New Rivalry? Is that possible?

[Matorko]

I'm managing Newcastle. Won the title in 3rd season, but Tottenham were upfront for a very long time, so I'm guessing they're pretty upset at me.

Playing 4th season at the moment, 8 games left, I'm level on points with Tottenham at the top of the table.

On top of all that, I'm playing against them in 1/4 of CL!

Can't help but thinking that some sort of rivalry is born.

Checked Info screen, I have 2 rivals (Boro & Sunderland)

Can the game itself add Tottenhem to that list if we continue to battle for titles?

I know it's weird question, but I'm curious...

[borobadger]

No, sadly dynamic rivalries are not in the game, but they definitely should be

[Winto]

This would be great. But like others have said, it should build up over years, not one or two seasons battling at the top. With West Ham, Man Utd are a rival, only because they are a big team and we like to beat them every now and again. This should be reflected if your team go stellar, a few more smaller teams should see you as a rival, if a bit of history is built up.

It would also be good to see this reflected a bit more in the media. It would be good to see a bit more build up to rival games like this, more challenging questions in the press conference and for big important games too - just to reflect the real life hype that Sky and the like have created.

[Leon_fogo]

should have this already in fm 14, there are millions of threads here in the forum already last year with improvements users would like this tava and among them, I fully support!

[VonBlade]

Absolutely this should be in the game. It's insane that it isn't. So much of FM is static, dreary, eternally the same. Go back 15 years to "Swales Out City" or Dennis Wise turning up for Chelsea. Things change in the world. FM, for all its "Different from the moment you press continue" is depressingly familiar.

[podunkboy]

My team's two rivals are either two divisions down or dropped out of the playable leagues, I've been in the SPL for 10 years now, I'd love to have Hearts as a rival (since they're just down the road from my team) instead of some minnows down below.

[nev147]

I fail to understand how club legends, icons and favoured personnel change over time yet club rivals do not. Seems strange to me. Surely if you can do one you can do the other. As people have said within this community it has been requested for years. Seems a no brainier for me. And yet relatively simple compared to many other features.

[Matorko]

Insane battle here for years now...

[Linie]

Want this ingame badly as well. Allthough i can understand that the variables behind such an idea are many more and complex than those of favoured personel...

[Dar2000]

Yes I agree dynamic rivalries would be a nice addition to the game

[london boy]

I agree that it would be a great addition - Even if it were just to see those listed as other rivals become stronger/more intense rivals (should the competitive rivalry increase, of course)

[milnerpoint]

I fail to understand how club legends, icons and favoured personnel change over time yet club rivals do not. Seems strange to me. Surely if you can do one you can do the other. As people have said within this community it has been requested for years. Seems a no brainier for me. And yet relatively simple compared to many other features.

Because its two completely different things. Favoured people is much easier to code. The two are not in anyway related to each other.

What parameters do you take into account for rivalries? How would you decide when the game would introduce a new rivalry or not?

[nev147]

Because its two completely different things. Favoured people is much easier to code. The two are not in anyway related to each other.

What parameters do you take into account for rivalries? How would you decide when the game would introduce a new rivalry or not?

Given the technologically advanced in the game that have occurred in recent years I don't think this addition would be reinventing the wheel. I am not saying it would be easy, but for me very doable.

Parameters would be games played against each other. Take Chelsea and Barcelona in real life. They have never been rivals to my knowledge. Yet that was changed a few years ago when they met in the CL and played many games against each other over a period of time. The best in Spain against the best in England. Playing at the business end of the competition coefficients could also come into force. You would have to be very careful, so you don't have lots of rivals, but just like the favoured personnel it would be a gradual process. The players would have parameters like if a player plays 200/300 games etc/competition wins scores 200 goals then they get onto the list.

Just like with the example above with Newcastle and Spurs, they contested the league for three consecutive years and hence they should become rivals. Just like IRL with Man Utd and Chelsea in say 2005 when they were the two tops teams in England for say 5/6 years and played in many 'big games', FA Cup final/CL Final. And the same would apply to all levels of football.

The definition of rivalry...... ' Competition for the same objective or for superiority in the same field.'

