Question to SI

Firstly, I’d like to tell you about little experiment I carried out. I re-played the same match between two teems a couple of times. I added a new manager so I managed both teams. I chose two very similar teams – Marseille and Lyon. I used FMRTE to ensure that both teams were inspired and had good match preparation. I used the same tactic for both teams – 4-2-3-1. OI and Team talks were the same every time (certain for each team). First two matches were very even – it was a draw both times. But players’ motivation was different every time. Then one game won Lyon with slightly advantage over the opponent and one game won Marseille the same way. The difference in performance was pretty obvious – the team that won had 7-7.3 average rating, the other one – 6.3-6.5. Then one game again won Lyon. Every time players had different motivation. Then I decided not to use OI and team talks with one team. I was surprised but the team without team talks had a better motivation! But its performance was bad – only few shots and 6.4 average rating. I tried it several times but every time a team with team talks and OI was better than the other one. Well, it’s pretty obvious.

I have a question: why every time teams had different motivation and their performance differed a lot? It seems that motivation and players’ performance is randomized a lot. IRL if team plays bad – it’s only manager’s fault. He hadn’t prepared his team enough, hadn’t motivated his players enough. But if the manager does his best, his players also do their best and play good, even if they lose. In FM it seems everything is randomized too much. I used my best tactic for each team (last season I won everything with this tactic) and inspired both teams using FMRTE and some players had 6.0-6.3 rating in one game and 7.0-7.5 in the other one. So, why is it so randomized? I feel a little confused now, it seems I can affect too little things in the game.

I don't know how much motivation is randomized, it's a good question, but you have to keep in mind that the "Motivation" you see is only the perception of your AssMan and, thus, dependent on his abilities.

So it's possible there isn't actually a big difference in "Motivation" or much randomness, just a difference in AssMan perceptions.

It's the asst. Manager call on how the motivation is there.

Secondly, each player have their own attributes and their own set of personality with hidden attribute. So the same thing appeals to every player in different way.

I don't know how much motivation is randomized, it's a good question, but you have to keep in mind that the "Motivation" you see is only the perception of your AssMan and, thus, dependent on his abilities.

So it's possible there isn't actually a big difference in "Motivation" or much randomness, just a difference in AssMan perceptions.

Yes, good remark. Well, I have a very good assistant with pretty high attributes, so... I think I can trust his judgement. But sure, it is one more factor we should take into account. Random motivation doesn't really bothers me a lot, random perfomance and player rating - that's a bigger problem. Almost every player's rating differed from 6 to 7.5.

It's the asst. Manager call on how the motivation is there.

Secondly, each player have their own attributes and their own set of personality with hidden attribute. So the same thing appeals to every player in different way.

The thing is not that every player reacts in different way. The thing is that the same player reacts in different way to the same team talk and OI in the same situation - nothing really changed, every time I just loaded the save just before the match and replayed it, but motivation and players' perfomance differed slightly.

If you get your team talk right, not only does it make your players prolific it makes the other teams pathetic. It doesnt seem that random to me. Basically the team talk won everytime.

Firstly, I’d like to tell you about little experiment I carried out. I re-played the same match between two teems a couple of times. I added a new manager so I managed both teams. I chose two very similar teams – Marseille and Lyon. I used FMRTE to ensure that both teams were inspired and had good match preparation. I used the same tactic for both teams – 4-2-3-1. OI and Team talks were the same every time (certain for each team). First two matches were very even – it was a draw both times. But players’ motivation was different every time. Then one game won Lyon with slightly advantage over the opponent and one game won Marseille the same way. The difference in performance was pretty obvious – the team that won had 7-7.3 average rating, the other one – 6.3-6.5. Then one game again won Lyon. Every time players had different motivation. Then I decided not to use OI and team talks with one team. I was surprised but the team without team talks had a better motivation! But its performance was bad – only few shots and 6.4 average rating. I tried it several times but every time a team with team talks and OI was better than the other one. Well, it’s pretty obvious.

I have a question: why every time teams had different motivation and their performance differed a lot? It seems that motivation and players’ performance is randomized a lot. IRL if team plays bad – it’s only manager’s fault. He hadn’t prepared his team enough, hadn’t motivated his players enough. But if the manager does his best, his players also do their best and play good, even if they lose. In FM it seems everything is randomized too much. I used my best tactic for each team (last season I won everything with this tactic) and inspired both teams using FMRTE and some players had 6.0-6.3 rating in one game and 7.0-7.5 in the other one. So, why is it so randomized? I feel a little confused now, it seems I can affect too little things in the game.

