Sep 11

1.3 Wage Related Changes – A Breakdown


A number of changes to the wages system are introduced in 1.3, some of them have been met with applause others with contempt. A large number of items on the change lists will pass by unnoticed by most by users, but when it comes to anything that will affect the finances of their clubs you can be sure the better managers will scrutinise every facet of it.

1.3 has a few and while most are beneficial to all, one in particular may increase the costs of running the better clubs. The following bug fix created mass hysteria in the forums this week:

Adjusted wage demands to more closely reflect player reputation and attributes. As a result you may find some players wage demands increase whilst others ask for less. - v1.3 changelist

What was all the fuss about?

Player wages are one of the biggest expenses for clubs in FML, as a daily cost they have a huge impact on the decision made when purchasing a player. So everyone wants the lowest wages they can get with the best players for those wages. Good players bring substantial rewards, both on the ground and in monetary terms, as a fair slice of the clubs income is generated from the reputation of it’s players. So let’s take a look at all the wage changes planned for 1.3 and how they might affect your club.

#1 – Sales Tax Change

A compromise here between those that want to buy purely to trade and those that believe players should not be treated purely as a commodity. The current restrictions mean it’s almost a full season before maximum profit can be kept by the seller, under this new change it’s down to 17 days – just over half a season. The 7 days of 100% sales tax remains but from 1.3 onwards the rate of tax decline is doubled to 10%.

#2 – Wage Auctions

A big change in the philosophy around wage bids, 1.2 saw an adjustment where people are no longer informed about the number of bidders in any wage auction (although you will know that at least one other has bid). This means it’s no longer as important to hold people to whatever bid they make as multiple bids will no longer be the reason for others to increase their bid. So it’s now possible to lower a wage auction bid down to the minimum, if you have decided you’re no longer as keen to acquire the individual player. You can’t remove the bid entirely, but if you have found another player you’d rather pursue you can lower your bid to free up your projection in order to bid on another.

A minor change for wage auctions is in the priority order when multiple managers have bid the same amount for a player. Now the winner of the auction will be the owning club (for end of contract wage auctions), or the first bidder for free agents.

Another small but significant change in line with the last upgrade, where bank veto’s on auto extends would see a player revert to re-bid as opposed to nothing, this system will now apply to youth players who are too old for youth extensions, they will now revert to auto re-bid automatically.

#3 – Older Players

Here is where we approach the most contentious change in the wage structure, for a long time the forums have been full of requests to lower the wages and fees associated with signing older players. Changes were brought in to address this issue previously, but they haven’t been working as they should. The main reason for this was a bug which meant players wouldn’t ask for their true wage demand, it would get stuck somewhere in between. This bug was affecting both ends of the wage scale younger players weren’t asking as much as they should, older players weren’t asking for less.

Along with the bug fix, that should see a more dramatic decline in the expected wage of older players, there have also been further adjustments to make signing older players both more attractive and more affordable. Signing-on fees will now reduce for players from the age of 30 onwards: At 30 it drops to 8 times wage, 31 to 6 times, 32 to 4 times, 33 to 2 times and from 34 years of age or older there will be no signing-on fee for players.

The expected drop in older players wage demands, even if they have been playing well they will demand 5% less per year from the age of 30 onwards and even if their contract is set to auto-extend they will lower their current wages by up to 20% if the basic wage demand is less than their current wage.

Looking Into Wage Demands

How much is a player worth? How high should his wages be? It’s one of the biggest decisions every manger needs to make. Player valuation can work in a number of ways the key factor is always about what they bring to the club. If a player is the best in the world then the wages he demands should reflect that, whether or not a manager is prepared to pay that wage is dependent on the value the manager puts in the player. If my striker is demanding 50k wages a day I have to seriously consider the value he brings to my team, is he good enough to win me the premiership, is the rest of my team good enough to supply a player that good, and the important one, can I find a player that good for less.

A lot of managers prefer to look at players AF/MV to value them, but that’s an inaccurate valuation. AF/MV are reflections of what you can get for that player when you no longer want him, a valuation that indicates what it will cost you to replace him, it does not reflect the value he might bring to your club. His true value to the club is in the wages you’re prepared to offer him, whether that matches his demand or something less, the decision is up to you.

To give you a bit of background, first we should tell you how the wage demand system works. Each player has the wage demand you see, but they also have a wage demand behind the scenes which represents what their skills justify i.e. the wage they deserve. Over time the wage demand you see moves towards this figure. A long standing bug in the game however meant that this movement towards the player’s ‘true’ wage was too slow which in turn meant that many players would never reach this level at all – they would always ask for less than they deserved. This issue has been addressed in 1.3. – Marc Duffy in The 1.3 wages debate

What will this change mean to you?

