AI Experiment - what would happen if?

[chrishunt1212]

Very nice to see Man Utd relegated again

Suprised to see Chesterfield finish mid-table above Liverpool, I thought they would probably struggle, I expect them to next season though.

KUTGW Kipfizh

[warpig]

Originally posted by foxmad:

KUTGW Kip!

I just wanted to remind the thread in general that the amount of people on player search will also depend on the quality of scouts, ie. if you have a scout with extremely good spanish knowledge, you will have lots of spaniards or players based in spain on there.

Great thread though

This comment just got me thiking, what are the attributes for the staff, and how many staff do they have? Is their back room staff, always changing or are they stable in this area. After all poor backroom staff, wont help the long term ambitions.

I suppose one area that i would like to see in updates, int he ins and outs of staff, and obviously if they are improving this area.

Keep it up Kip, it is a rollercoaster of emotions, worse than supporting Everton!

[Meitheisman]

Originally posted by kipfizh:

On a separate note, can I just take a moment to ask you a few questions about what you like/don't like about the thread:

1- Which sections do you look to with the most enthusiasm?

2- Are there any sections you tend to gloss over (too much text/not interesting information, etc)?

3- Are the last two sections analysing the first team useful?

4- And are there any other sections you'd like me to consider?

Thanks

1- Without a doubt it's the final ranking of the Bandits I look forward to the most, as soon as you post the update I can't wait to see if they got promoted, then I tend to read every section in whatever order you posted them.

2- Although I do read everything that you take the time to post I don't really care how the Bandits ex-players are doing as coach/scout/assistant manager since we can't really tell whether they're doing a good job or not. I do want to follow-up their managerial career though.

3- I personally really like the 2 last section (the Team Analysis one especially) it really feels like I'm reading a report on my team and that we can see the progress it is making... or not.

4- I just spent a few minutes thinking about what you could add and to be fair your thread is already as close to perfect as it gets but if I had one thing to ask it would probably be a ranking of the best managers in the world by CA/PA to see how good of a job the Bandits' chairman is doing. Like if there's 50 managers with a CA/PA of 170 or above in the world and the Bandits have a 108 Manager then the chairman is just dumb and should be held responsible for the Bandits not making it to the top faster.

Overall it's an awesome thread that I can't keep my eyes away from, everyday at work I have to go check several times if by any chance you had the time to post a new update, KUTGW!

[nick...]

Did either of the Goalkeepers' clubs sign any youngsters who later turned/could turn into world beaters while they were scouts?

[Bootch]

Woah didn't expect that one, but the real misake was Gamble gambled on not signing anyone, trying to seek stabilty when he should of continued to be ambitious and signed better players.

Such a great thread and already excited about the next update!

[Dreaded Walrus]

Originally posted by Meitheisman:

I don't really care how the Bandits ex-players are doing as coach/scout/assistant manager since we can't really tell whether they're doing a good job or not.

It is a bit of a limiter, yes, and I think kipfizh sees this too when creating the section. Perhaps this calls for it to be something to be looked at in FM08? A function that allows us to see the performance of staff members?

The human manager's scouts, it's easy to tell, likewise with his assmen, to an extent, but most other staff members, both of his own team and others, you pretty much just go by guesswork, and purely off his visible stats/reputation.

Perhaps this might sound silly, but on the personal screen, a little extra field such as "involved in" might be good. So it might be used to show which players they played a large role in acquiring, or developing to their current standard. So for Carlos Queiroz, one of the players mentioned would be Rivaldo, the Mozambique player who he discovered.

But yes, I don't want to hijack the thread of course, so good work Kipfizh

[Meitheisman]

I fully agree that this could be a good addition to the game and I'm sure everyone will agree on this one but let's keep this thread to what it is, the best thread on this forum by a mile and not turn it into yet another wishlist for FM 08

[waz_nufc_awk]

I'm pretty much liike Meitheisman regarding the sections I read, first see how the Bandits faired then read up on the other sections and I also really now like the sections on the breakdown of the team and aims for the future.

For future reports I for one would be interested to see if any of the bandits ex players (apart from the original prodigies of course) had gone into management, not coaching/scouting but full blown managers.

If they were in the game at the beginning their is a possibility that their ambition was higher than that set for the wonderkids of 2006, and that they've gone on to bigger things. Maybe Kinch 'The Legend' has started in LLM?

Might be an interesting piece of info?

[kipfizh]

Thanks for the feedback everyone - all very enlightening. I was particularly concerned about the team analysis part as I'm aware it's a large chunk of texts, and I know that I for one sometimes find my eyes glazing over when I see stuff like that.

As it's useful I'll certainly keep it, but I might try to find some way to tweak the layout.

Your answers have been hugely valuable, and will kick off a few new sections, which I'll post shortly, and retrospectively, covering the past season, so I hope you like them

Any other questions I haven't covered in those sections I'll revisit afterwards

(Bear with me, some of the planned sections might take a bit of time to set out first time around, so don't expect a post in five minutes!)

Thanks again - having the readers I have keeps me interested in the experiment, and your questions make me analyse the world further.

