[retired_ellat3083]

It's a completely new implementation of an old feature so SI should be given time to sort it. Yes, I agree that in it's current state it's pretty much gone t*ts up (I too have experienced this when I was promoted twice in four seasons, getting the team to their highest EVER league finish on the way. Yet still my confidence remained at satisfied even though I am currently 6th in the league with a media prediction of 24th) and is unrealistic to a degree.

However, I have 100% confidence in SI to fix this, be it in a patch or new version, it will be fixed.

[leftfoot]

Off topic for the moment but in responding to this thread I’ve noticed how atrocious the search function is on these forums. I tried using the advanced search option and it just kept freezing up.

Ched the one man critiquing machine

Back on topic I agree with everything you’ve said :thup: and I’ve posted my opinions on it in previous threads. Here’s some of the threads to add to the evidence that some people aren’t pleased with the lack of intelligence in board opinions. But as you noted after every point they seem like pretty obvious potential scenarios to code for which gives me the impression that this section of the code was put together at the last minute or just not vigorously tested (just my opinion).

Also the fact that these issues were raised even within the demo and were not adjusted for the patch suggests it is pretty low down on the list of priorities.

- Lack of judgement of opposition in cup competitions relative to expectations, as well as prioritising of competitions (check the date of this post and it gives you an idea of how far down the list of priorities this issue is, assuming this was noted by testers)
http://community.sigames.com/eve/for...1/m/6232093943

- Board sending club into debt due to outlay on investment (stadiums/grounds keeping) and blaming the manager
http://community.sigames.com/eve/for...1/m/8862035473
http://community.sigames.com/eve/for...1/m/1142008373

- Board selling of players for low prices (relates to finances confidence)
http://community.sigames.com/eve/for...1/m/2302070653

- Board judging managers based on financial situation created by predecessors:-http://community.sigames.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/521102691/m/4682086163

I wonder is there no way to create an extra bit of code that records the balance at the time a manager is hired and then compare the balance relative to this?

It could be a simple addition so the board effectively judge the balance as being at 0 at the moment the manager is hired. So take the current bank balance in the memory and add the balance at the time the manager is hired. Then use this value to evaluate financial performance. This could be applied only when a club is in the red to avoid potential problems when a human manager takes over at a club with a healthy balance.

Not sure if that makes sense in words so maybe a numerical example would better illustrate:-

Get offered and accept a job at Club A. At the time I accept their balance is -5m. The code checks if it is a negative value and if it is it records it. Say 1 month in the balance has increased to -2m. The board finance confidence code would instead make an evaluation of -2m -(-5m) = 3m, and then recognises that you have in fact contributed to generating 3m in profits since you took the job. Thus their statement in the confidence section might read 'Although the board is still concerned with the current balance, we are pleased with your efforts to reduce this and hope that you continue your frugal approach to managing the finances'. It could be made a little more complex and actually be assigned a % reduction of the debt and then the statement could have a range of emotions e.g. disappointed, pleased, delighted etc.

Or it could be stated at the time of the job offer that one of the expectations of the board is that the manager ensures that the club is running a positive balance within x number of years? It could be like the long term competition expectations. This way at least the human manager knows what to expect. Having never been in that situation myself I don't know if it is in the game already so if it is apologies.

The above paragraph might be how it would be implemented within the current system where the manager is blamed financially for decisions the board make (new stadiums in particular). In the case of ultra realism it could be an expectation that the manager meets a net transfer spend target so as to contribute to running down the debt.

Also relating to this is the budgets a particular chairman assigns. Sure their individual characteristics should reflect how large the budget is and how tightly they expect you to control it (pretty easily implemented I would think). But if you are under your wage budget by a reasonable percentage and have a positive cashflow from transfers then that should be enough to make any board happy with your financial impact on the club. Unless reducing the debt by a certain amount was part of your remit when accepting the job and your sales of players weren't sufficient.

