A Closer Look at Training.

[phnompenhandy]

That's right. If the first session went spiffingly well, I'll often have the same tutor-tutee relationship repeated to further increase the atts.

[NickToye]

Is there a tool to monitor this?

[phnompenhandy]

Only determination is visible; fo rthe hiddens you need FMRTE.

[NickToye]

FMRTE? whats that

[phnompenhandy]

In-game editor which allows you see (and change) all the attributes. You need to go to the Editors' forum for that kind of thing.

[NickToye]

Yeah but it doesn't show you during the game, only prior to games being started. As most of my youngsters are all on zero, it doesn't really help much.

[phnompenhandy]

It's an IN-GAME editor. That means it tells you within the game.

[NickToye]

I thought you meant it was the editor that came with the game.

So do you have a link for this FMRTE?

[phnompenhandy]

FMRTE website: http://www.fmrte.com/index.php?option=com_jdownloads&Itemid=0&task=viewcategory&catid=5

Editors' hideaway thread: http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php?t=57016

[NickToye]

thanks i'll take a look.

[phnompenhandy]

A new question on training (or if it has been covered - sorry!):

I have 2 excellent 7* coaches for my strength and aerobic schedules. Neither of them will accept a new contract to change to be fitness coaches. Is there any advantage to having a specialist fitness coach as opposed to a 7* coach who covers a fitness schedule?

In a similar frame, is there any advantage to having a specialist youth coach as opposed to a coach with 'working with youngsters' 20?

Of course, If I can afford 7* coaches, the salary differential is of no consequence!

[iamjerome]

surely there should be no difference if they are coaches on just fitness schedules than someone with the job specification of 'fitness coach'? should be a case of a six and two threes. regarding the youth coaches though, i'm not sure if that translates over to this as well because work load may come into the question if the coach in question has duties with the seniors as well.

[Sammie B]

So am i right in thinking you give each individual player there own training schedule? instead im putting all forwards in 1 etc

[phnompenhandy]

So am i right in thinking you give each individual player there own training schedule? instead im putting all forwards in 1 etc

If you've got the time and patience that would be the ideal.

[Sammie B]

If you've got the time and patience that would be the ideal.

Excellent, so what would you reccommend train players on poor attributes or concentrate on making their good attributes better?

Also do you need both coaches and youth coaches?

Sorry only just read this and i know hardy anything about training compared to all this.

[Sammie B]

Also if a player is playing close to their full potential is there any point putting them on a individual schedule or just leave them on general?

Finally i saw screenshot of someones training intensity at very high, i normally only go up to medium does going any higher not make more injuries or players unhappy?

[phnompenhandy]

Excellent, so what would you reccommend train players on poor attributes or concentrate on making their good attributes better?

Also do you need both coaches and youth coaches?

Sorry only just read this and i know hardy anything about training compared to all this.

For your second question - that's what I just asked; I think no one is 100% sure, but it seems that good coaches that train senior and youth players are fine.

For the first question, it depends on what you want and on the player. If the poor attributes are physical ones like strength or stamina I would focus on those if it's a youth - after about 23 they won't improve anyway. If it's a defender with poor positioning or tackling I would focus on that. However, if you defender has poor long shots or finishing, it doesn't matter so don't train those attributes.

[Sammie B]

For your second question - that's what I just asked; I think no one is 100% sure, but it seems that good coaches that train senior and youth players are fine.

For the first question, it depends on what you want and on the player. If the poor attributes are physical ones like strength or stamina I would focus on those if it's a youth - after about 23 they won't improve anyway. If it's a defender with poor positioning or tackling I would focus on that. However, if you defender has poor long shots or finishing, it doesn't matter so don't train those attributes.

Cheers for that is there a list which attributes are covered by each training area?

[phnompenhandy]

Yes, in the game. Go to any player's profile and find the 'training/attributes' screen. Find the 'training category' drop down menu and each training category lists all the attributes trained in that schedule.