[dante]

Club report: I think you can leave out everything except maybe the past two seasons, previous seasons can be found earlier in the thread. It's not necessary to repeat the info here and makes the post longer. I like the addition of the media prediction. The seasons' summary is always an interesting read.

player reports:Losing appeal to me ever since the bandits' players stopped playing.

Other stats:Interesting read, gives a bit of knowledge on the game world.

Summary: idem as above.

Former manager watch:I tend to skip over this part.

Bandits squad:I read the number of interested players and find out whether the general squad improved or not but don't go in the detailed breakdown as this is not really different from any savegame any of us is playing.

Best and worst:Don't really read this.

Ryan Morley:Interesting trivia bit.

Team analysis:Same as squad. For me, not much relationship with the original experiment left.

In overall, I still check for updates, but the thread isnt' as interesting to me anymore as when they were still playing. The modifications you made are almost out of the game (only the active bandits and the bandits squad are still effecting the game) and as the bandits team isn't taking full advantage of their potential (due to the limited ambition) I feel the experiment has gone more or less as far as it should go. I'm not really interested in how their managerial career will go as it seems as your editing (on their attributes) doesn't have a great effect on their managing stats (otherwise there would have been more players managing surely). Maybe it's time for a new experiment?

Nevertheless, I appreciate all your efforts and ha(ve)(d) a great time reading it and will probably continue to do so while it lasts!

[johnnydude]

Dante,

I think that your comments are exactly why it needs to continue. I have read this silently since it began and have been very interested in what happens (as well as excited to see if they make promotion). The team isnt taking full advantage of their potential. Why? The experiment is telling and the fact that they done so well under the recent manager and used resources has proven that stats do work. I think it is interesting to see that unlike real life (although it does happen sometimes) a club like the bandits seem to go from top to bottom of leagues so frequently. it is almost like the game needs to balance things out. If the new manager (with worse stats than the last) takes them to the premiership it raises questions to me. Also I want to see what happens when they make it to the prem (does the game act more realistic as more time has been taken by devlopers on the main leagues (maybe, maybe not) but we do need to see.

As for all the information I agree it is not all relevent to the experiment but it has grown to so much more than an experiment and a lot of the stats are from popular demand so its for the statos of the world ;-)

Great thread lets keep it going just how it is.

[VonBlade]

*devils advocate*

People like Ackter spend their entire lives telling us that the AI can't tell the difference between a human and a CPU. Now we all know that there is a problem with getting jobs you apply for (ones you don't being just fine).

Soooo. What if all the good managers apply to the Bandits but the bug stops them getting the job and so the chairman has to appoint the scrubs that he seems to because they're the only ones left??

Just a thought.

/devils advocate.

[kipfizh]

To start off the new section, I’ll give you a couple of screenshots.

To start here’s one of Joe Ryan, the highly valued player on the interested list for the Bandits. He isn’t all that really:

Joe Ryan

And secondly, some news that Man Utd have been bought out by a consortium based in Montenegro. Check out their board:

Man Utd Board

[kipfizh]

English Teams and Managers

Premiership

1. Chelsea (+1), managed by Right Mid 1 (45, 130/130) (started as player)

2. Arsenal (+2), Danny Overson (61, 108/120) (Barnet assistant manager)

3. West Ham (0), Stefano Fiore (60, 113/130) (player)

4. Newcastle (+7), Steve Lescott (61, 107/120) (youth coach)

5. Derby (+5), Lee Bailey (53, 120/120) (regen)

6. Leeds (-5), Sol Campbell (60, 109/130) (player)

7. Portsmouth (+10), Turgay Tufan (40, 156/156) (regen)

8. QPR (+7), Andy Mason (59, 104/120) (assistant manager)

9. West Brom (-1), Phil Whitney (62, 101/120) (coach)

10. Man City (-4), Michael Brookfield (45, 168/168) (player)

11. Chesterfield (p), Jeff Forsyth (47, 154/154) (player)

12. Tottenham (-7), Dietmar Hamann (61, 113/130) (player)

13. Liverpool (-6), Ian Taylor (61, 95/107) (assistant manager)

14. Birmingham (-2), Michael Bates (58, 101/106) (regen)

15. Scunthorpe (-2), Oliver Hand (61, 95/120) (youth coach)

16. Reading (-7), Adrian Whitbread (63, 130/150) (assistant manager)

17. Sheff Wed (p), Steve Brackstone (60, 100/120) (coach)

18. Aston Villa (-4), Liam Marsden (50, 120/120) (regen)

19. Man Utd (-3), Ian Goodison (62, 119/130) (player)

20. Bradford (p), Stuart Belford (61, 76/99) (regen)

There’s a few star managers in there, but not at the clubs you’d expect them to be at – Turgay Tufan masterminded Portsmouth leap up to seventh, Brookfield kept Man City in the top half, while Forsyth, also England manager, managed to comfortably keep Chesterfield up, and if he stays next season, there’s no reason why they shouldn’t progress.

It is no surprise to see Liverpool struggling with such a poor manager, or to see Bradford bottom with the worst manager in the league. Danny Gamble’s CA of 120 is only bettered by five top flight managers.

