Feed
Already playing ? Get these essential add ons to enhance the game Want updated squads for FM19? We have the worlds biggest FM2019 Data Update. 14 minutes ago
JúNioR_SpAwN.d commented on: Request Thread (ONLY TEAMS, COMPS and NATIONS THAT ARE IN THE OFFICIAL FM DATABASE)
1 hour ago
ChrissBurns1993 commented on: Rangers
1 hour ago
A new version of our data update was released with 520688 changes from 918 contributors.
1 hour ago
A new version of our data update was released with 317822 changes from 983 contributors.
1 hour ago
A new version of our data update was released with 26336 changes from 159 contributors.
2 hours ago
ChrissBurns1993 commented on: Rangers
2 hours ago
A new version of our data update was released with 520685 changes from 918 contributors.
2 hours ago
A new version of our data update was released with 317782 changes from 983 contributors.
2 hours ago
A new version of our data update was released with 26245 changes from 159 contributors.
5 hours ago
u-78 commented on: 3D Official Kits Thread
5 hours ago
WorkTheSpace added a video: Football Manager 2019 | Burnley Live #4: Winable Games #FM19
12 hours ago
Armagedon_55 commented on: Request Thread (ONLY TEAMS, COMPS and NATIONS THAT ARE IN THE OFFICIAL FM DATABASE)
14 hours ago
kingrobbo commented on: staff member not appearing
14 hours ago
kingrobbo commented on: staff member not appearing
14 hours ago
kingrobbo commented on: staff member not appearing
15 hours ago
kb1000 commented on: staff member not appearing
15 hours ago
kingrobbo commented on: staff member not appearing
15 hours ago
Madman99 commented on: SS Official Kits Thread
15 hours ago
Madman99 commented on: Germany - Regionalliga Level 4 SS'2018/19 Relink! (31/03/19) - Not SSKCC yet
16 hours ago
kowalatkomc commented on: New Logos
16 hours ago
JúNioR_SpAwN.d commented on: Request Thread (ONLY TEAMS, COMPS and NATIONS THAT ARE IN THE OFFICIAL FM DATABASE)
16 hours ago
mizie commented on: [FM19] Hungary Database Update
16 hours ago
kb1000 commented on: staff member not appearing
18 hours ago
kingrobbo commented on: staff member not appearing
19 hours ago
mons commented on: Facepacks Release thread - NO REQUESTS
19 hours ago
mons added a download: Pending missing images mixpack 82 [12 images] [11.02]
19 hours ago
aleshaebanko commented on: SS Official Kits Thread
20 hours ago
Jeff's72 commented on: 3D Official Kits Thread
20 hours ago
Mr. T commented on: Facepacks Release thread - NO REQUESTS
20 hours ago
Mr. T added a download: Pending missing images mixpack 60 [18 images] [10.09]
Discussion
Just dropping into that the new system is great - really efficient and easy to use! Being able to see where each request is at, and see mod's comments individually instead of in an unwieldy threat is also fantastic. It's encouraged me to upload far more requests than before. Good work!
FM15 Previous Saves
Hibernian-2014-2017, Lille-2017-2021
Current Save
Defensor Sporting - 2014-2016, Cruzeiro - 2017-
@Rob The download button in the "request-list" isn't linking to download for me, but to the request itself. Is it possible to change this? I've included a screenshot to show what I mean

https://s1.postimg.org/288o95sqr3/Fire_Shot_Capture_43_-_Swedie_-_Cut_Out_Player_Faces_Megapack_-.png
Gents (and lady)

Prompted by Sopel's post (and my reply), I think it's time we had a discussion on the current pack request system. I’d been thinking for a while about ways in which the teampack/mixpack request system can be sorted out as I don’t think it’s functioning well or as intended and I’d like to hear your feedback on this.

I’ve tried to @ all the active frequent contributors to the megapack, both cutters and requesters, so that all opinions are captured. Apologies if I’ve forgotten somebody, no offence intended and you're all encouraged to contribute

It’s fair to say that a lot of requested packs are not dealt with. There are presently 18 pages of teampacks requests pending and 6 pages of mixpack requests. Each page has 30 packs. Each pack has anything between 5-30 images. That’s a rough estimate of over 10,000 images, and probably much more. It’s a pity as there are plenty of good and maybe even necessary sources in there which, let’s be realistic, will never be cut. Also, there’s really no way, other than manually, in which one can (a) check whether a particular image has already been requested, (b) check whether a particular source included in a pack was cut separately later, (c) check for duplicate requests included within packs. Additionally, I would say that a lot of the improvement requests within packs aren’t really necessary, especially in requests made by newer users.