[Sammie B]

Yes, in the game. Go to any player's profile and find the 'training/attributes' screen. Find the 'training category' drop down menu and each training category lists all the attributes trained in that schedule.

Excellent found it cheers mate for all your help trying it with Hibs see how it goes

[Sammie B]

If the coach report says the player is playing to his full potential shall i still make a individual training schedule?

[phnompenhandy]

If the coach report says the player is playing to his full potential shall i still make a individual training schedule?

Yes, because training redistributes his atts. Eg it can take points off a strikers positioning and add them to finishing.

[Ukchris]

I'd say the question depends on the specific player. If you look at them and think "actually, they play great and I'm happy with their attributes" you don't necessarily need to try to change them. If you look at a player and can identify a key attribute you feel is too low - say a striker with 15 finishing or a defender with 15 tackling, while they have other attributes you don't mind seeing lower - you'll likely want to try to shape them with a custom schedule designed to achieve that.

I generally use custom schedules as soon as they turn 17 to help shape them the way I want alongside their natural development, and this custom schedule changes through their development. In the early years it will have high strength/aerobic to work on physical stats and then as they move into their twenties it will lean more towards technical areas depending on their position. As they approach 30, if I'm happy with how they look I'll put them on a general schedule. If I think there's something to be gained by continuing to try to tweak them in their remaining years they'll stay on a custom schedule - I'll sometimes do this to attempt to combat decling by trying to retain key attributes while sacrificing less important areas.

[jmknpk]

I hope this hasn't been answered already, because I only read the first page of the thread.

But I tried the training suggestions and notice that players are getting orange and red down arrows, even when I have set those sliders all the way down to none.

So is this happening because they want training and they are getting none? Or is this a residual effect of the general training schedule they were on a couple weeks ago? Or is this something that I expect when I specialize training?

Is my goal in training to get all great arrows? Or is it okay to leave some orange or red arrows? Or is the purpose to get the status quo minus sign?

Thanks in advance

[jmknpk]

Another question. How do I deal with injured players. I noticed injured players are not taking well to the training. Do I just wait it out? How do I adjust for injuries...gradually increase strength and aerobics only and then gradually introduce the rest?

[phnompenhandy]

jmknpk -

2. Injured players automatically stop training, then automatically restart as soon as they are able - dso just leave them.

1. Red arrows mean the attribute has decreased, which is what you'd expect if your training slider is 0 - no training in that category at all. If you want your striker to be an excellent goalscorer, you max the shooting bar and put defending on 0. His defending arrows will go red and striker arrows green. Only young players on a fairly general schedule will get (nearly) all green arrows. Also bear in mind the arrows only reflect changes in the last week or so - they will naturally go up and down a lot. Pay more attention to trends over a month or two.

[jmknpk]

Now I have a promising young player who lost ability in Teamwork. What training slider do I increase for this?

[jmknpk]

Nevermind. I found that if I a player's training attributes screen, and then selected the training category in the upper left, it showed me the attributes that went with the training category.

[Sammie B]

I made training schedules for everyone based on screenshots on page 2 with heavy workload but they are all unhappy, that mean it should be no more than medium?

[phnompenhandy]

They can be unhappy with their workload but keep going. you raise their morale in other ways. Workrate and determination affect how happy they are with workload.

[Sammie B]

If the coach says should offload this player in future is there any point setting them up on training schedule?

[phnompenhandy]

If I'm definitely selling a player and won't be playing him, I take him off training to reduce the chance of injury.

[Sound]

I now have 12 schedules.

I have 3 each of GK, DEF, MID, STR.

GK (Youth)

GK (21-24)

GK (24+)

DEF (Youth)

DEF (21-24)

DEF (24+)

MID (Youth)

MID (21-24)

MID (24+)

STR (Youth)

STR (21-24)

STR (24+)

[robbybobbybd]

This goes completely against everything already written above (which is excellent) but realistically I have very little time to play FM, and the time I do have I want to spend on just enjoying the matches. However, I still want to develop my youth players - if you simply dont touch the training schedules at all will the players still improve to a decent standard (though obviously not as good as they could be)...