Promoted from Championship

1. Sunderland ®, Paul Robinson (130/130) (regen)

2. Coventry (+19), Chris Swailes (108/120) (coach)

5. Charlton (P), Tony Yates (113/130) (regen)

Remarkably, Charlton gain their second successive playoff promotion, having managed in from sixth in League One last season, they are now in the Premiership. Swailes manages a feat nearly as impressive, taking Coventry from the brink of relegation to automatic promotion.

[kipfizh]

Bandits Staff

Andrew Wilson, Chairman, 52, 72/142

Danny Nurse, Director, 32, 96/96

Matthew Bolder, Director, 33, 43/44

Phil Edwards, Manager, 58, 106/120

Luke Spicer, Assistant Manager, 62, 103/117

Carl Pike, Coach, 60, 97/113

Jefferson Thompson, Coach, 61, 50/62

Nicholas Mohan, GK Coach, 38, 120/120

Bradley Vine, Physio, 57, 103/113

Chris Miller, Scout, 67, 75/75

Billy Ball, Scout, 68, 65/65

Phil Plumley, Scout, 67, 52/52

Kris White, Scout, 65, 66/66

James Blunt, 65, 120/120

Well that’ll teach me not to look at the backroom staff! Last summer, Robbie Rooney, the old Bandits chairman, seemed to disappear, presumably he retired, and suddenly we have a new board! They are headed up by Andrew Wilson, whose CA is poor but his PA very good, can he get up there? His ambition is 9, before anything asks.

His directors are both young, and both useless, and while they have the odd good member of staff (Spicer, Mohan, Blunt), there are some really poor ones in there.

To put all this in perspective, there are nowhere near as many talented members of staff as players. There are only 15 managers in the entire world with CA of 140+, when you take out all the scouts, coaches who don’t want to be managers, and boards. The best of these is Rolan Kim (41, 185/185), the Germany coach, while the second, Billy Jones (51, 183/183) took Cardiff to fourth in the Championship and will probably either take them to the Premiership or get hired by a team already there.

There are a load of managers with CA of 130, but anything above that is a rarity – 23 managerial staff in the world on that list right now. But those managers are not generally in the Premiership, so the Bandits could get lucky, you never know.

[kipfizh]

Other stats (continued)

The most impressive giant killing run in the FA Cup came from Bournemouth, now in the Conference, who made it all the way to the fifth round before being hammered 5-0 by Derby. The League Cup was dominated by the Premiership.

Arsenal, in retaining the Champions League, set a new record of twelve consecutive games without conceding, running from the second leg of last season’s quarter final to the same match this time around. Even then, they couldn’t be stopped.

In last summer’s World Cup, England extended their unbeaten run to 23 games, running back all the way to 2032, twelve years ago. Along the way, penalty shoot outs have been scuppering them. On the flip side, South Korea extended their own record of game without a win to eleven, also over twelve years.

The tournament also saw the game no-one cared about – USA and Uruguay managing an attendance of just 5969, a new low, while 38 year old Czech keeper Petr Simak became the tournaments’s oldest player.

Incidentally, the World Cup record attendance is for a match between the Czech Republic and Congo, which smashed the record purely because it was held in the Bandits stadium in 2030, and drew an enormous 139994 fans, two more than the Bandits’ own record.

[kipfizh]

Where are they now?

So, having gone through the Bandits’ entire history of players, to see who is still in the game, the following have moved on from playing (not including the original Bandits, who we all know about):

Nathan Wright (2007-13) – now a physio at Fulham

Steve Watson (2009-13) – coach at Wigan

Clive Savage (2014-18) – unemployed physio

Andrew Whing (2018-20) – coach at Wigan

No other ex-Bandits have gone into coaching yet.

[kipfizh]

Ones to watch

Your annual guide to the stars of tomorrow (criteria – stunningly talented teenagers):

Carlo Lupo (19, 161/198), Milan’s young centre back, is being hotly tipped to dominate the Italian backline for years to come. Big and strong, with a surprising level of skill on the deck, he was recently the target of an 11m offer from Chelsea.

Toni Halonen (19, 160/187) is currently playing a much lower profile role – the Finnish centre back, already capped twice by his country, has been playing for Championship Fulham, but after a huge fight for his signature, he is moving this summer….to Chelsea.

A year younger, Patrick Schmidt (18, 139/184), can play anywhere on the right flank from full back to attacking winger, and is currently plying his trade with Gelsenkirchen, having come through their youth system. He is already a first team regular there, and they opt to play him high up the flank, from where he scored eleven goals last season. It is only a matter of time before the big guns come sniffing around.

[kipfizh]

World beaters

The player currently holding the accolade of being the highest rated in the world by CA is Chelsea’s French defensive midfielder, Franck Camus (28, 196/198), who joined them for 22.5m four years ago and is close friend with….Ryan Morley.