It is extreemly random (well only the player performances basically) and it's why I stopped playing FM.

I played the same game West Ham vs Everton over 200 times in a test and found out that 1 bad team talk prior to the game was the likely culprit of the bad performances vs Everton (I was West Ham).

No matter what I did, something would always go wrong.

Over 200 games I only won about 15 of them. Most games I was absolutely demolished (3-6 goal losses)....about 40 games ended up in high scoring draws (and on about 50% of those games I surrended 3-4 goal leads.)

I also tried virtually all tactics available and even let people watch pkms to see what I did wrong. Eventually I was told by a few people that certain tactics "always" work due to them being almost game breaking and being border line cheat tactics. (thats how you see a lot of people winning every game with weak sides).

If I remember correctly someone from SI also commented in a seperate thread that team talks and under "certain circumstances" things happen that make it hard for a team to be successful.

I am not the best manager around, but I am not clueless but FM has too much randomness for my liking. :applause:

but motivation and players' perfomance differed slightly.

Naturally, as not every match is going to play out the same way. Players make mistakes, take a heavy tackle by the opposition, get skinned permanently by the opposing striker, place well timed tackles themselves, are playing in the team that opens the score sheet, are playing in the the team that gets behind... Motivation can change and does change multiple times throughout a match, as your assistent tells you. We're talking this many actions per game that can go either way that I don't know what this thread is supposed to be about.

Team talks have an influence, but as was highlighted by wwfan, I think, they don't have the impact they used to have.

edit: By the way, from my experience, people have always been overly obsessive about the tactical and motivational input the player makes in the game anyhow. It's not that they don't have an influence, it's not that those aren't needed to make a side "overperform". It's just that there's a fair share of leeway put into the game that makes it possible even for newcomers to win games, promotion spots, even championships - at least with sides proper. By and large, unless you're doing permanently the outright stupid, such as expecting a win away in Old Trafford playing Bolton yourself and going gung-ho when facing Barcelona, you can do just fine via halfway competent transfer policies. Buying the right players, scouting promising youngsters, which is comparably easy compared to the real sports, putting your talents out there. Just like in the old days. Evidence is to be found in the many players that win their first championship in the very first season of their very first FM save.

When I first started I didn't have a grip on either, neither team talks, certainly not the sliders back then (which mostly I just left as they were!), and not how to scout proper. But I won a promotion spot just by having halfway solid players. Extreme experiments and replaying single matches a hundred times is what being obsessive is all about of course, fair enough. :-)

Firstly, I’d like to tell you about little experiment I carried out. I re-played the same match between two teems a couple of times. I added a new manager so I managed both teams. I chose two very similar teams – Marseille and Lyon. I used FMRTE to ensure that both teams were inspired and had good match preparation. I used the same tactic for both teams – 4-2-3-1. OI and Team talks were the same every time (certain for each team). First two matches were very even – it was a draw both times. But players’ motivation was different every time. Then one game won Lyon with slightly advantage over the opponent and one game won Marseille the same way. The difference in performance was pretty obvious – the team that won had 7-7.3 average rating, the other one – 6.3-6.5. Then one game again won Lyon. Every time players had different motivation. Then I decided not to use OI and team talks with one team. I was surprised but the team without team talks had a better motivation! But its performance was bad – only few shots and 6.4 average rating. I tried it several times but every time a team with team talks and OI was better than the other one. Well, it’s pretty obvious.

I have a question: why every time teams had different motivation and their performance differed a lot? It seems that motivation and players’ performance is randomized a lot. IRL if team plays bad – it’s only manager’s fault. He hadn’t prepared his team enough, hadn’t motivated his players enough. But if the manager does his best, his players also do their best and play good, even if they lose. In FM it seems everything is randomized too much. I used my best tactic for each team (last season I won everything with this tactic) and inspired both teams using FMRTE and some players had 6.0-6.3 rating in one game and 7.0-7.5 in the other one. So, why is it so randomized? I feel a little confused now, it seems I can affect too little things in the game.

your experiment shows nothing really except different things can happen during a game of football, how can you compare the same game over and over with different changes and expect the same results? These threads pop up all the time, "i re-loaded this game a million times and this happened" and they all end up the same, proving absolutely nothing in the bigger picture. One tackle can change the course of a game, one shot, one save, one red card, one bad pass, one good header, none of which you can predict or control, because that is the essence of football, its not suppose to be predictable!!!!

