The Ask-SI-Anything Thread

[leonavich]

Players are a bit more cautious when on a yellow card. That is coded in. Still though, if he has high aggression and/or Get Stick In etc, it may not be enough to just expect him to calm down and not still get a 2nd yellow. He will be a bit more cautious though.

Is there an ME highlight "spoilers" in regards to this? On FM14, I notice that they tend to show a highlight for a player on a yellow card most of the time when he goes on to get a red.

As an example,

Player X has a highlight at 15 minutes for a yellow card

Player Y has no highlight at 35 minutes for a yellow card

Player X has a highlight at 44 minutes for a second yellow and a send off.

I have seen this play out a few times and whenever I see a highlight for a yellow these days, I usually sub off that player at half time or within 10 minutes for the yellow.

May be coincidence, or that I notice these occasions more than others, but i feel like a yellow card highlight is almost a spoiler at times, or an indication of what's likely to come.

[Svenc]

What is SI's stance on the really wildly wide-spreading of PPMs influencing (forward) movement? To me that 1) is the definition of tactically ill-discipline, as regardless if you encourage such a player to stay deep and hold position, he won't, and even on more relaxed duty, he'll be inclined to push all the way up, therefore overriding tactics to an extent. 2) There is absolutely nothing about these PPMs that can't be encouraged tactically by the game's instructions, never was from the beginning. Want a full-back pushing all up? Give him an instruction /an accordingly role, duty. Don't? Ditto. This is not in the slightest a case for getting rid of PPMs such as "gets forward at every opportunity". This is merely a case for not awarding it as a baseline default, but actually start considering. There may be players who may warrant such PPMs, Hitzfeld couldn't get Lucio's forward surges out of him even if he would have fined him regularly, and he has had it all his FM life, even though for the centre back position in the game it has always meant zero as else defending wouldn't be able to cope -- imagine one of the CBs regularly leaving his position, you'd have hockey scorelines all over the shop.

But they're so wide-spread by now (outside of Germany for instance, whose research seems to have some common sense in this) that you have squads where basically every single wide player including the backs has such a PPM. It's over the top, with such PPMs getting awarded by default as seems by now up to the very top, as if SI wouldn't have communicated to the research at all that you wouldn't need to give like every single wide back of Barcelona such a PPM or else he wouldn't possibly make any forward run whatsoever in the game. You look into squads of Arsenal, Juventus, Barcelona, Napoli, etcetc likewise, and almost every single one of their players has such a PPM or similar. And those are just the top clubs. This naturally has a big knock-on on AI management as well. AI manager merely trying to shut up shop for good = no dice with such squads.

Is there an ME highlight "spoilers" in regards to this? On FM14, I notice that they tend to show a highlight for a player on a yellow card most of the time when he goes on to get a red.

come.

Seems unlikely as according the main coder, the match (or half anyway) is played through in sequence entirelly first, so that the "highlights picker" would know where to kick in when things are basically "re-winded" and then played over again. It is basically the same as you saving a match as pkm and loading it up from the game's main menu to watch over and over again. The exception that unlike on match days, you can't make changes anymore and make things recalculate from that minute. What you are witnessing may be a case of perception bias. I.e. every time there is a yellow shown and player gets send off, your brain remembers. Every time this doesn't you don't. Plus a player getting awarded a lot of fouls leading to incidents is going to be shown more (and is more likely to receive a booking), however the ME doesn't know how matches end or what incidents are going to happen. Guess they could program the higher level highlights picker to consider in such a way and make it aware of when a player gets send off in minute xxx eventually, but it seems too much "spoon feeding", i.e. not much to do with simulating sports management, more like giving things so much away beforehand that you can start to actually predict with some certainty what's going to happen eventually.

[turnip]

Or you could scout a player thoroughly and not sign him if his PPMs go against your tactic. I forget to look half the time, but at least that's my fault.

On the subject of referees, in a previous iteration of the game, I did see one get fired after a bad game with a couple of very poor decisions. I think the referee's average rating was also really poor before that game, so it wasn't just that game that caused it.

[Guest]

Or you could scout a player thoroughly and not sign him if his PPMs go against your tactic. I forget to look half the time, but at least that's my fault.

It's a fair question about the criteria researchers use for setting PPMs. I have felt that some PPMs assigned to players are a reflection of what their current manager is asking them to do rather than a tendency that they will carry from manager to manager or club to club.

Edit: Svenc could be onto something as I've just checked a test save I'm running & the 'Gets Forward' ppm is used a fair bit in England when compared to other nations, is this really because English based players have a greater tendency to get forward whenever the chance presents itself or is it more to do with the way English based coaches/managers instruct them to play? The reverse could be asked of Germany as the number there is much lower while in Italy there is a low number because there could be significantly more low level researched youngsters than any other nation, there are twice as many players in Italy than the nation with the second largest number of players contracted to the top three divisions & there are actually more players aged 18 or under in the top three Italian divisions than are in the top three divisions of any if the other nations.

For the comparison I only looked at players contract to clubs in the top 3 divisions of England, France, Germany, Italy & Spain as of day 1, the save did not use the add players to playable teams function & is using the SI winter update data.

England: 213 (5.48% of players)

France: 82 (3.76%)

Germany: 17 (0.99%)

Italy: 78 (1.27%)

Spain: 125 (3.86%)

[Danchinaski]

Regarding PPMs, what takes precedence, PI or PPM? For example, say you have a very effective AP (A), with the unchangeable PI to shoot less often, but he has the ability to score from distance like Le Tissier in his prime, and has the Shoot from Distance PPM.

I'm guessing the PI takes precedence, and if you wanted to encourage him to shoot you'd be better off changing his role / duty, but this may also negatively impact on his performance overall, but this is just a guess, and I'd be grateful for a bit more clarification on this.

