez indeed, I got mixed in the list with Maxi Rodríguez there. 

The people in your last post, I'm too young to rate some of them (and I don't come from a Wanderers family personally), but overall the rest look OK, Gerardo Alcoba's rating should probably increase a bit given that he's come back now and that we're doing good with him as captain (this always thinking of next year's edition). In addition, I think that taking those ratings into account, Muslera's should raise to a 10-12, as we have a special affection for him, not only because he's one of the most successful goalkeepers that we ever produced, but also because he's always stated publicly that he wants to end his career at Wanderers (instead of Nacional, for example).

I have mixed feelings about Betito Acosta and Aguirre, since they became more prominent figures at and of Peñarol after Wanderers than they were probably for us.

I get your point about the former icons interacting with the media about Wanderers in game, I just used the editor to decrease Francescoli to 30 because it was getting annoying seeing him speak about Wanderers every ingame weekend.

[[Uruguay] Data Issues]

12 hours ago, Kaniko Ramone said:

It's always very helpful to have this information first hand from club's supporters, so it will be fixed inmediately.
From 1-20 in "likeness", which rating do you suggest for:
- Pablo Bengoechea
- Enzo Francescoli
- Sergio Blanco
- Chifle Barrios
- any body else

Are any of those (or any other) worth the status of Legend?
 

20 for Tito Borjas, Obdulio and Barrios, and legends the three of them

17 for Blanco

15 for Francescoli

14 Daniel Carreño, Mauricio Nanni 

13 Alfredo Arias

10 Ronald and Julio Ramírez, Maximiliano Olivera, Guzmán Pereira, Maximiliano Rodríguez Maeso, Adrián Colombino and Sebastián Eguren

8 Santiago Rodríguez, Diego Riolfo, Rodrigo Pastorini, Gastón Bueno and Ignacio María González Gatti

maybe 5 for Bengoechea, Fernando Muslera, Pablo García, etc.

On the disliked personnel there is only two I can think of right now and that's Gastón Rodríguez Maeso with a -20ish and Emanuel Gularte with a -15ish.

In terms of new stadium names, Obulio Varela should probably come unticked by default in the list, as we already have Villa Española's with that name. If Wanderers ever builds a new stadium and names it after a club legend it would be most likely René Tito Borjas, unless Blanco returns now to the club and we win the Clausura and this season's Uruguayo, but that will be info for next year's edition  

[[Uruguay] Data Issues]

Hey @Kaniko Ramone this is not an issue but rather a nuance.

Can we stop having Francescoli and Bengoechea as Montevideo Wanderers' icons for future editions? The thing is that, although we are proud of them being products of our youth system/their early career days, neither of them have been interested in Wanderers at all in recent decades or ever, so having them speaking about Wanderers' latest form is weird (I know this is a very niche thing, but bear with me). On the other hand, having people like Chapita Blanco or Chifle Barrios speaking about Wanderers is extremely more common in real life (you can see Blanco supporting Wanderers on Twitter even as a Torque player nowadays, not to talk about el Chifle being part of the Wanderers board and its football committee as of writing this).

Could this be a thing for future editions? Glad to help in the research for other clubs and this sort of thing too.

[[Uruguay] (Official) League Specific Issues]

On 21/11/2020 at 03:19, Kaniko Ramone said:

Thanks for reporting.
This has been discussed many times.

Apertura, Intermedio and Clausura are just part of the Uruguayan First Division championship, so, while in real life there's a celebration, we couldn't find a good balance in game between this an reality.

For instance, if we set this stages as isolated tournaments, in game, clubs which battle for the title (Nacional, Peñarol and to less extent Danubio and Defensor Sporting) would consider winning one of those stages as an achieve itself, instead of just a step of to the title.
Like Danubio or Defensor Sporting feeling accomplished if they just win Apertura but gets defeated in the championship final legs. This is even less realistic if this happens to Peñarol and Nacional.

So, while in real life there's a praise for winning Apertura, Intermedio and Clausura, what really matters is winning the First Division itself.

Hope it makes sense when reading out loud.

Couldn't we argue, nowadays and with very recent evidence, that these short tournaments are actually important for Peñarol and Nacional as well? Munúa lost the final for the Apertura and got sacked, that means that for Nacional, as it is for the vast majority of teams in the league the short tournaments are important.

Nothing to be changed in this rather failed edition of the game for a league like the Uruguayan one (not your fault Kaniko), but to bear in mind for FM22.

[Average ratings = way too low]

It happens the other way around too. Whenever a player scores a screamer his rating ends up being high no matter what happens throughout the match.

In the PKM attached Marcelo Palau scores from a good long distance shot in the 5th minute (1:1). He gets an instant 8.3 then. His team ends up losing the match 1:7. Everybody gets the logical very low ratings except for Palau, who ends with the same 8.3 he got for his 5th minute goal.

Nacional (PAR) - Wanderers (Palau).pkm

[[FM19] French Lingerie - Acre State, Brazil]

Jimbo, you're the Bielsa of my FM world. Loved reading through the search for explanations for your AMR lack of creativity and the research on youth development. Keep it up!

[Football Manager 2017 17.3.0 Official Feedback Thread]

47 minutes ago, HUNT3R said:

If the SI guys could, they would have made it save compatible.

It's the usual thing for issues like these not to be save compatible though, unfortunately.

I supposed so  

Maybe paying a little more attention before FM18's release to those competition-related bugs can avoid all these troubles and frustration we're having. I mean, for example, the Uruguayan Primera División had the same bug on the release version of FM16 than it had in this FM17 one (I played over 1600 hours with that FM16 release version and all its bugs in an only save, and plan to do the same with FM17), I feel it was something that could have been avoided by looking more closely to last edition(s) bugs during the testing.

[Football Manager 2017 17.3.0 Official Feedback Thread]

Is there no way to make this update save-compatible? This is not a game you play casually, we can't just start a new save whenever you guys fix the issues with the half-baked product you released in November (that was 4 months ago!).

[Football Manager 2017 17.3.0 Official Feedback Thread]

Are the Libertadores and Uruguayan Primera DIvision fixes save compatible? Or should I start a new save?