Well after running this change through a copy of one of the live worlds the data collected was posted on the forums. If we look at some of that in the following table we can get an idea of how big a change this will be:

Current Ability (CA) AverageReputation(1-10,000) Current Wages (1.2.1) NewWages (1.3) Wage Difference (percent)
30 155 £501 £216 - 132%
60 697 £884 £533 - 66%
90 1744 £1,716 £1,303 - 32%
120 3808 £3,914 £3,387 - 16%
160 6999 £17,742 £17,482 - 1%
170 7689 £23,899 £26,000 + 8%
190 8813 £41,250 £43,688 + 6%

From the above we can see the changes will be minor for most players, with some lowering of expectations amongst the lesser players and some increases amongst the better players. Overall nothing too dramatic, probably the most interesting area is the correlation between attributes and reputation. Both of these have an impact on the wages your players expect, and as they improve so too will the players expected wage. This is an area that you can impact on especially for the younger players, as it now becomes valuable to keep them out of senior competitions where their reputation will jump faster, as will their demand for more money.

There will always be a level of consternation with changes to the financial system, whether through wage adjustments or the introduction of infrastructure (and yes, there is likely to be a cost involved in Academies when they come in). But we should all remember that there is an overview to the game’s progression that is not always clear to the general users. There is a constant development process behind FML, and for some that’s a large part of the attraction, occasionally it may feel as if your game world is being turned upside down ~ but the tools are in place to deal with that.

And if things look sticky in the meantime thanks to the new tools introduced in 1.1 we can make adjustments to tax rates, signing on fees, stadium income, interest rates and so much more very easily meaning that the economy can be much better managed from here on out. – Rob Cooper in From Rags To Riches

Written By Mark Burton
A moderator since May 2008 in a number of beta worlds and now GW Fowler, he strives to highlight the community aspects of FML and inform new & experienced users about future game development.
Interested in more? Here are some related articles for you!
  • T-Bag

    "The expected drop in older players wage demands, even if they have been playing well they will demand 5% less per year from the age of 30 onwards and even if their contract is set to auto-extend they will lower their current wages by up to 20% if the basic wage demand is less than their current wage"

    Where are these figures from ?  On the copy of my live GW running 1.3 all of my old players want MORE money.  I have a 33 year old who is demanding a wage increase, a 36 year old goalkeeper wanting a 45% pay increase etc etc.  I don't have a single old player who wants a wage reduction.

    Despite this they are all getting worse with attributes dropping all over the place.

  • Mark Burton

    I've not noticed anything too dramatic in this area, remember though that their current attributes are reflected in their wage demand, so as they decline so will the wage they expect. Yes, your likely to see more downward arrows - but the key factor is the actual points they decline not the arrows. I am sure we'll get rants about it on the general forums, but so far it hasn't raised much discussion in the beta forum.

  • Mark Burton

    Wages are still position dependant to a degree, so your Goal Keeper is unlikely to expect the same wage as a Striker of the same reputation.

    There will soon be a test world created from a back up of a current live GW and that should give some more specific data on individual increases, if there's anything dramatic then it can still be tweaked further.

  • Guest

    My main concern is GK wages, right now lots of great GK's are on pretty low wages, around 2-3k for some super keepers, is this going to increase to 30k? I know the chart shows a small decrease for wages around that mark but if the player has great atts then surely this is going to go up big time?  If so, then I do find it quite unfair as the change is not minor.  They need to show a specific team so we can get a better idea rather than just quoting averages as averages are only the mathematical average and not the true picture.

  • amg from nicholson

    The changes dont seem too dramatic I guess.. There was another issue that Jackswans have raised concerning old players' CA dropping even though they have high natural fitness. Soon later SI released a note about fixing 2 issues in the update (wages and progression)

    I would like to hear GW1 view about old players progression (or depression i guess) in 1.3. As many managers have a strategy that focuses on buying old players to get victories.

  • WiseSif

    Decent analysis once again.

    In my point of view is that one of the most pleasant changes is the ability to lower your bid on a player.

    Its really important to do this when you seek for multiple players ,as finding a player after a bid you did might change your mind to give the amount of cash you already did.

    Additionally, after a closest look at the forums and after this analysis , i can say that the wage demand alternations are not so dramatic at all. I was among the people that said :-o when they saw this ... but in the end of the day it seems reasonable.

blog comments powered by Disqus