Jump to content

enigmatic

Members+
  • Posts

    11,049
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    14

Posts posted by enigmatic

  1. 51 minutes ago, roger redknapp said:

    Huw Jenkins, Speakman, makes no difference.

    Extensive YR, State of Art facilities, 5* Rep, makes no difference.  

    It still takes 50+ reloads to finding a decent player. 

    Ive played the game for 1000s if hours, hundreds of careers and seasons, I’m not going to pretend this part of the game isn’t broken when it is. 

    They should scrap hidden stats, simplify how facilities effect your club, possibly scrap preferred formations and personalities, as currently they just complicate. 

    And make the HOYD work all year round, rather than 1 day a year. That is how real life works, players aren’t rounded up on one specific day at youth level. 

    Go look at all the people taking clubs from minor leagues to the Champions League whilst not signing anyone outside of their youth intake. Youth intakes in FM produce far more players with first team potential than the real life cohorts of youngsters (let's face it, in the past couple of decades Swansea's produced Ben Davies, Joe Allen and a lot of players that wouldn't make the Swansea team even now they're in the second tier. Guess that's what happens when you don't get to save/reload because you haven't got wonderkids with good personalities)

    It's not the game that's broken, it's your expectations...

  2. yeah, but I think the OP is right that the mechanism is fundamentally implausible and overly black and white

    Players who don't have any reason to respect their inexperienced manager IRL might sneer at team talks, back their teammates' complaints and be very keen to engineer a move away regardless of what the manager says, and they might think "meh" when they receive a compliment, but they generally don't get so upset by an appropriately timed compliment their morale suffers and their relationship is permanently slightly damaged (which is the standard FM "negative interaction" outcome)

  3. 20 minutes ago, HUNT3R said:

    Him saying that? No. Him thinking it. Yes.

    FM is just not hiding it from us.

    I think the real life negative outcome tends to be a player being totally uninterested in the congratulations, not losing morale and acquiring a small permanent dislike of the manager as a result of them saying a quick "well done"...

     

  4. 6 hours ago, goqs06 said:

    The starting positions do matter though in the shape. My intention is to still have the WBs in the full back strata, not the wing back strata.

    Why would you do that? Many managers push their wingers back to act like wingbacks: nobody plays with a pair of orthodox fullbacks on both sides

  5. 10 minutes ago, forameuss said:

    While I can see why some might want it, what exactly does it bring to have SI code this in as standard, rather than just putting all those restrictions on yourself?  It's a single player game, you're not competing against anyone else, so surely you can just put them all on yourself and run the save with those kinds of challenges built in yourself?

    There is a trend for people playing other single player games like the Paradox strategy series to have a mode where they can (i) avoid the temptation to save/reload and (ii) prove it when showing off to friends or completing steam achievements. It's not dissimilar in intent to the "disable editor" function in the existing version.

    Whether implementing it in FM is worth the engineering time or not is another question.

  6. 7 hours ago, westy8chimp said:

    what about most match conference response mood? Add Mourinho style...

    Passionate

    Calm

    Agressive

    Cautious

    SULKY

    We already have the Mourinho-inspired function for adding your own comments so you can spout literally any bollocks you like 

  7. 9 hours ago, Snorks said:

    Where do you look? All the ones  I see are attached

    There's the ability to find lists of all youth intakes accessible from a menu at the top, per this link https://www.passion4fm.com/how-to-find-the-best-wonderkids-and-newgens/

    They will show as appearing at a club, but sometimes you'll be able to "approach to sign" them without agreeing a transfer with their club and (rarely) you won't owe the club any compensation. That's normally the case for only a few days after the youth for that particular nation have come through

     

    Less like cheating and more useful for small clubs is Youth Departures available on the same submenu, which (after they've been released) will give you a list of everyone released from Youth Contracts without ever signing a pro contract, grouped by club, so you can look at 18 and 19 year olds that weren't good enough for the biggest clubs in the country who might well be good enough for you.

     

  8. You can see them in multiple places with the official in game editor (and I think in some skins even without it)

     

    On 01/06/2018 at 16:19, phnompenhandy said:

    Bear in mind there's usually a few regens who appear on intake day unattached to any club. You have to be quick if they're any good though!