[samuelawachie]

On the subject of referees, in a previous iteration of the game, I did see one get fired after a bad game with a couple of very poor decisions. I think the referee's average rating was also really poor before that game, so it wasn't just that game that caused it.

Wow, really? That would have been a sight to behold!

[Svenc]

Regarding PPMs, what takes precedence, PI or PPM? For example, say you have a very effective AP (A), with the unchangeable PI to shoot less often, but he has the ability to score from distance like Le Tissier in his prime, and has the Shoot from Distance PPM.

If this works as previous, it would be like this: long shots instructions: rarely/mixed/often. If you would set a player to rarely and he had such a PPM, it's as if he was on mixed. If he was on mixed, it's as he was set to often. The mixed option has disappeared, it's when you neither select shoot more nor shoot less, therefore if it's the same, it's as if the playmaker with such a PPM had selected neither shoot more nor shoot less. Therefore you wouldn't be able to completely get natural tendencies out of a player, and it's a neat addition to the game as it's a challenge top level management has to face all the same -- if the research is sensibly.

It's not only the number of players. There are entire squads where you can't even field players without such a PPM. Juve in Italy, all their starter backs look to "get forward at every opportunity". Pretty much the same for Barca. There's many more. Not even sure if AI Managers take this into account, but obviously, at their desiredly most rigid, which is parking 5, 6 players behind the ball, this won't be happening anymore etc. Maybe I'm missing something intentionally, but this is the Lucio PPM, this is tactically illdiscipline, one of the few players even modest Hitzfeld attacked in public for his tendency to just maraude upfield when accordingly to Hitzfeld he shouldn't. I doubt it that Wenger ir any of the other top managers would assemble a squad where players would ignore such hugely impactful instructions. Forward runs/Runs from deep is unsurprisingly one of the most impactful instructions the engine has ever had as similar to an actual match of footie, that's players pushing up or holding their positions. Likewise all of those players in the game would in general to simplify be more aggressively in their forward movement than the pick in role/duty of their manager would imply.

The simply question really asked is: If say any manager would encourage his player/s to sit or be more cautious, and if it was for seeing out the dying minutes of a game, something surely happens everywhere across the world, would there really be a big number of them who would just bomb forward regardless. Plus would top level managers of Juventus, Barcelona et all assemble entire squads of those.

[Lawlore]

Well, we have quite a few wrestling fans in the office but I'd be surprised if we went that route. Although never say never. I know quite a lot of the mods on the forum are also big wrestling fans so you're not alone.

We've also produced EHM, which is a ice hockey simulation game much in the same vein as FM. The forums are here and you can pick the game up on Steam so I'd definitely recommend giving that a try. Personally, I'd think the design and gameplay of FM could be transferred to any sport really and I'd quite like a basketball or cricket game designed like FM. Again though, I doubt that's something that'll ever happen but we can all dream, right!

I'm still waiting for Rob Cooper to convince everyone to use the FM style for a new Chart Wars. Someone nudge him to get on with that, eh?

[Pirlo's Beard]

What, exactly, does the Aggression attribute do? When I read about it, it's most often mentioned with regard to defense -- i.e. the likelihood a player will close down, attempt a tackle, charge after a loose ball, etc. My question is: does it also impact how a player performs on attack? I seem to notice a real difference in players with high aggression in aerial duels, and I find Target men with high aggression perform their offensive role better. Am I imagining things, or does aggression (in conjunction with bravery) signal a player's desire to "go and get it." That would seem to fit with the in-game description, but as I said most people speak of it as a defensive attribute.

If I'm correct in this, does aggression impact a player's decision making in other ways? Is it essentially a mentality modifier?

[Duncan Greenwood]

I'm still waiting for Rob Cooper to convince everyone to use the FM style for a new Chart Wars. Someone nudge him to get on with that, eh?

Haha, I'll give him a poke for you!

Regarding most of these other questions they're about the ME which isn't really my forte so I'll have to leave them to the moderators as many of them know the ME inside and out.

[s1111]

It's a fair question about the criteria researchers use for setting PPMs. I have felt that some PPMs assigned to players are a reflection of what their current manager is asking them to do rather than a tendency that they will carry from manager to manager or club to club.

Edit: Svenc could be onto something as I've just checked a test save I'm running & the 'Gets Forward' ppm is used a fair bit in England when compared to other nations, is this really because English based players have a greater tendency to get forward whenever the chance presents itself or is it more to do with the way English based coaches/managers instruct them to play? The reverse could be asked of Germany as the number there is much lower while in Italy there is a low number because there could be significantly more low level researched youngsters than any other nation, there are twice as many players in Italy than the nation with the second largest number of players contracted to the top three divisions & there are actually more players aged 18 or under in the top three Italian divisions than are in the top three divisions of any if the other nations.

For the comparison I only looked at players contract to clubs in the top 3 divisions of England, France, Germany, Italy & Spain as of day 1, the save did use the add players to playable teams function & is using the SI winter update data.

England: 213 (5.48% of players)

France: 82 (3.76%)

Germany: 17 (0.99%)

Italy: 78 (1.27%)

Spain: 125 (3.86%)

In Germany some PPMs are almost non-existent. Gets Forward, Likes to Break Offside Trap, Shoots From Distance, Arrives Late/Gets into Opposition Area, Tries Killer Balls, Runs With Ball, Dwells On Ball, Hugs Line, have been almost completely removed. There are hardly any players in the top 2 divisions that have these PPMs.