Behind him, it is the story of Barcelona, who hold the registrations of Ivan Kovac (28, 194/194), the Serbian midfield superstar with a minimum fee clause of 105m, and Benjamin Slot (27, 194/194), his Dutch midfield ally, who they signed on a free seven years ago and now has a release clause of an astonishing 126m.

The rest of the top five is made up of two Welsh Milan strikers – Jamie Harris (26, 192/193) the player who scored a goal a game last season, and his partner Luke Mudge (28, 191/194), ex-World Player of the Year and Welsh legend, who cost Milan 48.5m a few years ago. Both players, oddly, arrived from Leeds, at a combined cost of 65m – Harris joined last summer to team up with his international partner.

It beggars belief how Wales, with a strike partnership like that, are still so utterly useless.

[dante]

I agree that it's still interesting to see how the Bandits will fare.

However, don't you contradict your own post in saying that

1° The team isnt taking full advantage of their potential

2° they done so well under the recent manager

Originally posted by johnnydude:

I think that your comments are exactly why it needs to continue. I have read this silently since it began and have been very interested in what happens (as well as excited to see if they make promotion). The team isnt taking full advantage of their potential. Why? The experiment is telling and the fact that they done so well under the recent manager and used resources has proven that stats do work. I think it is interesting to see that unlike real life (although it does happen sometimes) a club like the bandits seem to go from top to bottom of leagues so frequently. it is almost like the game needs to balance things out. If the new manager (with worse stats than the last) takes them to the premiership it raises questions to me. Also I want to see what happens when they make it to the prem (does the game act more realistic as more time has been taken by devlopers on the main leagues (maybe, maybe not) but we do need to see.

As for all the information I agree it is not all relevent to the experiment but it has grown to so much more than an experiment and a lot of the stats are from popular demand so its for the statos of the world ;-)

Great thread lets keep it going just how it is.

[kipfizh]

All thoughts on the new sections are welcome, some won't run every season (e.g the ex-Bandits that've gone into coaching hasn't had a new member in fifteen years, so would be quite dull).

Any you like/dislike/don't care about? Any more info required in those sections?

I'll answer more questions shortly, then wrap this season up with a few AI conclusions.

[dante]

Originally posted by kipfizh:

There are only 15 managers in the entire world with CA of 140+, when you take out all the scouts, coaches who don’t want to be managers, and boards.

that's interesting. With a potential maximum of 200 surely there should be more/higher rated managers in the game ? How is this compared to when you start the game, anyone can shed light on this ?

[steve_888]

Im loving the new sections kip. Alot of useful information for us so we can get to grips with the AI wourld outside of the Bandits. However the summaries may become tedious both for you to write and us to read. I feel that alot of the information would just be repeated year by year so this would probably be best done every 5 years.

[johnnydude]

Dante,

Sorry poor writing on my part (told you i dont post much ;-)

I was quoting what you said in your post and asking why. They did very well under their last manager and were reaching their potential with what they had. You are right though they are not reaching their actual potential for a club that has so much money. That is what is interesting in this experiment. It does show to me that the game is somewhere flawed. At the same time the situation is unusual as you would not get a club like that in the lower leagues. That is why I think it is important to see what happens when they get to the premiership.

I have re-read this post and it makes sense to me so I hope you understand it ;-)

[kipfizh]

shota92: Not sure how I can find out who the Bandits tried to sign, only who they did.

VonBlade: As started this season, the 'Other stats' section will be fleshed out more, to include cup runs, and record broken across Europe and internationally. Also, I'll keep a track of the best few players in the world, and the best few youngsters, and see just how many end up at Chelsea.

Speaking of Chelsea, Roman Abramovich has left, and been replaced by Daniel Eustace (52, 93/188). This change of ownership might go some way to explaining why they've appointed no manager for two years. Oh, and Frank Arnesen outlived him there - he's still director of football at 78.

CMeds: Although the Bandits, in the game, have the colours of Fisher Athletic, that's only because I didn't set them up properly. In reality, they're based upon our university team, and the two kits were 1) Yellow shirts, blue shorts, yellow socks, and 2) All black.

Chilliconcarnie: I've listed the Premiership managers, took a while though so I'm not sure I'll be going further!

chrishunt1212: The difference in fortunes of Chesterfield and Liverpool can be explained by their managers - the Chesterfield (and England) manager is excellent, while Liverpool's is very poor.

warpig: Now included

Meitheisman: It seems that there realy aren't that many decent managers around. There are loads between 110-130 CA, but only 23 above the 130 mark, so as soon as the Bandits get one, they must hang on for dear life.

nick...: No, it doesn't seem they had much impact.

Dreaded Walrus/Meitheisman: You're both right, it is very difficult to gauge the success of backroom staff. Players and managers are fine, but how much effect does a good assistant have? How can you tell how good a job a coach as done? How can you tell if a scout is effective if you can't tell whether the manager follows up on his leads? It's a difficult area, and as a result I'd admit that the reports on the ex-players probably isn't that interesting.

waz_nufc_awk: Very few former Bandits are in coaching, and none of them have made any waves.

[kipfizh]

dante/johnnydude:

I can see why the player reports are losing their appeal - unless they are actual managers, it is hard to gauge how they are doing, I agree.

