FM 13 New Video: Changes in Training

[spankie]

You are quite right, mate. Until the game comes out, it is quite impossible to be certain of anything. Nonetheless, the basic instruction you are giving your player/coach does reveal a tad, doesn't it? Especially since, from what I have understood from the video and the posts (perhaps wrongly), is that the underlying system of training has not changed, merely the UI.

If that is true and if the schedules for the players exist in a text file format then like I said above it may be possible for people to create their own training schedules for their players.

I really hope that SI have implemented it like this so that those who like to micromanage training on all of their players can do (although outside of the game) and those of us who aren't interested in that minute detail can use the new training UI.

We won't know unless a SI bod tells us or the demo is released.

[x42bn6]

This thread raises an interesting point and it is how "individualism" is trained during training sessions.

Take, for example, learning in a classroom (of insignificant variability in terms of ability). While you have one teacher, the same curriculum, same learning materials, and so on, is it possible for two students to develop in different ways during that class? How big can you make the difference?

Where I think the old training schedule falls down is that you can theoretically have one different training schedule for every single player, implying full-on micromanagement of a player's training with a limited number of coaches, implying maximum variability possible.

So in a sense, this new system appears to be better, as it limits the variability to a certain extent - whether that level of limitation is accurate would need to be measured against real-life training.

The other point that some are making is that it dumbs-down because training the old system was hard to learn. From a pure software development perspective, that is exactly what is required. The best software is invisible - you desire to perform action A, which has a direct bijection A' in the game, and the actions taken to aim towards A' in the game are clear. You never need to learn "the system". Users generally don't want to learn "the system". This is why the tactics creator was only ever the correct direction to go - users no longer needed to learn "the system" that is the world of sliders - if they wished to exploit, say, the opposition's slow left-back, they could switch to 4-3-3, tell their right-winger to attack more, and toss in a shout to focus passing down the right for good measure. The knowledge required to manage the sliders is an additional transient bit of knowledge which causes some users issues - this shouldn't be necessary.

However, this isn't "dumbing-down". I've always advocated "easy to learn, difficult to master". Removing barriers between A and A', i.e. making software invisible, is making it "easier to learn", but not necessarily making it more "difficult to master". This training improvement in theory falls into the "easier to learn" category as it reduces the complexity. Instead, any additional effort "wasted" in "learning the system" is pumped into actually making a good training schedule - "difficult to master".

I do think davidbowie has a point that there is a lot of control lost in this system, though. Some managers, quite frankly, are control freaks. Marcelo Bielsa is one - his training schedules are described here: http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/blog/2012/mar/07/marcelo-bielsa-athletic-bilbao-manchester-united

When he arrived, Bielsa had watched their 38 league games last season, writing all the details on colour-coded spreadsheets. And that really is all the details – he says: "There are 36 different forms of communicating through a pass." He watches thousands of games, building a footballing taxonomy, like some kind of botanist. If a player does something new, he labels and stores it, learning from it. Teaching from it, too. Few are so didactic: he once drew on his shoes to show players exactly which part of their foot to use, wearing them for days after. Video sessions can last five hours and players joke that they do not dare make a mistake lest the green laser rest upon them and Bielsa demand a convincing explanation.

Training is intense, even when Bielsa takes children from the crowd and gets them to deliver instructions for him. Stopwatch in hand, he preaches high pressure, constantly interrupting and demonstrating. Gangs of players sprint from pole to pole, hunting as a coordinated pack, their errors revealed to them on a laptop. There is an almost childish wonder about Pep Guardiola's description of Athletic: "They all run up … and they all run down again. Up, down, up, down, up, down. They're fascinating."

All endeavour, no aesthetics? No. Bielsa, a former Argentina and Chile manager, has altered Athletic's historic identity as the most "English" of teams, teaching them in the words of one insider "not to be afraid of the ball any more". They have scored almost twice as many headers as any other team in Spain but where the ball used to be thumped into the area at the first opportunity, it is now being worked up the pitch. Only Madrid and Barcelona have completed more passes or scored more goals. "The style is totally different," says the defender Andoni Iraola; Llorente does the "opposite" of what he did before.

Synchronisation is fundamental, attacks automatic, movement mechanised, the pitch partitioned with tape, moves constructed and deconstructed piece by piece, passes made instantly. The circulation is constant. One exercise involves eight squares: two players cannot occupy the same space; if a team-mate enters your square, you vacate it. Crossing and shooting exercises, following specific, interchanging "passageways", do not end with the shot but with players sprinting back into their starting positions. Defence and attack are not separate.

[Crispypaul]

I think some people are missing the point of those who want the old style back.

Just because we want individual training does not mean we think that real life players all train individually. Individual training does not mean we think players literally go on their own to train. We mean individual managed training within a system of team - group - player training sets.

The reality is that players will train as a whole group, in sub-groups (def, mid, fwds), in small 2/3 man groups and on their own.

We feel that the individual training represents an abstract way of allocating players to do more or less work that the rest of the team in certain areas, which is represented in real life by micromanaged player training as well as the whole group -> subgroup -> 3 man groups -> individual training -> specifically attribute training that all players go through and that represents the level of intensity in a specific area.

We also feel that the change to the training that means players can only ever train in a pre-set role or train an attribute is unrealistic and rips choice away form the user, to the detriment of those who have put the effort into the game to learn how the training module works.

We do not believe that SI should completely remove the new system, but that they should make sure that the old system remains available.

This is an astonishingly arrogant post. Who on earth do you think you speak for?

This is all just the tactics creator argument rehashed again.

[Bootador]

I think he's using the "royal we", which is fair enough given his username

[davidbowie]

The other point that some are making is that it dumbs-down because training the old system was hard to learn. From a pure software development perspective, that is exactly what is required.

The old module was not hard to learn.

It was incredibly simple. People just refused to read or ask the most basic of questions. Here is a simple explanation:

Each attribute is considered part of a specific training category.

Aerobic trains Acceleration, Agility, Balance, Pace.

etc etc for all the categories.

To improve the attributes in a given category the slider needs to be set high. Alternatively, categories in a schedule that are set low will cause players put onto it to lose attributes from that category.

Balance the categories based on what you feel is most important (or least important), and then allocate them to appropriate players.

In time their attributes will shift as the player spends more time training with the new schedules.

It's not as hard as some people claim it is.

You can google "Football Manager Training" and get this on the front page:

http://www.guidetofootballmanager.com/training/training-schedules/training-categories

It says the exact attributes and also has a guide to training.

People who didn't know what training did or how it worked were simply lazy or stupid when you consider it takes all of 10 minutes to read and understand how to use that old module and are using 'reality' or 'difficult to learn' as an excuse for their own failure as a player.

The biggest failure here is that SI haven't explained the module properly inside the game itself so that even Joe Moron from Idaho who got gifted it from his English friend can learn what to do.

Instead of actually improving their tutorial they've just ripped out the module and replaced with something that is so limited in it's choice that even an idiot can't get it wrong, because there's nothing to get wrong, even if it sacrifices depth and realism in the process.

Where I think the old training schedule falls down is that you can theoretically have one different training schedule for every single player, implying full-on micromanagement of a player's training with a limited number of coaches, implying maximum variability possible.

Those who want the old method (I say this yet again) do not believe that individual schedules mean every single player has their own individual coaching in reality and never speaks or trains with the rest of the team. Instead we believe that levels of training exist that go from whole team training to sub-group training to small group training to individual training depending on how intense the training a player in a specific area is. And that this type of training tiers is completely realistic and far more realistic that the new modules version of "everyone trains together all the time and never does anything on their own".

Take, for example, learning in a classroom (of insignificant variability in terms of ability). While you have one teacher, the same curriculum, same learning materials, and so on, is it possible for two students to develop in different ways during that class? How big can you make the difference?

That example is flawed. Training in FM is much more like an entire grade (team) of students (players) being involved in their own courses (categories), and that these students will learn (train) at different intensities in different courses, and that this intensity can be seen as students who take higher level courses, those who have intense self-study and those who get tutoring. While almost every student will take English, there will be some doing the most basic level of English, some doing Advanced English, some doing Extension English Courses, those who do additional English sub-courses like Creative Writing and those who don't do English at all.

Instead, any additional effort "wasted" in "learning the system" is pumped into actually making a good training schedule - "difficult to master".

There's nothing to master in the new system.

In the videos shown each player can pick to either train an attribute or one of the pre-set "roles" which the user has zero control over and in the video doesn't even give the user the ability to train the player outside his specific positional roles. And you can't do both. It's one or the other.

There's no depth in the new system.

You are quite right, mate. Until the game comes out, it is quite impossible to be certain of anything. Nonetheless, the basic instruction you are giving your player/coach does reveal a tad, doesn't it? Especially since, from what I have understood from the video and the posts (perhaps wrongly), is that the underlying system of training has not changed, merely the UI.

Unless by some miracle despite what SI have said in this thread and what the video showed if that the old system with the sliders is still in place then great. But I doubt it. SI would have told us by now if the old system was still in place. The video showed choosing between role training or attribute training and not doing both, it showed pre-set roles, and it showed not being able to choose a role outside the positional roles of the players main position and it didn't show any sliders or any way to get to what looks like sliders for training. They wouldn't let a topic go for three pages when 99% of the content is about something that we think has been removed but SI know is still actually in the game.