[herne79]

What' date=' exactly, does the Aggression attribute do? When I read about it, it's most often mentioned with regard to defense -- i.e. the likelihood a player will close down, attempt a tackle, charge after a loose ball, etc. My question is: does it also impact how a player performs on attack? I seem to notice a real difference in players with high aggression in aerial duels, and I find Target men with high aggression perform their offensive role better. Am I imagining things, or does aggression (in conjunction with bravery) signal a player's desire to "go and get it." That would seem to fit with the in-game description, but as I said most people speak of it as a defensive attribute.

If I'm correct in this, does aggression impact a player's decision making in other ways? Is it essentially a mentality modifier?[/quote']

Aggression can be a tough one to explain, as it's easy to stray into the territory of Determination, Work Rate and Bravery.

You're right, it is essentially a mentality modifier. It helps to govern how willing a player is to get involved in the action - they'll actively go looking for the ball with high aggression, rather than sitting back and letting things come to them.

Clearly that can have a large impact on defensive play, and can really help a high intensity system with lots of closing down, but it can also help when in possession as players can aggressively look for space or get ahead of opponents in 50/50 or tight situations.

Players with high aggression can pick up more bookings than others simply because of their willingness to put themselves about, roll their sleeves up and get stuck in. However this has nothing to do with being a dirty player - that is governed by the hidden Dirtiness attribute.

I personally love aggressive players, especially when combined with high Determination, Work Rate and Bravery.

[Plachy]

Does dirtiness feed into the 'competitive streak might lead this player to bend the rules' scouting report item? I've always wondered whether that's a good or bad thing. I don't know masses about the hidden attributes but that one has always confused me. I would expect it to mean he's dirty and not very sporting. However those two things seem like 'negatives' in the games eyes. But I would consider a playing willing to break the rules as quite often brilliant - Sergio Ramos and Luis Suarez are utterly incredible players but you'd make a hard time arguing their brilliance without putting it down partly to their willingness to bend the rules (both to me would be dirty and unsportsmanlike). So I've always liked players with that scout report item, but I can't come up with a positive explanation in terms of the attributes that feed into it.

Could I be enlightened?

[Jimbokav1971]

Ooh ooh ooh. Good thread!

What is the accurate definition of a "clear cut chance" within the game?

[Svenc]

Ooh ooh ooh. Good thread!

What is the accurate definition of a "clear cut chance" within the game?

A clear cut in FM is only when the attempt is within some kinda decent unknown range, when the moon is full and when the possibly miss has all the cracking ability to make players start whinging threads -- and of course when the finish is not a header, as players hitting the ball with their egg heads even when the net is empty and both crash at point blank range for some reason won't do. :-P

On a more serious note, that's a good one, really. Either it all started out like that or it has possibly never much compared any to the Opta stat. On my last save it didn't look like it going through my matches, neither for my team nor for the AI. Even though in FM it's still all over the place, and in my opinion will always be (this is a judgement call for the human eye -- feeding algorithms with variables and making them measure up won't do), the average conversion might be in a different range then the one in three of Opta (long-term). The problem of course ain't the average. It's that the things can be anything from impossibly angles (such as out from the touch line, just as long as the finisher is nearer to the goal than the last defender), anything from actually quite good angles and point blank ranges (even if it's an easy block) as well as actually, well "sitters" (except if they're headers, see above). With "sitters" being a punditry term that any football data analyst will tell you is a contradiction in terms as far as footie is concerned. That is outside of tap ins into an empty net,

If SI deal in such subjective categories, they could publish the long-term expectations for the average in-game, no matter how wide the invidually finishes are apart. In particular as this can be off Opta either way, despite sharing the name tag. And it certainly is, was as much as FM 2014 anyway, this is from public soak tests posted for FM 2014 for instance: Clear cut chances per match 2.62 Missed clear cut chances per match 0.51. In other words, unlike Opta, they indeed would be converted quite regularly, in this sample if 0.51 out of 2.62 were missed (20%) it would be 80% converted which if still comparably would be a hugely impressive number considering that most of those will be from open play (penalties are always flagged as CCC) where anything above 50% is ultra-rare, and those are penalty conversion rates, basically.

[Svenc]

Lol. I always have the stats widget up during games, and I've removed CCC's from that window because imo they are not an important statistic. We've all seen chances that were and weren't actually CCC's being regarded/disregarded as such by the game. The number of CCC's doesn't tell you a whole lot, not unlike most other statistics. The numbers can potentially point you in the right direction, but there's no shortcut for watching things back and figuring out why things are happening like they are.

I think nobody who actually pays attention would disagree. I've seen a number of players who only ever pay attention to CCCs and HCs though conversely, for some of them that's the only stats they would assess, which is a one-way route to rage quit and heart attack. As far as data only is concerned, a better way would be to look at long-term SOT conversion. Anything approaching 1 in 5 or being worse (and some AI always are) = bad. Anything approaching 1 in 3= good. The team reports have made this easier to assess for any team including your own, as it collects the overall number of goals plus the overall number of shots /SOT. Aside of that, agreed completely. FM ain't a stats sim. It's the second by second play making the numbers, eventually, and some weird decisions, your own as well as AI, can influence this too. Plus in the worst case there's always genuinelly (marking) bugs you would never spot but suffer from without noticing, making your opponents have much better conversion long-term by default.

It's still a viably and interesting question never addressed anywhere to my knowledge, and it should be also tackled in-game somewhere somehow as long as it stays there. :-)

[Jimbokav1971]

What is the accurate definition of a "clear cut chance" within the game?

Ok. I don't think anyone really expected a response to that one so how about an easier one.

With regards to the taking of a penalty, what are the optimum attributes that most significantly impact on the outcome?

[Edit]

What I am looking for is something to explain why a GK with the following attributes will out-perform a MC with the following attributes over a 10 year period?

GK. (Professional). Penalty Taking 1. Composure 13. Finishing 3.

MC. (Balanced). Penalty Taking 15. Composure 14. Finishing 9.