Basically, I think we need to consider changing the process for pack requests, and maybe even removing it outright. I’ve come up with 4 proposals below; all of which have their pros and cons.

*Packs only by staff/mods – this would allow the roundup mixpacks to continue at least
*Packs should only include missing images – I don’t know how this can be enforced
*Packs to have maximum limit of 10-12 sources – smaller sized packs may encourage more take-up
*No packs at all – encourages a more judicious use of the individual request system so that only genuinely needed sources are requested

@bakizp @Baja @Swedie @marrtac @HRiddick @pololuxury @diogoamaral @maxtod77 @rekooner2 @Tatavo @cksrl1000 @delhomme @Lebohang Mokoena @arryst @fumuj @Belajariman @krissmed @ArturM @katalonczyk22 @Rowan @geordie1981 @mvngmnd @StaffMan @ovidiu10 @andr3 @leftfoot @Mustang13297 @tv_capper @jWaSiMhE @Giro @zdendo @Vinceultras42 @Aksull @...KäoS... @ABBFH @andresm_91 @dydwo @tofthefly
First of all, I agree with you that it's impossible for the team of cutters on the site to handle the amount of teampacks that are currently still open for cutting, let alone manually check every pack for improvements. The first option of having packs only by staff/mods would be a good choice. That way, there will be genuine improvements requested. The option of having only missing images would indeed be hard to police. The third option of having a maximum limit would probably see requesters split teampacks up in parts, so that a whole team can be cut eventually. The option of having no packs at all would see the amout of individual requests rise considerably, which would perhaps put more stress on the team of cutters.

In my opinion, it would be best to have only packs by staff/mods or have a maximum of images per pack.

«This comment has been edited»
Maybe since my post has been singled out I'll post my idea for the solution - the "no packs" way.

In the current system the request the process goes like this:
Someone makes a request, the request goes uncut, @mons moderates the request after ~a month, does a round-up and creates a mixpack, requester can post another request

What I've been proposing:
Someone makes a request, the "timer" for the request starts, the request goes uncut, ~a month passes, "timer" stops, the request stays on the list, requester can post another request

What it accomplishes is a situation in which the mixpack section is for the teampacks, etc, not a burial ground for many.
The request list gets longer, but is more accessible and it becomes easier to asses what's in there (due to the preview option).
That way cutters can choose what they want to cut, when they want to cut, they decide the quantity of the cuts, the whole process becomes less of a chore.
Think of it this way - someone who wants to do a missing/improvement mixpack wants to take on a pack 20 pictures - various variety, quality, size, etc. That may be off-putting, that may be discouraging.
In this solution, someone who wants to make 20 cut-outs can filter the list, find images that suit them and create the ones that will be the easiest for them and possibly providing the best quality that they can give.
It's basically a choice between working with what you get vs cherry picking what do you want to work with.
Because - from my experience - some very easy cuts just escape me, I wasn't around when they were posted and could easily get them done. But they have been already moderated and I won't take on the whole pack and get them done. Sure, I could just take one picture and when I'm done just leave the comment on the mixpack "X has been cut", that's an option. But that just shows that the nature of mixpacks is flawed - some cuts have been already requested again an cut, the numbers of files are misleading, there may have been better sources since when the pack was uploaded etc.

My solution came with other ideas that would improve the whole request process f.e. a new, duplicate request instead of creating another page could just add the new photo to the original request; duplicate requests from unique requesters would give the request a "bump" or a "like" as a sign of popular demand; a mandatory need for every photo in the teampack to be assigned to a ID from the database, which would allow a control on the contents of the teampack and singular requests.