[Fidardorist]

Shouldn't this be the case, or am I missing something? Because whereas fitness training is vital for youths, once your player has matured he isn't going to increase in fitness, so surely you just need the sliders on the minimal notch to prevent decline and therefore crank up the other important ones pretty high.

Further to this above, what exactly is the minimal to not lose fitness? And do traits besides fitness degenerate if you don't train?

Finally, what's a round rule of thumb for how fast traits generally increase? How many units per season?

thanks answers to an addicted newb!

[nni]

A new question on training (or if it has been covered - sorry!):

I have 2 excellent 7* coaches for my strength and aerobic schedules. Neither of them will accept a new contract to change to be fitness coaches. Is there any advantage to having a specialist fitness coach as opposed to a 7* coach who covers a fitness schedule?

In a similar frame, is there any advantage to having a specialist youth coach as opposed to a coach with 'working with youngsters' 20?

Of course, If I can afford 7* coaches, the salary differential is of no consequence!

The only difference is that fitness coaches get paid less (relatively) and can only do fitness (obviously). I guess they just don't want the salary drop

[phnompenhandy]

Further to this above, what exactly is the minimal to not lose fitness? And do traits besides fitness degenerate if you don't train?

Finally, what's a round rule of thumb for how fast traits generally increase? How many units per season?

thanks answers to an addicted newb!

Point 1: generally bottom of medium, but you need to tweak since each player is different.

Point 2: Yes, any training regime on 'low' or 'zero' will result in points being dropped. You can see this when a player is injured - many of his technical attributes will fall.

Point 3: That depends massively on the player. His age, personality, training facilities etc all come into play. A key factor is that how well he trains is massively affected by the hidden personality attributes of ambition and professionalism. Therefore, it is important to get these boosted in a kid through tutoring as early as possible so that he progresses more quickly. But progress isn't smooth; one year a player might increase his CA by 30 points nad then the next year by 5.

nni - that's the 'received wisdom'. So many seemingly obvious ideas are being deconstructed under thorough experimentation that I'd like to know if anyone has found your assumption to be otherwise.

[Mikael H]

What are your thoughts of training when you have part timers in lower league since you van not get the training bar very high. Do you think that the best way to go is to zero out some training as defending and freekick training for an attacker as an example to maximaze other training categories. what are your thoughts about that? What do you do to setup part time training

//Mikael

[phnompenhandy]

Frankly I'd say that the facilities will be so poor t part-time level that you can't substantially improve players through training at all. But within those limitations, yes, I'd do that.

[Frag]

Is Pre-Season Training important and if so, how long should your pre-season training period be?

I usually use Tugs Traing Schedules and just wondered if I should use these rotines from the off - OR - have a pre-season training schedule to the start of the season?

All help appreciated.

Frag

[phnompenhandy]

There are different views on pre-season training. Should you up the fitness regime or not? Personally I've stopped doing a special pre-season routine. I find that pre-season match practice is key to getting the players in condition, so better to set up enough friendlies rather than a different training regime. That's me; others may differ.

[SFraser]

I don't know if there is any "objective" benefit of a specific Pre-Season Training regime, but I use a specific Pre-Season Training regime for all outfield players in order to gauge their relative training behaviour and reaction.

Particular physical statistics play a role in how quickly a player recovers condition between games, and how quickly a player loses condition during a match, so by having all players on a single Pre-Season Training schedule and subjecting them to similar match conditions (11 subs at half time etc.) then you can get a good idea of the relative intensities of individual training required to maintain maximum or desireable condition levels amongst your regular players, and also test out the "endurance" levels of youngsters or newcomers relative to established and well known first teamers.