    There's also (at least in some countries) the ones who are attached to a club but haven't signed a contract yet. They tend to be very reluctant to move and want silly money though, and you won't get time to properly scout them 

  9. Wider observation: for the most part I'd like to see fewer roles. Follows naturally from there being an "is FM elitist" thread

    Fullbacks have already been mentioned, because the existing set of roles is absurd. Roles which are called wing back but pure wingbacks aren't actual natural at playing? Ridiculous. And does anybody actually know whether a fullback WB(S) supposed to be less attacking or more attacking than a FB(A)? Keep it to  Defensive Limited Full Back, Fullback(D/S/A) and Inverted Fullback, maybe a "Complete Fullback" if you need something more aggressive than a FB(A)

    The DM playmaker roles DLP (doesn't have an attacking setting) and Regista (doesn't have a defensive setting) are both screaming to be merged into DLP(D/S/A) too

    Raumdeuter is not a real position name, and whilst I can just about see the point of having a Wide Poacher, how about we call it what it is, and not a jokey comment Muller once made about his personal style of play? Better still, how about we have the Muller style of play something you can get from a generic wide AM role if you customise it to sit narrower, get further forward, move into channels and play with high creative freedom but no dribbling or shooting from distance (and sign Muller to play in it). The AI won't use it, but it's not actually a common role...

    The ridiculously long list of striker positions can be culled too. Isn't a Trequartista by definition behind the strikers, not another type of striker? Either way, there doesn't seem to be an obvious need for two types of DLF, a False Nine, a Complete Forward (S) and a Trequartista all as separate options for dropping deep to link the play. tbh I think False Nine should really be a strikerless-only AMC role, but that might not be making things simpler...

     

     

  10. 3 hours ago, alanschu14 said:

    With respect to Egypt, we'd have to talk with the scouting team at SI because Egypt does have a very high quality regen score of 138 (England's is only 120). Obviously more factors at play with so many more clubs in England and many of them having fantastic youth intakes to ensure there's going to be plenty of English footballers with high quality potential compared to Egypt, but as a dope for international football knowledge the impression that I get is that this is either a bug, or SI feels Egypt should have decent enough regens.

    China's generated player score is a mere 60.  KSA is 85.  Iraq is 106.

    Now I understand these are just "weights" that get used to factor in regens. China can probably compensate overtime because the clubs themselves are often quite rich and can probably grow facilities over time. But the game does not appear to do very much to support these particular clubs and their intakes based on the systems provided.

     

    I also think that there's another factor with regards to comparing real players and regens. Real players, with each edition of the game, get tweaked. There's undoubtedly issues where players that were seen to have excellent potential in FM just didn't pan out, and their PA would have changed with different versions of the game. Same goes for players no one expected to become rockstars that had low PA in FM, but later had higher CA/PA because reality had them being very good players.  In essence though, we probably have a lot more context over how good a player is going to be based on real life scouting information and whatnot and don't need to roll the dice as much, so to speak.

    Especially with the AI not being particularly strong at developing players compared to a human.

     

    From experiments in FM17 (more pissing about with databases and watching Chinese superstars fail to win a world cup and Indian superstars fail to materialise than serious research) , those youth rating scores really don't affect very much (and I think are mostly intended as counterbalances to the reputation and facilities of the nation's clubs, which also impact the players they generate). You can crank that score for, say, Indonesia up to 200 and hardly ever see wonderkid amongst the Indonesian intake.

    What actually makes a massive difference is the national reputation (bump a national team's reputation up to 8000 and they'll get some very good regens, even if their local clubs suck but that reputation will also drop very quickly if they don't keep winning tournaments...)  and the reputation of clubs that tend to generate players of that nationality (establish San Marino's local club side in Serie A as many FMers have and the San Marino national team will eventually become competitive)

  11. Retraining players taking up CA points can sometimes be annoying when they're near their potential and your midfielder with the attributes to be a defender actually becomes less good at heading the ball and marking once he's spent enough time training as a defender to become natural at it, not for any logical footballing reason (quite the opposite!) but simply to rebalance weighting algorithms.

    That really shouldn't be a problem for a raw 17 year old with enough potential to play for your first team one day though.

    And lots of retraining that's useful (teaching a fullback to play in the wingback roles you actually use, teaching someone to play on the other side of the pitch because that's where you need the long term replacement) usually has no impact on CA at all...

  12. 16 minutes ago, RBKalle said:

    Define: coming through academies...