Look at 1:42 in the Video in 1080p.

It's the Individual Tab. There is literally nothing in the video that even remotely looks like it leads to an individual slider type screen. It then shows new style "focus" which then lets you choose out of attribute training or role training (and not both). It then shows the player only being allowed to pick a "Role" (match roles in the tactics engine) and no other options at all. I can only hope there is some hidden area where you can get control over the training 'roles' or that they can be edited outside the game. I'm doubtful though.

[davidbowie]

This is an astonishingly arrogant post. Who on earth do you think you speak for?

This is all just the tactics creator argument rehashed again.

The people who don't want their game dumbed down for Casual users and who want to keep the slider system and old training system in place.

I say "I think some people are missing the point of those who want the old style back" in the very first line of the post, which in my mind made it completely clear who I was "speaking for".

"Those who want the old style back."

[Svenc]

The old module was not hard to learn.

It was incredibly simple. People just refused to read or ask the most basic of questions. Here is a simple explanation:

Yeah, I think that some just missed how hovering the mouse over a training slider and holding it there for a second explains the thing itself immediately. It's not like the classic tactics setup, in which multiple instructions intertwine with each other, and some options (such as "counter attack") work entirelly differently to what is being described in the game's manual.

I wasn't around back then, but the current training module is said to be essentially more simplistic than what was in FM before it was put into place. I remember people talking about how there was much more micro-management involved, apparently you got to set up training by designing daily schedules. As it is now, it's really just a matter of taking a look at your players, deciding what you want to improve, designing a schedule, assign the players to that schedule, and you're set. You don't need a manual or guide, what attributes each of the sliders affect is described right in the game.

[x42bn6]

The old module was not hard to learn.

It was incredibly simple. People just refused to read or ask the most basic of questions. Here is a simple explanation:

It's not as hard as some people claim it is.

You can google "Football Manager Training" and get this on the front page:

http://www.guidetofootballmanager.com/training/training-schedules/training-categories

It says the exact attributes and also has a guide to training.

People who didn't know what training did or how it worked were simply lazy or stupid when you consider it takes all of 10 minutes to read and understand how to use that old module and are using 'reality' or 'difficult to learn' as an excuse for their own failure as a player.

The biggest failure here is that SI haven't explained the module properly inside the game itself so that even Joe Moron from Idaho who got gifted it from his English friend can learn what to do.

You shouldn't even need to Google it in order to figure out how to use the system. The best systems are self-documenting.

One of my pet peeves about the system was that you don't know if a training schedule is "incorrect". For example, what is a "correct" workload? Is it alright to set the workload to "Very Heavy"? Can we ignore the players complaining about the workload? How do we distinguish between attribute raises due to the training system and attribute raises due to playing time? The only real way to actually learn the basics of the sliders without documentation is to set them and wait for a few in-game years. And then take the results with a pinch of salt because player attributes rise for reasons other than training.

This is the reason why training via sliders is "difficult to learn". You don't actually know if you are doing it correctly, or even incorrectly.

Instead of actually improving their tutorial they've just ripped out the module and replaced with something that is so limited in it's choice that even an idiot can't get it wrong, because there's nothing to get wrong, even if it sacrifices depth and realism in the process.

Hence my concerns about the variability and possible lack of depth.

Those who want the old method (I say this yet again) do not believe that individual schedules mean every single player has their own individual coaching in reality and never speaks or trains with the rest of the team. Instead we believe that levels of training exist that go from whole team training to sub-group training to small group training to individual training depending on how intense the training a player in a specific area is. And that this type of training tiers is completely realistic and far more realistic that the new modules version of "everyone trains together all the time and never does anything on their own".

I would argue neither system supports it properly. It does feel seem the new system is like a Pick 'n' Mix machine where you press some buttons and stuff comes out. Grouped-training posits a requirement that we should be able to arbitrarily split our players up into various groups and assign our coaches to them and setup a full-fledged schedule. I do think the old system can mimic it better somewhat (you just pretend the different schedules for, say, your central midfielders reflect the fact that some central midfielders took part in different drills with different players).

That example is flawed. Training in FM is much more like an entire grade (team) of students (players) being involved in their own courses (categories), and that these students will learn (train) at different intensities in different courses, and that this intensity can be seen as students who take higher level courses, those who have intense self-study and those who get tutoring. While almost every student will take English, there will be some doing the most basic level of English, some doing Advanced English, some doing Extension English Courses, those who do additional English sub-courses like Creative Writing and those who don't do English at all.

You misunderstand the context in that paragraph. In that paragraph, I was posing a rhetorical question on the degree of variability possible within a tutoring environment. Let's take Manchester United. We have 6 listed coaches on our website (and not all train the first-team). Let's pretend all 6 are first-team staff as an argument. Our first-team and qualified underage reserves total around 30-35 players. Clearly, if we gave them 35 different individual training schedules, it would not be feasible to do so, because 6 coaches cannot micromanage 35 players' training (at best, you'd have to isolate them from each other, but you'd lose the benefits of a football... team). The question was how much you could actually group them before your training variability becomes too "exotic" to handle.

(And, of course, not all training schedules need the same amount of oversight... For team matches, you don't need everyone. For set-piece practice, you might not even need a coach! For teams with older players, the older players could be relied upon to act as semi-staff for smaller drills. And so on.)

There's nothing to master in the new system.

[snip the rest]

If it wasn't clear, I largely agree with you, by the way. It seems there is global training and individual focus, but limited options otherwise. I only disagree with mastering the training system (that should never be necessary), and leave open the question about how variable you can make things.

To me, something like a "training wizard" akin to the tactics creator would have been a nicer option. For example, you'd pick your promising but weakling midfielder and go to the wizard. You'd then select the "Box-to-Box midfielder" training role (that sets sliders behind the scenes), but your assistant then tells you that it's a bit pointless to use the out-of-the-box solution because George Elokobi would eat him for breakfast. You agree, and you'd click the button that puts an emphasis on strength training, to the detriment of his set-pieces (say). Then another coach tells you it's a bad idea to sacrifice that, as he has a free-kick attribute of 17 - you should pick another attribute to decrease. Then it's up to you to pick another. This is the "mastering" bit (and it sounds very much like the backroom staff alternative opinion). And, of course, you can tinker with the sliders behind the scenes.

For what it's worth, I don't think there are enough sliders - assuming this wizard takes care of the vast majority of training, we could probably afford to make it more complex behind the scenes. Things like splitting set-pieces up into set-piece teamwork (working set-piece routines as a team) and set-piece individual skills (hitting corners nicely). The fact that "Passing" falls under "Attacking" is beyond me, since Passing is something that is fundamental to football. You might want your central defenders to improve their passing without aspiring to become Xavi by wasting time trying to thread through-balls between Messi's legs (creativity), or trying to be Beckham (crossing - since when do centre-backs actively try to cross?). Surely something like Passing as its own slider would have been better?

Still, that doesn't take care of grouped training since every player can still end up with their own training schedule. Maybe we could have a warning when our training schedules become too variable, so we need more staff. Or maybe we could use these individual training schedules as a guideline and you do the "global" training with a percentage devoted to "individualism". Spend too much time on team stuff and your players turn out like sub-optimal robots; spend too much time on individualism and Daniel Sturridge will be a better team player than any of your players. Maybe in some cases there is no correct percentage - at lower levels, players don't develop that much in general anyway, so team training is the way to go. At higher levels, you could get away with more individualism. If you are QPR, you might have no option but to use individualism because let's face it - you'll have a revolving door at the end of the season anyway, so why waste your time?

[tommonufc]

After catching up on this thread, and spending 10/15mins reading through the posts I have to say that davidbowie is articulating more or less every point, view and opinion I could wish to put across; one of which is largely of disappointing, and that SI have taken a backwards step, and missed an opportunity in this years release.

Forgive me if this point has been made; I would argue that training and the development of players is one of the, if not the most important skill sets a manager can have. Therefore I believe the importance of this should be actually reflected within the game - something I fear just isn't the case with the new training model.

If you as a manager want to really harness abilities to mold, develop and train players you should be able to - there are certainly great degrees along a wide spectrum in the real world of managers who have this ability to turn a blank canvas of say, in FM terms a -9PA, into a world class player - and this ability will be reflected in those managers who play the game that decide to pay great attention to training players. You take the opposite of this, in real management [insert relevant manager here] doesn't pay so much attention to training and development to say a Marcelo Bielsa or Alex Ferguson and that same -9PA player won't turn into the same end product.

Now I'm not saying that it's right or wrong, or calling out 'casual newbs' and trying to categorize those who play the game. There have been many occasions where I haven't the time, interest or motivation to set up training schedules for players, and they've been left on the default schedules; where as their have been occasions where I want to embrace the training side of the club, and run a team in the mold of Barca, Arsenal, Man United where they produce many, many players each year that go on and have careers within professional football due to the effort and quality training and coaching they receive at these clubs.

I just don't feel that there is this same ability to immerse and embrace training anymore, and this is something that I believe to be very detrimental to the quality of the game, and the experience that many players are going to have with the game. On the whole I'm disappointing from what I've seen SI release on the FM13, but that's neither here nor there in terms of this thread.