Now that the players have retired, the real experiment is the Bandits as a club. I never edited the chairman anyway, so the change there won't make a difference, but they are still a supremely rich club with a wonderful stadium, and they should progress forward with that advantage. The test is around whether they will.

To combat the loss of the AI experiment to do with the players, I have started doing the Team Analysis. The point of this section is a return to an experiment on AI, although it differs from the original premise in that it isn't a test on extreme conditions of AI, merely on the squad sense of your average manager at an extraordinary club. It doesn't take much for us to see what he should do, the question is - does he?

As johhnydude alludes to, there is quite a lot of positional jumping around below the Premiership. Looking at real life, this is actually realistic, it is in the Premiership that you never see a team jump from tenth to second in one season. If they make the Premiership, their rises should be small, while their drops could be large.

What I mean by this is - how often do you see a Premiership side slowly improve for five seasons, and then plummet? I'd bet quite regularly. The plummet can be due to injuries, a change of manager, a sale of a top player - whatever. The point is - progression up the Premiership is always slow, while a fall can be dramatic. I'll want to know whether the Bandits can ever break through the glass ceiling. At the moment, Arsenal, Chelsea, West Ham and Leeds are dominant, much like we currently have four top teams in real life. Can anyone break the hold?

One final question - when the Bandits, as a super-rich club, made it to the Championship, they finally started splashing the cash. What will they do when they hit the big time?

[kipfizh]

Originally posted by VonBlade:

*devils advocate*

People like Ackter spend their entire lives telling us that the AI can't tell the difference between a human and a CPU. Now we all know that there is a problem with getting jobs you apply for (ones you don't being just fine).

Soooo. What if all the good managers apply to the Bandits but the bug stops them getting the job and so the chairman has to appoint the scrubs that he seems to because they're the only ones left??

Just a thought.

/devils advocate.

If it's a bug against a human player, then you're right, there's every chance it also affects the AI managers.

[Dreaded Walrus]

Originally posted by kipfizh:

Any you like/dislike/don't care about? Any more info required in those sections?

Like steve_888 says, the new sections are excellent. I really enjoyed reading them just now, and unlike steve_888, I could see myself reading them all every time.

One problem FM has is that once the real-life players are all gone, the game makes very little attempt at showing the player who is promising, who is currently performing great. In real life there is always speculation in the news regarding promising foreign youngsters possibly coming to the UK, whereas in FM the player generally has to discover these players himself.

Your summaries, and especially these new sections, help inject that feeling of life, and knowledge of the save into the game that even I have trouble seeing in my own saves.

So again, well done from me.

[kipfizh]

Some maths:

Number of players in the game : 14442

Number of staff in the game : 3652

Players with PA 180+ : 198 (1.4%)

Staff with PA 180+ : 81 (2.2%)

Players with PA 160+ : 857 (5.9%)

Staff with PA 160+ : 249 (6.8%)

Players with PA 140+ : 2405 (16.7%)

Staff with PA 140+ : 450 (12.3%)

Players with PA 120+ : 4870 (33.7%)

Staff with PA 120+ : 1111 (30.4%)

Players with PA 100+ : 7598 (52.6%)

Staff with PA 100+ : 1629 (44.6%)

Although there is some disparity between these two sets of results, I think they are close enough together for the difference to be explained as a combination of randomness, and the fact that many staff in the game were there at the beginning and are therefore not part of the Fred mechanics.

It seems the reason there are so few talented managers out there is simply that there are far fewer staff than players. There are a quarter the number of staff as players, and of them, only 459 are listed as managers, the rest are scouts, coaches and board members with no desire to be a manager.

All this means that for every 100 players, there are three managers. So while we see many talented players, we quite rightly don't see so many managers with the same ability. Which, if you saw the FAs chase for a new England manager, is very realistic indeed.

Incidentally, if you search for well known players, with no filter, you get about 10000 players, which means there's well over 4000 players you never see in 'Player Search'. Maybe scouts really are useful?

[ryu2999]

Now that Abramovich has left Chelski are their finances different at all?

[kipfizh]

Originally posted by Dreaded Walrus:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by kipfizh:

Any you like/dislike/don't care about? Any more info required in those sections?

Like steve_888 says, the new sections are excellent. I really enjoyed reading them just now, and unlike steve_888, I could see myself reading them all every time.

One problem FM has is that once the real-life players are all gone, the game makes very little attempt at showing the player who is promising, who is currently performing great. In real life there is always speculation in the news regarding promising foreign youngsters possibly coming to the UK, whereas in FM the player generally has to discover these players himself.

Your summaries, and especially these new sections, help inject that feeling of life, and knowledge of the save into the game that even I have trouble seeing in my own saves.

So again, well done from me. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thank you - I might not just list the best players by CA and PA, but also make a few tips on who I think will be huge in the future (maybe someone with low CA but huge potential), and then come back a few years later and see how they did.

I can imagine a few 'promising players' to make the step up to the 'best players' list. I only hope they don't all end up at Chelsea

[kipfizh]

Originally posted by ryu2999:

Now that Abramovich has left Chelski are their finances different at all?

