Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community
Cleon

Let’s make a difference – training fm16 and beyond

Recommended Posts

This is taken from my blog

http://www.sisportscentre.com

........................................................

We all bitch about FM from time to time, some more than others! I know I do especially with regards to the training module. So I thought how about we actually try and make a difference to how the game is made and see if SI will take notice? With this in mind I’ve spent the last 3 months maybe longer coming up with new ideas for the training side of the game because imo its lacking and pretty restrictive how it currently is. I’ve spoken to a few other people who I know take training serious on FM and came up with a few ideas on how we’d improve it.What I want to do though is create a fully working concept with the help of the community (yes that’s you:P) and then present it to SI and lets see how it goes. For us to be able to do this though we need to come up with something and be able to explain how it all will work and provide the documentation to back it up. It sounds daunting but it isn’t really, it just involves us all putting our heads together and thinking of a concept that will actually work in practise that is more realistic and flexible compared to what we have now. If we do this then SI will more than likely take it more serious and if its good enough they might make changes based on this or even add it.

I wrote something about this a while back that wasn’t used in Clear Cut Chance at the time so thought I’d post it here to gauge some reactions and hopefully get others to chip in with how they’d change training or what they’d like to see implemented. The stuff written below was done about 4 months ago and I’ve actually changed/adapted some of the ideas which I’ll be sharing with you in a series of articles over the coming weeks. I’ll not add my ideas and the concept we have come up with just yet as I’m really interested to see your own ideas and what you’d like to see implemented for a fuller more immersive training module without the influence of what we’ve come up with.

Here is what I originally wrote about this subject

I know that sliders were removed for FM14 but for me, Football Manager 13 was a step away from the sliders system that many have grown fond of over the years. I think many people knew that sliders were becoming obsolete but didn’t think it would happen this fast and still thought they had at least another year of them. I think the new training module was a big indication of how the game is changing and what the future held when they did away with the sliders from that part of the game. While many feel sliders were unrealistic, I think the main reason for stepping away from them is they just don’t fit the direction the game is going currently. This brings me onto the next point; What next for FM?

The current training module is far from perfect and was added because it was more real life like and less micro management compared to the old training system according to the games developers. But is this actually true? According to all the coaches we’ve interviewed or spoke to for Clear Cut Chance, the current training module isn’t a reflection on real life at all and doesn’t even resemble it. As for the less micro managing argument, I think now you have to micromanage just as much as you did before. Nothing really changed in that aspect unless what they meant by less micromanaging was actually its a lot easier to ignore training now, then I’d agree with that.

Now that sliders have been abolished from the game I think this means that training needs to be linked more closely to tactical side of the game in the coming years. I’m not sure what SI’s plans are for training, but I really hope they do have plans for the current training module. It just doesn’t deliver at the minute in its current state because its far too simplistic, yet very fiddly at the same time.

What we need to see introduced is something that allows us to see the bigger picture of how training is actually working for your players as individuals and as a team. This means that the feedback you get from the game needs to be more in depth and clearer than it currently is. Everything about training is currently bland and mundane. There is no real feedback and its far too easy to achieve great results with little effort.

What’s the point of having different role training schedule if the user is just going to pick the one that trains the most attributes?! Lets take the forward positions for example, there is no real benefit choosing a preset role schedule like advanced forward when the complete forward one covers more useful attributes and a lot more of them. Sure you might see a slight difference in how the player develops but it’s very minimal at best. Anyone who’s followed any of my training projects in the past will see what I’m talking about.

The complete forward training schedule is the better one to use long term because it offers a wider variety of attributes to train (although they are supposedly learnt at a slower rate the more attributes the category has but I haven’t always found that to be true). This isn’t right and it needs to be corrected. The same could be said for the box to box midfielder role too. What needs to happen is to either give us the ability to select which attributes we want to focus on, or make the role trainings actually mean something. Another thing that needs to happen is a bigger advantage and distinction between team training and individual training. In its current form team training is almost redundant to individual training and there is no real benefit to choosing team training over individual training long term, you could even go as far as claiming its a hindrance. What needs to be done is a clear separation of the two, and the options of favouring one over the other should be made more prominent.