In real life if a team plays badly its not only the managers fault at all, that is nonsese, i used this example in another thread where i watched an interview with Wenger who said all week his team looked good and prepared, left the dressing room looking good, but never started the game and lost, a manager has very little control on the course of a game once it has started.

The thing is not that every player reacts in different way. The thing is that the same player reacts in different way to the same team talk and OI in the same situation - nothing really changed, every time I just loaded the save just before the match and replayed it, but motivation and players' perfomance differed slightly.

But this is a good thing! Players performance will differ slightly dependant on anything - what they ate, how late they stayed up the nighit before, what the weather is like, heck.. what side of bed they got out of that morning! Have you heard of the butterfly affect? Any little incident in their day - be it a near-miss on the drive into training or getting headrush whilst bending down to tie their boot laces up.... any little thing at all, can affect a players performance. It's random because it's realistic - human performance is random.

I think... :confused:

If you had too much control in a game, it would be very easy to get your players to play well every game. It would become like Fifa or Pro Evo where you have the ability, through the games programming, to win everything. The randomness is what puts FM above the rest! IMO....

random perfomance and player rating - that's a bigger problem. Almost every player's rating differed from 6 to 7.5.

It only takes a goal in a game to massively change the end result. Take the Man Utd v Chelsea game last weekend, Hernandez scores early, Chelsea's confidence is massively affected, they struggle in the first half, maybe creating only one decent chance. Second half they play a little better but Man Utd are comfortable and contain them, bar Lampard getting the late consolation goal. You are probably looking at 7.5s for Man Utd players and 6s for Chelsea players.

But what would have happened if Hernandez had missed that chance, or Luiz had just cleared it? The pressure is on Man Utd, they are torn between keeping it tight and getting a goal to win the league more or less out right. Chelsea know they have to win, they just have to attack, so Chelsea probably throw players forward with more confidence. If Kalou(?) scores from the corner then the pressure is really on Man Utd they have to come out and get the goal back, Chelsea pick them off and score another goal or two on the break. End result is 7.5s for Chelsea and 6s for Man Utd. All dependant on whether Hernandez scores that early goal or not.

It really annoys me when people say something like 'I used the same team talks and tactics and got loads of different results'. Tactics is not just what you set up at the start of the game and then leave alone. Tactics is also how you respond to what's happening in the game. If they score an early goal you react, if you are changing on at the end you react, if you are getting out played you react and so on. Goals change games, and unless you change accordingly you will get massively different results.

It is extreemly random (well only the player performances basically) and it's why I stopped playing FM.

I played the same game West Ham vs Everton over 200 times in a test and found out that 1 bad team talk prior to the game was the likely culprit of the bad performances vs Everton (I was West Ham).

No matter what I did, something would always go wrong.

Over 200 games I only won about 15 of them. Most games I was absolutely demolished (3-6 goal losses)....about 40 games ended up in high scoring draws (and on about 50% of those games I surrended 3-4 goal leads.)

I also tried virtually all tactics available and even let people watch pkms to see what I did wrong. Eventually I was told by a few people that certain tactics "always" work due to them being almost game breaking and being border line cheat tactics. (thats how you see a lot of people winning every game with weak sides).

If I remember correctly someone from SI also commented in a seperate thread that team talks and under "certain circumstances" things happen that make it hard for a team to be successful.

I am not the best manager around, but I am not clueless but FM has too much randomness for my liking. :applause:

If you had saved the game immediately prior to the match starting then your 200 game "experiment" was worthless as the players are affected by the events leading up to the game far more than by the team-talk... the team-talk should reflect the events leading up to the game, not be a separate thing.

If you want to properly perform this type of experiment then you should save it immediately AFTER a match and then recreate everything you do/say from then to the next match... heck do/say the same thing 5 times and use the 5 different team-talks, then do something different 5 times and use the same team-talk... and so on and so on...

All of this "I played the same match..." garbage is just a waste of your time unless you do a PROPER 'test'... personally I just play the game, if I lose - I lose, draw - I draw, Win - I win... reloading the match is, to me, stupid, boring and pointless...