If FM cannot come with a formula to show a few rivalry's on your club information screen over the years then it is a bad job for me. You could go on all day saying you can't do this or that. But you could put an obstacle to anything. You have to be creative and optimistic.

Ultimately you would have a number between teams. And if that number passes and certain score then the rivalry is created. Of course this would not happen overnight, it would take a number of years and it would be hard to pass that certain number. There would also be geographical rivalry's. But I think that would be self explanatory.

I am not saying the above is perfect but just my thoughts.

[forameuss]

I absolutely cringe any time anyone describes any feature as being easy.

[milnerpoint]

Well two things. Firstly the Chelsea vs Barca thing wasnt because of the number of games, it was due to the incidents during games. So you be asking them to code based on incidents during the match if its to follow that example. Secondly number of games against each other cannot be a reason, in smaller leagues like the SPL you can play the same team 6 times or more in a season depending on the cup draws, so before long, you would end up with every team as a rival. Trust me, playing Hibs 6 times in a season does not make them a rival, it makes them a bore to watch.

What about rivalry's dying off? Do they include that?

You make it sound like its very easy, whereas the reality is without extreme care, it would go haywire. Its not as simple as favoured players or staff, no where even close.

[nev147]

Well two things. Firstly the Chelsea vs Barca thing wasnt because of the number of games, it was due to the incidents during games. So you be asking them to code based on incidents during the match if its to follow that example. Secondly number of games against each other cannot be a reason, in smaller leagues like the SPL you can play the same team 6 times or more in a season depending on the cup draws, so before long, you would end up with every team as a rival. Trust me, playing Hibs 6 times in a season does not make them a rival, it makes them a bore to watch.

What about rivalry's dying off? Do they include that?

You make it sound like its very easy, whereas the reality is without extreme care, it would go haywire. Its not as simple as favoured players or staff, no where even close.

Take a standard deviation then....... Problem solved for you Scottish example.

Is it the same as the players in terms of difficulty then no. If I made it appear so in the beginning then my fault.

[nev147]

Do they rivalry's die off? They are dynamic.... What do you think!

But joking aside then yes they would. Maybe take a ten year rolling system.... Similar to the European coefficient points for example. But the changes are not a year on year basis.

[nev147]

Back to the Scottish example if Queen of the South for example played Hibs six times per season in the SPL over the course of say 5/6 seasons and they both finished in the top two each year. Hibs 1,1,2,1,2,2 and QotS 2,2,1,2,1,1 then that would be a rivalry. As the formula points score would create the rivalry.

The definition of rivalry...... ' Competition for the same objective or for superiority in the same field.'

[milnerpoint]

Back to the Scottish example if Queen of the South for example played Hibs six times per season in the SPL over the course of say 5/6 seasons and they both finished in the top two each year. Hibs 1,1,2,1,2,2 and QotS 2,2,1,2,1,1 then that would be a rivalry.

The definition of rivalry...... ' Competition for the same objective or for superiority in the same field.'

What if they play each other 6 times a season for 10 seasons in a row, and QOS finish third bottom each year, and Hibs finish 3rd. Does that still make a rivalry? It really cannot be as simple as you make it out to be.

If a rivalry dies off, what causes it to die off in the game?

Why cant a rivalry be built up over 1 or 2 games? There is rivalry between Stoke and Arsenal, purely off the back of one challenge.

[nev147]

What if they play each other 6 times a season for 10 seasons in a row, and QOS finish third bottom each year, and Hibs finish 3rd. Does that still make a rivalry? It really cannot be as simple as you make it out to be.

If a rivalry dies off, what causes it to die off in the game?

Why cant a rivalry be built up over 1 or 2 games? There is rivalry between Stoke and Arsenal, purely off the back of one challenge.

That is not a rivalry. Pleas read my definition of a rivalry.... 'Competition for the same objective or for superiority in the same field.' In your example QotS are not challenging for the title. The end of season positions in the league would determine the points rivalry. QOS and Hibs would score few points in 'their' rivarly for that period. and as such.... not rivals.

Causes it to die off? The rolling score! When the cut of date... be it every five or ten years... then if they are below it goes.