Plan Outline

It would be great to have tactic specific training options to supplement the role options, e.g. Defensive play, defensive transition, attacking transition, attacking play, general movement, tactical understanding etc. This would then provide us with some more fine tuning options. Not only that but individual training which consists of fitness or tactical work should be classed as extra on top of the team training. All the coaches we’ve spoke to seem to indicate that these (fitness and tactics) are all extra work done by adding extra training sessions or time rather than actually taking away from their normal training.

Individual/Group player training

Role training should remain but rather than having individual attribute training it should focus more on smaller groups of attributes instead. So it could be something like.

  • Technique focus - Passing, dribbling, first touch etc
  • Defensive - tackling, marking, concentration, composure
  • Without the ball – closing down, marking, positioning,
  • Communication – Teamwork, work rate, decisions
  • Speed - Pace, acceleration, agility, balance

These are just some examples to give you an idea of what I am talking about. Or alternatively you could add something that allows 3 or 4 players (small groups) to work together to work on these attributes.

And if you wanted to work on Fitness then this should come as added time and the players would do an extra session a day or whatever we can select.

New match training

  • Offensive Organisation
  • Defensive Organisation
  • Transition from Defence to Offence
  • Transition from Offence to Defence

It could even be an added option called Team Functions and work along side match/general training. It could focus on.

  • Attack – Defending – Transition
  • Depending which one of those you select it would train.
  • Build up play/scoring – covering and defending space

Match training is a good idea in theory but limited in what it actually does. I believe that doing something like this would allow you to actually build towards how you want to play or set up for the coming game. After all, FM is becoming more and more about adapting and changing for every game and is reflecting real life more in that sense. So the build up to a game should also reflect this and training should be focused on the game you play next.

A manager should be able to decide how often and how long a training session is. FM treats every manager the same in this regard but in reality everyone trains a different length. I remember we had a manager at Sheffield United who liked his players to train two 2 hour sessions and we had another who linked two 1 hour and 20 minute sessions. I think Nigel Clough currently works longer than both those. So it should be down to us as the manager to decide upon these factors.

Staff

The number of staff you employ should make a real difference on the game, but currently it doesn’t really matter if you have 30 coaches or 4. You can still see significant development irrespective of the number of coaches. Making staff actually play a bigger part in actual development or players needs to be added to the game. The more spread and poorer the coach, the less improvements I should see.The more quality coaches I have, the better/faster the development should be. All that matters for staff at the moment is the workload aside from that you can basically achieve the same development whether it’s a 5 star coach or a 3 star coach. (this bit actually did change for FM15)

If I decide to go the player development route then I should have to put actual thought into the backroom staff I’m assembling.

Attributes

The development rate of these should be slowed down and happen at different times. It’s quite common currently to have a high potential player and have him hit that potential before he’s 22. It’s really a far too common occurrence for any top club. What I’d like to see is the mental side of development slowed down a little. This should come more with age and experience. I know the game kind of works like this now but its still all a bit too rapid and doesn’t make much sense. Some players will be mentally strong when they are younger but not every single one after a few years of development, which is what we currently see.

That is the basic outline of the original idea (its changed a lot since this post though but wanted to show the start point to generate some discussion). So what are some of your ideas? Please post them in the comments section below.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, just when I was thinking about this yesterday you come up with it. You sometimes have young midfielders who have virtually e.g. a range of 5-8 in all of his stats, so you just train him to be a Central Mid (all duties) so all of these attributes are put in one player. No realism.

One of my defenders has immense heading and pace, but poor marking/concentration/tackling, but instead of making him work on those group of attributes I had to work him on being a Central Defender.

Also, i'm sure you've heard of how Marcelo Bielsa has his strikers at a different time, defenders say they don't even see the striker on some different days. There needs to be more grouping, in-depth work into training. By alternating between Light -- Avg -- Heavy, makes you feel like there's no work being put into the game.

