Jump to content

Lyssien

Members
  • Posts

    2,819
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Lyssien

  1. My schedule is very unpredictable, so no promises, but I 'd love to. First I have to play the game a bit (I bought it recently) to get motivated and get ideas flowing. Cleon, where art thou?
  2. The sliders approach was my idea. It made sense back then, because the tactical module worked with sliders as well (that's where I got the idea from). I think it succeeded in allowing more gamers to work with it, as a lot of people were lost with the pig-in-the-middle approach. But I agree, training can do with a rethink.
  3. Could be. Or maybe it is confusing because it does not allow tampering with things that one would logically expect to tamper with (workload). But yes, due to former experience it is hard to know what exactly is the case. Oh man, I hated it. It was too opaque for me, and for most others as I recall. To each his own, I guess. You know, the problem with FM training was never its complexity (eg, compared to the tactical module), it was always the presentation of information. From what I see, I think SI have missed this point entirely. Provided I can afford the time, I may be back with a detailed proposal for training after I play the game for a while.
  4. Cheers, Dr Hook! Good to see you still here. What is the story behind this decision, did it come from SI initially or did the community campaign for it? I am very -VERY- disappointed with this. I don't understand it either, does SI really believe that people who get easily overwhelmed will find training simpler now? It is actually more confusing than it used to be.
  5. Hi all! After missing FM15, I am trying to get into FM16 now. I am a bit confused with training workload at the moment. Here are my questions: 1) In the default skin, where is the option to set the intensity of individual training? Has it been streamlined out of the game or is it somewhere and I don't see it? 2) In the default skin, do we get information on the percentage of time devoted to each training element for a player? (eg, individual training, ppm, team training etc) In FM14 we used to see bars explaining everything about workload, but now I don't see such a thing. 3) In the default skin, training workload for each player is shown on 2 different screens. a) In training->individual training->player, and b) in squad->player->develpment->training. Are these both !TOTAL! workload for each player or (TOTAL-TEAM TRAINING)? No matter what I do with team training workload, the above workloads are always MEDIUM for every player, so I am confused about what they take into account. Thanks. We have several screens full of overwhelming information on training, so I 'll be very disappointed if I can't customize training as much i used to in older versions.
  6. If he is a newgen, then add to that Prof=5-20 (determination case 2). If he is not a newgen, then you only get what Cougar said.
  7. If he has potential left (I don't know what his CA/PA are), there is no reason why his acceleration/pace cannot improve a lot. If you care enough, work him on Quickness to help him out.
  8. Teamwork is trainable with some roles training. As is usually the case with role training, it is difficult to get a specific attribute exceptionally high. But you can pick one of the roles that involve TW (if available) and see how it goes. Of course, in such a case, you 'll be investing Ability points in the other attributes of the role too. Note that my training facilities are below average, so I can't know whether TW becomes trainable separately with better facilities. In the 5 years of my save, I have only had one player whose TW increased significantly (4 points within 3 years). Still, I run a LLM club with low-potential players, so it shouldn't be out of the question.
  9. Got a regen in my academy called... Ebenezer De'ath. De'ath is a right midfielder, btw.
  10. Cheers, Jim. I think I haven't explained "and/or" conditions very well above. So here is a practical explanation for anyone interested: "and/or" conditions are practically useful only when you know one of the two inputs to be False. When one of the conditions is False, the other one is definitely True. E.g., in the example of your Balanced/MediaFr player, a (hypothetical) "Professionalism=20 and/or Pressure 11" condition would tell you that Pressure=11, since you know that Prof can't be more than 14. When you can't be sure that one of the inputs is False, "and/or" conditions won't give you information.
  11. Jimbokav, OK, first of all let me clarify that I haven't checked the OP's numbers (I am not using editors currently), so I am taking them at face value. Let's start. Since Det=11, (1) is irrelevant. Yes! Yes! Not quite. You have to combine Sportsm=1-14 with Sportsm=5-20. The end result is Sportsm=5-14. (The first one tells you that Sportsm<=14. The second one tells you that Sportsm>=5. Combining them, you get Sportsm=5-14). You don't know. This can only be used when you *do* know. In this specific case, your player is Media Friendly, which means Temp=7-20. So already the Temp-5-20 condition is satisfied. In consequence, you get no information on Professionalism from this. It does not supersede it, it is combined. You know that Amb<=14 and Loy<=14 (because he is Balanced). So both Amb=6-20 and Loy=1-10 may be satisfied. This gives you no new information then. He is Media Friendly, which means Temp=7-20. Combining this with the quoted condition, the information you get is that Temp=7-9 and/or Press=1-14. You can't know if Temp=7-9 is a satisfied condition, so this gives you no new information. The Pro=1-14 is satisfied (because he is Balanced), so you get no information on Pressure from this. So, in result, the information you get is: Balanced-Media Friendly (for newgens): Prof/Amb/Loy 1-14, Sportsm=5-14, Temp=7-20, Contr=1-14. This is all you get. Jimbokav, I wouldn't mind if you brought another example to work through together. If you do, please try it on your own first and then we can compare our results. But it would be better if it were something different than Balanced/MediaFr which is extremely generic and does not yield much information.