Another benefit of Pre-Season Training with all players on a single schedule is you can evaluate training performances on a fair basis. By having all categories set to an equal level, and by assigning say your best "Tactics" coach only to Tactics training, you can then study the weekly Training arrows in the Training screen and find out whether particular players are slacking off in general, slacking off under a particular coach, or whether one particular coach is infact having a detrimental effect on your players in that category. Perhaps your coach is rated at 6 stars Tactics but he is getting less positive results than your 5 star Ball Control coach. Is he training players too hard or too soft? Is he getting on well or poorly with players? Is his level of Discipline too high or low? Is one particular player being a pain and requiring some discipline or an adjusted level of category training compared to your ideal plans?

The key thing about Pre-Season training is that it is a time where you can evaluate players without the necessities of perfect condition. It gives you time to analyse your players and coaches and time to adjust and take measures, even extreme ones. Perhaps some hotshot youngster in the start of his third season has underperformed for 2 seasons on the pitch, and is still underperforming in his third pre-season and so you recognise the signs and decide to get rid of him for top dollar before it becomes obvious he can never reach his potential.

Pre-Season gives you the time and opportunity to set up all these little indicator tests and evaluations with all the players and staff at your club, while you still have the time to make decisions and solve all possible problems. When Pre-Season ends and the season starts and the transfer window ends it is four-five months untill you can buy and sell again, and 11 months untill you get that same time and opportunity to evaluate your entire squad under comfortable conditions.

Pre-Season Training and Pre-Season Friendlies are pretty much two sides of the same coin in how I run my club. The space between friendlies and the friendlies themselves are all a big test-bed opportunity for you as a manager to figure out how to improve your club over last season.

[GADONGTA]

@SFraser: Thanks for some energic deep thoughts on the pre-season training. I have never gone through thinking the pre-season as a "stress" test on my coach abilities but I noticed in a recent game (last night) pre-season training when my tactic coach workload turned to Medium (I always want to keep it at light though) but when I redistributed my players to their appropriate full season training schedules after the preseason, the coach workload turned back to Light, which I think confirmed what you said. Yet, why not take the preseason training to get growth like this.

Moreover, I just want to throw my hat into the training ring now. For me, I do think Preseason training is important as in real life because it would help me to improve areas that the players don't train much during the season, especially the physical areas. I have proposed this in the "other" "A Closer look at training" but didn't receive much of response which was kindda sad, therefore, I just want to re-introduce it here.

I believe you are all familiar with the term of "workload optimisation" and the "training limit theory" and I think during the season, the physical training (which concerns the Strength and Aerobic limit)should be applied loosely to create successfull training schedules. As these are the only two training areas that link directly to the physical aspect of every player, if you were to improve this aspect of a player, these two sections would be the areas that you would need to concentrate on in order to find out your optimum schedules. However, I did some testings of my own and came to the conclusion that it would be increasingly difficult to come up with a "good" training program if I were to increase these areas too high. Furthermore, I also concluded that these 2 areas are pretty much influenced by the secondary effect of AGE factor. That is the reason why no matter how crap I train young players in Strength and Aerobic, they would ALWAYS improve their physical stats and for old players, no matter how much I train their physical aspect, they would simply drop when coming to certain age. I am even more convinced with the fact that we cannot train a sissie into a physical monster or a "slowpoke" into a "speedy gonzalez" no matter how much I devoted them in physical training. A young player's physique is influenced by his stats at the beginning of the game and personal NATURE development and not because of how much Strength and Aerobic we would train him. What we could do in training is in fact make him LESS a sissie and ENCOURAGE his growth as much as he can. Only when I combine the physical limit training with the "training limit theory" that I can consistently make schedules that give little injuries with consistent and positive training improvement overall.

I came up with my magic numbers of physical training for reference which enable me to make quite a number of successfull schedules.