    Here we're taking as a fact that those who don't even get a tryout for the clubs' official Youth Team (U18, C-team, Primavera, Amateur... whatever it's called) are already taken into account as "cuts" and FM doesn't bother generating them.

    To me, the 16 youth candidates we get each year are those who will indeed "make it" at least until the highest youth level in real life.

    Not all of them will become top players, but most of them will indeed have a career in football, but probably at a semi-pro level.

    Also, 1 usable prospect per team (in EPL) means 20 new EPL-level players per year... Isn't it a bit too low to replenish the league?!

    ~1 new player per club per year, will have career of 12-18 years.  11 players on a team, 18 in a match day squad. Most of the league actually consists of foreign imports and few top PL prospects end up plying their trade overseas.

    Pretty much everyone that comes through a Premier League youth intake FM will be good enough to make it as a pro eventually anyway, it's just you're not interested in developing the 90PA player your coach rates with one star potential to help him reach the heights of League Two, and the game tends to delete released players a month or twelve after you release them partly because it's inefficient at matching free transfers to clubs in general and partly because nobody cares about following their 17 year olds they weren't willing to spend £2k per annum developing as they look for a semi pro contract to get back into football.

    23 minutes ago, RBKalle said:

    I don't have time now to research, but off the top of my head the Inter Milan side that won the UEFA Youth League some years back has produced 1 mid-table Serie A player, 3 or 4 low-level Serie A players, a handful of lower/minor foreign leaguers and only a fraction of gas station attendants.

    The Barça side that won it the following year has likely a similar ratio.

    Still, much like a "normal distribution" where the core of a Youth Generation ends up in Tier 2/3, with few exceptions at both ends of the curve.

    So probably the best youth team (by current ability) in Europe that year produced no players good enough to play for Inter Milan today, and some players that probably didn't make it as professional footballers? Thanks for proving my point. Title-winning youth side peaks at "three star" ability, the level the OP was complaining his 16 year olds didn't start at...

    Have we actually seen any evidence that the youth generation in FM isn't broadly normally distributed? Because if you get a team normally distributed in that manner, a scout with perfect foreknowledge will rate the one or two prospects at 3 or 4 star potential, and everyone else (second tier player or failure alike) at one or two star potential... exactly the sort of thing that prompts this threadwhinge.

     

    53 minutes ago, RBKalle said:

    It may be worth a check as well, looking at how the CA/PA distribution works on newgens for a specific nation on youth intake day.

    Agree this is a good idea. I think you'll prove the same point in your last thread (more theoretical world beaters than you'd expect) and possibly be pleasantly surprised that a lot of your expectations around distributions of players and ability to play a couple of levels down from the starting club if not higher are actually met...

  13. 2 hours ago, westy8chimp said:

    kind of, certainly in FM terms. They seem to have added passing behaviour to the role, which could be improved.

    If you asked me in real life what a sweeper keeper means... it is purely that his initial positioning is more advanced, and his aim is to rush out and clear and direct balls behind the defence, allowing your team to play a higher line.

    I would completely decouple sweeping and passing. i.e. Ederson at City is involved in a lot of build ups ... but he isn't a sweeper keeper who rushes out a lot, or stand outside his penalty area. Lloris under Villas Boas however, had a very high starting position and often rushed out to make clearances, but isn't really renowned for his passing ability or involvement playing out from the back.

    Ederson's the quickest keeper to rush out I've ever seen, but I agree with the wider point that he's used in buildup play, whereas Lloris isn't and just positions himself very aggressively.

    What I'd ideally like to see is a "use in buildup play" option, for goalkeepers and central defenders (and possibly FB(D)s and anchor men; I'd assume i would be on by default for everyone else including ball playing defenders). Basically I'd like (e.g) Matic to consider passing to Lindelof a very good option, passing to Smalling a last resort, and not have any particular presumption about passing to Rojo. And I might be very happy to encourage my time wasting side to play lots of passes to De Gea even though he's definitely not a sweeper keeper.

    This is an instruction it should be possible to get the AI to use sensibly and infrequently too.

  14. 44 minutes ago, RBKalle said:

    Not arguing with that, but with the star/decent LL player/gas station attendant ratio in the Top Leagues

    Assuming in any youth intake the bulk of the hopeless kids has been taken care of already, the 16 or so players EVERY club is presented with should reasonably consist of mostly middle-of-the-road prospects whose career could range from decent rotation option at that level to starter or star one or two levels below that. If anything, because those 320 players (in EPL) shoudl rejuventate the league's landscape in replacing retired players (due to age or to crappiness).