Duties of managers in the real world are far from what they used to be I feel, gone are the days where you'd seem them as head of scouting, player recruitment, plus any other role you'd care to imagine; on the whole, to the credit of SI, I believe this is reflective within the game, and even more so this coming year with inclusions such as Head Scout, DOF, Head of youth development - but on the whole I'm left wanting more in areas of the game that real life managers have total control over. By and large these areas would focus around the tactic depth and accuracy you are able to achieve, the challenge you receive from the AI on a match day, and how you coach and train players.

Whether the slider system was good, bad or ugly, my point isn't to try and discuss this; as I don't wish to get bogged down into the specifics and debate at length the merits of each training model ect. as I see a few people are doing a great job of this already. My view, and what I would like to put across is that, irregardless of the slider system, this new model isn't up to scratch and just doesn't reflect the challenge and art that coaching players is within football management. As previously said, for me it's one of the fundamentals of being a coach or manager. I heard this mentioned the other day, I think by Tim Vickery, that within South America and Europe 'managers' are known as coaches. They coach the side, develop players and harness their abilities, plan to often minute details (see Bielsa) training sessions and how their teams will be set up in their systems; where as often in the English game, systems and tactics are shunned aside, and thought to be a bit 'nerdy' when all their team really needs is a good old motivational talk before the game, or the hairdryer treatment at half time if things aren't going to plan - and that in general English football as a culture has focused a lot more on the man-management of players, hence the term manager as opposed to coach used in English terminology.

This isn't to disregard the ability to motivate and have your players on side, look at somebody like Mourinho, whilst being tactically as brilliant as anyone he really knows how to have his players fight for him - but the ability to coach, develop and train players in a model of play is taking precedent over an ability to have your team fired up come 3 o'clock. I'd sight the example of Brendan Rodgers taking over from Dalglish at Liverpool, and go as far to say that Dalglish being a very stereotypical British manager, where as Rodgers takes on a more continental approach - something no doubt developed under his time with Mourinho, see AVB, Tottenham and Redknapp as well.

What I'll finish by saying is that now Rodgers is at Liverpool he'll want to coach his players into how he wants them to fit into a specific system, and will do this with great skill and ability - and this I feel just isn't reflective within FM, I see a small degree of challenge with the slider system, but can't see any art of skill within the new system. A fundamental basic of football management just isn't there within the game. Training should be something that has to be mastered, and not something that should be dummed down and shoe-horned in to selecting a position and specific skill or ability.

[Svenc]

Whether the slider system was good, bad or ugly, my point isn't to try and discuss this; as I don't wish to get bogged down into the specifics and debate at length the merits of each training model ect. as I see a few people are doing a great job of this already. My view, and what I would like to put across is that, irregardless of the slider system, this new model isn't up to scratch and just doesn't reflect the challenge and art that coaching players is within football management.

According to Miles Jacobson, it does - at least for the clubs he and SI are keeping in contact with regarding a halfway realistic design within the game. I'm waiting for the demo before I judge. However, I'd like to top what I posted earlier because it is funny, almost absurd considering the wealth of general options in the game: Actually, the way FM's training is now, that is right here right now, as it is in FM 2012, belongs to the most straight forward, basic and vanilla training systems in any management game I have ever played.

Even ho-hum FIFA Manager still has you doing daily schedules from Monday to Friday. There are more than 20 individual training programs all meant to influence different aspects of play. There are several slots to fill with those programs for each day. Additionally you can split your team into several groups with individual schedules, let the youth join senior training, set up individual player schedules. And to top it off, you're not merely micro-managing player development in the long run, but also levels of daily fitness and levels of general freshness, all needed to be taken into consideration when setting up your training regime. Sure, you can also let the assistant do all of that. But whoever seriously thinks FM to be thick on options and considers its training complicated likely hasn't played much of any other management game. Like ever.

Also: On FM 2012 when managing Bayern, the first thing I did was editing individual schedules for Robbery. They're prone to injury, and as the in-game tool-tips do tell you: more physical training as well as a bigger level of intensity is more likely to cause injuries during training. So I set up a schedule that adjusted those accordingly. 2011/2012 was probably my first ever season on FM that Robben played almost throughout all year. Sure, it detoriated a little from there, and I sold him by Summer 2013. Now I've never been that keen on micromanaging everything all the time, training in FIFA Manager is pretty much a testament to what training has always been like in almost every management game ever developed in Germany: lots of options, wasted on mediocre at best match day experiences where they appear to make no real difference. But the above is a level of squad and training management that hopefully is also included in the makeover.

[Alekos]

Henceforth I am 100% sure that the company aims BASICALLY the casual players and new customers..Nothing more nothing less...

[soldierblue123]

Looks really interesting.

[themadsheep2001]

Henceforth I am 100% sure that the company aims BASICALLY the casual players and new customers..Nothing more nothing less...

Exactly how can you be sure of this?

[davidbowie]

According to Miles Jacobson, it does - at least for the clubs he and SI are keeping in contact with regarding a halfway realistic design within the game. I'm waiting for the demo before I judge. However, I'd like to top what I posted earlier because it is funny, almost absurd considering the wealth of general options in the game: Actually, the way FM's training is now, that is right here right now, as it is in FM 2012, belongs to the most straight forward, basic and vanilla training systems in any management game I have ever played.

And what teams are SI most likely to be able to talk to?

Mid and lower league English teams like Wimbeldon.

I doubt they get to ask AC Milan how their Medical Lab works. I doubt they talk to Bielsa or Mourihno.

tommonufc has posted one of the best posts in this topic so far and it covers exactly why this new module is a failure.

[spankie]

How can you call the training module a failure when you have not even played it? At least give the demo a shot and then complain in a resonable manner.

At the moment you are just seeing screenshots and a few seconds worth of old video. Until the demo has been released we have no idea if it is possible to create new individual training schedules either in the game or by copying existing training schedules outside of the game and editing them as we see fit in Notepad.

I wouldn't completely discount the ability to create our own individual schedules just yet.

[TOUGHGUY]

I must say I don't like the new "training wizard" approach. Well, that is rather strongly worded, but I do dislike what it stands for.

Someone on page 1 said this is a step towards 'communicating' with the game in a language both it and the player understand. That is a fair point.

And don't get me wrong, actually understanding what the particular options do and how they change the game is important. But right now it comes at a cost of actually removing features from the game. Just like the tactics wizard.

You see, this shift in interaction with the game has been introduced only after we were given the tools that actually surpassed it in previous titles - tools now replaced by in fact more limited mechanics.

So in this regard, this is a step backwards.

We were given a large number of options - some potentially gamebreaking, yes - but instead of having them fixed and preserving the variability, only bits and pieces were hand picked instead and presented as the way to play the game.

It's not just training. It is the whole shift towards the tactics wizard, towards roles and duties. I completely understand what the developers are trying to do - see the 'language' comment - but as I said, it is a shame we had to lose things like f-arrows, individual training schedules, or the possibility to emulate certain real life tactics in the process.

[BiggusD]

It's not cheating or an exploit, but it's easy to make it become so once you work out how it works.

To bring finishing from 14 to 20 you'd need to sacrifice a lot, but what use is tackling, marking, positioning etc to a striker? You'd end up with those attributes as 1s or 2s.

I've tried that route and I must say that I found absolutely no difference at all. If the player had high enough potential he would become world class without sacrificing anything, and if not he would not be world class. If I let his "unimportant" attributes drop to 1, mediocre players stayed mediocre, but became worse in my tactic.

I'd rather have a 15-in-everything player than a 20+1 player simply because most attributes are "insensitive" from 15-20. Pace is an obvious exception, but 18 is more than fast enough, making sacrificing 10 Tackling points to get it from 18 to 20 pretty pointless.

[Alekos]

Exactly how can you be sure of this?

Are you really wondering?

Classic mode?

Simplified training?

Director of Football?

And really if you want to simplify the game and make it more casual put all those to the classic mode not to the basic game..I might not use DoF at all but training with no sliders and not seperate categories-schedules for my GKs Defenders Midfielders etc? Come on please..

[themadsheep2001]

Are you really wondering?

Classic mode?

Simplified training?

Director of Football?

And really if you want to simplify the game and make it more casual put all those to the classic mode not to the basic game..I might not use DoF at all but training with no sliders and not seperate categories-schedules for my GKs Defenders Midfielders etc? Come on please..

We've seen what, 7 videos from 25, which wont even contain everything that is new.

DoF certainly isnt just for casual/new players or whatever distinctions people are throwing out these days. They are actually a part of football, it will be an interesting experince for those who choose it, to work in more continental style, with a DoF who might not actually work with you.

Bearing in mind the long awaited updates to the ME are something that benefits everyone.

So considering the majority of information is not even out there. How can you be 100% sure?

[Alekos]

We've seen what, 7 videos from 25, which wont even contain everything that is new.

DoF certainly isnt just for casual/new players or whatever distinctions people are throwing out these days. They are actually a part of football, it will be an interesting experince for those who choose it, to work in more continental style, with a DoF who might not actually work with you.

Bearing in mind the long awaited updates to the ME are something that benefits everyone.

So considering the majority of information is not even out there. How can you be 100% sure?