The Staff one is arguably the most annoying though, and I feel like there should be an increase in attributes of poor attributed staff who've had success with you (e.g. at a Lower League Club, getting promoted all the way to the Premier League) with that specific staff member should make him like a member of family, knowing all the players regardless of attributes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FM needs a leap forward regarding training, I totally agree with you Cleon. I agree also with your points but I think the advanced step forward would be to replicate what actually happens in training and how it affects the tactics and in game behavior. I would like to have the possibility to train game plans, schemes or plays, however you want to call them. E. g. training how your forwards should link with the midfield and so on. Now, this happens by setting roles, PI, etc. but more depth to this would take the game to an other level. I know not everybody understands football (I belive Xavi once said that only 5% of people watching it, really understand it - and I agree) but for people who want more, this would be a nice feature (even opptionally).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There isn't really much to add to your excellent text, but I somehow feel we're looking at it from the wrong direction.

We don't necessarily need to look at real life training and try to apply that to FM, rather we need to look at the effects of training in real life and talk how we can achieve that.

FM is a simulation, true, but training is arguably the most boring part of football (how often do we read in the news about what Chelsea players were doing in training? Ever?). Outside very specialized, and most often inaccessible to general population, sources, there's nothing about it.

I remember in one of the much earlier versions (still in CM days, iirc), that you could set up specific excercises for your training sessions. So, you could have a “piggy in the middle”, followed by “weight lifting session”, followed by “piggy in the middle” once more on a Wednesday, and a completely different setup for a Thursday training session.

Back then, my English wasn’t quite advanced so I had no idea what “piggy in the middle” was at all. What does training have to do with farmyard animals? Kidding aside, even when we take language issues out of the equation, how big a part of FM player base actually knows how a training session is conducted? How many would understand the difference between one two hour session and two 80 minutes sessions? Indeed, what is the difference? Are Sheffield United players in better physical shape if they train a 160 rather than 120 minutes? Are they better tactically? Better technique? It’s all vague, and there obviously isn’t a single “right way” to go at it, otherwise all managers in the world would do it that way.

So, replicating real life isn’t always the best route.

Besides that, we need to acknowledge there are other limitations in FM that affect training. First and foremost, the very rigid fixed CA/PA system. After that, player’s hidden mental attributes, that are, bar tutoring, fixed. SI so far showed reluctance to change that.

So, in my humble opinion, before starting a proper brainstorming session, we need to figure out what we want to achieve and how we can achieve given current limitations of the engine, and only then think of how it could be represented within the game.

Also, we need to understand that the most important aspect is how intuitive and easy to use the system is for the most FM human players. It can be the best in the world, but if those playing the game don’t understand how to use, there’s little point in it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to say that I don't have any idea what goes on in a professional football club's training sessions. But this might be how I would organize it:

Team Training

The whole first team, the whole coaching staff. You work on general stuff, a little bit of everything. You play some 5 vs. 5's, attacking unit trying to break down defensive unit, a group trying to play around or through a pressing unit, rondo, set pieces, keepie-uppies (is that what you call it in engilish?) that kind of stuff.

The whole point is to work on football generally and as a team. Also to bind the players together, blend in new one's, have a little fun as well.

I'd expect to see improvements across all the attributes, but more so in the attributes relevant to a players natural position.

This is the training you can do even if you don't have many coaches and it won't affect their workload that much.

After Team Training

Focus groups

The team splits down into groups. The groups all need a coach to lead them so the number of coaches might limit how much of focus group training you can do.

Scoring, Technical abilities, Defensive skills, Tactical understanding.

I'd see these groups as an important part of education of a player, mostly giving players the tools and understanding to perform their tasks on the pitch. The general training, where defenders train with the strikers and so on, would be where you'd then put these ideas into practice. You'd just be better prepared for those sessions after taking part in your focus group and getting to know what exactly you're supposed to get better at.

A Scoring group would construct situations where they need to move into a good position, the ball comes in, you try to score. Balls over the top, cut backs, floated crosses, low crosses, first time volleys, trap the ball and shoot, dribble and shoot, where to aim, when to shoot with power, when to place it etc. Finishing, long shots, composure, flair, dribbling, crossing, passing, off the ball, agility, balance, jumping, heading etc - some attributes would see a little bit more action than the others.

Technical group would concentrate on ball handling skills, controlling the ball in every situation, honing different kinds of passing techniques, shooting techniques, crossing techniques.