Rivalries over 1 or 2 games are not the norm but the exception. I would argue Stoke and Arsenal is not a rivalry..... Again please read the definition of a rivalry. That would be called a grudge match/heated animosity between the two teams. Because of one tackle. And there is a big difference between that and that of a rivalry.

[milnerpoint]

Well not really, you sited Chelsea vs Barca as a rivalry, whereas it was build upon a similar sense of injustice as the Stoke vs Arsenal one is, so it would have come more under a grudge match, plus the Chelsea/Barca one only really came from the Chelsea side, Barca for the most part were not overly bothered about it all. So how would they code that to be in the game? Does that game hold the same "rivalry" now? Not at all. So in essence that rivalry lasted a couple of seasons, no more, based off the back of a few dodgy in game decisons and very little else.

Which is why this is so hard to get right. Would you have the Stoke vs Arsenal one? Would you have the Chelsea vs Barca one?

You can quote me the definition of rivalry all you want, but a great deal of these things are based on perception of the people involved, which is impossible to code accurately.

[Wonky]

I absolutely cringe any time anyone describes any feature as being easy.

I know what you mean. This feature would not be easy, but it's definitely a nice suggestion, in my eyes.

What if they play each other 6 times a season for 10 seasons in a row, and QOS finish third bottom each year, and Hibs finish 3rd. Does that still make a rivalry? It really cannot be as simple as you make it out to be.

If a rivalry dies off, what causes it to die off in the game?

Why cant a rivalry be built up over 1 or 2 games? There is rivalry between Stoke and Arsenal, purely off the back of one challenge.

If the teams aren't competitive with each other, then, unless specified as a permanent rivalry in the DB, the rivalry would die down until there is no longer a rivalry. It's not like it would be an on/off switch. It would most likely be 0-100.

News items would be able to reference "an increasing rivalry between the two teams", for example.

[nev147]

Well not really, you sited Chelsea vs Barca as a rivalry, whereas it was build upon a similar sense of injustice as the Stoke vs Arsenal one is, so it would have come more under a grudge match, plus the Chelsea/Barca one only really came from the Chelsea side, Barca for the most part were not overly bothered about it all. So how would they code that to be in the game? Does that game hold the same "rivalry" now? Not at all. So in essence that rivalry lasted a couple of seasons, no more, based off the back of a few dodgy in game decisons and very little else.

Which is why this is so hard to get right. Would you have the Stoke vs Arsenal one? Would you have the Chelsea vs Barca one?

You can quote me the definition of rivalry all you want, but a great deal of these things are based on perception of the people involved, which is impossible to code accurately.

First if all...... Arsenal/Stoke..... Chelsea/Barcelona

Arsenal/Stoke was a one-off match....... They play in a league so by definition they will play each other at least twice.... Again please bare in mind a standard deviation score.

Chelsea and Barcelona was not a one off match.... If memory serves me correct..... Since 2004 they played each other in the knockout rounds of the CL on four occasions... that is four times in eights years. That includes two semi-finals. And in that period of time they have won the competition 4 times between them and reached 5 finals.

Each season in the CL they two of the best teams which was reflected in what they achieved and the betting. So they were fighting for the CL and thus played each other many times in that particular 'era'. Yes I agree there were goings on but that could only happen in the first place because they played each other many times at the business end of the CL.

[nev147]

And leading onto a slightly different point would be managerial rivalries......

[milnerpoint]

First if all...... Arsenal/Stoke..... Chelsea/Barcelona

Arsenal/Stoke was a one-off match....... They play in a league so by definition they will play each other at least twice.... Again please bare in mind a standard deviation score.

Chelsea and Barcelona was not a one off match.... If memory serves me correct..... Since 2004 they played each other in the knockout rounds of the CL on four occasions... that is four times in eights years. That includes two semi-finals. And in that period of time they have won the competition 4 times between them and reached 5 finals.

Each season in the CL they two of the best teams which was reflected in what they achieved and the betting. So they were fighting for the CL and thus played each other many times in that particular 'era'. Yes I agree there were goings on but that could only happen in the first place because they played each other many times at the business end of the CL.