The "experiment" its self is useless no matter what you do, unless you are able to replicate the exact same week for both your team and the AI team every time with the exact same player condition, moral, injuries, press conferences, team talks, selection and tactics, and the tactics in game would have to be exactly the same each time with no variance from the AI at all at any time. Replaying the same game over and over to try and prove a point in FM is the biggest waste of time you could do with the game, you will do nothing but get annoyed and come to false conclusions.

In real life if a team plays badly its not only the managers fault at all, that is nonsese, i used this example in another thread where i watched an interview with Wenger who said all week his team looked good and prepared, left the dressing room looking good, but never started the game and lost, a manager has very little control on the course of a game once it has started.

It proves that even such experienced managers as Wenger sometimes make mistakes. His players looked good and prepared but something went wrong and he must figure out what's the reason. May be they only looked prepared or motivated or may be they were complacent. Manager hadn't noticed it and his team lost. Anyway, **** hapens. Even in football.

If you had too much control in a game, it would be very easy to get your players to play well every game. It would become like Fifa or Pro Evo where you have the ability, through the games programming, to win everything. The randomness is what puts FM above the rest! IMO....

Yes, sure you are right. It is too easy to win everything in PES and FIFA. I want more control in the game but it should be a real challenge. I want it to be really difficult to control every aspect of your players' preparation but if you do your best, your players should also do their best. Current situation in FM is that you can't do your best because a lot of things are just randomized and you can't affect them. I want more detailed match preparation, I want to set up my players' training routine, I want to see more detailed results of their training, I want to motivate them every day before the match, not just during pre-match team talk. All this things managers do in real life, but nothing of this we can do in FM. So, the things we can't affect are just randomized.

Well, I understand that even one goal or one tackle can change everything but I have one example. In one of those replayed matches one of my defenders had 5.7 rating, missing almost every tackle, every header, every interception. Obviously it lead to a goal in the end of first half. In other matches this defender played well. So, you want to say that something happend to this player when he was going to the pitch? Because team talk and tactics were the same every time. He played like he was not ready to play that day. Yes, **** happens, but that "****" was completly random. IRL it happens sometimes but it means that managers sometimes don't notice that some of their players are not ready, are not prepared. We don't have an ability to "notice" something like this in FM at all.

Well, I understand that even one goal or one tackle can change everything but I have one example. In one of those replayed matches one of my defenders had 5.7 rating, missing almost every tackle, every header, every interception. Obviously it lead to a goal in the end of first half. In other matches this defender played well. So, you want to say that something happend to this player when he was going to the pitch? Because team talk and tactics were the same every time. He played like he was not ready to play that day. Yes, **** happens, but that "****" was completly random. IRL it happens sometimes but it means that managers sometimes don't notice that some of their players are not ready, are not prepared. We don't have an ability to "notice" something like this in FM at all.

who's to say that player did not miss a vital tackle in the first 5 minutes of the game that knocked his confidence? You cannot even begin to compare this to real life because the situation could never happen ever no matter what. When a player plays badly its not always because he has gone out without confidence or not prepared, it can be as simple as having a bad day at the office.

who's to say that player did not miss a vital tackle in the first 5 minutes of the game that knocked his confidence? You cannot even begin to compare this to real life because the situation could never happen ever no matter what. When a player plays badly its not always because he has gone out without confidence or not prepared, it can be as simple as having a bad day at the office.

I think that if player plays with confidence and is prepared and motivated one missed tackle can't affect his morale so badly. Of course it depends on his mental attributes. But, who knows...

I think that if player plays with confidence and is prepared and motivated one missed tackle can't affect his morale so badly. Of course it depends on his mental attributes. But, who knows...

Says who? One missed tackle early in a game can make a player question himself, maybe think about a situation slightly longer than he has too and get caught out. Again tho you cannot compare the performance of a player against the same game over and over, its pointless, you cannot compare it to anything in real life which is what your trying to do. Anything can happen on any given day, but we cannot replay life, so why try in FM?

What is causing confidence in pitch changing ?

How can we change them ?

Complacent, ll disciplined, nervously etc....

The thing is not that every player reacts in different way. The thing is that the same player reacts in different way to the same team talk and OI in the same situation - nothing really changed, every time I just loaded the save just before the match and replayed it, but motivation and players' perfomance differed slightly.

Well everyone do, because it's not just what you see in front of you or what happens at the moment. It's about buildup to the moment. And the rating difference also occurs because of the opposition, decision taken during the play, the time of decision, importance of the decision, etc;