    But if a solid half of those (and I'm being generous, as it's more like 75%) are rubbish and will disappear merely months after having been brought into the gameworld, maybe the average level is a tad too low?

    BTW, it's particularly noticeable when you manage a NT in an inactive league... I'm currently managing Portugal, and I'm constantly 1 injury away from a LB crisis, as the only viable options are aging mediocre players, while no decent prospect has been generated in SEVEN YEARS worth of youth intakes...
    Again, not expecting to see 5 or 6 world-class fullbacks, but what are the odds of such a long dry spell for a specific role in a nation that has otherwise produced (too?) many high-potential players?

    This is wrong on so many levels it's hard to know where to start.

    The top leagues' players are made up of the best players of 12-15 years' worth of youth intakes (plus the best players from lesser leagues). Of course most of the rest of those youth intakes didn't reach that standard and few  of them had any chance of doing so. You need less than one prospect that makes it per team per year to replenish the league. In general, most players coming through academies will not become senior professional footballers at all, even including quite a few from the big clubs

    Someone actually posted the class of 2012 from the UK's second best academy. There's more gas station attendants than feasible rotation options.

    It's a simple fact that the average potential for newgen youth intakes is higher than the average potential in the starting database, not lower. You posted a graph highlighting this yourself three days ago...

    A national team not having a decent prospect in a particular position is pretty normal IRL for most national teams (England have over various ~7 year periods sorely lacked good striker, left winger and right back prospects) and of course it's going to be worse if it's an inactive league so the game is only generating a fraction of the players. That's a database size problem, not a player ability distribution problem (much worse if in order to fill out inactive nations' teams, their local clubs only generate future internationals. Imagine how pointlessly easy that'd make finding prospects...)

  15. I think there's a decent argument that the players coming through the youth academy ought to reflect your own formation preferences to some extent  (i.e. your scouts might have found natural wingers despite you invariably playing 5-3-2, but someone will have forced them to play at striker or wing back in the U-15s at some point to at least "awkward" level if you've been there for more than three months and that's the way you want the side to play. Not that you can't retrain 17 year olds with varying degrees of success anyway). It'd be nice to be able to set basic preferences for physical over technical players or vice versa as well (at the risk of losing the odd physically/technically immature high potential player to neighbouring academies)

    But in general youth footballers from the local intake never look like the manager's ideal of what a footballer should be, they just happen to be the a team comprised of the best footballers of their age in the area that didn't get signed by someone else. One of the finest defensive prospects at the UK's most productive academy is Ro Shaun Williams, who epitomises "the fish" on the chart - lightning quick, actually has OK technique but can't really dribble or create and basically plays in central defence because he's bigger and quicker than the opposition strikers rather than because he has a natural defensive brain. The fact the quickest kid in Manchester ended up anchoring United's Premier League 2 defence when not injured had nothing to do with Ferguson, Moyes, van Gaal or Mourinho's ideal defender looked like and everything to do with the fact he's pretty effective there in youth football, probably has the potential to be a pro at some level and young Stams and Ferdinands don't actually come along very often. And if you want Fosu Mensah's you have to go to Holland to look for them.

     

    And I hate to break the news, but the reason you can't see any evidence your HOYD goes out to work every day is because he is in fact actually only a record in a database consisting of a few dozen numbers whose primary role is to influence the values of numbers in other records in a database. Which is pretty much the same as everything else in FM, come to think of it....

    (And frankly, there's enough tedious pseudo-conversation and newsfeed spam in the game already so the last thing I want is to need to click buttons to send HOYDs messages to convey to the U11s or pay attention to news items on which primary schools his junior coaches are organising U8s coaching sessions at to have a better chance of my U18s turning out decent because somebody has decided it's not immersive enough if you don't understand each member of staff's daily routines)

  16. FM produces a lot more newgens with 150+ PA than in the original game, and has done for a very long time

    I assume this is entirely deliberate, because (i) PA is an artificial limitation to influence what level real life players end up at based on a number of known factors about their actual experience, improvements in recent seasons, physical growth potential and bigger club interest, not an actual thing (ii) it's reasonably balanced by the higher potential newgens being much more likely to stagnate due to crap personalities, crap starting clubs and crap AI management than real life players and (iii) it's a game, and ultimately if newgen PA was distributed the way it is for real life players the whole academy side of the game would be incredibly lame because you'd only get one player every couple of years worth bothering with. Making everyone have 10-20 more points of possible improvement and typically needing more work to get there gives a lot more scope for youth challenges etc. 