Well the Arsenal/Stoke thing is still on going, when they played the other week it was clear the grudge or rivalry is still very much there between the two clubs. It definitely was not contained to a 1 off situation or had anything to do with challenging each other for honors. Its down to one tackle in one game, and a bit of back and forth between the two managers.

Barca and Chelsea might have been fighting for the champions league, but the grudge was built upon the incident at Stamford bridge, and the Drogba sending off, nothing to do with them competeing for a competition. Again tho, its arguable that they are rivals, or just two teams who clashed over a couple of dodgy calls by the ref.

[nev147]

Well the Arsenal/Stoke thing is still on going, when they played the other week it was clear the grudge or rivalry is still very much there between the two clubs. It definitely was not contained to a 1 off situation or had anything to do with challenging each other for honors. Its down to one tackle in one game, and a bit of back and forth between the two managers.

Barca and Chelsea might have been fighting for the champions league, but the grudge was built upon the incident at Stamford bridge, and the Drogba sending off, nothing to do with them competeing for a competition. Again tho, its arguable that they are rivals, or just two teams who clashed over a couple of dodgy calls by the ref.

I disagree. As you keeping talking about Barca/Chelsea regarding one incident in the first game. Yes it happened and it did crank up the heat in a kind of grudge way like the Arsenal/Stoke manner. I.e. An incident. But I call that as 'heat' or 'animosity'. But we are talking about rivalry's in this thread. And the rivalry was created as I mentioned above... They were rivals in Europe for a sustained period of time. Whether or not the Frisk things happened is irrelevant. As the rivalry was built up because they were two footballing powerhouses of the CL and played each other in many big games. In FM they get the rivalry points form playing each other in the business end of the CL over a period of time and gaining many rivalry points.

[milnerpoint]

But they are not rivals, no one really see's that game as a rivals match. Doesnt matter how many times they have played each other in recent years. Barca beat Man Utd twice in the final in 4 years, no one see's them as rivals. They had a few grudge matches against each other, but they are not competitive rivals in the sense needed for the game.

Again this is the issue. A lot of rivalry is based on perception of the people involved, and perception cannot be coded.

Im all for this feature, but only if its extremely well thought out, if they try a half arsed way of doing it, it would be worse than not being in the game.

[nev147]

Also Milner these incidents cannot be replicated in FM. But they do not create the rivalry. They are often the result of a rivalry. Take Man utd/Arsenal. In the late 90's early 00's they were big rivals. And then there was the 'pitch brawl' or rather handbags at Old Trafford and also the pizza gate. These events often take place because of the rivalry they do not make the rivalry. Just like Barca and Real Madrid in recent seasons. Simply put these incidents cannot happen in FM and cannot not influence the rivalry points score because they could not possibly exist. So it is a no point for me. You have to be realistic, yes FM is a simulation, put somethings just cannot be shown. But not that they should influence the rivalry in FM because it would be impossible. Or maybe FM will create pizza gate again! Hahaha

[nev147]

But then we have to leave it to FM's perception or rather the code to determine the dynamic rivals. And I am pretty sure given FM over the years then SI and FM would not introduce a feature that was half arsed. But I do agree with you in as much there may be a reason why it has not be introduced yet. Either it is not high on their to do list, or it is but they are struggling/may take a few years. Although I have a gut feeling that it will be in FM15.

[nev147]

IMO given that Barca/Man Utd played two finals and a semi final in four years then a Top level European rivalry was created. But it is opinion and perception like you say. But the same does apply to the players in terms of icons/legends etc. And some people have complained about them before or you as the manager may think hey where is player x he should be there if players y is. It is impossible to get it perfect.

I have gone on too much now!

But at least the thread is getting some decent discussion which is what the forum is about.

[Langefis]

I absolutely cringe any time anyone describes any feature as being easy.

Depends what you compare it to. Designing a match engine seems somewhat more difficult.

[Bluebird123]

This feature would be nice. I constantly played Man City and played them in important matches in my Southampton save.