Defensive group would work on how to defend in certain situations, what to do when there's 2-on-1 situations, 1-on-1, 1-on-2. Do you follow your man wide/up or do you hold position. How to cover for others, when to move as a unit. Where and when to clear the ball. How and when to tackle. Defending skills will improve, some mental abilities will increase, some technical abilities to a lesser extent.

Tactical group will spend time on understanding the game in itself. Vision, decisions, team work, anticipation, positioning, off the ball.

Goalkeeper training

I'd expect goalkeepers to train their own things (who knows what they do ;)).

Fitness training

Being fit is so important that I would always want my players to train fitness. The question is how much and what. I'd expect (in a big club at least) to have a fitness team consisting of fitness trainers (not necessarily football coaches), someone from the other coaching staff, physios, doctors.

I'd require everyone to train everything, but on top of that have individual fitness program. So for each player you could set the amount of fitness training and what they will work on individually. Sometimes you want to develop strength or pace, sometimes a player might need a program designed to help him recover in time for the next match.

Match preparation

I'd certainly have a little session a day before the match, or in the morning, to educate the players of what to expect and how I want them to play in the match. Also let them know who will be playing and what our strategy is going to be. That way my players would know what to expect and could get ready for the match. And if I felt like we need to work on something specific, I would. Set Pieces, attacking movement, passing, whatever. I don't know what the effects are exactly in the ME now, but if viable I'd maybe go simple and boost decisions in relevant match situations and if for example we trained defensive cohesion, then possibly concentration. If we trained defending set pieces then also bravery.

Preferred moves

I'd keep the system where you ask your coaches to do this. But they should decline if they have too many players under their wing already and it should be almost obligatory to move the player to a relevant focus group and preferably to that particular coaches focus group.

That's all that I'd expect from the coaching department.

Then there's:

Match Experience

From what I understand playing gives your player a general development boost. What I'd like to see is something more specific.

When a player does something a lot in a match, then he should get a boost on the relevant attribute. For example if a player makes tackles very often, he'd eventually get better at tackling. And maybe even start to like it, thus getting a PPM dives into tackles. So, simply by using someone as a defensive winger he'd develop into a better defensive winger. Better at tackling, dribbling, crossing, maybe gains PPM's dives into tackles or runs with ball down left.

I'd just like to see the match experience tied to training in a more specific way, so that the things that the player does a lot in matches get the CA instead of more general distribution of it. And for PPM's to develop on their own if a player does something successfully in matches on consistent basis. It's only natural that they'd start to prefer such things.

So, I don't know how detailed training system we should be having really. But the stuff I wrote above boils down to setting up these things in-game:

Team training

General training: low---------------------high

Focus groups: low---------------------high (can be capped by lack of coaching personnel)

Fitness training: low---------------------high

Match preparation: low---------------------high + focus: _____(choose)

Individual training

Focus group: ______(choose)

Fitness focus: _______(choose) (one focusing on recovering faster, essentially less workload)

New position: _______

PPM:______

Overall workload shown somewhere.

Match experience: essentially using a player in a certain role would lead to him shaping into a player that is better in the role that he plays and could help develop PPM's organically.

EDIT: I forgot to cover the tactics familiarity. I think you'd gain that in the general training where the whole team is together. So you'd just gain the familiarity by sticking to your preset tactics and playing with them, times the amount of general training and the quality of coaches.

Also, what is needed is the staff making a racket of these things. More feedback from the game about how things are going and what is working well, what is working badly. This will make the training seem more important. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One other point, and I don't know if the intention is to cover this topic here or not (ignore if not !) is Tutoring - especially in relation to personality development.

For me, Tutoring feels like it's been bolted on without feeling particularly integrated, which is a shame as I think a player's personality is actually a very integral part of the game. I believe this is then compounded by a very woolly tutoring interface of merely choosing between an on or off pitch tutoring "regime" which may or may not work out - and doesn't even tell you what these 2 woolly options will do or what actually makes a good tutor/tutee.