More can be read in the original discussion, I just wanted to showcase my idea for this in a less rambling manner
I would just leave things as they are now...In my experience as staff member in past few years (I'm also requester and cuter),problem with too much was always active,and will be.On old forum I was collecting all improvement and missing mixpacks,some of them was on list for years and at the end,before moving to the new forum @HRiddick done them all.Also me and @marrtac was checking full list wich was a lot more than this now and re-uploading them,some of them are done,but some stays undone since I believe main problem is too many requesters and requests and too low number of cuters.For example as staff member and cuter I have around 50 teampacks still waiting to be done,some of them are here for years,but not much people cares for them since they are from Serbia (12),Montenegro (21),Bosnia (17) and Slovenia (3),even they are HQ or at least 50% better\bigger than most of requests today.Some of those packs have only few (less than 10 images) and most of them are missing.We also had actions that we are doing "old" packs from time to time,when we had a large number of them,and the list was getting smaller,Megapack was bigger.
Good thing from those years is that we have most cuts from major leagues,most of them are HQ cuts,no matter 180x180 or 250x250.Even I think this change made a confusion to some people,and they are just making requests because new size.It's unfair to have 15 cuts (improvements for some players) and 0 cuts for some others.Missing images should be priority.
The system with uncut collection works for now,tnx to @mons @krissmed and me as researcher for best possible sources.For example I would avoid re-uploading full mixpacks (for now we are rejecting old and making new active),I would just re-upload them in comment (of the main mixpack) after some of them are done,that's the way to have less mixpacks on filter no matter rejected or active.But that's not some kind of big problem.
About double requests,for example someone made request for some player year ago,and now someone else is making it again but from better source...in that case we\staff often are pointing out to potential cuter where is better source,or we are packing that new source in re-uploaded mixpack.Only staff members should make mixpacks,that's my suggestion,and teampacks should be allowed to all.Maybe that would motivate some requesters to become cuters.It worked to me.
Spliting packs would be a nightmare...especially teampacks.I had a system in my head on old forum to make collections after every 10 pages.Now @mons I don't know what system of collecting you have now,but maybe you should collect them more often,and have less images packs.Just missing packs is simply bad idea,teampacks should have both missing and improvements,and cuter is the guy who should decide is it improvement or not.
At the end cuters are free to do what ever and how many cuts they want.So for example @Sopel,and everybody else you can always pick some teampack\mixpack and do what ever you can,and send\re-upload rest wich you couldn't in comment or send to mons,krissmed,so he can re-upload them again (as we are doing now).
Limiting people on just 3 individual requests was one of the best decisions we ever made.
Only solution is getting more cuters,nothing else.

«This comment has been edited»
https://i.imgur.com/7TeM2re.jpg
I agree with Baja about mixpacks for staff members and tempacks for everyone and with Sopel about duplicate request added to the original post instead of creating a new page, although I think that would be very hard to code.

I recently have been working with South American teampacks because those are the teams I play with in my game, but for the same reason I honestly don't have much interest in doing, for example, Baja's Eastern European ones since I don't even have those players loaded in my saves.

For that reason I think some sort of organization where cutters take responsability over certain teams, countries or regions would help getting the teampacks done more rapidly; I remember in the old forums there were a couple guys (sorry I can't remember whom exactly) that would show up every month or so to do the uncut mixpacks and that helped avoid requests getting old, buried and forgotten. I know sometimes real life happens and people can't check the site periodically, occasionally I have to go away from the site for a month or more but when I come back I go check for those South American request that might have been added in the meantime.

Also having "better requesters" would help, several times I end up cutting just 10-12 images from teampacks that include 50 requests because most of them already have good cuts, if they take the time to check which players really need a new image it saves us cutters a lot of time plus a smaller teampack always looks more attractive than a huge one. A way to check if a teampack has already been requested would help too.

But at the end of the day having more cutters is the better solution, perhaps Mons should try the "your requests are very good you should try cut them yourself" pep talk with more members of the community, I know it worked for me
For teampacks or mixpacks, why not do like the WC2018 topic, bring together members from different countries looking for exellente source complete team packs. After the cutter is organized for cutting for the realized

One can like: @Swedie and other member who works a lot on Sweden, @HRiddick on England. etc .....
I actually think packs only by staff and mods might be the way to go.
I think mixpacks for staff/mods only and keeping teampacks available to all sounds like a good idea, and may help keep the number of requests to a more reasonable amount than at present

It may help to have teampacks listed with their team nationalities searchable too maybe?
I know maxtod77 likes to keep on top of everything Italian, HRiddick with England & arryst with S.America
If cutters are quickly able to source packs they want to cut, that may help cutters find requests and clear through some images.

I also agree that Sopels idea of adding a duplicate request to the original post instead of creating a new page would be great to have, although I'm not sure how easy that would be to implement practically

«This comment has been edited»
FM2016 GOAL OF THE SEASON WINNER
I like having packs but also agree requests often go unanswered. I think when posting a pack it should force check the ID before getting into the next phase of uploading it, and if possible is there a way to link a player ID to a teams ID using the data update DB? Then is someone goes to post a single face they can be notified the player is already in a requested team pack.

