Chat Does the financial structure bother anyone else?

[Scottish Guy]

As it is, any money for players sold goes straight to the available funds 

Couldn't it be possible, that depending on the size of the club, we could only keep a certain percentage of transfer money? 

One save at Walsall, in league one, I had £19 million to spend, after a load of my best players left in a January transfer window 

It'd make the game far more challenging, if we lost our best players, and had little to no money for replacements. Managers face this all the time in real life. I just think it'd be a big boost for the reality aspect of the game 

Just a few days ago, someone on twitter posted pics of taking York City to the champions league final (spending £275 million during his save), wouldn't it be more enjoyable if we faced the same problems as managers do? 

[Ashez]

Most people's favourite part of FMM is the transfer aspect and finding new players, while I agree the current system can be taken advantage of i'd hate to see it messed with. 

[Kennyd100]

I agree this would go for certain clubs and there is no way York city should be wining the champions league, the thing is there is to much money in the game now esp in England, takes wolves top of championship and signed in 4 or 5 quality Portuguese players some on loan at first but now all signed on perm deals and not really disclousing the fee, said joto's move permanent now from atl Madrid but didn't really say a fee so wolves must have spent 70million at least doing these perm deals and fee for neves etc aswell, possibly keeping fees undisclosed for financial fair play, which P.S.G and Man City have made a mockery of to be honest, so back to your point of York city is there should be abit in game that makes it pretty impossible for that club to spend anywhere near that under financial fair play.

[BatiGoal]

I totally get what you're saying. You might like a related challenge I created couple years ago.

 

[FuddledFox]

2 hours ago, BatiGoal said:

I totally get what you're saying. You might like a related challenge I created couple years ago.

 

Shameless plug?

Bati is right though you can add your own challenges as well by restricting what you spend.

I can see your point and it would be more realistic if the board only made a % of transfer income available for you to spend on transfers based around the size and finances of your club. I think they don't do that because a lot of casual players want to play the game in a Fifa ultimate team way and build a squad of galacticos at their chosen club.

[Ashez]

There is a fine line between realism and what's fun, that's always been FMM's problem as it sometimes forgets it's a game first. 

[phila]

The idea of a transfer budget isnt really real either though. Most clubs dont say to their managers here is X amount of money - go and spend it. Thats a recipe for people spending just for the sake of it. For example at Liverpool, apparently Klopp approaches his boss and says something along the lines of "Id really love this guy for these reasons". The board then decides how much he can spend to get him and away he goes. So the money is there for specific players - he is limited by how much the board thinks that player is worth and by FFP (which by the way is calculated over a number of seasons). IMO The in-game transfer budget is FMM approximation of how FFP would work for that club and streamlines the process.

[Jack]

I'd love for the option to invest transfer money into your club's infrastructure. It'd be tricky to do and the scale of the game wouldn't allow you to invest into many things but it'd be a pleasant change.

[BatiGoal]

11 hours ago, Ashez said:

There is a fine line between realism and what's fun, that's always been FMM's problem as it sometimes forgets it's a game first. 

That's no question the most difficult part to get right. How to make it fun yet realistic, challenging and appealing enough for us, the players. 

Think of goals for example, in real life 1KCs are extremely rare, in FMM extremely common, would you "give up" 1KCs for a more realistic game? I know the general player wouldn't appreciate it. 

More on topic, no matter how small the club, it's not too hard to bring the worst or poorest team all the way up to the top division within a decade. Again, very common in FMM but rare in real life. Would you give this up too for a game closer to reality? General players would hate it and probably seek managerial success on a new medium if it came to that point. 

So you're right, there's a fine line between fun and realism.

[rafa]

The financial system in FMM18 is really weak. Basically, you can increase your wage budget exponentially every season. I don't think the game should be complicated with financial decisions, but a more solid economics system shouldn't be too hard to accomplish.

It would be nice if teams had a projected budget for the season, based on the team size and reputation and which competitions they're in. Based on that and their current wage budget, money should be made available for transfer funds. This should be updated every season start.