They're fourth on the rich list, and I think a chairman leaves the money in the club (which is why the Bandits are still super-rich despite a takeover).

What I think it does mean is that they no longer have a sugar daddy.

[dante]

nice addition, this one .

you're probably right, irl it's also the same few top managers which occupy the spots with the big clubs/countries

Originally posted by kipfizh:

Some maths:

Number of players in the game : 14442

Number of staff in the game : 3652

Players with PA 180+ : 198 (1.4%)

Staff with PA 180+ : 81 (2.2%)

Players with PA 160+ : 857 (5.9%)

Staff with PA 160+ : 249 (6.8%)

Players with PA 140+ : 2405 (16.7%)

Staff with PA 140+ : 450 (12.3%)

Players with PA 120+ : 4870 (33.7%)

Staff with PA 120+ : 1111 (30.4%)

Players with PA 100+ : 7598 (52.6%)

Staff with PA 100+ : 1629 (44.6%)

Although there is some disparity between these two sets of results, I think they are close enough together for the difference to be explained as a combination of randomness, and the fact that many staff in the game were there at the beginning and are therefore not part of the Fred mechanics.

It seems the reason there are so few talented managers out there is simply that there are far fewer staff than players. There are a quarter the number of staff as players, and of them, only 459 are listed as managers, the rest are scouts, coaches and board members with no desire to be a manager.

All this means that for every 100 players, there are three managers. So while we see many talented players, we quite rightly don't see so many managers with the same ability. Which, if you saw the FAs chase for a new England manager, is very realistic indeed.

Incidentally, if you search for well known players, with no filter, you get about 10000 players, which means there's well over 4000 players you never see in 'Player Search'. Maybe scouts really are useful?

[CanaryLawn]

Is it just me who's delighted that James Blunt turned up on the Bandits staff?! Makes it all the more 'Beautiful'.

Apologies.

[steve_888]

Originally posted by dante:

nice addition, this one .

you're probably right, irl it's also the same few top managers which occupy the spots with the big clubs/countries

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by kipfizh:

Some maths:

Number of players in the game : 14442

Number of staff in the game : 3652

Players with PA 180+ : 198 (1.4%)

Staff with PA 180+ : 81 (2.2%)

Players with PA 160+ : 857 (5.9%)

Staff with PA 160+ : 249 (6.8%)

Players with PA 140+ : 2405 (16.7%)

Staff with PA 140+ : 450 (12.3%)

Players with PA 120+ : 4870 (33.7%)

Staff with PA 120+ : 1111 (30.4%)

Players with PA 100+ : 7598 (52.6%)

Staff with PA 100+ : 1629 (44.6%)

Although there is some disparity between these two sets of results, I think they are close enough together for the difference to be explained as a combination of randomness, and the fact that many staff in the game were there at the beginning and are therefore not part of the Fred mechanics.

It seems the reason there are so few talented managers out there is simply that there are far fewer staff than players. There are a quarter the number of staff as players, and of them, only 459 are listed as managers, the rest are scouts, coaches and board members with no desire to be a manager.

All this means that for every 100 players, there are three managers. So while we see many talented players, we quite rightly don't see so many managers with the same ability. Which, if you saw the FAs chase for a new England manager, is very realistic indeed.

Incidentally, if you search for well known players, with no filter, you get about 10000 players, which means there's well over 4000 players you never see in 'Player Search'. Maybe scouts really are useful?

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I agree that this is a great touch and it would be good to see how these figures compare to those when starting a new game. Especially the PA groups the players and staff fall in to.

I love the fact that you are diversing this thread to cover all aspects of the AI. KUTGW

[Lufbra Bantam]

Originally posted by kipfizh:

World beaters

...The rest of the top five is made up of two Welsh Milan strikers – Jamie Harris (26, 192/193) the player who scored a goal a game last season, and his partner Luke Mudge (28, 191/194), ex-World Player of the Year and Welsh legend, who cost Milan 48.5m a few years ago. Both players, oddly, arrived from Leeds, at a combined cost of 65m – Harris joined last summer to team up with his international partner.

It beggars belief how Wales, with a strike partnership like that, are still so utterly useless.

It's just like the good old days of the likes of Ian Rush and Mark Hughes!

[Meitheisman]

The new sections:

English Teams and Managers

Great read although I'll agree with whoever said it (sorry can't be bothered re-reading everyone's comments) this should only be included every few seasons or when a major change happened.

Bandits Staff

Same as above, interesting read cuz it was the first time but reading this every few seasons or when new staff is hired/fired but no need to do that every year imo.

Other Stats

Pretty interesting but not really relevant to the experiment, if it doesn't take you too long to do then keep doing it else I'd personally rather have updates more often and not have this section.

Where are they now?

Would be very interesting if the ex-Bandits become managers but like for the former Bandits superstars until they become managers it doesn't really matter to me what they do.

Ones to watch

Pretty good section, it will gain in importance as the Bandits grow in the EPL since we're all gonna get super excited when some of these players start to interest the Bandits.