I do appreciate that things have improved significantly from FM14 in this respect.

I also appreciate that things like pressure influence things.

[Guest]

I'd put the keeper ability at spot kicks down as a bug, they should be less efficient from the spot but the ME fails to calculate correctly due to the anamilous attributes.

[Jimbokav1971]

I'd put the keeper ability at spot kicks down as a bug, they should be less efficient from the spot but the ME fails to calculate correctly due to the anamilous attributes.

Now that I have looked up the definition of anamilous..... (excellent wordage by the way), I think you actually make my point for me.

What I mean is that if you compare the above 2 players, well..... both have attributes for penalty taking, composure, finishing and even technique, and of course the likes of composure and professionalism, then everything about them suggests that the MC should have a better conversion rate then the GK,

If I was to substitute the GK for an outfield player with equally poor attributes, are you suggesting that he would perform as well as the GK with poor attributes? (I don't agree with you if that's your suggestion).

It's not a matter of looking at GK's in isolation though, (which I agree might be a problem in itself). If you look at the best players in the World and look for those who you think should be the best technical players, then why is it that they aren't actually very good at converting a penalty opportunity into a goal? Pick a real player with the required technical, mental, (and even hidden), attributes at the top of the game, set them as a penalty taker for a big dominat club and go on holiday. Then come back and explain why they have missed, (or had saved), so many penalties.

Apologies if that last bit sounds rude and abrupt. That's not how it's intended at all.

What I'm getting at is that FM is a really complicated game in many respects, but if we were able to simplify any single part of it, then converting an opportunity from the penalty spot with the ball at rest while under no challenge from opposition players...... well you would think this would be the easiest type of opportunity to get right. If this tiny little part of the game can't be done accurately, (with no outside influences of moving ball or challenging opposition), then how on Earth are we to expect that when we complicate matters by introducing them, that SI now somehow overcome the areas that they were unable to overcome when the ball was still and there was no defender involved?

Do you see what I mean?

[forameuss]

Now that I have looked up the definition of anamilous..... (excellent wordage by the way), I think you actually make my point for me.

What I mean is that if you compare the above 2 players, well..... both have attributes for penalty taking, composure, finishing and even technique, and of course the likes of composure and professionalism, then everything about them suggests that the MC should have a better conversion rate then the GK,

If I was to substitute the GK for an outfield player with equally poor attributes, are you suggesting that he would perform as well as the GK with poor attributes? (I don't agree with you if that's your suggestion).

It's not a matter of looking at GK's in isolation though, (which I agree might be a problem in itself). If you look at the best players in the World and look for those who you think should be the best technical players, then why is it that they aren't actually very good at converting a penalty opportunity into a goal? Pick a real player with the required technical, mental, (and even hidden), attributes at the top of the game, set them as a penalty taker for a big dominat club and go on holiday. Then come back and explain why they have missed, (or had saved), so many penalties.

Apologies if that last bit sounds rude and abrupt. That's not how it's intended at all.

What I'm getting at is that FM is a really complicated game in many respects, but if we were able to simplify any single part of it, then converting an opportunity from the penalty spot with the ball at rest while under no challenge from opposition players...... well you would think this would be the easiest type of opportunity to get right. If this tiny little part of the game can't be done accurately, (with no outside influences of moving ball or challenging opposition), then how on Earth are we to expect that when we complicate matters by introducing them, that SI now somehow overcome the areas that they were unable to overcome when the ball was still and there was no defender involved?

Do you see what I mean?

I imagine his suggestion was that a calculation is performed in the ME that determines the outcome of a penalty kick. That calculation uses values that are present in all outfield players, but perhaps not in a goalkeeper. Maybe the missing value means that the result of the calculation is always positive.

That's not to say that goalkeepers should or shouldn't make good penalty takers - personally I believe that if you're a professional football player, you should be able to kick a ball into a goal from 12 yards more often than not - but more that the ME can't handle you putting a goalkeeper there.

[Guest]

I get what you mean & my expectation is that an outfield player with attributes that match the keeper would be an awful choice, my thought is that because the player is a keeper the ME is not looking in the correct location for the outfield technical attribute values & possible outcomes are that it reduces the calculation to just the mental attributes, is pulling across a high keeper attribute that is in a field normally assigned to the outfield penalty taking attribute or is creating an assumed average for the technical attributes

There is certainly something going wrong somewhere & iirc you've provided SI with examples to look at in the past.

[eriktous]

I'm a bit late to this (great!) thread, but there are a couple of things I want to chime in on, mainly the Shadow Striker question and ensuing discussion.

1) Why does a shadow striker have "More Risky Passes" instruction?

When he "operates as the team's main scoring thread", probably everyone around him has support duty. So to whom would he want to make a risky pass?

1) For SS: As you said, "If he's going to be in such an advanced position a shadow striker is liable to be looking for passes which lead to a goalscoring opportunity." Then why a Poacher will release "Fewer Risky Passes"? I don't think "the advanced position" between a SS and a P could be that much different to cause 2 opposite decisions.

Let me give you an example. Let's say I play 4-3-1-2 with 2 world class strikers who I am pretty sure will be marked tightly even when they go to toilet. So I decide to be deceptive by setting a decent U19 youngster as an SS and the 2 famous strikers as F9's. I plan to confuse their defenders by letting them mark the 2 famous strikers and when they are busy, the SS will finish them.

Now, the SS has "More Risky Passes". The main role I plan for him fades because whenever he picks up the ball and can't shoot, he just pass it riskily to nobody when he should at least try to retain the ball.