Well till now I havent seen any update to to the ME and I don't think I will..The other thing I haven't seen is the improved AI which is the most BASIC part of the game..And I am 100% sure I won't see them..And you know why?Because as I mentioned in an other post if there were any updates to those they should have been the first things to mention at the blogs-videos and not the DoF and the classic mode which means more care to casuals and new customers than loyal fans..

[themadsheep2001]

Well till now I havent seen any update to to the ME and I don't think I will..The other thing I haven't seen is the improved AI which is the most BASIC part of the game..And I am 100% sure I won't see them..And you know why?Because as I mentioned in an other post if there were any updates to those they should have been the first things to mention at the blogs-videos and not the DoF and the classic mode which means more care to casuals and new customers than loyal fans..

Apart from the fact that Paul has mentioned many times there have been changes, he also posted what general kind of changes there were:

I'll clarify the situation with the ME "re-write" here once and for all.

We have re-written elements - mainly ball physics and player movement physics plus one or two other small areas of code.

We have re-factored lots of code to make it more efficient and easier to debug as years of maintenance had made some of it quite convoluted!

We have left an awful lot essentially as it was, while making small adjustments as bugs and issues come up in testing.

The result is a ME that has needed rebalancing and until we are happy with this, and that the players/teams essentially perform close to what you'd expect in real life, this will be the focus.

Once we feel the basics are solidly in place we'll move on to other areas such as tactics. Realistically there will be no major tactical work until after FM2013 at the earliest.

However I reckon most of you will see we have made significant progress from Fm2012 once we get a demo live for you. Yeah I am sure there will be a few bits to iron out but that has always been the nature of the beast and I'm old enough to realise its pointless trying to claim otherwise ;-)

Again just because they have not been announced yet, doesn't mean they are not there, hence why you cannot be 100% sure of anything, till you actually play the demo. You cannot be 100% sure of anything when you havent got access to all the information.

[7Bestie7]

Depending on my mood and time allowed I can make anywhere from 15 individual training schedules all the way up to a personal one for every single player.

But let me first say this. I never interpreted these individual schedules as each player is training on their own regardless of what the others were doing. Instead I looked at it as everyone is training in their strength/aerobic areas and the individual schedules are telling each player when/where to stop in comparison to everyone else. So "under the hood" my squad is in the gym but player X who has high strength training is then told to spend an extra half hour/hour on his work than player Y who has to start his ball control early because I want him to build up his first touch and technique. Because this is how some gym classes actually work. If you do a physiotherapy session, you're with a group of people all doing "training" at the same time but the physios are going round to each of you to make sure your individual needs are being worked on.

The video gives the impression that this ability has been taken away from me. I don't want all my defenders to be trained the same way, I don't even want all my fall backs to be trained the same way. I want my players to have the chance to be individually developed for their strengths and weaknesses. As the training currently stands I can focus a player on more than one area but maxing out the training in one category (say Ball Control) but have another be his High intensity individual focus (say passing). I like my players to be well rounded, I like having training for individual roles and have the opportunity to switch players between these routines as they progress in their careers or when I change my tactics for a few seasons. None of this appears to be possible and if it is, certainly not at the level it has been in the past.

The Tactics Creator allows for us to have a verbal way of creating our systems. "This means that, this setting will make the players do this" but we still have the option of a more detailed tweak. People think those sliders aren't realistic but there was there is a story (possible allegory) about United in 2008 when they were facing Barcelona in the Semi finals and Queiroz put training mats on the field to spell out exactly where he wanted each player to be and where to pass to. Most coaches don't go into that level of detail but some have, do and will in the future. That's the RL version of using a TC or sliders ("I want you to play deep." vs "No, I want you right here when you're defending.").

By taking away the chance to create individual schedules SI has removed that option when it comes to the training. What they should have done is improved the basic training schedules so that anyone who doesn't want to go into that depth of development still has a way of moulding their players like many coaches in football can and do. While also allowing people like me (Milan lab?) who want something specific for each player, because after all each player is an individual, to still be able to go deeper. If the options were there then I would probably mix and match more between the two but the very idea that I can't (as far as the video has shown) turns me off of playing FM13.

The development of players is a massive part of the game and if it's gone towards more cookie cutter training than individual development then it takes a massive part of the experience away.

[themadsheep2001]

Depending on my mood and time allowed I can make anywhere from 15 individual training schedules all the way up to a personal one for every single player.

But let me first say this. I never interpreted these individual schedules as each player is training on their own regardless of what the others were doing. Instead I looked at it as everyone is training in their strength/aerobic areas and the individual schedules are telling each player when/where to stop in comparison to everyone else. So "under the hood" my squad is in the gym but player X who has high strength training is then told to spend an extra half hour/hour on his work than player Y who has to start his ball control early because I want him to build up his first touch and technique. Because this is how some gym classes actually work. If you do a physiotherapy session, you're with a group of people all doing "training" at the same time but the physios are going round to each of you to make sure your individual needs are being worked on.

The video gives the impression that this ability has been taken away from me. I don't want all my defenders to be trained the same way, I don't even want all my fall backs to be trained the same way. I want my players to have the chance to be individually developed for their strengths and weaknesses. As the training currently stands I can focus a player on more than one area but maxing out the training in one category (say Ball Control) but have another be his High intensity individual focus (say passing). I like my players to be well rounded, I like having training for individual roles and have the opportunity to switch players between these routines as they progress in their careers or when I change my tactics for a few seasons. None of this appears to be possible and if it is, certainly not at the level it has been in the past.

The Tactics Creator allows for us to have a verbal way of creating our systems. "This means that, this setting will make the players do this" but we still have the option of a more detailed tweak. People think those sliders aren't realistic but there was there is a story (possible allegory) about United in 2008 when they were facing Barcelona in the Semi finals and Queiroz put training mats on the field to spell out exactly where he wanted each player to be and where to pass to. Most coaches don't go into that level of detail but some have, do and will in the future. That's the RL version of using a TC or sliders ("I want you to play deep." vs "No, I want you right here when you're defending.").

By taking away the chance to create individual schedules SI has removed that option when it comes to the training. What they should have done is improved the basic training schedules so that anyone who doesn't want to go into that depth of development still has a way of moulding their players like many coaches in football can and do. While also allowing people like me (Milan lab?) who want something specific for each player, because after all each player is an individual, to still be able to go deeper. If the options were there then I would probably mix and match more between the two but the very idea that I can't (as far as the video has shown) turns me off of playing FM13.

The development of players is a massive part of the game and if it's gone towards more cookie cutter training than individual development then it takes a massive part of the experience away.

Excellent post, pretty much my view on it. Guess we will have to see how it pans out in the demo.

[tommonufc]

Here, here.

My view regarding training and the video first posted in this thread is one of SI really selling themselves short.

I've said this numerous times, but I'll touch on it again; I have played FM long enough to class myself as an experienced player, as many others are, and overall a massive fan of what SI have done with the Football Manager series (I mean, would we all spend as much time as we do playing the game if we weren't?), but I'm getting the the overriding impression that the game is being catered for the masses, rather than the 'die-hard FM'er' shall we say. The fundamental basics of football management, from coaching your league side, to managing in an El Classico, year on year are not being progressed and developed; rather features and additions being added to the game that are rather on the periphery. Due to this, as a seasoned FM player I certainly feel that the game is just isn't progressing, certainly to my needs and wants as it should be.

With next years game I shall no doubt win the Premier League at a canter with a top side, as I have done this year; take a side from the lower leagues to titles and silverware at a rate that would be inconceivable within the real world, and countless other situations and scenarios that can be played within the game. Here lies my first issue with the game, whilst playing all of these saves, at a point the challenge of the game ends, and you then have to source your own spin on the game to keep interest and maintain a modicum of challenge - the replication of a real life tactic, only using home-grown players, developing young players, the list can go on. There are obvious exceptions to this no doubt, but you only need to look around countless team threads and see hundreds of people achieving, and in some cases well beyond reality. I understand that FM is at the end of the day a simulation, and to balance my point slightly I understand that real life cannot be replicated. But by and large, for a seasoned gamer success and the challenge from the AI comes all too easy - therefore, in my view not giving an accurate representation of what it's like to be a football manager at all.

The most basic barometer of a manager is their ability to win games of football. In the real world you are going to be up against another manager who has put hours and hours of preparation into the following 90mins, and is damn sure you are not going to turn up and take the 3 points without a fight. Do you really feel this with the game, I certainly don't, and this fundamentally comes down to the intelligence of the AI you are up against. This is how, I as a seasoned player of FM is going to find his challenge and enjoyment from, and from which other areas of success, enjoyment stem from. With an improved challenge from the AI you are going to see greater tactical complexity within the ME, improved squad management plus various other areas that will give you challenge from your title rivals. With this you are going to need to our game to match a more intelligent AI; meaning that without sufficient planning or preparation in various areas behind the scenes, the simplest of 3rd FA Cup ties can turn into a giant killing. Fundamentally realigning the challenge, skill and ability it takes to be a successful manager within the real world; obviously to an acceptable level, as after all it's a simulation.

This is what I, and I'm sure many others want from Football Manager. But whilst writing this, I understand Joe Bloggs picking up the game for the first time has no understanding of how infuriating it is not to get a back three to work properly, or to see an AI Man City make a complete hash of the transfer market; what he wants is to load up the game for the first time, pick his favorite side and achieve success with them - if the game is too hard, and he really cannot gain promotion with Ipswich Town he's not going to find enjoyment, let alone appreciate the complexity of the AI that seasoned FM'ers are craving for, and think "Yes, Barnsley really did do well in the January window and they deserve that final play off spot", they are going to think the game is too hard and not play any longer - very few will have the desire to work at what it takes to succeed within the game.