World Beaters

Same as above, interesting section that will get more and more interesting as the years go by and the Bandits improve.

Overall I enjoyed reading these sections and paid special attention to the managers stats and rankings, less than 30 Managers above 130 shows us why the Bandits were doing so well with Gamble simply because he's one of the best in the world!

Oh and I almost forgot about the Maths section which actually was my favorite one, would it be possible for you to do the same breakdown but on top of doing it for Players and Staff you could do it for Managers only... I've never used FM Scout or any of these programs so I'm not sure how long it would take, if it's too tidius don't worry about it.

Kipfizh, on a side note I don't really know how but this must take you a whole lot of time and I happen to have some free time at work so if you want to delegate some of your work-load to me I'd be more than happy to help

[VonBlade]

Ooooh where to begin? Having lobbied for many of the new sections I have to say I enjoyed them hugely.

The "other stats" stuff is a pain to compile but really helps get a feel for where the Bandits are in the world. Especially now so little of the original experiment (so long Mr Chairman) exists besides the club themselves.

If there is one thing it's highlighted it's the utter paucity of World-Class managers. All things being equal it doesn't really matter (if everyone is 120CA then 120 becomes 200), but it's still interesting to note that Danny Gamble was the cream of the crop and how far the quality of managers has fallen. I realise that we have more players than staff, but compare the numbers now to the numbers in a "fresh" game and the difference is staggering.

So all around I enjoyed it massively and now we have some base figures to compare to, the next update will be far easier to compile as you only need to write what's changed. Thank you so much for the time and effort that's gone into this. If no-one else enjoyed it, know you've brought some joy into this stat freaks world.

@Meitheismann. FM Scout actually makes the whole counting process a breeze. Just input the numbers you wish to find and it tells you how many there are. It's like the worlds most powerful database query tool, but easy to use.

VB

[VonBlade]

Originally posted by kipfizh:

Incidentally, if you search for well known players, with no filter, you get about 10000 players, which means there's well over 4000 players you never see in 'Player Search'. Maybe scouts really are useful?

Since my first day here I've lobbied long and hard for the player search feature to stop being so bloody-minded and search every player in the database rather than just well-known ones. I've constantly been rebuffed with "how much time it would take to search" and "the sheer processing overheads required". Of course we all know that FM Scout searches in no time at all so that's hogwash.

I am sick to death (nearly) of having to manually click through each obscure club to see the players there, rather than them all just appearing on a list. It's not like I can't see they exist without scouting them. BAH!!!

[Berrern]

I started a new game to compare the numbers to Kipfizh's figures. The numbers in italic are the numbers I derived from the new game:

Number of players in the game : 14442 - 10218

Number of staff in the game : 3652 - 3831

Players with PA 180+ : 198 (1.4%) - 166 (1.6%)

Staff with PA 180+ : 81 (2.2%) - 145 (3.8%)

Players with PA 160+ : 857 (5.9%) - 1122 (11%)

Staff with PA 160+ : 249 (6.8%) - 432 (11.3%)

Players with PA 140+ : 2405 (16.7%) - 2452 (24%)

Staff with PA 140+ : 450 (12.3%) - 907 (23.7%)

Players with PA 120+ : 4870 (33.7%) - 3661 (35.8%)

Staff with PA 120+ : 1111 (30.4%) - 1468 (38.3%)

Players with PA 100+ : 7598 (52.6%) - 4921 (48.2%)

Staff with PA 100+ : 1629 (44.6%) - 1909 (49.8%)

As you can see from the numbers, there's a considerable higher amount of both staff and players in the top-PA region on a new game. I'm very interested to see if this trend continues as the experiment goes on.

[kipfizh]

Just to let you know, Phil Edwards may not appear to be a good manager, but having seen his summer signings, I may change my mind.

Hopefully the players he buys will make the difference, rather than just paper over the cracks of his ability.

But over 17m has been spent this summer, and from what I can see, it's been spent well.

[Dreaded Walrus]

Kipfizh, you're such a tease.

[njligernj]

Originally posted by kipfizh:

And secondly, some news that Man Utd have been bought out by a consortium based in Montenegro. Check out their board:

Man Utd Board

Bobby Charlton reaches 100+. If you're looking for a new feature for the reports I'd say a Bobby watch would be a good one.

[njligernj]

I can't edit my post which is annoying. Anyway, evidently he's not quite 100 yet.

[Walcott\'s Wonderkids]

Liking the new sections you've added Kipfizh, although like someone has previously said, some of the sections may not change much of the course of one season so you may not want to do them every season.

Particularly like the 'Worlds top 5 section' - although all regens so mean nothing really, its interesting to hear what their nationalities are and where they are playing.

Amazed at the global manager CA crisis, as there is many many more managers with CA 140+ in the game back when you start in 2006.

I can't remember whether this stat is available for staff as well as players, but I know from doing my sign up game that when you use FM Scout you can see people's World Reputation. I was just wondering what the Bandit's current manager world rep is and whether it is higher or lower than Gamble the previous manager? (as that may be why he was given the job even though his CA is lower).