A Shadow Striker may be described as the team's main goal scoring threat, that doesn't mean he needs to be the only one. And just because players are set to a support duty, doesn't mean there won't be situations where they get in an advanced position. Going off my real life expectations, a shadow striker is a highly dynamic, physical role; they're athletic players, at the same time strong and tall, yet fast and with high work rate. Not the most technically gifted, but opportunistic: if they don't have the ball, they will look to make runs into the box to receive the ball in a dangerous position and get a shot off; if they do have the ball they will look to run with it into the box and get a shot off; if their progress gets blocked, they will aim to keep the forward drive going by playing the ball to a team mate in the box. This is where the risky passes come in. They don't care too much about possession, they care about going forward, about intimidating an already occupied defense, creating confusion, indecision, and mistakes. I see them as a brute force approach, a sledge hammer against an organized, static, defensive wall. I think of them as the same kind of player as a box to box midfielder, but higher up the pitch, always moving about.

The poacher, on the other hand, is going for the patient approach, waiting for that one moment where they get a bit of space from their defender to get a high quality shot on goal. If they get the ball and are not in the best position to go for a shot, they will lay off a safe pass to a team mate to go back and keep poking at the defense and try to find a new crack in it. Their style of play is not about going forward by all means, but about keeping possession and moving the ball around just behind the forward line to wait for that one good opportunity.

Not sure if I missed it but it seems to be flying over some's heads sometimes. There's roles that are supposed to be specific jobs, such as the aforementioned shadow striker. However each position has more general roles as well which are tweakably to your heart's content. If you don't like how he's configured you could as well go with an attacking midfielder and tweak him to your liking.

I feel there are a couple positions that could use a more vanilla role, so to speak. Particularly the wide advanced midfielder. The available roles have too much default PIs set. Wingers always dribble more, cross more often, and run wide with the ball, inside forwards always dribble more and cut inside with the ball, and advanced playmakers always cut inside with the ball. Please, let me choose for myself. I just want a wide passing option, being part of a circulation system, so to speak. I would also like more options for central defenders, mainly going forward. Why can't I experiment with a central defender that steps into midfield when in possession, either by dribbling more or getting further forward as a passing option? And no, I don't want a libero (at least I think I don't, I've never actually tried one), I want him to defend as a regular central defender.

I actually quite like your idea of tutorials and having them set up like players earning coaching badges. I think the main problem with having a tutorial is that there is so much content to cover within tactics it'd probably end up being very long and tedious. It's probably fairly easy to define words used within the tactic creation process but a while longer to help people understand the mechanics behind their choices. I'd be interested to know if you, or anyone else, could come up with an interesting and streamlined way we could do them that would be both engaging and informative. I'd happily read through them and try and work out a way using your ideas that we could put forward as a future feature in the game, but obviously they'd have to be reasonable ideas.

Although I don't really feel the game needs a tutorial myself, it could be set up by initially blocking most options in the tactics creator, and just allowing the player to set a formation and a mentality, keeping the roles to the most general ones for each position (CM for MC, WM for MLR, W for AMLR, AF for ST, and so on), then in a couple of steps open up the choice of roles and duties, available TIs, Team Shape, and finally PIs.

I do agree the main problem will be how to explain the influence on the match performance each option has.

They change okay for me. The only attribute that changes is finishing which is removed when changed to a support role from attack.

I'm also seeing the issue 0zymandias mentions. When on a player's profile page, clicking on a role will highlight the important attributes. But when selecting a different duty (support/attack) from the drop down menu, the highlighting doesn't change. I have to click on the role once to remove the highlighting and then click on it again to show the correct attributes highlighted. I agree with the other posters that UI issues like these and some I was already experiencing in FM15, like erroneous column sorting in some views, difficulties with column width in custom squad views, and more, make me feel a bit more disappointed with FM16 than necessary.

[eriktous]

my thought is that because the player is a keeper the ME is not looking in the correct location for the outfield technical attribute values & possible outcomes are that it reduces the calculation to just the mental attributes, is pulling across a high keeper attribute that is in a field normally assigned to the outfield penalty taking attribute or is creating an assumed average for the technical attributes

Ouch, that sounds like some awful coding, if true.

[Conardo]

Want FM live back - any chance?

[Neil Brock]

Want FM live back - any chance?

Nope afraid not. You could always try moving to China so you can play Football Manager Online though - http://www.footballmanager.com/news/football-manager-online-headed-china

[ThomasCro]

Would you consider adding travelling choices as a financial impact for the next game?

Adding that with the ability to choose if your team flies to every game, or they just take buses, etc.

I can imagine it could have an impact on finances, but cost less fatigue of the players.

[PeeDub]

i feel there are a couple positions that could use a more vanilla role, so to speak. Particularly the wide advanced midfielder. The available roles have too much default pis set. Wingers always dribble more, cross more often, and run wide with the ball, inside forwards always dribble more and cut inside with the ball, and advanced playmakers always cut inside with the ball. Please, let me choose for myself. I just want a wide passing option, being part of a circulation system, so to speak. I would also like more options for central defenders, mainly going forward. Why can't i experiment with a central defender that steps into midfield when in possession, either by dribbling more or getting further forward as a passing option? And no, i don't want a libero (at least i think i don't, i've never actually tried one), i want him to defend as a regular central defender.

yesyesyesyesyes!

[Neil Brock]

Would you consider adding travelling choices as a financial impact for the next game?

Adding that with the ability to choose if your team flies to every game, or they just take buses, etc.

I can imagine it could have an impact on finances, but cost less fatigue of the players.

I'm not really sure it's something the manager would have too much say in with all honesty. More often than not the budgetary constraints of the club would decide this. But yeah, it's something we've discussed before in regards to taking more into account in regards to players travelling to games, fatigue etc. It just becomes very micro management when you go down those kinds of avenues.