EDIT: Or have to list each ID that will be covered when doing the team packs. Either way I think ID's can be better utilised for duplicates, discussion etc.

«This comment has been edited»
I also agree with mixpacks for staff/mods only and keeping teampacks available to all might help with a amount of requests. And I like Sopel's idea of duplicate request added to the original post.
I can comment my experience because maybe can be useful.

Before this new request system, every year I requested the same teampack (Real Oviedo) since... 5 years ago, I think. Never wer made IIRC, but this season I requested every player individually and was completed in less than a month (plus I learned to make er... tolerable cut-outs ) so maybe one of the problems are big teampacks. Of course I'm not criticizing nobody

What's the solution? I don't think there is one but a mix of various.

- Don't make big request (teampacks / mixpacks should be ~25 pics) because sometimes never get cut
- Allow more requests per user for individual pics (5 indtead of three). Con I see here is when sources aren't good. Pro is more likely than any cutter do an image than a pack.
- Prioritizing. For me, missing is more important than improvement most of the times.

Also mixpacks only for staff/mods sound a good idea.

Edit: My english grammar is awful, hope people understand me.

«This comment has been edited»
https://i.imgur.com/3kNqZ2l.jpg
To be honest I don't really have a clear opinion about the packs. But I can only add that I sometimes use it as a placeholder for collected sources, to make sure they don't disappear or a server goes down.

And when we are talking about the request system, a small question for Rob. Would it be possible to include the URL for the source of requests. I see two benefits for this:
1. If it's a good source, it's possible to collect the rest from the same website.
2. A lot of times a bigger version can be obtained by changing the URL, it would be easier to have the url directly rather than having too search for the image first.
My case is very easy. For me, I used to look in here before the forum change.
I never tried to see how the new form of requests really worked so I was more ausent.

That also made me look almost exclusive for all portuguese divisions.

But I agree, we just don't have enough cutters for all those requests...

p.s. In this next few days, I'll take a look at the request system.
I think there should be a place dedicated to report error images but don't have one to replace on hand. I found out that "Charlotte Van Wynsberghe", UID 18100896, is given the wrong cut out.
Cool
I think there should be a place dedicated to report error images but don't have one to replace on hand. I found out that "Charlotte Van Wynsberghe", UID 18100896, is given the wrong cut out.


That's actually not a bad shout, but I imagine it would be a bit of coding work ( @Rob ?) , and it's not that often something is wrong, so posting it on the main thread is just as easy? HERE is the updated image of her which will appear in the next update.
Can you add Spurs wonderkid Troy Parrot ID 28122837
Attachments


«This comment has been edited»
Can you add Spurs wonderkid Troy Parrot ID 28122837

Come on man, I've already told you he's been cut here already. Besides, for future reference, this is the request forum I referred to in that post.
Sorry having a bad day,
Would it be possible to add a direct link to player/coach sortitoutsi profile from the Request page?
Would it be possible to add a direct link to player/coach sortitoutsi profile from the Request page?

What do you mean? Can you give an example of a similar person you're having an issue with?
What do you mean? Can you give an example of a similar person you're having an issue with?

If there's a team with the same UID as a person, the cutout search page for that person links to the team's one. I don't have an soecfic example but I've noticed it a few times
If there's a team with the same UID as a person, the cutout search page for that person links to the team's one. I don't have an soecfic example but I've noticed it a few times

Ah, I see. I'll check to see if it's possible
@mons it's not an issue.
Is it possible to add a link to player profile here?
https://i.imgur.com/iCe5FTN.png
@mons it's not an issue.
Is it possible to add a link to player profile here?
https://i.imgur.com/iCe5FTN.png

It's already one of the ideas under consideration for when the site is eventually renewed
Ah, I see. I'll check to see if it's possible

Found an example from a recent cutout request - this staff person has the same UID as a team, and View Existing Cuts shows the players on the team instead
I thinks it's the case when de UID exists out of 3 digits or less,from 4 digits the search function is working correctly.
It's showing the face of the searched person.
http://oi50.tinypic.com/2wo93c2.jpg
Can we disable the "Your graphic request has been assigned" report message if request uploader and request receiver is the same person?
Can we disable the "Your graphic request has been assigned" report message if request uploader and request receiver is the same person?

It's not really a top priority to be honest.

Besides, if you have a completed cut to be uploaded, it shouldn't be done as a request, but through this section:

https://i.imgur.com/5gaYKVz.png

«This comment has been edited»
Login to post a comment

Login Register