Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by borivoje213

  1. it would certainly make it more interesting. I'd posted here before that it's too easy to upgrade, but I hadn't considered that it is quite boring in that it's always rigidly incremental. perhaps it could be a risk reward type of deal. the board could say to you, this is what it'll cost for these 3 levels of improvement right now, but these are the levels of expectation we have on the pitch / how hard it will hit your budget. or alternatively, we could invest to the level of facility you want, but it'll take us until the end of next season to do it. it'll be cheaper to wait and upgrade to that level in one jump rather than improving in two separate works, but this is where we expect the club to be by then if we're still going to go ahead with the project.
  2. Generally speaking players are trained to cross to areas and those attacking the crosses to time their runs to the cross. So really the technique of being able to cross on the run or otherwise can be practiced without other players as much as passes can be trained to mini goals/cones/targets. And yes their are mid-air targets you can get for crosses.
  3. Please consider removing the need to confirm trialists in favour of having a news item notifying you that they've accepted and their arrival is imminent. Perhaps just have a cancel button in that item for the rare occasion you change your mind.
  4. Please consider: 1. Removing all sounds for players making contact with the ball with the exception of, 2. Long kicks and hard strikes of the ball only, and 3. Make it a very deep hollow thud rather than a slapping noise, and 4. Delay the sound to replicate noise travel to the touchline/stand.
  5. So it's literally not an attribute that can be influenced by any additional training?
  6. Yeah i see there are schedules, but i can't see there being one that influences crossing. I saw passing etc in one of them but nothing that works the crossing attribute. which one is it?
  7. something akin to this has been suggested and reviewed recently. I agree.
  8. I can't seem to see an individual player training option that includes crossing, is it possible?
  9. Do you feel this latest chat has gone pretty well?
  10. Mine was weird. I've still been able to sign foreigners of all kinds (EU and Non-EU) and despite failing WP applications, they're still allowed to play for me without any restriction. I think it's a little broken. Before the brexit any foreign player that failed WP app was ineligible to play, now they can all play. I just can't renew their contract unless their WPs are granted. Easy way around that though...sign them on an 5 year deal with a optional contract extension and boom, got them for years until they're likely to have played enough International games or earned a passport. Bit of a cheat really but you can only work with what you're given.
  11. As far as the mental attributes go it's hard to say, it becomes convoluted as some of them are directly linked to coaching ability which is completely abstract as there's no actual coaching that happens in the game, just passive development of numbers through a series of options. The other problem is as a player of the game I have no idea how many, probably countless instances, where those attributes are generating results for various interactions. But if I were to take them at face value: (please keep in mind that it's 0530 in the morning here and I'm trying to keep myself awake for the next 3 hours) The coaching attributes for the manager would initially be set - hidden - as a default value for whatever status/level club you manage initially. Those stats would grow based on your success in the game. They would deteriorate at a specified parachute rate. So for instance that way if you did get relegated or sacked you wouldn't suddenly become a much worse coach/lose licences over night. This way you'd be able to choose whether you would focus on one area of training or spread yourself thin, but either way you would be equally adept depending on what it was you wanted to coach. Or perhaps have to choose one specific coaching specialisation. Mental stats wise I'd have them hidden and either set at a default value, or as with LoD rise and fall based on success/failure/behaviour. Since most of them practically function as a difficulty level. Currently the only interest I have in the mental attributes is how good a coach I want to be in the game. I have no interest in the game's opinion of me as a person. For instance IRL there is a probability of how people are going to react to my authority, I don't know this probability, like a crazy person I just wing it depending on who I'm talking to and how I think it'll go down based on experience. 99% of other users would probably hate it, but you can't please everyone
  12. It's a matter of identifying whether the poor performance is due to their motivation or your tactical instructions really. I've turned around as many games by firing my players up with an "I'm disappointed" talk as I have from making tactical changes. If it's a tactical problem then it simply a case of making the change that's causing the problem, it might be that they're caught out of position defensively that could be rectified with a role change or mentality change. If it's not and they simply should be performing a certain way already then it could be that they don't have the current level of motivation, in which case criticising a specific part of their performance would have exactly the same effect the current "disappointed" speech does, which is usually a boost in motivation. Lastly it could be due to an opposite number who is completely unplayable that day. It which case you will have to 1. motivate 2. change player instruction to counter 3. hope, then ultimately substitute and repeat steps 1 - 3. But ultimately identifying a specific problem plays more into making specific changes to your player instructions/tactic than it does motivation, because the result of the motivation issue is kind of binary anyway regardless of what it is they're not doing.
  13. Also with so many players playing the game it proved that the ME works. If it were to never happen then it would be broken. If the forum were flooded with people complaining then clearly it would be broken. But with thousands playing entire seasons in the space of a week and one person posts, it kind of proves it's a freak occurrence, as it is in real life. I sympathise, it's really bad that it happened to you, but it has to happen to someone eventually. Try to feel lucky you witnessed something few players ever will
  14. I was reading each reply to see if someone else had mentioned this already
  15. I'm aware of this setting. But since the option is there to customise my own that's what I tend to do. I'm just saying it's not a feature I necessarily agree with. I agree with auto-filling it even less as I don't feel the need for a human manager to have visible attributes in the first place.
  16. This is exactly what I thought. It's just bizarre, I don't know if anyone else has it constantly happening as I do. As I said, it wasn't this way with previous versions.