KUTGW

[Meitheisman]

Originally posted by Berrern:

I started a new game to compare the numbers to Kipfizh's figures. The numbers in italic are the numbers I derived from the new game:

Number of players in the game : 14442 - 10218

Number of staff in the game : 3652 - 3831

Players with PA 180+ : 198 (1.4%) - 166 (1.6%)

Staff with PA 180+ : 81 (2.2%) - 145 (3.8%)

Players with PA 160+ : 857 (5.9%) - 1122 (11%)

Staff with PA 160+ : 249 (6.8%) - 432 (11.3%)

Players with PA 140+ : 2405 (16.7%) - 2452 (24%)

Staff with PA 140+ : 450 (12.3%) - 907 (23.7%)

Players with PA 120+ : 4870 (33.7%) - 3661 (35.8%)

Staff with PA 120+ : 1111 (30.4%) - 1468 (38.3%)

Players with PA 100+ : 7598 (52.6%) - 4921 (48.2%)

Staff with PA 100+ : 1629 (44.6%) - 1909 (49.8%)

As you can see from the numbers, there's a considerable higher amount of both staff and players in the top-PA region on a new game. I'm very interested to see if this trend continues as the experiment goes on.

Thanks for doing this Berrern. It shows how in long term careers the game has a hard time generating good enough players and staff which is something that SI should really look into imo.

[kipfizh]

So, which is wrong:

a) The quantity of quality players/staff in the game at the start

b) The quantity of quality players/staff in the game once all originals have retired.

In the second instance, when all in game people are Freds, you would've thought the numbers would stay largely consistent. So should the original database attempt to match this future balance, or should the Fred system be tweaked to mimic the original game balance?

I guess it depends which in game situation is more balanced, and I'm guessing a Fred-full world is, assuming there are no critical issues with it (e.g. all player being generated as five foot, to pick a daft example).

What I'd love to see, is a continuation into the Fred system, a future played out so that the Fred balance is found, and then the original database normalised to this state. Then we'd have some consistency.

[kipfizh]

Originally posted by VonBlade:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by kipfizh:

Incidentally, if you search for well known players, with no filter, you get about 10000 players, which means there's well over 4000 players you never see in 'Player Search'. Maybe scouts really are useful?

Since my first day here I've lobbied long and hard for the player search feature to stop being so bloody-minded and search every player in the database rather than just well-known ones. I've constantly been rebuffed with "how much time it would take to search" and "the sheer processing overheads required". Of course we all know that FM Scout searches in no time at all so that's hogwash.

I am sick to death (nearly) of having to manually click through each obscure club to see the players there, rather than them all just appearing on a list. It's not like I can't see they exist without scouting them. BAH!!! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The only argument I can see for the current system is a forcing of the fact that you cannot possibly have heard of the player playing in the Brazilian third division, whose reputation is below X.

Once the reputation hits that level, it means they've had exposure somehow, doesn't really matter how, but the player can now be viewed. Before that, only scouts can find the player, because you would the the 'first' to discover them.

I would imagine that as soon as the player does something notable, like sign for a good club, appear in a cup run, have any kind of international recognition or interest from another club, he would become known around scouting networks.

Does that make sense?

[chrishunt1212]

Originally posted by kipfizh:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by VonBlade:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by kipfizh:

Incidentally, if you search for well known players, with no filter, you get about 10000 players, which means there's well over 4000 players you never see in 'Player Search'. Maybe scouts really are useful?

Since my first day here I've lobbied long and hard for the player search feature to stop being so bloody-minded and search every player in the database rather than just well-known ones. I've constantly been rebuffed with "how much time it would take to search" and "the sheer processing overheads required". Of course we all know that FM Scout searches in no time at all so that's hogwash.

I am sick to death (nearly) of having to manually click through each obscure club to see the players there, rather than them all just appearing on a list. It's not like I can't see they exist without scouting them. BAH!!! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The only argument I can see for the current system is a forcing of the fact that you cannot possibly have heard of the player playing in the Brazilian third division, whose reputation is below X.

Once the reputation hits that level, it means they've had exposure somehow, doesn't really matter how, but the player can now be viewed. Before that, only scouts can find the player, because you would the the 'first' to discover them.

I would imagine that as soon as the player does something notable, like sign for a good club, appear in a cup run, have any kind of international recognition or interest from another club, he would become known around scouting networks.

Does that make sense? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That makes a lot of sense.

It would work the other way too, like if you were managing in Brazil, then you are highly unlikely to have heard of the reserve DL for Gainsborough, unless they had a fantastic cup run, or he was picked in the senior England squad etc.

[Meitheisman]

I think you guys both missed VonBlade's point (or I'm the one who didn't get it)

From what I understood his point was that if you want to go check out a player in the Brazilian 3rd division you can go check him out, except his hidden attributes, but you can see his position, size, age, price... even if his reputation is 0. On the other hand if you go to search players and you just want to see Brazilian players under 19 for a price of less than $1M and taller than 6'3 even if the above mentionned player meets the selection criteria you won't find him because he is not listed as a "well known player".

Did I make things clearer?