(Physical training = Strength+Aerobic)

-18(low physical training): with the last MEDIUM workload, the training progress OVERALL will be 1-2 notches higher than the last limit progression line, no matter the kind of training orientation I give my players.

-22(optimum): with the last MEDIUM workload, the progress OVERALL will reach EXACTLY the last limit progress line.

-26(physical heavy): the training workload need to go to HEAVY level to achieve a satisfying TPO. At the last Medium workload level, the progresstion bar is 1-2 notches short of the maximum line while at the last HEAVY workload level, the progression bar is 1-2 notches over the maximum progression line.

- 29(physical heavy): with the LAST HEAVY workload, the TPO will reach EXACTLY the last progression limit line.

I tend to give old players (32+)low physical training level, while the physical heavy levels to my young players (U24) and the optimum level to those in their 24-32 and I got relatively low injury concern when I set out training schedules.

As you can see, the level that I give my players in physical training during the season is relatively low and not at all spectacular. However, if the difference between Strength and Aerobic combination is too big, the preseason would be ideal time (well, for me) to make up of the "lost numbers". As a result, couple with preseason matches (to regain match fitness asap), my players' progresses with high workload off-season training are much positive and higher than "in-season" training.

Of course, I might get a few injuries along the preseason training but they are more or less the risks and benefits that I need to take. In overall, I have no worries as my squad consists of strong, determined, professional players and my training facility is good but I have not tried for a club of poor facility and a squad of lazy, injury prone, un-professional players but if that happens to be your case, then I might tone down the workload a bit and that would be all to it.

[Becanes]

I've read this thread fully and skimmed it a few more times. I'm looking for some definitive answers on training at different age groups. I know there isn't a definitive answer but I want to get some indications. What I'm looking for is what kind of training should be done in certain age groups.

Example:

17-20 = no so intense physical training

20-24 = intense physical training

24+ = decrease physical training and increase mental and technical training

I'm looking for something like this. If you have any thoughts on this please respond.

Thanks

[James8]

SFraser,

Would you mind posting the schedules you use for players who are close to or at their PA (for each position in a standard 4-4-2 plus AMC). Just screenies would be fine - no need for downloadable links.

Many thanks

[woggle007]

This has all been very intersting and I have certainly changed my approach to training as a result, although I don't think I have mastered it yet! Just one thought for discussion. As players lose attribute in the closed season, should we think about having a pre-season schedule that focuses on the particular skills we wish to develop so that attribute gains will be targetted, rather than general. for example, if I want to increase ball control skills, would it be a good idea to have ball control training very high so that the gains are directede here? Do you think this would work - I am not currently pre-season so I can't check just yet.

On a second point, I have previously done some experiments with the FM editor (I have not used FMRTE as the temptation to tweek would be to strong!). Giving a player a CA/PA of just 1, but setting all attributes to 20, I have then loaded a game to see what skills players actually end up with. All technical skills come out as 4, although aggression, determination and flair are 20. Using Genie Scout, hidden attributes are also 20. However, acceleration, pace, agility and balance come out as 13, with natural fitness at 20. It seems therefore, that most physical attributes do not take up much CA. Any comments?

[SFraser]

On a second point, I have previously done some experiments with the FM editor (I have not used FMRTE as the temptation to tweek would be to strong!). Giving a player a CA/PA of just 1, but setting all attributes to 20, I have then loaded a game to see what skills players actually end up with. All technical skills come out as 4, although aggression, determination and flair are 20. Using Genie Scout, hidden attributes are also 20. However, acceleration, pace, agility and balance come out as 13, with natural fitness at 20. It seems therefore, that most physical attributes do not take up much CA. Any comments?

This is a perfect example of the meaning and relevence of attributes.

Those attributes that remained at 20 are not Ability relative attributes. They do not increase or decrease according to CA. Those attributes are fundamental "personality" attributes as I call them that have a significant impact over how a player behaves in a game.