For SI and Sega this would be a disaster, and they certainly wouldn't have received such widespread accolation that they have with recent FMs is they had produced a game that only catered for the 'seasoned FM'er' and was simply too complex and hard for the man on the street too understand. That is one end of a spectrum I feel, and something that simply wouldn't work, but the overriding impression I'm getting is one of the opposite of what I have said. The term 'dumbed down' has been banded around somewhat within this thread, and even if we don't agree with the sentiment entirely, I hope we can all understand what the term means and certain connotations that it stands for. For the first time ever, the upcoming weeks of a new FM release, I'm not the tad excited. I have a general feeling of disappointing from what I've seen, and the impression that can be summed up with a shrug of the shoulders and a sigh of 'is that it?' I have a few reasons behind this, some that don't need to be touched on here but a common place around the forums no doubt, but shooting to the top of the list has seen the new training feature go.

When I first set eyes on the training sliders, I certainly didn't have a clue, and for the first couple of FM releases I played I generally didn't pay too much attention to this area of the game. Reasons behind this would be that it was rather complicated from first impressions, and I didn't have too much of an idea of what I was doing. But when the time came to embrace this side of management I took time to understand how to use it. This could have quite easily gone the other way, I could have held a certain level of complexity against the game and not wished to rate the overall package as highly, or just flat out not play it. A very similar tale can be told with tactics. What we have now, along with the tactics wizard is something that is designed not to put off first time users, or the 'newbie' 'casual player' or what ever you want to categorize people who aren't as experienced with the game as others no doubt are. I can understand this need, as it's going to allow Sega and SI to sell more and more copies each year, as it's going to be a game that's going to be viewed as something you can quickly pick up and play, rather than needing hours and hours.

This is no more so than with the inclusion of the styles of play in FM13 - and is something I can appreciate despite it something I can't see myself using. Other features added to the game this year I see as nothing more than cosmetics, and whilst add to your gaming experience, do not offset the lack of evolution within other areas of the game. I can understand the inclusion of various new levels of staff, but I can honestly say I can do without a Director of Football, or Head Scout; what I do want is to immerse myself into a game that offers a greater degree of challenge from various directions - and to re-direct back to topic, I wanted a new training model; but what I'm seeing just isn't that.

I think the most glaring mistake made has been to completely remove the existing training model from the game, where a training set-up akin to the tactic creator sat alongside the classic model. I'm by far a creative sort, so would not best suited to thinking up new ideas of how training can be taken on to the next level, but I certainly wouldn't have plucked for a set-up where by I select a standard training schedule from a pre-set drop down list that fits in with the position said player plays in, with only a supplementary training to go with. This just seems such a step backwards. At least with the slider system I have a greater degree of control of how my players will train, and most importantly will develop, and how I can set-up training accordingly so that they can fit into styles of play. For instance I may take a 19 year old winger who has some decent base attributes that you may wish in a full back, and through intensive work in certain areas, that come as an opportunity cost to potential attacking development you can turn him into an attacking winger - this is what was done with Ashley Cole; and something I tend to do with midfielders, I develop them into defenders who have greater ability on the ball. I will say the ability to micro-manage throughout the week certain areas of team training is an improvement, but again I feel that certain pre-set options on how your team prepares for games just isn't up to scratch in it's complexity and representation to how hard real life managers will work on these areas. Instead of clicking an option to work on set-pieces, I'd want to work on how my players move and attack the delivery of a corner. How my defender will beat his man, how other players will stop and block the oppositions 'John Terry' player from winning the ball in the air. Working on set-pieces should be something I have to think about, and plan, and without doing this my set-plays on a Saturday should be representative of this - without working meticulously on how I'm going to defend against the oppositions 6'7'' center back coming up for corners I should be punished - here lies how a the AI and general gameplay can offer challenege to you. As I'm damn sure every single manager within the Football League will have an idea through scout reports and general knowledge of the threats they are up against at the weekend when it comes to an area of the game such as set-pieces, and will plan accordingly on the training ground to combat this - but all we have within FM is as it stands a drop down menu. Other examples can be made until the cows come home, 'defensive positioning', what about how I am going to stop a Rooney dropping deep off the back line, or how I am going to work on doubling up out-wide to nullify a pacy winger.

Whilst writing this, stemming from my thoughts on how basic training is, it's easy for me to see how each area of the game can flow into each other - scout reports of greater detail, look at one of AVB's in his time at Chelsea http://www.bragafut.com/artigos/art18.pdf ; this is the degree of complexity and accuracy that happens within the real world, but I can get by from save to save, season after season without taking a second glance at my opposition scout report, and see no adverse affect as a manager in doing so. By having greater scout reports on opposition, you will then be able to take that greater degree of tactical complexity (overhalued ME) and there will be a need to guide your players on the training pitch in how to combat who you will be playing. If your playing a side that likes to keep the ball and is dominant when in possession, you should be able to emphasis the importance of team shape and how you are going to keep your lines between defence and midfield tight.This therefore will undoubtedly need greater tactical accuracy from the ME and AI to allow you to be effectively punished by not keeping those lines tight, and allowing a side too much space to pass through you. The tactical approach from the AI should be that if you are nullifying this threat, they change tact, and you then need to combat a plan B. I go back to the same point, maybe I'm missing the point, but this is what you would be doing if you are a real football manager.

I've rambled on far longer than I envisaged, probably to my determent in the points I'm trying to put across; but as one of SI's loyal customer base, I just don't feel the game is evolving at a rate it should and continuing to offering a challenge to the more seasoned player any longer - example, Head Scouts, Head of Youth Development; these roles have been around for many, many years in the real world, but only now they are being introduced and seen to be a big feature, when fundamentally they could have been put in place a couple of series ago, and by this time they could really add something that would be otherwise unattainable by you as a manager. I mean, everything a head scout will be able to do, I can do manually within FM12 anyway - these features should really be supplementary to further developed angles within the game. The Head Scout has been introduced, by I'm not seeing any evolution into how players are tracked or how thier attributes or standing is ascertained - if this was the case, the inclusion of this role would be really something, where as it's just adding very little to what was already available.

[Shakes]

The problem with that 7Bestie7 is that as currently implemented there's a lot of pointless farting around with sliders to get that effect. You shouldn't have to micromanage: that's what we have computers for.

My ideal training system is one where I can just say "I want this guy to be a winger - attack" and the game works out how to "set the sliders" to make that happen. It should be dynamic based on the player I give it too: I ask my coaches to turn a slower player into that role and they'll intensively work out his aerobic, where as if I put a fast guy with poor skill on it it'll work on things like dribbling and crossing. There's really no reason for me to have to set sliders after all: the game knows its own rules, and can easily work out where they need to be at to make the player into what I intend him to be. It shouldn't be burdening me with what is essentially busywork that it can do perfectly well all by itself.

The other benefit of breaking it down like that is it's something the AI can probably get good use out of. If you put players on a training schedule based on the position/role you intend them to play them it shouldn't be too hard to have the AI capable of making sensible decisions about that too, based on the formation the AI manager is employing.

I don't think this system is there yet: it seems to just be a UI makeover that has a greater range of static schedules and hides the sliders. But moving away from a slider based interface is certainly a step towards the place it needs to be, even if it means that the FM2013 implementation feels a bit interim.

[davidbowie]

We've seen what, 7 videos from 25, which wont even contain everything that is new.

DoF certainly isnt just for casual/new players or whatever distinctions people are throwing out these days. They are actually a part of football, it will be an interesting experince for those who choose it, to work in more continental style, with a DoF who might not actually work with you.

The DoF as played in FM 13 is nothing more than a glorified assistant manager who will take over parts of the game that a casual player doesn't want to deal with. He will have no control other than what the human player gives him. From the options I've seen most non-casual players will take all control away from the DoF except perhaps selling/loaning players that are transfer listed because of how poor the AI is at squad decisions and contract negotiations.

[Preveza]

The DoF as played in FM 13 is nothing more than a glorified assistant manager who will take over parts of the game that a casual player doesn't want to deal with. He will have no control other than what the human player gives him. From the options I've seen most non-casual players will take all control away from the DoF except perhaps selling/loaning players that are transfer listed because of how poor the AI is at squad decisions and contract negotiations.

Ok David...So yes the DoF perhaps might be a glorified version of the Assistant manager, but I personally think it is a good and positive inclusion which in fact makes the game more realistic. Thats the way I want to look at it. Yes it may reduce the workload on us managers in the game, but in hindsight, doesn't it do the same IRL?

SI is trying to give us a more realistic life like game and we need to give them praise here instead of bashing them about targetting the game for 'newbs', and going backwards.

Ok..So what would you like implemented in FM13 ?

We can sit here and criticise SI about this new feature, but until we see more videos/blogs, and ultimately the demo, I think some of us should simply stick to the topic (In this thread its the training regime) and quit talking about how FM is making the game specifically 'newb' friendly.

