"PPM strength"- a suggestion for a future feature

PPMs. A feature introduced to make players more unique. Players can now shoot hard or place their shots, pause on the ball or play a killer pass, dive into tackles or stay on their feet.

However, there's one problem I have. If a player has "shoots with power", he'll shoot with power more often than not. However, IRL some players always shoot with power- John Arne Riise anyone?

Likewise, in the Reading squad Leroy Lita and Stephen Hunt have the PPM "attempts overhead kicks". They both do this, but they both do it with different frequencies. Lita will attempt an overhead kick once every ten matches or so- most players never attempt one. Hunt will attempt one every other match. At the moment, the PPM means that a player will attempt an overhead kick once every 20 matches or so.

So, here's what I'm suggesting:

• PPMs given a "strength rating" out of 10- 10 being constantly or wherever possible, 1 being "more often than not". I suppose the scale could be out of 5 instead.
  
• Then, in the player's "position" screen, where PPMs are normally displayed, it could have them like so:
  

1. Always shoots with power.
   
2. Attempt overhead kicks whenever possible.
   
3. Sometimes runs with ball down left.
   
4. Likes ball played into feet (PPMs like this one could remain the same)
   
5. Prefers to place shots.
   
6. Punches ball (see link below).
   
7. Curls ball quite often.
   
8. Stops play all the time.
   
9. Likes to dive into tackles.
   
10. Occaisionally attempts to play way out of trouble.
    

• The numbered ratings would be set by the researcher, the text in the game would relate to the numbered ratings.
  
• This would make players more unique, and would make FM more enjoyable. Every player would be different to the last one, rather than being similar like they are at the moment.
  
• Lastly, before you ask, tutoring. I think the "inheiritance" of the PPM and its strength should depend on several factors. Determination of both players, personality of both players, age of both players, whether the tutor has tutored previously, the experience levels of both players, etc. So for example, if a youngster is very determined, he will inherit the PPM at a higher strength than if he's lazy. If he gets on with his tutor, he'll do better than a player who doesn't like his tutor. If his tutor has tutored before and has high determination, he'll be a better tutor, so his tutee (if that's the word) should do better.
  

You may find this thread interesting:

http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php?t=41933

Like this very much actually, and even though I am against the idea in that thread you have linked to there, combining it with this would make it useful

One thing I do have to question though is how much impetus would be placed on these? At the moment, PPMs are very much secondary to the attributes of a player, and obviously having the right stats to tie in with their PPMs is essential to being succesful when doing them, do you think that PPMs should become, in a way, more on a par with attributes or stay in the background?

I only question this out of interest in seeing how you would like to see this idea evolve, personally, I am in favour of them becoming fairly prominent, should this system be used, as the attributes do determine how good a player is at his PPMs and I think that they could maybe become fairly important to finding players that fit your teams style of play

I think they should affect how a player behaves, whereas attributes should affect how well they play. However, attributes like decisions and composure could affect how PPMs work too. Aggression could affect "dives into tackles", etc.

I think they should affect how a player behaves, whereas attributes should affect how well the play. However, attributes like decisions and composure could affect how PPMs work too. Aggression could affect "dives into tackles", etc.

That's almost exactly what I was trying to say before but I aint slept yet so it didn't quite come out right

Top idea and explanation mate

Really good idea, but I think attributes should still be central.

Really good idea, but I think attributes should still be central.

Oh yeah, absolutely, I wasn't suggesting that they shouldn't become secondary to PPMs, just that PPMs, using SCIAG's idea, should then become more prominent as it would then be easier to see which players would fit into your style of play

Indeed. "Dives into tackles" should and will never mean "this person can tackle well", unless of course the ME has a bug which makes diving into tackles a good thing (shoots with power on 08, anyone?).

The idea of PPMs is that they are only given to play that regularly do those actions on the pitch. Not every player has PPMs, and the players that do generally only have up to 3/4, maybe 5.

A player without them will still do them sometimes, but they don't have a preference.

Dive into tackles and does not dive into tackles are not good or bad, its just the players style of play.

There's no need to give player PPMs for 'Occaisionally attempts to play way out of trouble', or 'Sometimes runs with ball down left', if the player doesn't have those PPMs, they will still occasionally do those things.

The idea of PPMs is that they are only given to play that regularly do those actions on the pitch. Not every player has PPMs, and the players that do generally only have up to 3/4, maybe 5.

A player without them will still do them sometimes, but they don't have a preference.

Dive into tackles and does not dive into tackles are not good or bad, its just the players style of play.

There's no need to give player PPMs for 'Occaisionally attempts to play way out of trouble', or 'Sometimes runs with ball down left', if the player doesn't have those PPMs, they will still occasionally do those things.

Scotham, I'm fully aware that not every player has PPMs etc, I'm also fully aware that most aren't good or bad.

My point is, if we give Rio Ferdinand and John Terry the PPM "attempts to play way out of trouble", they should both do it the same amount of times (in theory, it probably won't work that way in practise though). IRL, Rio does this more than Terry, who still does it quite a bit, and more than Carragher. They both deserve the PPM because they both do it more often than not, and if you didn't give it to Terry he'd do it no more than Carragher, for example.

