Playing Time

[Gorgeous_Joe]

They really need to fix this, it's just plain stupid. I'm nearly at the end of my current season and one of my star players is concerned about his playing time, despite the fact that he has so far played 44 games! WTF?!?!

In fact only my main GK has played more games at 47 and his playing time is only satisfied, seriously?!?! WTF?!?!

Basically if you put anyone as a STAR player it ****s up the game mechanics, clearly.

Or can someone explain the thinking behind this?

In fact, the only player who is "DELIGHTED" with his game time is a squad player with 29 games played, many from the bench.

There is an IMPORTANT player with 45 games played who is "HAPPY" with his game time.

What an utterly garbage system

and yes everyone has an overall happiness of "DELIGHTED" but it's just another stupid little game mechanic that needs to be addressed.

[𝔓𝔲𝔰𝔥𝔶]

He is simply pressuring you to leave the club or to get your hands on the money and want a better contract, these are signs of that lol , for mercenary stars playing more than 40 games is not enough , try to sell it for a million dollar price and try to find a better one for half the price 😁

[fc.cadoni]

There is a difference between how many matches played and how many matches have started in XI and not coming from the bench. There is a difference between Agreed Playing Time, Actual Playing Time and Expected in Next 5 Matches.

Star or Important Playing Time should be only 1 or 2 players max IMHO. Everyone else with Regular or Impact Sub.

[Gorgeous_Joe]

Originally posted by fc.cadoni:

There is a difference between how many matches played and how many matches have started in XI and not coming from the bench. There is a difference between Agreed Playing Time, Actual Playing Time and Expected in Next 5 Matches.

Star or Important Playing Time should be only 1 or 2 players max IMHO. Everyone else with Regular or Impact Sub.

-----
This comment links in nicely with another of my posts regarding contract negotiations and just how stupid they are too

ME: Would you accept Squad player?
AGENT: NO, Star player, don't test my patience.
ME: Would you accept First Team player?
AGENT: I WARNED YOU! We now refuse to negotiate with you any further, I asked you to be reasonable.
ME: Stares at the screen thinking WTF.......

So everyone is a star player or they leave the club

[Garth Fartuncle]

This, alas, is the sad truth and it is utterly stupid. Also not the most realistic take on how contracts are negotiated. Well done SI!

[fc.cadoni]

Originally posted by Gorgeous_Joe:

Originally posted by fc.cadoni:

There is a difference between how many matches played and how many matches have started in XI and not coming from the bench. There is a difference between Agreed Playing Time, Actual Playing Time and Expected in Next 5 Matches.

Star or Important Playing Time should be only 1 or 2 players max IMHO. Everyone else with Regular or Impact Sub.

-----
This comment links in nicely with another of my posts regarding contract negotiations and just how stupid they are too

ME: Would you accept Squad player?
AGENT: NO, Star player, don't test my patience.
ME: Would you accept First Team player?
AGENT: I WARNED YOU! We now refuse to negotiate with you any further, I asked you to be reasonable.
ME: Stares at the screen thinking WTF.......

So everyone is a star player or they leave the club

Well, you have to deal with it or look elsewhere. Personally, I don't have such problems because I am giving the playing time which I have agreed between club - agent - player. When I am approaching players which is not going to be my regular first XI, I want him as coming from bench and agent - player asks to be regular or important, then I am looking for someone else. ;)

[𝔓𝔲𝔰𝔥𝔶]

The problem is that the games for the cups are not counted as played, they complain based on the games played for the League, I stopped guiding myself by the games as starters, now I guide myself by the total minutes played in my point of view, even so they still complain, maybe the best thing for them is to play all the games unless they get injured.
- What's more annoying is having our assistants constantly advising us to increase the agreed game time with the players knowing that if we do so it will be a nightmare.

[fc.cadoni]

Originally posted by 𝔓𝔲𝔰𝔥𝔶:

The problem is that the games for the cups are not counted as played, they complain based on the games played for the League, I stopped guiding myself by the games as starters, now I guide myself by the total minutes played in my point of view, even so they still complain, maybe the best thing for them is to play all the games unless they get injured.
- What's more annoying is having our assistants constantly advising us to increase the agreed game time with the players knowing that if we do so it will be a nightmare.

Best is to avoid implement any advice from background staff. You are smarter from them and you can do it better IMHO.

What matters, is the starting XI. A Star player will demand - expect to start in every game; more than in 95% of total matches. Star or Important must be rare. Even an Squad (agreed) player will start to complain about his playing time, if you bring him only from the bench.

Let's say you have a season with 41 matches:

Star: 30-35 matches
Important: 25-30 matches
Regular: 20-25 matches
Squad: 15-20 matches
Impact Sub: 10-15 matches
Fringe: 5-10 matches
Breakthrough: 5-10 matches

Those starting in first XI, not as subs.

[Frown Syndrome]

It's the worst part of the game, adds annoyance rather than depth. Young players playing every game, then crying to want to leave to join a bigger club they almost never end up playing for.

[Damedius]

The real problem in my opinion is that SI spends the majority of their time making the Matches look pretty and never bother to improve all the systems they have added over the years.

The have ignored all the feedback we have provided on the official forums for years. The only thing they acknowledged during FM 24 Beta was the AI not rotating squads. As you can see despite acknowledging it they failed to do anything about it.

To be fair maybe the people making the game aren't making the decisions. It could be other people who figure that making the AI better or improving the systems in the game is a waste of time and resources. That the most important hing is to make the game as pretty as possible.

Who knows, they could be right. Maybe the majority of the people who play these games don't play enough to notice that at lot of things in the game don't really work. Maybe the console version is more popular and the majority of people playing, play the game more casually.

All I know is that it's frustrating for me that the things that a lot of people have been talking about for years have never been improved. It's why I stopped buying new versions of the game. I'll generally just Beta test the newest version, find out nothing has changed and go back to playing the last version I bought.