Murdre Dukc

This probably should turn up when debugging anyway but just realised - maybe it happened because I had a testimonial for Ter Stegen scheduled and he's a former teammate?

Do you know if Basic is better or worse than Poor? Half of these words look like euphemisms to me. Wouldn't make a difference to me if it said "probably not the best" or "could pass on a good day" (pretty much how the youth intake preview looked like at first)

This is a grab-bag of similar issues. I've seen this improve for the youth intake preview feature, so hopefully more progress can be made on the front. I'll try to list them all: Facility quality description. They are described as average, below average, adequate, basic, poor, etc. What is "adequate"? What's the point of using words here? I would much rather have a number here (I believe the range under the hood is 1-20). On top of that, academy coaching and youth recruitment seem to use different sets of words. Player physical condition. It used to be a percentage, then a few fairly readable graphical elements on top like circular or straight bars, but now it's a strange heart shape (variable width makes it hard to parse visually) which doesn't display a percentage ever. The most reliable information here seems to be "Tired" or "Match fit" when inspecting the full profile. What's the gain here? Is this obfuscation intentional? It adds friction to the basic squad selection process. Player morale. There's a word, there's a colour, and there's an arrow which is an interesting choice. The arrow never helps until I can compare it with another player side by side and the word suffers from the usual issue - is "Excellent" better than "Superb" or "Extremely good"? I've never managed to instinctively remember it, instead I just ignore the words. When a player is unhappy I usually know from other sources anyway. Using a different set of words to describe factors contributing to morale (playing time, treatment, contract etc) adds further friction. These will be the worst for non-native speakers, but I believe native speakers (of all languages, when playing that language in FM) will experience the issue. From my personal experience, having lived in the UK for a long time I still can't intuitively put those adjectives in order, and I can't imagine it being easier in my native language. Perhaps the "range" used to be "very bad/bad/average/good/very good" so it still made sense but expanding it made it blurry.

No worries, sometimes things slip

I think it might be only triggering vs teams at a comparable level, that's why it was harder to see it in La Liga. Could be by design of course.

Please ignore this, funnily enough it started happening right after I posted.

The current data hub requires me to either rely on a selection of charts from the staff (not recommended to anyone who ever relied on staff AI) or about five minutes of clicking on everything only to fill the screen with a disorganised list of charts. What I mean is this: To get everything I want, I need to go through a three-level menu multiple times for every screen (team, player per position, etc). The menu is itself disorganised (Match Momentum, Pass Map, xG are football terms, while Polygon and Scatter graph are data display terms) Dropdown lists can easily go out of focus if I move my mouse by accident. When I'm done, there is no way to organise all the tiles in a sensible way The "ask for" widget is on a dropdown and can't be visibly pinned. I'm not sure if it's going to disappear if I hover outside it or not, and this uncertainty makes me more cautious about moving through UI that already requires a lot of time. I feel like the intent here was to create "immersion" by having to "ask the data analyst" depending on my need, then presumably wipe the screen every time (?), but that's absolutely not how real people play games, never, ever. I don't want to have a conversation with my UI. I want to look at it and see things, and I want to organise it at the speed of thought. Once I've done it, I want it to remain useful. In a real conversation with a real data analyst, I would tell him "please give me all stats which would help us find the optimal way of progressing the ball". There was no manual work here involved. Then I would tell him "I want this report updated real time from now on". What I would like here as a player is: A more organised UI divided logically into areas of interest - not a blank grid to throw charts at Areas prefilled with basic stats and with an option to add more charts - or just give me all of them, whatever No 3-tier dropdown lists I have to click through all the way for every chart, just give me a list of tickboxes. FM is notoriously bad at using screen space Ideally, I would like to add my own screens with several charts. For example "defensive performance" would be tackling across all positions, goalkeeping stats (basic + advanced), maybe defender passing. Leave this up to me, let me keep it for later.

I've just noticed a few forwards increase their tackling attributes, potentially as a result of my training emphasis. I now have Havertz with 11 tackling while Nianzou remains at 13. Again, purely anecdotal. Maybe training a high-pressing tactic results in forwards and midfielders getting their tackling up while defenders concentrate on interceptions? Still don't like it, haven't seen it in FM a few years back.

Uploaded file `bug-murdredukc-chelsea-progression`. I've made no actual custom training profiles, I just rely on the assistant, but I try to edit the running calendar as needed which you can see in the current schedule in that save. Thanks!