[crowsus]

Well not really, you sited Chelsea vs Barca as a rivalry, whereas it was build upon a similar sense of injustice as the Stoke vs Arsenal one is, so it would have come more under a grudge match, plus the Chelsea/Barca one only really came from the Chelsea side, Barca for the most part were not overly bothered about it all. So how would they code that to be in the game? Does that game hold the same "rivalry" now? Not at all. So in essence that rivalry lasted a couple of seasons, no more, based off the back of a few dodgy in game decisons and very little else.

Which is why this is so hard to get right. Would you have the Stoke vs Arsenal one? Would you have the Chelsea vs Barca one?

You can quote me the definition of rivalry all you want, but a great deal of these things are based on perception of the people involved, which is impossible to code accurately.

Hmm i like the idea of grudge matches as a different feature to rivals! Or have 2 categories of rivals, e.g Eternal and Recent. I know the game now includes different types of rivalries but none are dynamic as far as I know, so it would be good to have that in play. If there's no significant interaction with a grudge rival in, say, 4 seasons that would keep it in fans' memories (play in a cup game, red card in a fixture, finish within 2 places in a league), the grudge drops off both clubs' list. You could have a maximum in there as well, lets say 3 in addition to the lasting rivalries.

However, as far as the original post was concerned, I don't think being close in the league would make Tottenham and Newcastle 'rivals' in the the true sense of the term. They are based at opposite ends of the country for one thing. Being close in the league makes it interesting (and a good short-term grudge, see above) but I would term that as just a worthy adversary.

[Gangor]

This would tie into the narrative system quite well. If you've been finishing close to another club in the league for a while then there could be a chance that a journalist asks you a questing which would start the narrative. Completing the narrative with the "correct" choices would result in a new competitive rivalry. Same for other rivalries - play a competitive game against a geographically nearby team and you might be asked the trigger question or starting a war of words with the manager of one of your former clubs might create a chance to cause a historical rivalry. Similarly, there could be narratives which might result in the removal or modification of a rivalry. For instance, a former prem team relegated to league 2 would be unlikely to continue to have a competitive rivalry with a top prem team, but they might retain a historical rivalry.

[nev147]

Hmm i like the idea of grudge matches as a different feature to rivals! Or have 2 categories of rivals, e.g Eternal and Recent. I know the game now includes different types of rivalries but none are dynamic as far as I know, so it would be good to have that in play. If there's no significant interaction with a grudge rival in, say, 4 seasons that would keep it in fans' memories (play in a cup game, red card in a fixture, finish within 2 places in a league), the grudge drops off both clubs' list. You could have a maximum in there as well, lets say 3 in addition to the lasting rivalries.

However, as far as the original post was concerned, I don't think being close in the league would make Tottenham and Newcastle 'rivals' in the the true sense of the term. They are based at opposite ends of the country for one thing. Being close in the league makes it interesting (and a good short-term grudge, see above) but I would term that as just a worthy adversary.

Eternal/Recent rivals could be a good suggestion, I like that. However you say Tottenham and Newcastle could never be rivals because they are at opposite side of the country. That would be a derby or rather not a derby game as opposed to a rivalry. So Tottenham/Newcastle could not be a derby but could be a rivalry. They are two different things. In the proper sense then a derby is between local teams although you could make a point of Barcelona/Real Madrid being the EL Clasico Derby. But as the name mentions it is the classic rather than derby.

This would tie into the narrative system quite well. If you've been finishing close to another club in the league for a while then there could be a chance that a journalist asks you a questing which would start the narrative. Completing the narrative with the "correct" choices would result in a new competitive rivalry. Same for other rivalries - play a competitive game against a geographically nearby team and you might be asked the trigger question or starting a war of words with the manager of one of your former clubs might create a chance to cause a historical rivalry. Similarly, there could be narratives which might result in the removal or modification of a rivalry. For instance, a former prem team relegated to league 2 would be unlikely to continue to have a competitive rivalry with a top prem team, but they might retain a historical rivalry.

That is a superb suggestion and would be great immersion for the manager. As the managers do play a major role in the rivalry of clubs as I mentioned a few posts above.

[forameuss]

Depends what you compare it to. Designing a match engine seems somewhat more difficult.