    Looking at the distribution of nationalities, it doesn't seem like there's anything very wrong with it once you've taken into account all the players are 10-20 points better in potential than starting players (particularly when you take into account most of the Danes and Poles will probably have successful careers at good European clubs and most of the Iranians probably won't get near that potential, and I bet France/Portugal/Germany have a decent chunk of dual nationals compared with Brazil & Argentina). 

  17. The best academy in the country produces just over 1 player with the potential to play in the Premier League per season, none of whom have been Premier League standard aged 16/17 since Ryan Giggs, nearly three decades ago. Players who are Premier League standard at that age are absolute freaks.

    FM skews in favour of youth development

  18. 5 hours ago, herne79 said:

    @Neil Brock Is there something else at play here to do with player personalities?  Do we understand enough about their personalities, media handling skills and our own relationships with individual players to fully appreciate that differences here can result in different outcomes to conversations?

    ok, bugs and ambiguous statements notwithstanding, how much can we understand about our own and player personalities to have meaningful conversations?  At present, we get told a player's personality and their media handling - but what do they mean?  The coach/scout report only goes so far to relay us snippets of "hidden" information and many people don't even look at this anyway.  In the T&T forum it's pretty obvious most people there look as far as player attributes but no further.

    A related issue is I think the underlying model of player behaviour based on ~6 hidden variables which are often randomly set and presumably fairly difficult to research is always going to be difficult to test to see if it's behaving as expected, especially in game conditions. And I've certainly played FM variants where I have set those variables for custom players and the behaviour of players has been very, very unexpected. For other variables, they're visible and easily compared with others at the same level and there's a match engine to see how they perform and how that conforms with expectations.

    Instead of relying on ambiguous combinations of "Ambition", "Loyalty" etc, it'd be nice if prominent players' decision making was based mainly around (visible or not) specific traits similar to the manager ones e.g "happy in backup role", "expects to win trophies", "will accept lucrative contracts at less prestigious clubs", "relaxed attitude to training", "aims to play for favoured club" etc.

    Unlikely to happen, but from a realism point of view I think it'd be better actually scrapping a lot of the player personality/interaction logic altogether, focus on better implementations of stuff that's actually essential to a management simulation (transfer requests/promises, game time balancing, demanding more from players) and not stuff that isn't like making players overreact to implicit statements about young players or passing being a joy to behold in a forced-choice conversation system. I'd genuinely rather see player tantrums be completely random than the result of deficient conversational systems.

     

  19. 13 hours ago, XaW said:

    I think you are missing a point here. The player isn't leaving because he failed to develop youngsters. He wants to leave because he feel the manager have lied to him. No matter the promise, if you make it you should keep it. As to the question you ask, I don't have any examples, but absence of evidence does not equal evidence of absence. Not that I think that it happens a lot, we cannot say for certain since we don't know the reason behind each and every real life transfer.

    However, I do believe the whole promise aspect needs some work and should not be as exact as it is now. As a manager, if a player comes with issues you are likely to have made an error (at least in the eyes of the player). Your job as a a manager is to resolve it, and I do think it's a needed addition if FM is supposed to be a realistic simulation. Motivating and handling the players is a very big part of the job, as any other position with management responsibility.

    Once again, as in real life, don't promise anything if you are not 100% certain you can keep it to the extent of the recipient's expectations.

    Sure, but the only reason the player "believes the manager lied to him" is because the player was programmed to irrationally interpret a statement to the effect that a player had been replaced by a younger, better player as a binding commitment to play a specific number of youngsters in a specific number of games, without any further interaction to clarify being possible, and then programmed to massively overreact rather than seek clarification.

    In the absence of any evidence to the contrary, I'm going to assume that the number of players who have ever demanded to leave a club because they the manager lied to them by not dropping more senior players for youngsters is zero. Which is why this "feature" would be best improved by removing it and focusing on improving the sort of manager promises that actually do have consequences, like those concerning transfers.

×
×
  • Create New...