I have no idea how real clubs go about personality development or whether they using a tutoring system, and if they do whether it actually works. I don't however believe for a second that any club simply assigns a tutor to a young player and it is then solely the responsibility of that tutor to develop the youngster's personality - which is how FM works.

Perhaps someone with more knowledge of how clubs go about this can chip in here, but off the top of my head:

- Psychology and/or media training added (whether that be we can actually employ staff such as this or an additional 30 min "session" a week with a consultant for example)

- Further interaction between player and club management for management to help develop the player. I seem to remember a young Ryan Giggs being "protected" by SAF from the media while Giggs was developing

- Keep player tutoring (I do actually like the principle of it) but have it as part of an overall integrated player development plan, perhaps with semi-regular tutor/tutee/manager meetings to check progress and make changes if required - rather than just being told 6 months down the line the tutoring succeeded or failed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the current system. It's simple and easy to understand and requires little to no micromanagement. If the "complete forward" training schedule is always more advantageous to use than the "advanced forward" one in terms of total attribute growth (confirming this would make a good experiment!) then the solution to me is to fix it so that's not the case, rather than throw the baby out with the bathwater.

That training only makes a slight difference seems realistic to me - there's a reason top sports men and woman by and large take up their chosen sport at a young age. The vital shaping of their sporting abilities is done very young. By the time they're in our hands as managers of (virtual) adults they largely are what they are.

As far as match preparation goes, given it's not even documented what the mechanical effect of the current options are, I'm not real keen on expanding that area. Maybe I'm in the minority, but when given a choice where there's a lack of any real information just feels like making an arbitrary decision to me, and is not fun at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There isn't really much to add to your excellent text, but I somehow feel we're looking at it from the wrong direction.

We don't necessarily need to look at real life training and try to apply that to FM, rather we need to look at the effects of training in real life and talk how we can achieve that.

FM is a simulation, true, but training is arguably the most boring part of football (how often do we read in the news about what Chelsea players were doing in training? Ever?). Outside very specialized, and most often inaccessible to general population, sources, there's nothing about it.

I remember in one of the much earlier versions (still in CM days, iirc), that you could set up specific excercises for your training sessions. So, you could have a “piggy in the middle”, followed by “weight lifting session”, followed by “piggy in the middle” once more on a Wednesday, and a completely different setup for a Thursday training session.

Back then, my English wasn’t quite advanced so I had no idea what “piggy in the middle” was at all. What does training have to do with farmyard animals? Kidding aside, even when we take language issues out of the equation, how big a part of FM player base actually knows how a training session is conducted? How many would understand the difference between one two hour session and two 80 minutes sessions? Indeed, what is the difference? Are Sheffield United players in better physical shape if they train a 160 rather than 120 minutes? Are they better tactically? Better technique? It’s all vague, and there obviously isn’t a single “right way” to go at it, otherwise all managers in the world would do it that way.

So, replicating real life isn’t always the best route.

Besides that, we need to acknowledge there are other limitations in FM that affect training. First and foremost, the very rigid fixed CA/PA system. After that, player’s hidden mental attributes, that are, bar tutoring, fixed. SI so far showed reluctance to change that.

So, in my humble opinion, before starting a proper brainstorming session, we need to figure out what we want to achieve and how we can achieve given current limitations of the engine, and only then think of how it could be represented within the game.

Also, we need to understand that the most important aspect is how intuitive and easy to use the system is for the most FM human players. It can be the best in the world, but if those playing the game don’t understand how to use, there’s little point in it.

We aren't looking at it from the wrong direction though. We are looking at it via the ways you say. It's SI who said they wanted to develop a more realistic training module. We don't need to replicate real life as such but we do need training to function like it does in real life with what aspects training actually does.

SI are reluctant to change because its a hard task trying to think up a new module that is easy to understand follow and that works in practise. Hence why I started this project around 4 months ago long before posting on here. it's my idea to do all of this and think about it logically and realistically so when we present the final ideas to SI we can show how it works and provide the correct documentation so no-one is left guessing how it works and first and foremost, its simple to use and more importantly not too time consuming.