  17. tbh I forgotten/hadn't acknoledged how many times I'd changed up training , sold players or offered new contracts. so on the whole it's probably quite fair. personally I think attributes should remain reflection of whether coaching licences have been completed and how successfully we've performed rather than individually allocated. I feel already feel somewhat unsatisfied having to allocate my own attributes at the start of the game. it's far too easy to make yourself the near perfect coach in one specific area. and I don't like the idea of effectively choosing how harsh the attribute masking etc is by having player knowledge attributes. I'm not even sure a visible LoD attribute is even necessary. it's only relevant to how players are calculated to respond to you. in real life you just judge yourself how you wish to deal with individuals and your reputation comes from that, you don't look at a number then think about it, you do it based on previous experience. that number should be hidden just to help the game mechanic. adaptability is also an odd one. you either give it to yourself if you want to switch leagues at some point, or save your points for elsewhere by leaving it at 1. effectively choosing how easy/difficult it would be to get/perform a job somewhere else. not a fan. it's football manager not football coach. I understand certain mangers get involved on the training field in real life. but it's also true that FM has very little to do with coaching at all. player development and team training in the practical sense, IE how its implemented in the game has nothing to do with coaching, it's all a passive system that happens in the background based on limited options. not a fan of the manager attributes side of things at all. for npc it's necessary. but I don't think it should be used for us.
  18. I currently have one person improving their game for the first time, as before I haven't had any PPMs worth transferring. perhaps it'll go differently. but every single time I and someone tutor off the pitch it has resulted in them being disappointed or ending it early after a bust up, regardless of the improvement or matching with a similar personality. the determination attribute of the tutor has always been higher too. 100% of the time there is a determination improvement in the learner. but every single time they're disappointed. easily 30 or so occasions so far. im sure on previous versions I've had players be delighted with their experience when doing the same thing. that's why I'm so surprised this time around.
  19. aha. I was under the impression that "improve his game" was a player trait transfer attempt only and that "mentor him off the pitch" was a determination boost only.
  20. It's definitely something that could do with being looked at IMO. It's a lot of work to set up, although satisfying when you see it work. It's hard enough making one routine for each and managing it as games, team selections and formations change how and where you deploy people. I even find myself weighing up whether I can be bothered to change stuff when I've made a substitution that clearly weakens something, especially if it's late on in the game. It's kind of a victim of it's own success. Even though it's a simple system it's really customisable. There are only two things that I can think of off hand that could help, but there's no guarantee they'd be either popular or even work: 1. Change the presentation slightly so necessary information is far more visible. For instance, the pitch is far too big for what is being presented on it. It could do with being a much smaller visual representation off to one side with a list of the team selection in the left with a row of all the relevant SP attributes (because their aren't all that many presented for all SP roles). 2. Instead of having different routines for attacking SPs and single roles - Be able to assign one or more possibilities that a player can perform that can be kind of randomised. You could still set players to always stay back, but in this you could tick certain players to stay back if needed. That way when they aren't needed they might actually do something you want them to do rather than just go forward. You could also put your entire squad in order of priority for who you'd want to stay back. And each player have a list of different roles they can perform if they go forward for each SP type (corner, DFK etc). Then have a "Rule" that you set that says a set number of people stay back, or 1 more than opposing attackers etc. This way you would only change the rule to go more defensive or risky, and by your own player list it would select the most suitable available players to stay back. Leaving the others to randomly mix things up based on the options you've given each player for each type of SP situation. It would still be a lot of work to set up, but you'd only NEED to do it once and then just review it as often as you like, such as when you notice a flaw in an option or you have a new squad member. Although this would be really simple for the manager to work, the one negative I can think of is that some might find it limiting because they'd want to choose a specific delivery to match a certain player action. And they may not be guaranteed to occur simultaneously each time using this system. Edit: Instead of selecting one type of delivery, you could have tick boxes for each set piece so the taker would know if there are any you definitely don't want them to attempt. So the system would end up being: - This available player (IE is currently on the pitch) is top of the list as the SP taker of this type. - These are the deliveries you want available to them. - You've selected 2 to stay back at all times, these are the top 2 available players in order of who you'd want from the squad. They stay back. - Everyone else is therefore attacking the SP and will populate attacking roles at random based on what options you have set for each player for this type of SP. It sounds like a lot to set the options, but certainly no more than creating multiple routines that will lose effectiveness when your selection/formation changes. And again, this way you'd rarely need to change anything, still end up with multiple set pieces being attempted with players only doing things you'd genuinely want them to do, and not compromise defensively due to the "numbers staying back option".
  21. Anyone had any trouble with tutoring off the pitch? About a dozen or so of my players get tutored every season. About 7 seasons in - despite matching up youngsters with tutors of a similar personality & superior determination - 100% of the ones who've seen the tutoring period through have "gained a little" and been disappointed. No a single one has been happy. I find it odd considering the dramatic increases in determination, which is largely the main benefit of tutoring off the pitch and surely the measure of success. It's only a report in the inbox at the end of the day and I don't envisage it having any negative impact, but it just seems odd.
  22. I'm about 7 years into my save and my LoD attribute is still only 7. The bar in my profile that states how likely I am to come down on anyone who steps out of line is at max and my attempts to discipline players have been widely successful. I would have thought it would go up by now. Any particular way to get it to increase? It's holding my coaching ability back a little bit. I'd be on 5* otherwise.
  • Create New...