Not criticising you David btw. Merely a discussion

[BiggusD]

This is what I, and I'm sure many others want from Football Manager. But whilst writing this, I understand Joe Bloggs picking up the game for the first time has no understanding of how infuriating it is not to get a back three to work properly, or to see an AI Man City make a complete hash of the transfer market; what he wants is to load up the game for the first time, pick his favorite side and achieve success with them - if the game is too hard, and he really cannot gain promotion with Ipswich Town he's not going to find enjoyment, let alone appreciate the complexity of the AI that seasoned FM'ers are craving for, and think "Yes, Barnsley really did do well in the January window and they deserve that final play off spot", they are going to think the game is too hard and not play any longer - very few will have the desire to work at what it takes to succeed within the game.

For the record, I have played CM/FM from the beginning as well, but I will stop playing it the day it will be necessary to watch the entire full matches and make fundamental tactical adjustments in order to win.

That is, right now it is possible to create a tactic that is well balanced and works well against a number of tactics and a range of opponent levels, but it is impossible for SI to create an ME that behaves realistically in all the possible variations that are caused by the sheer number of tactical combinations. The limitations of the TC-system, however, make it easy to achieve realism. In other words, the days of the Classic Tactics are numbered, and by extension my interest in the game.

It is impossible for me to reacreate a style of football I enjoy watching using TC+shouts, and if it was it would be so complex that they could just have kept Classic anyways. So yes I agree with you, I don't like the direction SI is heading.

[7Bestie7]

The problem with that 7Bestie7 is that as currently implemented there's a lot of pointless farting around with sliders to get that effect. You shouldn't have to micromanage: that's what we have computers for.

My ideal training system is one where I can just say "I want this guy to be a winger - attack" and the game works out how to "set the sliders" to make that happen. It should be dynamic based on the player I give it too: I ask my coaches to turn a slower player into that role and they'll intensively work out his aerobic, where as if I put a fast guy with poor skill on it it'll work on things like dribbling and crossing. There's really no reason for me to have to set sliders after all: the game knows its own rules, and can easily work out where they need to be at to make the player into what I intend him to be. It shouldn't be burdening me with what is essentially busywork that it can do perfectly well all by itself.

The other benefit of breaking it down like that is it's something the AI can probably get good use out of. If you put players on a training schedule based on the position/role you intend them to play them it shouldn't be too hard to have the AI capable of making sensible decisions about that too, based on the formation the AI manager is employing.

I don't think this system is there yet: it seems to just be a UI makeover that has a greater range of static schedules and hides the sliders. But moving away from a slider based interface is certainly a step towards the place it needs to be, even if it means that the FM2013 implementation feels a bit interim.

So do what you suggested. Take the concept of a Tactics Creator and turn it into a Training Creator.

1. Create New Training Schedule
   
2. Set Position and/or role.
   
3. Type of training - Pre-Season, injury recovery, fitness (Aerobic/Strength focus), tactical, technique, level of overall intensity
   
4. Series of drop down menus which alter the focus of the slider positions. Such as:
   
   • Aerobic Intensity - Lesser, Normal, Heavier.
     
   • Strength Intensity - Lesser, Normal, Heavier
     
   • Something potentially for all areas of training
     

[*]Save Training

[*]Button to "go classic" which allows you to then see what all your choices have done to the sliders.

What this does is create options the AI is capable of using (by essentially using/expanding the same code that has the AI use the Tactics Creator), makes the building of personalised training schedules that much easier for those who want it OR you can create only role specifc training schedules and put all your WBs, FBs, DMS, CPMs/APMS, STs into it and then not look back. With a single click/drop down you would be able to change the training to a Pre-Season version which would fundamentally alter the position of the sliders but keep the ratio of the other options the same to make sure physical attributes are worked on but the rest aren't forgotten.

It's not that difficult a concept to come up with after seeing the TC work and would a far less turn off than what I'm seeing in this video.

[BiggusD]

So do what you suggested. Take the concept of a Tactics Creator and turn it into a Training Creator.

1. Create New Training Schedule
   
2. Set Position and/or role.
   
3. Type of training - Pre-Season, injury recovery, fitness (Aerobic/Strength focus), tactical, technique, level of overall intensity
   
4. Series of drop down menus which alter the focus of the slider positions. Such as:
   
   • Aerobic Intensity - Lesser, Normal, Heavier.
     
   • Strength Intensity - Lesser, Normal, Heavier
     
   • Something potentially for all areas of training
     

[*]Save Training

[*]Button to "go classic" which allows you to then see what all your choices have done to the sliders.

What this does is create options the AI is capable of using (by essentially using/expanding the same code that has the AI use the Tactics Creator), makes the building of personalised training schedules that much easier for those who want it OR you can create only role specifc training schedules and put all your WBs, FBs, DMS, CPMs/APMS, STs into it and then not look back. With a single click/drop down you would be able to change the training to a Pre-Season version which would fundamentally alter the position of the sliders but keep the ratio of the other options the same to make sure physical attributes are worked on but the rest aren't forgotten.

It's not that difficult a concept to come up with after seeing the TC work and would a far less turn off than what I'm seeing in this video.

OR:

1. Go to Team Policy

2. Click on the box named "Head coach administring training schedules"

3. Click on confirm

And then, based on the quality of your coaches, they will be able to analyze the actual individual tactical instructions of your tactic what kind of training would suit each and every player in the squad. So if you have four strikers, two obvious poachers and two obvious target men, and the tactic has one poacher and one target man, he would figure that out and fix the training for you. The better the coaches, the more specific the training.

[davidbowie]

Ok David...So yes the DoF perhaps might be a glorified version of the Assistant manager, but I personally think it is a good and positive inclusion which in fact makes the game more realistic. Thats the way I want to look at it. Yes it may reduce the workload on us managers in the game, but in hindsight, doesn't it do the same IRL?

SI is trying to give us a more realistic life like game and we need to give them praise here instead of bashing them about targetting the game for 'newbs', and going backwards.

Ok..So what would you like implemented in FM13 ?

We can sit here and criticise SI about this new feature, but until we see more videos/blogs, and ultimately the demo, I think some of us should simply stick to the topic (In this thread its the training regime) and quit talking about how FM is making the game specifically 'newb' friendly.

Not criticising you David btw. Merely a discussion

I don't have a problem with the inclusion of the DOF. Because it doesn't take away any control. I'll use it for a couple of the options listed for the DoF. I'm just pointing out that the FMDoF isn't like it is in reality.

My issue with dumbing down the game for casual 'noob' players and going backwards by removing depth and player control is when SI remove the existing in-depth options that non-casual, long term players of FM use.

SI want to include casual mode? Cool, as long as existing mode is there.

They want to introduce new tactics? Good, I use the new tactics module as the basic starting block for my own tactics.

Training module? SI implemented the new casual friendly option and removed the old one.

[Smurf]

The DoF is there if you want to use it. It doesn't dumb the game down and isn't just for noobs. It's just way automating things - and it's handy for noobs or experts of the game that don't want to take control of certain areas of the game for various reasons.

Nobody has taken away the existing mode - it's still there if you want it. It's just another option.

There should be a DoF in football manager, as that's they way some clubs operate.

[Govnar1]

...scout reports of greater detail, look at one of AVB's in his time at Chelsea http://www.bragafut.com/artigos/art18.pdf...

I have never seen this before, it's very intriguing. Than you!

[x42bn6]

OR:

1. Go to Team Policy

2. Click on the box named "Head coach administring training schedules"

3. Click on confirm

And then, based on the quality of your coaches, they will be able to analyze the actual individual tactical instructions of your tactic what kind of training would suit each and every player in the squad. So if you have four strikers, two obvious poachers and two obvious target men, and the tactic has one poacher and one target man, he would figure that out and fix the training for you. The better the coaches, the more specific the training.

They're not the same. 7Bestie7 is merely suggesting a less-fiddly version of the training system as it is (in the same way that the tactics creator is a less-fiddly version of the tactics sliders). For example, when inputting a new training schedule via the wizard, the strength of your coaches is immaterial - it merely follows a set of templates that can be refined further (if you wish). Yours involves the coaches from the very start.

If you like, imagine SI provide 30 different default training schedules representing all the different roles (i.e. for full-back: attacking full-back, defensive full-back, Dani Alves); then based on coaching feedback/your personal fancies, you can go into "advanced" mode and tinker with it further.

[Smurf]

Training module? SI implemented the new casual friendly option and removed the old one.

They didn't implement a new casual friendly option and they didn't remove anything at all.

It was explained earlier. They rewrote how the training was done to make it more realistic, and more inline to how it works in reality.

Yeh you can say they removed things - but that sounds like they did something wrong. And they didn't do anything wrong here. They simply made it better.

[Äktsjon Männ]

They didn't implement a new casual friendly option and they didn't remove anything at all.

It was explained earlier. They rewrote how the training was done to make it more realistic, and more inline to how it works in reality.

Yeh you can say they removed things - but that sounds like they did something wrong. And they didn't do anything wrong here. They simply made it better.

They didn't rewrite anything.

The way training works in relation to player progression and the coaching duties is pretty much the same under the hood, however there have been some changes to accommodate things like focusing a player on a role instead of just one attribute and the new team level focuses and intensities.