[MrPompey]

yes, exactly and I suppose thats why its called Football Manager, not Transportation Manager

However is there any chance as Manager I called select which washing powder is used for the shirts

I think the game needs to stay true to its title and something like this will very quickly become a chore

[Chief232]

Something I've wondered for a while, because I think I've heard both things. Are there actually any differences between roles besides the player instructions that it changes(or playmakers)? If I compare a CM-S for example to a BBM, everything in the player instructions is the same - mentality, passing directness, closing down, etc. Aside from "roam from position" these two roles appear to be the same. If I set a CM-S to roam from position is it the exact same thing? I understand that this is something one could potentially learn just through watching, but after a good few years of playing FM understanding the match engine is still rather difficult sometimes.

I feel that if there are subtle differences between roles that aren't stated in player instructions, perhaps a bit of assistance in future iterations with this will help some people with improving their tactics. Thanks in advance.

[kandersson]

Great thread

I have a question about past player comparisons (which personally I find an extremely cool feature): where do they come from??? Is it about similar PA's? Key Attributes? What makes a player being touted as the next Ronaldo rather than the next Jairzinho (btw these seem to be very common...)? Can I get a new Roberto Baggio, please?

Also I think there's room for improvement in this area, for example I've seen a 'next Rogerio Ceni' with attributes of 1 for free kicks and penalties... why is he the next Rogerio then I'd suggest 'the next...' should have more similarities with their 'comparison', like height/weight, preferred foot, PPM's, personality, key traits etc.

[chestermike]

I have a question for Si, how are the points for the leaderboard calculated? I can take Chester to the championship, get promoted with 91 points, and only get 40,000ish points and am in 77,000th ish place on the championship only leadeeboard, where as my mate got promoted via the playoffs with derby, a much bigger club, and got many many more points than me. Eh???

[Duncan Greenwood]

Great thread

I have a question about past player comparisons (which personally I find an extremely cool feature): where do they come from??? Is it about similar PA's? Key Attributes? What makes a player being touted as the next Ronaldo rather than the next Jairzinho (btw these seem to be very common...)? Can I get a new Roberto Baggio, please?

Also I think there's room for improvement in this area, for example I've seen a 'next Rogerio Ceni' with attributes of 1 for free kicks and penalties... why is he the next Rogerio then I'd suggest 'the next...' should have more similarities with their 'comparison', like height/weight, preferred foot, PPM's, personality, key traits etc.

Yeah, from what I understand, it's linked to PA and the nation they are born in. We don't have playing attributes for many of the ex-players that are included in the "could be the next.." so I'd be surprised if it was linked to to attributes but I'll ask around and see if I can get a definitive answer for you.

[Duncan Greenwood]

I have a question for Si, how are the points for the leaderboard calculated? I can take Chester to the championship, get promoted with 91 points, and only get 40,000ish points and am in 77,000th ish place on the championship only leadeeboard, where as my mate got promoted via the playoffs with derby, a much bigger club, and got many many more points than me. Eh???

This is something else I'll ask about, as I have no idea. How many points did your mate get?

[Whytecliffe]

As per my separate post earlier copied below, where do the funds come from for Staff compensation payments if not out of the transfer fund?

"Morning all

I have just noticed that paying clubs compensation for taking their staff no longer comes out of your transfer budget. It used to which, at a small club, was annoying but understanding. Is this right? Does anyone know when this changed and is the transfer budget now ringfenced. If so, I may be able to lure some better coaches in than the ones I pick up on a free"

Thanks

[Qwqwqw]

Ooh ooh ooh. Good thread!

What is the accurate definition of a "clear cut chance" within the game?

This will probably be a tricky one, but I don't think it actually matters. What matters is, IMHO, that whatever it is, the game recognizes it as a goal scoring chance (same for half-chances). In other words, in the game universe, it was a chance, and you should treat it as such.

In fact, I think this applies to a broader picture in the game, which (I think) often gives you hints about many things - e.g. I pay attention to media speculation about my next player signing, or perhaps about what other managers think about my "weak links". I might be seeing things, but - especially in the future player signing speculation part - the game is trying to tell you who will fit in well with your club. Basically, you need to think inside the game's universe, not the real one (or your own one). It's not always perfect, but I think that's the way to go and to really enjoy the game.

[Svenc]

This will probably be a tricky one, but I don't think it actually matters. What matters is, IMHO, that whatever it is, the game recognizes it as a goal scoring chance (same for half-chances). In other words, in the game universe, it was a chance, and you should treat it as such.

Not at all, hence the argument that subjective reading will trump the stats any time. It is the second by second play with on and off the ball positioning and actions of individually players (or 2d dots or 3d models) from minute 1 to 90 eventually making the stats, and the problem with subjective stats in particular is that they would need a human eye to be "reliably", and then they are subjective stats. It is a category when in fact it includes all kinds of individually finishing situations, even in a computer sim of football as FM's match engine. :-)

There's always been bugs in there and those stats algorithms tried to be refined. Had nothing to do with that play not being "genuine" and all to do with an algorithm behind the stats factoring in and weighting variables before adding (or not adding) +1 to the CCCs or half chances. The headers never counted as such even when the goal is empty and the keeper beaten is a good and more obviously example, there was a discussion back then I think where it was debated whether they should be included or not. However this applies to everything: At which combination and weighting of say distance to goal and next defender near and shooting angle, all more obvious factors in the match play, is a chance to be categorized as this and that? Say if there's no defender near, the keeper caught off-guard but the angle is really really tough and bad and the player is on his wrong foot, should that still count as a CCC? Shots and Shots On Target are rather simplish, same as long shots and shots off target, as distance thresh holds are easily set, and attempts whilst they include everything from headers to shots are either: On Target, blocked, or off target, which is a much simpler thing to register and programmed to be registered "accordingly". Thinking about it a more clearly distinction between attempts from open play and set pieces would be of benefit, as that would show if teams would be at all a threat from either (but at which point does an attempt stop being from a set piece, that is another thing to be defined right there).