- Fan/Board confidence in signings irrespective of your intentions with said signing, plus not being able to justify the signing to reduce their concerns. Also the lack of response from the board/fans when players are sold:-
http://community.sigames.com/eve/for...1/m/8802075373

[retired_hartinimaswar]

A spot on thread mate :thup:

[retired_ComfyRest]

Quality post Ched! :thup:

The board confidence is really unrealistic.
Ideal for cup games would be based on match by match goals instead of what it is now.
Maybe once in a while they could demand to reach a certain goal when your team didn't do well in the cups for some time.
But it's totally unacceptable to win everything all the time with top teams.
Even the smaller teams have pretty high expectations imo.

I'm afraid it isn't so simple to recreate a flexible board into the game, but yes in the past this feature was more balanced and not so demanding, especially in 07.

I think 3 days ago i wouldn't had agreed with you, but just 2 days ago i got sacked in my Leeds game after bringing them back into Europe but i failed to do well in the FA and league cup.
It really disappointed me after having fun in my Leeds game.

I also totally agree on the new signings issue.
Fans can be disappointed yes, but i do think this shouldn't affect board confidence so much as it is now unless they really are useless and expensive.
As for youngsters:
Imo it would be perfect if fans would only react on new signings when they are considered at least rotation players.

Selling players:
This is something that i wouldn't touch to much.
We must have a chance to offload a bad signing without to much punishment.
If this is getting to strict then imo this could become also an issue.
On the other hand when selling a player with to much loss this should have consequences in confidence.

[retired_hennapayne]

well done on the thread. so true.

[My_Evo]

Originally posted by RSCA4Ever:
Ideal for cup games would be based on match by match goals instead of what it is now.

No. The ideal is as it is now, but with the board capable of recognising a bad draw.

They also need to be able to prioritise better "We'd like you to reach the semi-finals of the league cup, but feel your priority should be the Premier League and Champions League"

I'm afraid it isn't so simple to recreate a flexible board into the game, but yes in the past this feature was more balanced and not so demanding, especially in 07.

This is a new feature.

Imo it would be perfect if fans would only react on new signings when they are considered at least rotation players.

I've no problem with fans having an opinion on youngsters, they just have to have opinions on them AS youngsters, not treat them like first teamers.

[retired_ComfyRest]

Originally posted by Dave C:

This is a new feature.

It is a new feature in the state as it is now yes, but it was always a hidden feature in all of the FM games!
If you didn't do well, you didn't get a new contract.
I call that board confidence.

[leftfoot]

originally posted by RSCA4Ever:-

I'm afraid it isn't so simple to recreate a flexible board into the game

If you are a programmer by profession and what I write sounds like me talking through my arse feel free to flame me. But would it not be simple enough to create a reference to the competition and the reputation of the opposition faced in said competition.

I can look at a fixture in the near future and it appears on screen stating the competition and the opposition. So why can’t the board reference these stored values when judging a result?

Could you not assign a code to each competition that separates them by country.

For example:-

1. Assign the English League Cup a value, ENG 03
2. Assign each round a value, ENG 03_a where a is a value from 01 to 08 with
1st Round = 01
2nd Round = 02
3rd Round = 03
4th round = 04
QF = 05
SF = 06
Final = 07
Winner = 08
3. Board of Team A is assigned expectations based on these values, so if the board expects you to reach the 4th round the value 04 is stored as ‘expected performance’.
4. Team A, reputation a, faces Team B, reputation b, in 3rd round, value 03.
5. Team B defeats Team A. The value representing what round of the League cup Team A reached is stored as ‘actual performance’, in this case 03
6. Board of team A compares performance versus expected to give a value termed ‘general competition confidence’ which = (expected performance) - (actual performance).
7. Board of team A compares the reputation of Team A to the team that defeated them, Team B.
‘Reputation B’ – ‘Reputation A’ = ‘Club Status Differential’
8. Board of Team A makes a judgement on the level of performance. This could be calculated in the same way the after match statements are decided (like the ‘should have won this easily’ that is the bane of so many FMer’s experiences).
9. Combine 6, 7 and 8 in a calculation to determine the board’s response thus incorporating the 3 main factors:-

(i) the board’s expectations in the competition
(ii) the quality of the opposition faced
(iii) the actual match performance

Given the hour of the morning my brain isn’t functioning well enough to spot the potential for bugs in that simplistic sequence but I would hope that someone who is employed as a programmer with a company that develops one of the top selling PC games could come up with something similar but more efficient and less buggy.