  12. One way to do it is to use IF's personal instructions + get further forward. As someone who switched from 4-1DM-2-2-1 to 4-1-4-1, my main interest is for my WM(A) (I only use one) to receive through balls from my creative lone striker. In order to achieve that, I do the following: - Set WM(A) on get further forward + sit narrower. - The WM(A)'s good foot should the one that would help him cut inside. E.g., if he plays on the right, his good foot should be the left one. - The lone striker's good foot should be the one that would help him pass best towards the WM(A)'s side of the field. E.g., if the WM(A) is on the right, the striker's good foot should be the right one. - I also find that it helps if my central midfielders stay out of my WM(A)'s way. So I usually use a DLP on that side of central midfield. Also, a WB on the same side can move up the field and stretch the opposition's defense when you are in an attacking mood. On average (depending on player), the defensive effort of my WM(A) is much better than the IF(A)'s, but his attacking output is a bit worse. Still good enough to keep 4-1-4-1 though.
  13. I have an AP(A) in midfield. He is great as long as he is not marked out of the game. Due to some aggressive PPMs I have given him (gets forward/moves into channels/shoots with power -the original plan was to make him a striker), he often both starts and finishes the moves! Not everything is rosy though. The opponents usually man-mark him and sometimes succeed in eliminating him. In such cases I change him to CM(A), as he just loses the ball all the time otherwise. But, to answer the original question, yes, playmakers can be difference makers.
  14. I 'd love it if we could do that, Cleon. At the moment I have no idea about my free time next year (Greek economy has been so weird since the crisis), but we can be in touch about it.
  15. Of course, train them on individual roles. Note the attributes you would like to improve and then pick a role that includes all or most of them. It does not have to be the role you will be using for the player, just as long as it is available and involves the desired attributes. The downside of this is that a) the attributes improve slower when you train lots of them at the same time and b) you will also be working on attributes you may not be interested in (wasting both time and CA points on them). Still, you will do a decent job if you choose the role carefully. Oh, and improve you facilities as soon as you can.
  16. I want him to reach the byline and then (only then) try to dribble his way in. I saw Robben and Christodoulopoulos (Greece) do it yesterday and I was inspired. I also remember seeing AI do it against me once, but of course I don't know what instructions AI was using. But at least it shows that it is possible within the ME.
  17. Question time! I 've been trying to do the "first reach the byline, THEN cut in" thingy, but have not been able to. My wingers and forwards are of poor quality, so I don't know if my failure is down to my instructions or my players. Has anyone been doing that consistently? With what instructions?
  18. Right, Cleon's Ajax thread is beyond excellent. There is no much point really in matching personalities. The reason you tutor is that you want the youngster's personality to improve. This won't happen if personalities are already EXACTLY the same. On the other hand, there may be a point in matching personalities when you just want to transfer the mentor's PPMs. In addition: I have not found a way to be 100% sure that a tutoring will work or not. There must be a formula coded in that produces a probability of tutoring success every week or month, but it's probably statistical. There seems to be an increased probability of success when the personalities are not extremely different. For example, suppose you have a youngster with determination=professionalism=1 and 2 potential tutors with det=prof=6 and det=prof=12. I would probably go with the former tutor first. After I raised the youngster's det&prof attributes a bit, I would follow with the latter tutor.
  19. Jim, sure, I was talking about the generic case. If I find no particular reason to use something different, I gravitate towards easy tackling against wingers. That's what I meant.
  20. I find easy tackling to work best on wingers. My fullbacks then are more inclined to try to stop the cross than to win the ball back and the defending is more robust. But you may still have some trouble if the wingers are much faster than your FBs and hug the line. Anyway, you 'd better follow Cleon's suggestion first, so that you see what difference the OI make afterwards.
  21. There is a Media Handling Style called "Plays Mind Games" which is not described in the OP. Can someone check to see what it is about? I am not using editors currently so I can't. Note that "Plays Mind Games" seems to only be available to player/coaches and coaches. Still, would be useful to know.
  22. Agreed! One thing I was thinking is that in this game I love professional players, while IRL I find my nothing-more-than-professional peers to be completely boring in the way they are approaching their job
  23. Right, I personally wouldn't have done the tutoring. Model Professional: Professionalism 20, Ambition unclear Fairly Ambitious: Professionalism 1-14, Ambition 15-20 You tutored your youngster with someone with lower professionalism, so his professionalism was reduced to 18-19. Be glad it did not reduce further.
  24. Well, you cannot expect Unambitious & Unprofessional youngsters to develop IRL either, can you? I think they 've gotten this part right. The problem with FM is that -with the exception of tutoring- personalities are more or less static. That is what makes tutoring so important. I guess it would be great if SI made personalities dynamic in the future. E.g., they can set the hidden attributes (and determination) to change randomly (+-1, seperately for each personality attribute) every year with some small probability. As a matter of fact, I like this idea so much that I am going to post it in the wishlist thread right now.
×
×
  • Create New...