Great thread SCIAG. Definitely something for SI to consider, and could make the game a lot more detailed with such a thing.

Thanks NepZ. If this could be implemented well, I can see player movement improving dramatically.

Mainly just getting this above the locked threads.

Perhaps I should have called the topic "3D- Yes or No".

Good idea, although appropriate distribution of PPM's would be the preferred solution to me.

Some good ideas here. Could almost be described as "Tendency to execute preferred move"

I would love to see more of them and for players to somehow learn them randomly without tutouring.

I think its weird how players have Does not dive into tackles and dives into tackles.

Then another player can have shoots with power and places shots.

Or gets forward whenever possible, stays back at all times.

Either way I like them and think there should be more, good thread

I had this idea myself over at FM-Britain, however I said there should be only two strengths "Often" and "Always". Always having more effect than currently and often having less. Any more than that is unnessecarily complcated, IMO.

I suppose I agree with that, perhaps there should be a third strenght though- reguarly. Less than often, more than without the PPM.

Rather than "often", "regularly", & "always", I would prefer each players PPM to be graded in strength from 1-20 the way everything else attributes-wise is.

SO if a player had 2 PPM's he might have different values of PPM strength for each one, and of course I would like to see this PPM strength rating be variable so that it could be influenced by outside factors such as comments from coaching staff & media and also the effects of the actions of the PPM's themselves.

I like the idea of 'weighting' the PPM's as i do agree that some players will do that PPM more often than not and some not so often but are still renouned for it. The thing we need clarification on is will a player do these PPM's anyway without designating it to their profile, if so what is the frequency of this? Also what is the frequency of a player carrying out the PPM assigned to him? There must be a mulitplication in the ME that increased the amount of 'atempts' that player tries his PPM.

Having weightings on the PPM's will give us researchers the ability to set the frequency rather than leave it set say at 25:50 opportunities arrising if they have the PPM in their profile or set to 1:50 opportunities arrising if they do not, which is left to the ME to determine.

Excellent idea. Let's hope something along these lines gets into FM10.

Go one further: Weight everything.

For example, Fabregas is inclined to pass short while Scholes passes longer. So if Fabregas moved to Bolton to play hoof-ball, he'd struggle to adapt.

Also, Barton is more likely to dive into a tackle than Scholes who is more likely to dive into a tackle than Carrick, so we'd have a "tackle aggression weighting".

If we have sliders for a player's playing style for all areas, we would have unique players.

Well I think they should just fix the PPM for now, seeing I had a youngster with: Moved ball to right foot before attempting a dribble. And yep... he was LEFT footed only! ...

Well I think they should just fix the PPM for now, seeing I had a youngster with: Moved ball to right foot before attempting a dribble. And yep... he was LEFT footed only! ...

lol that's awesome

Isn't "Dives into tackles" for players that like to dive when tackled?

Isn't "Dives into tackles" for players that like to dive when tackled?

No, it means the player usually slides when he tackles (eg Paul Scholes), does not dive into tackles is the opposite, players that never, or very rarely slide.

Players with a low sportsmanship rating (which is hidden) are more likely to dive.

Rather than "often", "regularly", & "always", I would prefer each players PPM to be graded in strength from 1-20 the way everything else attributes-wise is.

Using a 1-20 scale would just be far too much. There would be no point giving a player a PPM and rating it at 5/20 for example. That might mean the player does it occasionally, which would still happen in the match engine anyway.

Go one further: Weight everything.

For example, Fabregas is inclined to pass short while Scholes passes longer. So if Fabregas moved to Bolton to play hoof-ball, he'd struggle to adapt.

Isn't that partly down to Arsenal's style of play though?

Using a 1-20 scale would just be far too much. There would be no point giving a player a PPM and rating it at 5/20 for example. That might mean the player does it occasionally, which would still happen in the match engine anyway.

It depends on the PPM doesn't it.

A PPM strength rating of 5 on something like "tries tricks" might be an asset.

A PPM strength rating of 15 on something like "tries trick" would be a disadvantage because he would be doing them too often.

It depends on the PPM doesn't it.

A PPM strength rating of 5 on something like "tries tricks" might be an asset.

A PPM strength rating of 15 on something like "tries trick" would be a disadvantage because he would be doing them too often.

Spot on - a perfect example would be ronaldo when he first joined UTD compared to ronaldo now - when he first joined "Tries tricks" would be at strength 15-20/20 whilst now it is more of an 8/20 - yes he does it more than other players, but he also now knows when he can do it, rather than just ****ing around on the ball.

I like this idea. A player's style of play is as important as his ability in real life, but that isn't reflected enough in FM.

I think the players should even have a second set of attributes for playing style which would list all the possible PPMs with a 1-20 rating for each as Jimbakov suggested.