They show up in the attribute profile as they are vitally important, but they do not relate to CA/PA and do not alter according to changes in CA. It is incredibly hard to alter these values, but these values have a significant impact on a players behaviour ingame, more so than any other particular attribute.

Aggression, Bravery, Determination, Flair, Natural Fitness all describe the "personality" of a player on the pitch. They describe a players will to win, his desire to involve himself, his guts to get stuck in, his preference to play a flamboyant option and his ability to keep going game after game. These attributes have a greater impact on a players behaviour than any other individual attribute and are not considered to be "ability" attributes. CA does not go into these attributes, only game world activities can change them.

The rest of the attributes, those that changed to 4 and those that changed to 13, show the discrepancy in "weight" of each attribute compared to CA.

Now you set all attributes to 20 and you see the physical attributes higher than the rest, so you think that the physical attributes take less CA to see a higher result. This is not true.

What happens is that all the attributes are reduced by the same quantity of CA. The difference in CA between 20 for all attributes and 1 CA is split up equally and removed from each attribute. So imagine that 8 CA is removed from each attribute. The technical and mental end up at 4 but the physical end up at 13. This means physical attributes take up more CA than other attributes, and this is proven by the difficulty in increasing physical attributes in the game.

[woggle007]

This is a perfect example of the meaning and relevence of attributes.

Now you set all attributes to 20 and you see the physical attributes higher than the rest, so you think that the physical attributes take less CA to see a higher result. This is not true.

What happens is that all the attributes are reduced by the same quantity of CA. The difference in CA between 20 for all attributes and 1 CA is split up equally and removed from each attribute. So imagine that 8 CA is removed from each attribute. The technical and mental end up at 4 but the physical end up at 13. This means physical attributes take up more CA than other attributes, and this is proven by the difficulty in increasing physical attributes in the game.

Thanks for the reply. I understand the difference between player personality attributes and player skill attributes. Personailty is not affected by CA nor by training, but by ingame events. However I am still puzzled by the higher physical abilities (13 in my test) compared to the technical abilities. As I said, I gave a player 1 for CA and 1 for PA and set all attributes at 20 in the editor. When the game is loaded, physical attributes are at 13 (i.e. they have dropped from 20 to 13) and all others are at 4 (i.e they have dropped from 20 to 4!). Given that the CA and PA are only 1, how can you say that the physical attributes take up more CA - the CA is only 1 and yet the physical abilities are considerably higher than all of the other attributes. Is it because there are fewer physical abilities?

Thanks in advance

[isuckatfm]

Thanks for the reply. I understand the difference between player personality attributes and player skill attributes. Personailty is not affected by CA nor by training, but by ingame events. However I am still puzzled by the higher physical abilities (13 in my test) compared to the technical abilities. As I said, I gave a player 1 for CA and 1 for PA and set all attributes at 20 in the editor. When the game is loaded, physical attributes are at 13 (i.e. they have dropped from 20 to 13) and all others are at 4 (i.e they have dropped from 20 to 4!). Given that the CA and PA are only 1, how can you say that the physical attributes take up more CA - the CA is only 1 and yet the physical abilities are considerably higher than all of the other attributes. Is it because there are fewer physical abilities?

Thanks in advance

The game autocorrects editor values to fit the model using CA to attributes and does so uniformly. So if you put in CA 200 but assign all attributes as 1 the physical ones will increase by less. What happens in game in terms of how attributes link in to CA changes is completely different to what happens with the 'autocorrect' from editor values to in a new game values. and it is 99.9999% certain that Pace/Acceleration/Agility/Balance take up the largest chunks of CA in order to increase by a single attribute point.

Hope that clears it up.

[woggle007]

Aha! Now I never thought of editing this way, but this certainly does clear things up. Having done a few more tests, lower ability players are definitely given physical attributes over technical ones, which is pretty much true to real life. The more I learn about this game, the more I see the depth in the programming - a really wonderful game, even if (or maybe because) it is so complicated.