Ping: Marc Vaughn

[Desnudo]

Hi Marc,

I was hoping you might be able to offer some insight into the issues encountered with scouting and your assistant manager evaluations causing wages to be restricted when attempting to sign players. As an example, I currently have $57 million US in the bank, a $5.6 million/annum max salary allowed and yet I can't offer players more than $1.1 mil./annum because my asst. mgr. doesn't rate them. He doesn't rate anyone as signable and I've tried to sign dozens of players. Never mind losing all my stars because I can't afford to re-up their contracts. It's really starting to get frustrating. Here's a thread from the SI board:

Thread

I was hoping to get an official response because I haven't seen any on the SI board. I'm mainly wondering if this is an acknowledged issue that SI is working on. Thank you.

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by Desnudo

Hi Marc,

I was hoping you might be able to offer some insight into the issues encountered with scouting and your assistant manager evaluations causing wages to be restricted when attempting to sign players. As an example, I currently have $57 million US in the bank, a $5.6 million/annum max salary allowed and yet I can't offer players more than $1.1 mil./annum because my asst. mgr. doesn't rate them. He doesn't rate anyone as signable and I've tried to sign dozens of players. Never mind losing all my stars because I can't afford to re-up their contracts. It's really starting to get frustrating. Here's a thread from the SI board:

Thread

I was hoping to get an official response because I haven't seen any on the SI board. I'm mainly wondering if this is an acknowledged issue that SI is working on. Thank you.

Why don't you just fire your assman then?

[Desnudo]

Well the asst. mgr. is just representing the board's views. I've tried firing him and still can't offer any wages above what is mentioned. Which is nonsensical since they are the ones setting the wage limit in the first place. And I'm talking about trying to sign quality, known internationals who end up signing with other first rate teams.

Edit: And I do see this as a showstopping issue since it caps your game by severely limiting who you can sign. Anyone who likes to play the "take the conference team to the EPL" style is going to be out of luck once they get there, or even to the 1st or ECL. With wages stuck so low there's no possible chance of long term success.

At the end of my 2nd season in the EPL I'm going to lose half my team, around 10-11 players because I can't offer them more than a pittance of what they are worth.

[sovereignstar]

No! I'm not the Assman.

[Chief Rum]

I think you need to seriously consider then if your board wants to compete, althouhg I, too, have run into situations where it seems they are entirely too stingy with the annual wage levels for individual players.

I would like to see this addressed a bit, too, as an outside of the game fix, but within the game, maybe you ought to consider an ultimatum or you leave (and if they fire you, try to go to a team with a more generous board).

CR

[Desnudo]

Originally Posted by Chief Rum

I think you need to seriously consider then if your board wants to compete, althouhg I, too, have run into situations where it seems they are entirely too stingy with the annual wage levels for individual players.

I would like to see this addressed a bit, too, as an outside of the game fix, but within the game, maybe you ought to consider an ultimatum or you leave (and if they fire you, try to go to a team with a more generous board).

CR

But the thing is, the listed wage max is $5.6 million for one person. So obviously somethings wrong. Either they aren't "really" offering to let me me use up to that amount or it's a bug. Since they don't rate anyone, and I mean anyone, I could try and sign Wayne Rooney or whoever, as worthwhile signings, I think it's a bug.

Additionally, since I'm $30 million below my max wage budget, I could go out and sign 30 $1 million hosers and that would be just fine with them.

Forgot to add that if the player is below 20-21, it doesn't matter if he's listed as a wonderkid, I can't offer over $200K/per.

Anyway, I suppose I'll just look at this as a little (or large) extra challenge.

[Desnudo]

Dola, an example for my own edification:

Fred

Fred2

Team Finance

Team Wage Budget

So apparently my board considers anyone I go after either a backup or a youngster and doesn't classify them as anything else.

[Marc Vaughan]

I'll run some extra checks on this - but its likely you've got an unambitious board who simply think you can achieve without splashng out on wages (especially if you've done so before) - hence they'll restrict wages unless 100% behind a signing ....

[Marc Vaughan]

PS. Yes I need to improve the board feedback in this area so people can tell whats going on better ...

[Desnudo]

Originally Posted by Marc Vaughan

I'll run some extra checks on this - but its likely you've got an unambitious board who simply think you can achieve without splashng out on wages (especially if you've done so before) - hence they'll restrict wages unless 100% behind a signing ....

Thanks for the feedback Marc. What I'm wondering is why my allowed max per player so high then? They're basically telling me I can spend over $5 million/year for a player, but then don't let me. I'm trying to sign top flight players, so it's difficult for me to understand why even an unambitious board would restrict my wages so harshly (when the salary screen indicates differently). Or tell me that the player isn't worth signing. Thanks again for looking into this.

[Desnudo]

Would the scouts not correctly assessing talent have a correlation here? They seem to uniformly think that no one is good enough for my team.

Example with a player who has CA/PA of 187 and whom Chelsea signed after I was unable to offer over backup level wages:

Right

Come on