Interesting thought about the transfer rumors though, though I'd personally never sign a player based on those. :-)

[herne79]

I don't think I've seen CCCs summed up quite so succinctly since Ackter wrote this back in 2012:

It means he's got himself into a position where, if all things are optimal, he should score from.

People often forget the bit in italics [edit - underlined] and assume a CCC is a perfect chance every time.

Bottom line, use your eyes to see how good your chances are, not the stats.

[chestermike]

Sorry my figures were off, but the principal still exists. Here are the accurate figures....my mate is in 27,496th place with 752,384 points after his season with derby, where as I am in 35,806th place with 193,575 points. Seems strange that I have a better season with a much lower team at the same level of football, but my mate gets nearly 4 times as many points???

[Tony Wright 747]

I'm not really sure it's something the manager would have too much say in with all honesty. More often than not the budgetary constraints of the club would decide this. But yeah, it's something we've discussed before in regards to taking more into account in regards to players travelling to games, fatigue etc. It just becomes very micro management when you go down those kinds of avenues.

not sure I agree with you on this one Neil. I'm sure the manager would have quite a say on this depending on the manager and team of course. Yes the board would more than likely have the final say, but I'm sure the initial request would come from the manager. Perhaps it could be added in boardroom requests in the right circumstances

[Neil Brock]

not sure I agree with you on this one Neil. I'm sure the manager would have quite a say on this depending on the manager and team of course. Yes the board would more than likely have the final say, but I'm sure the initial request would come from the manager. Perhaps it could be added in boardroom requests in the right circumstances

There would be occasions of course where managers decide if the players travel up the night before, travel by plane, have an extra day there for training etc, but as said it just becomes very micro management when you go down those kinds of avenues for not too much addition to the game. There's a point where 'being a simulation' and 'being remotely fun' separate and this may well be one of those points.

[YKW]

There would be occasions of course where managers decide if the players travel up the night before, travel by plane, have an extra day there for training etc, but as said it just becomes very micro management when you go down those kinds of avenues for not too much addition to the game. There's a point where 'being a simulation' and 'being remotely fun' separate and this may well be one of those points.

I agree with you about the micro management, however I really think there is scope for things like this to be added, but in a more general way.

For instance, if the manager could set a 'Team Policy.' There could just be 5 - 10 checkboxes/dropdowns, and the combination of selected policies would translate into a "lenient" or "strict" overall policy. More strict could lead to less squad problems but at the expense of morale, and vice versa. Obviously manager attributes would play a part, as a high Level of Discipline would be more effective at using a strict policy style. Some squads may be brought to their best by giving them trust and freedom, however some squads would need to be kept in check to keep them performing. Bad runs of form, or too much pressure etc might also be solved by a slight change in the policy.

As example checkboxes/dropdowns could be

Team must travel together to matches [no policy]/[away matches]/[all matches]

Continental match travel [no policy]/[[budget]/[plush] - similar to the season budgets in the board may restrict your choices (and make exceptions for big games)

Wives and girlfriends can travel and stay with the team [no policy]/[club facilitates]/[banned]

Social media use [no policy]/[club controlled]/[banned]

Pre-match curfew [no policy]/[strict]/[Lenient]

Player diets [no policy]/[specialist]/[Player choice]

Breaking any of the above [case by case]/[monetary fine]/[first team exclusion]/[transfer list]

Poor Training performance [case by case]/[monetary fine]/[first team exclusion]/[transfer list]

Missing Training [case by case]/[monetary fine]/[first team exclusion]/[transfer list]

Red Card [case by case]/[monetary fine]/[first team exclusion]/[transfer list]

Unprofessional conduct [case by case]/[monetary fine]/[first team exclusion]/[transfer list]

Violent Conduct [case by case]/[monetary fine]/[first team exclusion]/[transfer list]

This way you could in theory visit the page once a season, or even once per job - therefore very little micromanagement. In fact, the bottom 5, as they already exist in the game, would also make the game more streamlined as punishments could be actioned automatically, and players would complain about the policy being too strict, rather than their treatment being unfair (as they knew in advance it would happen.)

There would be overall effects on Morale and Training performance determined by the relationship between the strictness level and the personalities of the players as individuals and as a group. In addition to this your assistant could report back with the odd news item that relates to the overall effectiveness of the policy, any suggestions that he has about changes, and also about specific events that relate to one of the policies directly.

For example "Player X wasn't on the coach with the rest of the lads. He was at the ground in time though, but didn't seem in the right frame of mind." If you have no policy regarding players traveling to games together then there is no problem, but it may indicate that your current policy is having a negative effect on that player. If it was your policy that he should have been there, then you can choose a punishment, or your already chosen punishment for breaking the policy will be actioned automatically, and you move on.

- sometimes boards would request a certain policy, for example if they want a high level of discipline

- sometimes the captain may respond to "how is morale in the squad right now?" with a suggestion or comment or about the team policy

- a pre-season tour could go wrong because the players are annoyed at being in a cheap hotel with no wives, maybe harming my reputation in that country. Or maybe they are happy and use social media to vastly improve my reputation in that country.

- sometimes players would gain a lot of weight and fall vastly out of shape due to a lenient diet policy

- sometimes players would learn PPMs of their own accord, maybe because they are frustrated about the rigidity of life, or maybe because they feel free to express themselves.

- some players with appropriate personalities would seek out a move to your club above others because they think they would improve a lot in your environment. Others with more negative personalities may see your club as the perfect place to maintain their nightclub addiction, especially if they have friends there and/or you are in a big city.