You should also have the ability to mould a player's style of play. For example you could try to get him to stop show-boating, or not drive so much. A good example of this in real life is Ronaldo who was coached to play a more direct style. Obviously this would be easier with younger players, and more professional players.

Misdoctakledist, you know you can do that in 09?

Actually, as PPMs can now be trained, perhaps we could gradually see the "PPM rating" going up, like we do for positions?

Just to expand on my last point: if you ask a 28 year old to stop diving, it might reduce his diving stat by one or two points if things go well, but a youth team player would be much more malleable. It would also be affected by your reputation and your relationship with the player, and by the quality of your coaches.

This would make youth development a lot more enjoyable because you could build a team with a certain style and ethos to reflect the way you want to play.

Misdoctakledist, you know you can do that in 09?

Actually, as PPMs can now be trained, perhaps we could gradually see the "PPM rating" going up, like we do for positions?

I know you can add PPMs already, but can't ask a player to "unlearn" a PPM which is what I was suggesting. It is also fairly limited in terms of adding PPMs.

I think this an absolutely fantastic idea.

KUTGW.

Just to expand on my last point: if you ask a 28 year old to stop diving, it might reduce his diving stat by one or two points if things go well, but a youth team player would be much more malleable. It would also be affected by your reputation and your relationship with the player, and by the quality of your coaches.

This would make youth development a lot more enjoyable because you could build a team with a certain style and ethos to reflect the way you want to play.

By diving I assume you mean the 'dive into tackles' PPM? That PPM is for players that usually slide when they attempt a tackle. It's having a low sportmanship attribute that makes players dive.

I know you can add PPMs already, but can't ask a player to "unlearn" a PPM which is what I was suggesting. It is also fairly limited in terms of adding PPMs.

I'm sure someone from SI said you can get players unlearn negative PPMs. Not sure which thread it was in though.

By diving I assume you mean the 'dive into tackles' PPM? That PPM is for players that usually slide when they attempt a tackle. It's having a low sportmanship attribute that makes players dive.

I mean that players should have a 1-20 score for diving. It's not as if a player's tendency to dive is any harder to find out than his heading ability in real life. That should be reflected in the game.

I didn't know about unlearning PPMs, but I still think FM could do with a better system for influencing a player's playing style.

Diving/simulastion isn't a PPM:confused:.

I'm sure someone from SI said you can get players unlearn negative PPMs. Not sure which thread it was in though.

Well if true then that's pretty cool, but I hope it's not too easy to to get them to unlearn it.

Maybe it should be linked to hidden attributes if they can unlearn it and it should be impossible for some.

[unlearn isnt even a word but forget doesnt quite cut it so.....]

SCIAG, I know that it is linked to sportsmanship currently, but I don't think it should be. Firstly, it shouldn't be a hidden attribute. Everyone knows that Ronaldo likes to go down as much as they know that he's great at dribbling, and it is something you should be able to find out by scouting a player. Secondly, a player may have poor sportsmanship in other ways, but wouldn't dream of diving. For example centre backs who habitually shirt-pull at set pieces.

I am kind of hijacking your topic with my suggestion though so I think I'll start a different thread about it.

No, it means the player usually slides when he tackles (eg Paul Scholes), does not dive into tackles is the opposite, players that never, or very rarely slide.

Players with a low sportsmanship rating (which is hidden) are more likely to dive.

I don't believe that's true, because if it was Mascherano would have dives into tackles was one of his PPM.

And Robinho who throws himself to the ground every time someone puts a leg in front of him has dives into tackles as one of his PPM. And i don't remember seeing Robinho doing slide tackles that often.

Scoham is right. It doesn't mean that the player dives.

Where did you get that information?

That's just how the phrase is used.

And Ronaldo doesn't have "dives into tackles." That's surely proof.

By being a researcher.

Scholes has the PPM dives into tackles, and he's not known to be a diver, so there's plenty of examples the other way.

A low sportsmanship rating is used for players that dive, the the PPMs dive into tackles and does not dive into tackles are used for players that almost always tackle one way or the other, since there is no rating for it.

LeoVieira. You are mistaken.

The PPM, "dives into tackles" has absolutely nothing to do with simulation.

It's not even about a players habit of both feet coming off the floor in a two-footed lunge as has been mentioned elsewhere.

It is purley a description of the agressive nature of the players tackling style. Rather than think if he can get the ball without comitting a foul, he will dive straight into the tackle regardless.

This is a PPM that can be both good and bad given different players and different tactical instructions.

There used to be a list of PPM's floating about but that was with the old forum. Sorry.

Ok, now i get it.

Anyway, can we stay on topic.

1-20, 1-10 or 1-5?

I think it's a valid idea, but for example is Messi running down the right because of PPM or because of his instructions. If there is any range I'd go for 1-5.

"Runs with ball down right" etc. I think works like this. If a player gets the ball and runs at the back four, will be tend to move down the left, the right, or the centre? I know instructions could come into it, but most players will have a preference to some extent.

I think thats over complicated, but I would like to see the following PPM's

Antagonizes Crowd

No Look Pass

Does the Dudek (jk)