It's just a new coat that hides the option to tweak training schedules. Which are still there in the form of defaults. To say that it's better or more realistic is just your opinion which is based on absolutely nothing substantial. Unless you've have inside info on training methods at top level football clubs. In which case we'd be glad to hear your insight.

[7Bestie7]

They're not the same. 7Bestie7 is merely suggesting a less-fiddly version of the training system as it is (in the same way that the tactics creator is a less-fiddly version of the tactics sliders). For example, when inputting a new training schedule via the wizard, the strength of your coaches is immaterial - it merely follows a set of templates that can be refined further (if you wish). Yours involves the coaches from the very start.

If you like, imagine SI provide 30 different default training schedules representing all the different roles (i.e. for full-back: attacking full-back, defensive full-back, Dani Alves); then based on coaching feedback/your personal fancies, you can go into "advanced" mode and tinker with it further.

Exactly this!

[pigfacemonkeyman]

If, as it seems, a lot of control has been taken away and replaced by templates, it's not just losing the ability to tailor training for each individual at your club, but losing the possibility of creating a unique team within your game.

Also the trend of simplifying, ie loss of control in areas of the game that really are essential whilst padding out boring non-essential areas by adding tone and extra questions is a bit worrying to say the least.

[davidbowie]

They didn't implement a new casual friendly option and they didn't remove anything at all.

It was explained earlier. They rewrote how the training was done to make it more realistic, and more inline to how it works in reality.

Yeh you can say they removed things - but that sounds like they did something wrong. And they didn't do anything wrong here. They simply made it better.

I know you're trying to suck up enough to get a mod position or something (because you suck up and defend everything SI do in every thread I see you in), but I've told you that you're wrong.

They have removed the slider option which was just as realistic as the new casual dumbed down system of pre-set 'options' that may or may not fit your player and team philosophy.

This new options is very 'casual friendly' because it's no-depth, no learning curve and the only thing a human can do for his players is pick either a role or an attribute.

So there's one thing they've removed, the ability to train a player in their role and in attributes at the same time. If your player is training an attribute he can't train in an actual role so he'll get stuck with whatever training the generic default is. So please, you're wrong again.

There are multiple posts in this thread not just by me that explain why you are wrong and why depth and choice has been ripped away and why that is bad. If you want to contribute to the thread I suggest actually reading and understanding it before blindly defending SI without comprehension of what is being discussed.

[Smurf]

That's your opinion and I'm fine with that.

I've 0 interest in being a moderator either, where that came from I will never know.

[Dekkard]

Synopsis:

Group A - All change is bad.

Group B - All change is good.

Group C - Change may or may not be bad or good but lets wait and see?

TBH the moment they removed the wibble wobble they ruined it and made it too easy for the casual id... (sarcasm was intended during this last line).

[Svenc]

FIn other words, the days of the Classic Tactics are numbered, and by extension my interest in the game.

But nobody has ever hinted at that. Sure, the way the training module is developing might hint at it, but until then there is no reason to suggest otherwise. The TC doesn't make things that more "hands-on" if you don't want it to, it merely translates sliders into options that are doing on the pitch what they are being described as doing. You have never needed to watch the match in full on any version, and with the TC it's still about sensible strategic decisions here and there, not micromanaging tactics by each minute of a match, and by no means is anyone "forced" to watch the entire game. For sensible decision making, the statistics suffice. I do watch the full games for important matches, as its really something else, but for the most part I also stick with highlights/advanced highlights, playing a mix between TC and sliders, leaning towards the latter, actually still. Within the German community, despite the many options and permutations of those with which you can immediately try to turn things around in many many ways without saving two thousand "classic" tactics, many accuse the TC of actually "dumbing down" the game, not making it more realistic. As you can still pick a general tactics or two, stick with those and get results all the same it seems. And "working" tactics are set up quicker than ever before.

SI are making all these adjustments to make the game more accessible to more people, how would making people spend the best of an hour on a simulated football match fit into that? Though I think it is important to further simulate a "real" match, not only because it is one thing that sets SI leagues apart from every other football game developer on the markt right now, but also because it allows for more tactical depth, more realistic and thus immersive ebbs, flows and statistics you can assess and compare to the real thing - and further just for more believable football than the nonstop action of FIFA/PES. In fact I'm secretly hoping SI are going to expand on their one eight-of a second simulation one day and go all the way. As it is now matches in FM are pretty much the length a real match lasts without stoppage time on medium/normal speed settings, as the one-eight of a second brought frequently up in interviews by SI would suggest.

It is clear however, that different people want different things. The vast majority of FM players likels is of the type tommonufc describes. Personally, coming from 20 years of rather arcadish management games before, of which there are a buttload, I've become attracted to FM because of its level of "realism". Yeah, you're not required to hold a coaching badge or have a degree in man management, it's still a game that you can fire up whenever you want to, and there have always been numerous exploits such as "player search", the rather simplified scouting, but apart from that SI seemed keen on going pretty much all the way without sacrificing much of any. There will probably come a time to decide where to actually go, rather than trying to cater to all of peoples' needs individually.

[BiggusD]

But nobody has ever hinted at that. Sure, the way the training module is developing might hint at it, but until then there is no reason to suggest otherwise. The TC doesn't make things that more "hands-on" if you don't want it to, it merely translates sliders into options that are doing on the pitch what they are being described as doing. You have never needed to watch the match in full on any version, and with the TC it's still about sensible strategic decisions here and there, not micromanaging tactics by each minute of a match, and by no means is anyone "forced" to watch the entire game. For sensible decision making, the statistics suffice. I do watch the full games for important matches, as its really something else, but for the most part I also stick with highlights/advanced highlights, playing a mix between TC and sliders, leaning towards the latter, actually still. Within the German community, despite the many options and permutations of those with which you can immediately try to turn things around in many many ways without saving two thousand "classic" tactics, many accuse the TC of actually "dumbing down" the game, not making it more realistic. As you can still pick a general tactics or two, stick with those and get results all the same it seems. And "working" tactics are set up quicker than ever before.

SI are making all these adjustments to make the game more accessible to more people, how would making people spend the best of an hour on a simulated football match fit into that? Though I think it is important to further simulate a "real" match, not only because it is one thing that sets SI leagues apart from every other football game developer on the markt right now, but also because it allows for more tactical depth, more realistic and thus immersive ebbs, flows and statistics you can assess and compare to the real thing - and further just for more believable football than the nonstop action of FIFA/PES. In fact I'm secretly hoping SI are going to expand on their one eight-of a second simulation one day and go all the way. As it is now matches in FM are pretty much the length a real match lasts without stoppage time on medium/normal speed settings, as the one-eight of a second brought frequently up in interviews by SI would suggest.

It is clear however, that different people want different things. The vast majority of FM players likels is of the type tommonufc describes. Personally, coming from 20 years of rather arcadish management games before, of which there are a buttload, I've become attracted to FM because of its level of "realism". Yeah, you're not required to hold a coaching badge or have a degree in man management, it's still a game that you can fire up whenever you want to, and there have always been numerous exploits such as "player search", the rather simplified scouting, but apart from that SI seemed keen on going pretty much all the way without sacrificing much of any. There will probably come a time to decide where to actually go, rather than trying to cater to all of peoples' needs individually.

I was just saying that SI is trying to steer FM towards less options in order to meet the demand of a better ME. There is no need for more complexity, though - just a better AI. It puzzles me that any game developer would want to design a single-player game (mostly) around things the user can do and then try to make the AI compete with the humans. The sensible method of single-player game creation is to begin with the design of the AI and what it can do, then the UI for us humans. After all, FM -is- the AI. It is like the game designers come up with an idea like that of the training module saying "this will make it much easier to use for the gamers", then someone asks "well, will the AI be able to use it?" "....eeeer no that would take way too much processing power. We will have to simulate it as generically as possible, so that its effect on AI-controlled players appear realistically and fairly. It will probably take hundreds of hours of testing to find the right balance."

Let's repeat that with tactics. "aah finally done with the TC. Amazing work guys, this is much more intuitive and immersive for our customers." "So what will we do about the AI tactics?" "...uh no idea. It can't use all these options, it would take too much testing to balance correctly." "What about just maxing out mentality and forward runs when they are behind and minimizing those when they are in the lead?" "Yeah that would work. Apply that to all formations in all football cultures! It will probably be enough to simulate tactical changes so that things appear differently as the score changes".

Aaaand let's repeat that with scouting: "... so this way we've obscured the CA/PA values enough that they'll find only 10% of the actual world class talents, and since they're randomly distributed it will take time to build a team consisting only of them. Brilliant work guys!" "So how will the AI managers find them?" "Dude, they can't use actual scouts, that will take too much processing time! We will have to simulate scouting knowledge by assigning the knowledge of the existence of world-class talent randomly to the big clubs upon creation." "But wouldn't that be considered rubber-banding?" "No, that's for racing games. Besides, how else are we going to do it?"

[Bababui]

They didn't implement a new casual friendly option and they didn't remove anything at all.

It was explained earlier. They rewrote how the training was done to make it more realistic, and more inline to how it works in reality.

Yeh you can say they removed things - but that sounds like they did something wrong. And they didn't do anything wrong here. They simply made it better.

You would be wrong.

[Bababui]

Also the trend of simplifying, ie loss of control in areas of the game that really are essential whilst padding out boring non-essential areas by adding tone and extra questions is a bit worrying to say the least.