It doesn't depend on anything apart from exactly how hard it is. The match engine is not "somewhat more difficult", it's probably an absolute vipers nest of code that goes far beyond being difficult. Hence why it's pretty much the brainchild of one man, who has done a fantastic job. But there is little point in comparing these and saying if "a is this difficult, then b must be easy". There are things that won't be too complex to add - but even they'll still need extensive testing, no matter how small the change - but they'll be pretty rare. This one would be by no means easy, as have many of the others that people have written off as being a piece of **** to develop. No wonder SI can never win.

To go into more detail, the reasons why this is more difficult than people are saying are on display in this topic, mostly by milnerpoint. There's so many ifs and buts in it. It's not as simple as saying "this team has finished second to this other team for yours, they're rivals". There's so many questions you need to ask to get this to work properly.

One other funny thing - I bet the ones who say how easy it is are the ones shouting the loudest when said feature is introduced and doesn't work properly.

[Langefis]

It doesn't depend on anything apart from exactly how hard it is. The match engine is not "somewhat more difficult", it's probably an absolute vipers nest of code that goes far beyond being difficult. Hence why it's pretty much the brainchild of one man, who has done a fantastic job. But there is little point in comparing these and saying if "a is this difficult, then b must be easy". There are things that won't be too complex to add - but even they'll still need extensive testing, no matter how small the change - but they'll be pretty rare. This one would be by no means easy, as have many of the others that people have written off as being a piece of **** to develop. No wonder SI can never win.

To go into more detail, the reasons why this is more difficult than people are saying are on display in this topic, mostly by milnerpoint. There's so many ifs and buts in it. It's not as simple as saying "this team has finished second to this other team for yours, they're rivals". There's so many questions you need to ask to get this to work properly.

One other funny thing - I bet the ones who say how easy it is are the ones shouting the loudest when said feature is introduced and doesn't work properly.

I'm just saying this can be done. It doesn't take a genius to see that some functions are harder to develop than others.

[forameuss]

I'm just saying this can be done. It doesn't take a genius to see that some functions are harder to develop than others.

I have never said it couldn't. Anything can be done technically, but this one is far from being the quick win that some have painted it as.

[milnerpoint]

Yeah no one is saying it cannot be done, this came up because of this statement,

And yet relatively simple compared to many other features

However the guy has now backtracked on that statement.

[hugo_rune]

I've thought of a number of ways it can be done algorithimically, and while there would be a bit of storage overhead involved, if you were smart it wouldn't be all that big - just pointers to clubs that are considered 'potential rivals', a score that adjusts when rivalry-type events occur, and something to control whether the rivalry decays and how fast. You would add a potential rivalry pointer when there's any direct interaction between you, your club, another club's manager, or another club, and the rivalry score could decay (eventually to zero, and then expiring the pointer) when there's no interaction since a recorded date.

Traditional rivalry and local rivalry could fit into the equation in a separate way to this rivalry constructed during events of the game.

It's really just a matter for SI to decide if, and how, they would program it in, obviously they have priorities and as cool as a dynamic rivalry system would be, it might not be one of those priorities.

[ozidnz]

I think they can add rivalries if both teams are chasing the title for about a decade (FM lists those rivalries as competitive) and anything more would be too difficult.

[kontermann]

FM could count how many bookings/red cars there have been between the two teams in recent years and identify it as a "grudge" match then or whatever you would like to call it.

I know its easier read than done though and I think the rivalry thing in general is damn hard to code (I even think its impossible to code a decent "dynamic" routine which reflects at least a bit of reality, so hardcoded seems the best way to do it)

[forameuss]

There's also the human element that you could never program automatically. Some clubs may see another one as a rival, but the opposite does not. You see this with nations in particular - Scotland see England as their football rivals, but England look towards better sides such as Germany. Germany themselves couldn't care less, and look to Holland as their rivals (and boy is that a rivalry). The Stoke/Arsenal "rivalry" is all because of one tackle, but is that in anywhere else other than the minds of the fans? Do the players really go onto the pitch thinking that this is a rivalry?

I suppose it comes down to the question "what makes a rivalry?". That's not that easy to answer, and is pretty subjective. Subjectivity isn't something that is easily coded effectively.