Is there any noticeable difference between speak tones?

Do you notice any difference in result from picking one tone over another when you teamspeak or individually talk? Over time, I don't really see it, except that some tones give you more options than others.

I'd say yes, more so that they would have to as otherwise it would be quite pointless.

As far as the breakdown, I haven't figured it out, mainly cautious and reluctant, the others seems pretty straightforward

I think there's a small difference, for example if you're team are playing nervously and losing, aggressive will be catastrophic and reluctant may motivate them but 90% of the time, none whatsoever.

I won a match 5-4. And I told the defenders Assertively that I thought they were crap. They reacted badly.

Later on in the game, I used the reluctant tone and they reacted well.

I usually go on autopilot and just say the same things every-time, unless we lose heavily where I get aggressive and they undoubtedly react badly.

I get aggressive when losing at home, by at least 2 goals. Especially if I'm expected to win. I use the Aggressive tone and the lads usually even up the score by the 60th minute, and usually take the lead towards the end of the game.

The easiest way I've found to think about it is that each player interaction or team talk is a gamble, and the tone is how much you want to bet on the result. If you get the interaction right, the stronger tones win you more morale and positive effects. If you get it wrong, you lose more. So being Cautious or Reluctant is good when you are not sure that the outcome will be favourable; if you get it wrong, it won't matter as much. Whereas Assertive or Passionate are better choices when you are certain how the player or team will respond. And calm is just sort of neutral.

It's not really a gamble. If the team you're playing against and you're favourites to win it, you can't get the lads too relaxed. So you can't say "Calmly - I expect you to win" you might as well be yawning while you're talking. You have to say "Assertively - I expect you to win". And if they're not winning at half time, say if you're losing then you can get aggressive. If you're drawing you can say "Assertively - I want you to do better".

I'd use the Calm tone when I've won a game I was expected to win, and say "Calmy - that was a good win for us" so the lads don't get complacent.

If I've won a tight-knit game with a lot of goals, I'll Reluctantly tell the defenders they weren't good enough. That might get a "bad reaction" but I want them to be angry at conceding 4 goals.

I use the Passionate tone when up against my rivals. Or for Finals of cups.

It's not really a gamble. If the team you're playing against and you're favourites to win it, you can't get the lads too relaxed. So you can't say "Calmly - I expect you to win" you might as well be yawning while you're talking. You have to say "Assertively - I expect you to win".

You don't "have to" do anything, and it depends on about seven or eight other factors, but if you are obvious favourites, yes, you should be using stronger tones, but only because it's a surer bet that it's appropriate to the situation, not because 'calm' means 'apathetic'. For more marginal decisions, where the outcome may not be more obvious, it's a good idea to lower the tone and so risk less morale.

I'd use the Calm tone when I've won a game I was expected to win, and say "Calmy - that was a good win for us" so the lads don't get complacent.

There are better options to combat complacency. If you don't see "Seemed to gain focus" in this context, you aren't combating complacency, you're helping it.

If I've won a tight-knit game with a lot of goals, I'll Reluctantly tell the defenders they weren't good enough. That might get a "bad reaction" but I want them to be angry at conceding 4 goals.

A bad reaction (in red) is always bad, and you should never be pleased your players are angry. Ever. Players who are being scolded for performing badly should react "Looked fired-up" or "Seemed motivated". That's the professional response.

I disagree - except on the last one. I actually don't remember ever getting a bad reaction in this regard, that is that I never got a player angry.

I've noticed that a player will get "stressed" and that shows up in red. Yet they always go on to get man of the match.

To me, thinking there is some strong causation between how a player responded in one game and their getting man of the match in the next shows a simplistic understanding of how the game's systems interrelate. To believe that "because I chose this team-talk option, this happened in the game" is ridiculous when there are so many factors at play.

And "stressed" is never good. It means your player can't handle the pressure of your expectations. This suggests a problem either with their mentality or with your expectations.

Hi Guys. New-ish guy here. I'd like to chip in this topic with my 2 cents...

I rarely had my players reacted angrily to my team talk...strangely enough happened when I foolishly used my assistant's advice to "have nothing to say after that" option at the end of a hard fought match that my Chelsea team narrowly won.

I often reacted angrily/aggressively (in my mind, I was giving them the Fergie hairdryer treatment) when we're down at half-time or losing the game against lesser teams. Often got the 'seemed motivated' and 'fired-up' response from my players. But then Torres had whined to the media about my 'motivation skills' whatever that means...so I tried to tone that down.

Recently before a big home game, I went in with my standard calm tone "do it for the fans" and my keeper Cech got stressed. And then went on to become the man of the match.

In the end, I guess I just go with my guts feelings depending on what the situation requires. No surefire solution for me - but it does make some difference at crucial times.