- sometimes negative relationships between players would be worsened by having to travel together, perhaps leaving those players with abysmal morale for kick off and/or having a negative body language.

- sometimes I would be asked in press conferences about something that one of my players has apparently said on social media. With newgens, this could be a controversial issue.

- sometimes my players would be spotted out somewhere on the eve of a big game. Perhaps they are being responsible, but then we lose the match 5-0 and the fans are really angry. If this happens a few times they could start booing the players or even develop them as disliked personnel.

Sorry for the long post but I got carried away trying to show that it could be done with little micromanagement and also add a lot to the game.

[Guest]

Are personality differences with team mates random? My FM crashed so I had to re-load, played through a couple of days and got a personality difference message I didn't get previously. So I re-loaded again, played those days once more and then didn't get the message.

[herne79]

Are personality differences with team mates random? My FM crashed so I had to re-load, played through a couple of days and got a personality difference message I didn't get previously. So I re-loaded again, played those days once more and then didn't get the message.

Basically anyone can clash with anyone else. However, the chances of this happening can reduce when using people with better personality traits. Putting together people with high levels of Controversy (for example) probably won't end well.

Can I please get some clarification on this?

What is considered 'youth' by FM - by that I mean where youth coaching, working with youth, and youth facilities are what's important, vs the rest of your training facilities? Is it 19 years and under or 18 years and under? Thanks.

Both. Depending on the league/country you are managing in, your Youth team will either be U18s or U19s. This can also affect which training facilities your Reserves team (eg., U21s) uses. In some leagues they'll share the Youth team facilities/coaches, in others they'll use the senior squad facilities/coaches. iirc U18s and U20s share, whereas U21s and seniors share.

However, 23 years old is the magic number when players stop being considered as youngsters and become senior players.

[Qwqwqw]

Not at all, hence the argument that subjective reading will trump the stats any time. It is the second by second play with on and off the ball positioning and actions of individually players (or 2d dots or 3d models) from minute 1 to 90 eventually making the stats, and the problem with subjective stats in particular is that they would need a human eye to be "reliably", and then they are subjective stats. It is a category when in fact it includes all kinds of individually finishing situations, even in a computer sim of football as FM's match engine. :-)

There's always been bugs in there and those stats algorithms tried to be refined. Had nothing to do with that play not being "genuine" and all to do with an algorithm behind the stats factoring in and weighting variables before adding (or not adding) +1 to the CCCs or half chances. The headers never counted as such even when the goal is empty and the keeper beaten is a good and more obviously example, there was a discussion back then I think where it was debated whether they should be included or not. However this applies to everything: At which combination and weighting of say distance to goal and next defender near and shooting angle, all more obvious factors in the match play, is a chance to be categorized as this and that? Say if there's no defender near, the keeper caught off-guard but the angle is really really tough and bad and the player is on his wrong foot, should that still count as a CCC? Shots and Shots On Target are rather simplish, same as long shots and shots off target, as distance thresh holds are easily set, and attempts whilst they include everything from headers to shots are either: On Target, blocked, or off target, which is a much simpler thing to register and programmed to be registered "accordingly". Thinking about it a more clearly distinction between attempts from open play and set pieces would be of benefit, as that would show if teams would be at all a threat from either (but at which point does an attempt stop being from a set piece, that is another thing to be defined right there).

Interesting thought about the transfer rumors though, though I'd personally never sign a player based on those. :-)

I get it that there can be a whole discussion on what a clear cut chance is, but my point is, to enjoy the game, just accept them as they are and don't analyze if what FM says was a CCC would also be a CCC in real life, and vice versa. Bottom line is that, IMHO, you should always go after a tactic that creates what FM thinks are CCCs, not what you think are

As for the transfer rumors, I think it was actually someone from SI stating that, years ago.

[themadsheep2001]

I get it that there can be a whole discussion on what a clear cut chance is, but my point is, to enjoy the game, just accept them as they are and don't analyze if what FM says was a CCC would also be a CCC in real life, and vice versa. Bottom line is that, IMHO, you should always go after a tactic that creates what FM thinks are CCCs, not what you think are

As for the transfer rumors, I think it was actually someone from SI stating that, years ago.

See I would disagree, having seen some of the chances that FM considers CCC (and I mean near unfinishable chances at acute angles) I don't actually use the CCC stat at all any more, and enjoy it much more that way. Each to their own I suppose.

[Qwqwqw]

See I would disagree, having seen some of the chances that FM considers CCC (and I mean near unfinishable chances at acute angles) I don't actually use the CCC stat at all any more, and enjoy it much more that way. Each to their own I suppose.

Could it have something to do with 2D/3D animations of the match engine? How accurate is that thing, anyway (the display engine)?

[themadsheep2001]

Could it have something to do with 2D/3D animations of the match engine? How accurate is that thing, anyway (the display engine)?

No, it's the shots themselves that are being wrongly assigned as CCCs, or not being assigned when they should be.

You can always have more and better animations, especially for mistakes etc, but it's very close.

Because the real life definition is so subjective anyway, I'm not a huge fan of putting faith, and that before some of the issues in game with it

[herne79]

With CCCs, ideally just watch matches and decide for yourself if you are creating decent chances or not - ignore the actual stat.

To back up what you see, use the Prozone shots analysis which is far more interesting and important than the CCC stat. You can even click on each shot to watch them.

For example: if your Prozone shots analysis consistently looks like the one on the left below, you need to make some tactical adjustments. If it looks like the one on the right, things are going well.

TL;DR - ignore CCCs, watch matches and use the Prozone shot analysis.

[Qwqwqw]

Hmm, ok, but how does the AI behave? I'm guessing it relies on my CCCs to play more or less defensively? Or does that not have any influence on AI's decisions? And should I also ignore the AI's CCCs?