I couldnt agree more with this analysis.

[tommonufc]

Originally Posted by pigfacemonkeyman

Also the trend of simplifying, ie loss of control in areas of the game that really are essential whilst padding out boring non-essential areas by adding tone and extra questions is a bit worrying to say the least.

I couldnt agree more with this analysis.

Agreed as well; for me features such as improved network play, leaderboards, added staff are all supplementary features that shouldn't be branded and packaged as near revolutionary; especially when the core of the game is becoming outdated by each and every release.

Adding extra staff into the game surely cannot have been such a development, or unthinkable addition that it couldn't have been implemented years ago?

Why has it taken so long for SI to finally wake up, smell the coffee and overhaul the training model - and even when they have done so they make a clear sub-standard effort in doing so. Maybe I'm expecting too much, but year on year I'd like to think that SI can really make leaps and bounds with the fundamental basics of how we play the game and compete against the AI - Match engine, tactical accuracy, training models, an improved CA/PA model? Surely year on year we should be expecting major changes in areas of the game that really affect the enjoyment and gaming experience, instead of which we are given additions that add little to how I'm playing the game - I mean why has it taken SI so long to add in a feature that allows me to dictate squad status of a player when I'm loaning him out. I could be wrong, but am I right in saying that the last brand new ME was back in FM09? and even now I'm lead to believe that this year won't be a new ME in the sense that you can achieve greater tactical control over your team, not until FM14 - with this years ME only being a tarted up addition with improved ball flight ect. - features that should have already been there in the first place, instead of which they are forgoing improvements into real issues such as center backs moving wide, an inability to effectively play a libero, inability to press in groups.

If I hadn't already pre-orderd FM13 ahead of the demo on a whim, I'd certainly have strong reservations on whether to bother - as right now I'm regretting the purchase, on the pure basis that I don't think SI have done enough to improve the game in key areas to warrant me spending money on a 'new, improved' release.

[Shakes]

So do what you suggested. Take the concept of a Tactics Creator and turn it into a Training Creator.

1. Create New Training Schedule
   
2. Set Position and/or role.
   
3. Type of training - Pre-Season, injury recovery, fitness (Aerobic/Strength focus), tactical, technique, level of overall intensity
   
4. Series of drop down menus which alter the focus of the slider positions. Such as:
   
   • Aerobic Intensity - Lesser, Normal, Heavier.
     
   • Strength Intensity - Lesser, Normal, Heavier
     
   • Something potentially for all areas of training
     

[*]Save Training

[*]Button to "go classic" which allows you to then see what all your choices have done to the sliders.

What this does is create options the AI is capable of using (by essentially using/expanding the same code that has the AI use the Tactics Creator), makes the building of personalised training schedules that much easier for those who want it OR you can create only role specifc training schedules and put all your WBs, FBs, DMS, CPMs/APMS, STs into it and then not look back. With a single click/drop down you would be able to change the training to a Pre-Season version which would fundamentally alter the position of the sliders but keep the ratio of the other options the same to make sure physical attributes are worked on but the rest aren't forgotten.

It's not that difficult a concept to come up with after seeing the TC work and would a far less turn off than what I'm seeing in this video.

That's not what I suggested at all though. You're just suggesting a different interface to the same old static schedules. I'm thinking something much more radical.

Schedules need to be dynamic: if a player is lacking in one area for the role you want the player to play then the game should be smart enough to put them on intensive training in that area without any manual intervention. I shouldn't have to go about creating an individual schedule to do it (whether through a wizard or not) and then monitor the progress on that schedule every so often and adjust it. Even pre-season training should be something the game is smart enough to automatically apply, none of this stupid having to switch over the entire team one by one and back again. Just set your team policy of how intensive you want to pre-season to be and bang, the game should auto adjust all the schedules to be more physical during the pre-season, and back to normal a week or so before your first competitive game.

I want to just make the high level decision - this is what role I want the player to play - and have the game take care of the tedious part of implementing a training regime to achieve that. Once I've asked the game to train a player in a particular role I should never have to adjust that player's training unless I change the role I want to train them for. I'm the manager, not some low level coach out there at the 6am recovery session, I set the agenda and someone else should take care of the details! That's not dumbing down the game, it's letting the manager make the decisions that require actual intelligence, and automating all the mechanics that are pretty formulaic. It doesn't take any great deal of thought to set up training schedules once you've decided what you want to do with them, just a lot of clicking.

As I said, I don't think FM2013 is there yet, but by making you give the training module be the role you want a player to play rather than raw slider values it at least has the input to the training module in the right format now, which makes me hopeful that in later releases the back end code can be brought up to speed.

[x42bn6]

That's not what I suggested at all though. You're just suggesting a different interface to the same old static schedules. I'm thinking something much more radical.

Schedules need to be dynamic: if a player is lacking in one area for the role you want the player to play then the game should be smart enough to put them on intensive training in that area without any manual intervention. I shouldn't have to go about creating an individual schedule to do it (whether through a wizard or not) and then monitor the progress on that schedule every so often and adjust it. Even pre-season training should be something the game is smart enough to automatically apply, none of this stupid having to switch over the entire team one by one and back again. Just set your team policy of how intensive you want to pre-season to be and bang, the game should auto adjust all the schedules to be more physical during the pre-season, and back to normal a week or so before your first competitive game.

I want to just make the high level decision - this is what role I want the player to play - and have the game take care of the tedious part of implementing a training regime to achieve that. Once I've asked the game to train a player in a particular role I should never have to adjust that player's training unless I change the role I want to train them for. I'm the manager, not some low level coach out there at the 6am recovery session, I set the agenda and someone else should take care of the details! That's not dumbing down the game, it's letting the manager make the decisions that require actual intelligence, and automating all the mechanics that are pretty formulaic. It doesn't take any great deal of thought to set up training schedules once you've decided what you want to do with them, just a lot of clicking.

As I said, I don't think FM2013 is there yet, but by making you give the training module be the role you want a player to play rather than raw slider values it at least has the input to the training module in the right format now, which makes me hopeful that in later releases the back end code can be brought up to speed.

I think they are similar. 7Bestie7 is suggesting choosing a role, choosing "modifiers" (pre-season, injury recovery, etc.), optional tinkering (with the existing slider system; this can obviously be changed as the slider concept is a transient step) and option to go advanced.

You are suggesting choosing a role and the rest is done behind the scenes via delegation to some staff member(s). You could argue that the staff might be able to choose a role, too.

Which is why we can do the best of both worlds via delegation - effectively, the staff do all the details, but you can override anything. For example, if you sign a D RC, then your staff automatically see he's a much better centre-back and assign him a centre-back role (maybe drop an email to the manager noting he's being trained as a centre-back - maybe you have bigger ideas for him as a right-back, for example). Then the staff automatically take care of pre-season, injury recovery, etc. - except that you can override those options too (i.e. if you have Owen Hargreaves, you might want to tinker with his injury recovery to avoid any physical activity whatsoever beyond fitness).

[7Bestie7]

That's not what I suggested at all though. You're just suggesting a different interface to the same old static schedules. I'm thinking something much more radical.

Schedules need to be dynamic: if a player is lacking in one area for the role you want the player to play then the game should be smart enough to put them on intensive training in that area without any manual intervention. I shouldn't have to go about creating an individual schedule to do it (whether through a wizard or not) and then monitor the progress on that schedule every so often and adjust it. Even pre-season training should be something the game is smart enough to automatically apply, none of this stupid having to switch over the entire team one by one and back again. Just set your team policy of how intensive you want to pre-season to be and bang, the game should auto adjust all the schedules to be more physical during the pre-season, and back to normal a week or so before your first competitive game.

I want to just make the high level decision - this is what role I want the player to play - and have the game take care of the tedious part of implementing a training regime to achieve that. Once I've asked the game to train a player in a particular role I should never have to adjust that player's training unless I change the role I want to train them for. I'm the manager, not some low level coach out there at the 6am recovery session, I set the agenda and someone else should take care of the details! That's not dumbing down the game, it's letting the manager make the decisions that require actual intelligence, and automating all the mechanics that are pretty formulaic. It doesn't take any great deal of thought to set up training schedules once you've decided what you want to do with them, just a lot of clicking.

As I said, I don't think FM2013 is there yet, but by making you give the training module be the role you want a player to play rather than raw slider values it at least has the input to the training module in the right format now, which makes me hopeful that in later releases the back end code can be brought up to speed.

Which is part of what I said. Create New Schedule -> Set Position or Role. (Or Use Schedule -> Set Position or Role)

If you didn't want to do anything else then you didn't have to. Same way that you don't have to tinker with tactics or do team talks if you think it's below you. Other people can get deeper into the changing of schedules if they want.

[Dave C]

Much prefer this approach to training. My initial reaction to the apparent demise of custmised personal schedules was negative, but if the role training works as it should, then it won't matter too much.

Hopefully this will translate into AI over how players are used, so the AM/Youth Manager will see where we are training players and use them appropriately. I'd also hope positional training will be better, with players losing 'natural' status if they don't train/play a role.

Hopefully Set Piece training is more appropriate, with players set as FK/Corner takers training to take them by default instead of requiring some special setting made. After all, they'll be taking in training as part of day-to-day activity, so it should be assumed so in the game.