A few things could be added, like stats on the financial screen including sponsorship income, how many years until the current sponsorship deals run out, etc.

A revamped finance system would also allow for different challenges, like taking up a Premier League club that has been relegated and suddenly sees itself without the major TV income, which would force the manager to sell out and reduce the wage budget.

Or a small team that makes strides into the Champions League having a surplus of cash at the new season due to prizes, increased TV revenue, increased number of tickets sold, etc.

I honestly don't understand why this system hasn't been improved in some many years. Hopefully FMM19 does a better job

[rafa]

13 hours ago, Jack said:

I'd love for the option to invest transfer money into your club's infrastructure. It'd be tricky to do and the scale of the game wouldn't allow you to invest into many things but it'd be a pleasant change.

I don't see why this is tricky. It's just a budget spreadsheet. A system where the club has some fixed expenses (wages, facilities maintenance, some overhead costs) and some fixed incomes (tickets, prize money, sponsorship).

That is enough to create a budget, and this budget should be flexible to tweak transfer budget, wage budget and investment in infrastructure).

[BatiGoal]

1 hour ago, rafa said:

It would be nice if teams had a projected budget for the season, based on the team size and reputation and which competitions they're in. Based on that and their current wage budget, money should be made available for transfer funds. This should be updated every season start.

Spot on. Add the club's most recent successes to that and I think we'd see a major improvement over what we have right now. Wouldn't be so hard, would it? 

[Connor1874]

For me, managing a smaller club is all about attention to financial detail and you’re right, it’s a bit too easy on FMM.

When playing on FM, you can raise funds by playing glamour friendlies, gate receipts, prize money etc. All of which have little or no value at all in FMM. 

[Scottish Guy]

On 14/02/2018 at 11:15, Ashez said:

Most people's favourite part of FMM is the transfer aspect and finding new players, while I agree the current system can be taken advantage of i'd hate to see it messed with. 

I understand that transfers are a big drawing point, but wouldn't realistic budgets make the game much better? 

This site, and twitter are full of comments from people saying that the game is too easy, but they've either signed current superstars, or well known 'wonder kids'

Taking a team from lower divisions to the top league should be a real achievement, if possible at all, but the transfer system makes it far too easy 

I don't know if you use twitter, but someone had shown pictures of his Blyth Spartans team, currently enjoying a two season unbeaten run in the Premier league,, someone else had spent £1.4 billion during his career, both said the game was easy. 

[Scottish Guy]

On 14/02/2018 at 12:19, BatiGoal said:

I totally get what you're saying. You might like a related challenge I created couple years ago.

 

Thanks, I'll try it out while waiting for the latest transfer update 

[Scottish Guy]

On 15/02/2018 at 13:47, Connor1874 said:

For me, managing a smaller club is all about attention to financial detail and you’re right, it’s a bit too easy on FMM.

When playing on FM, you can raise funds by playing glamour friendlies, gate receipts, prize money etc. All of which have little or no value at all in FMM. 

Yeah it'd be a big bonus, especially as it seems like it could fit in the game. Clubs get a small bonus for "giant killing" in competitions, so prize money, especially from European competitions would be great 

[Scottish Guy]

On 14/02/2018 at 14:36, FuddledFox said:

 

I can see your point and it would be more realistic if the board only made a % of transfer income available for you to spend on transfers based around the size and finances of your club. I think they don't do that because a lot of casual players want to play the game in a Fifa ultimate team way and build a squad of galacticos at their chosen club.

I can see why people enjoy that, but it's not realistic when Blyth Spartans, Poole Town and York City etc dominate the Champions League (after spending hundreds of millions) 

Wouldn't a Galactico scenario be a better challenge, where players are given £50-100 million each season, but success is demanded or they're quickly fired? 

[Ashez]

17 minutes ago, Scottish Guy said:

Yeah it'd be a big bonus, especially as it seems like it could fit in the game. Clubs get a small bonus for "giant killing" in competitions, so prize money, especially from European competitions would be great 

The prize money is there, it's just given as your transfer budget instead of being broken down.