The whole point of this thread is to figure out what we want as a community. It's the reason I haven't put up my own ideas and the concept we came up with yet as we want this to be a community thing and not decided by just a handful of people. Without being big headed I think if we posted what we have so far then most of it would be used at some point which would be good. But that doesn't mean its the direction that is needed by everyone. So by posting this thread and not our ideas so far it allows us to make it a real community project and work out what we all feel about training and work from there.

I want this to be a well thought out concept that everyone has the chance to contribute too. Then hopefully we can present the ideas to SI and it would just be a case of them coding our ideas rather than figuring out how they work as that's what we hope to do now. The goal is to do something revolutionary like when the TC was born from the ideas out of this very forum with the work wwfan and Millie did amongst others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have to say that I don't have any idea what goes on in a professional football club's training sessions. But this might be how I would organize it:

Team Training

The whole first team, the whole coaching staff. You work on general stuff, a little bit of everything. You play some 5 vs. 5's, attacking unit trying to break down defensive unit, a group trying to play around or through a pressing unit, rondo, set pieces, keepie-uppies (is that what you call it in engilish?) that kind of stuff.

The whole point is to work on football generally and as a team. Also to bind the players together, blend in new one's, have a little fun as well.

I'd expect to see improvements across all the attributes, but more so in the attributes relevant to a players natural position.

This is the training you can do even if you don't have many coaches and it won't affect their workload that much.

After Team Training

Focus groups

The team splits down into groups. The groups all need a coach to lead them so the number of coaches might limit how much of focus group training you can do.

Scoring, Technical abilities, Defensive skills, Tactical understanding.

I'd see these groups as an important part of education of a player, mostly giving players the tools and understanding to perform their tasks on the pitch. The general training, where defenders train with the strikers and so on, would be where you'd then put these ideas into practice. You'd just be better prepared for those sessions after taking part in your focus group and getting to know what exactly you're supposed to get better at.

A Scoring group would construct situations where they need to move into a good position, the ball comes in, you try to score. Balls over the top, cut backs, floated crosses, low crosses, first time volleys, trap the ball and shoot, dribble and shoot, where to aim, when to shoot with power, when to place it etc. Finishing, long shots, composure, flair, dribbling, crossing, passing, off the ball, agility, balance, jumping, heading etc - some attributes would see a little bit more action than the others.

Technical group would concentrate on ball handling skills, controlling the ball in every situation, honing different kinds of passing techniques, shooting techniques, crossing techniques.

Defensive group would work on how to defend in certain situations, what to do when there's 2-on-1 situations, 1-on-1, 1-on-2. Do you follow your man wide/up or do you hold position. How to cover for others, when to move as a unit. Where and when to clear the ball. How and when to tackle. Defending skills will improve, some mental abilities will increase, some technical abilities to a lesser extent.

Tactical group will spend time on understanding the game in itself. Vision, decisions, team work, anticipation, positioning, off the ball.

Goalkeeper training

I'd expect goalkeepers to train their own things (who knows what they do ;)).

Fitness training

Being fit is so important that I would always want my players to train fitness. The question is how much and what. I'd expect (in a big club at least) to have a fitness team consisting of fitness trainers (not necessarily football coaches), someone from the other coaching staff, physios, doctors.

I'd require everyone to train everything, but on top of that have individual fitness program. So for each player you could set the amount of fitness training and what they will work on individually. Sometimes you want to develop strength or pace, sometimes a player might need a program designed to help him recover in time for the next match.

Match preparation

I'd certainly have a little session a day before the match, or in the morning, to educate the players of what to expect and how I want them to play in the match. Also let them know who will be playing and what our strategy is going to be. That way my players would know what to expect and could get ready for the match. And if I felt like we need to work on something specific, I would. Set Pieces, attacking movement, passing, whatever. I don't know what the effects are exactly in the ME now, but if viable I'd maybe go simple and boost decisions in relevant match situations and if for example we trained defensive cohesion, then possibly concentration. If we trained defending set pieces then also bravery.

Preferred moves

I'd keep the system where you ask your coaches to do this. But they should decline if they have too many players under their wing already and it should be almost obligatory to move the player to a relevant focus group and preferably to that particular coaches focus group.

That's all that I'd expect from the coaching department.

Then there's:

Match Experience

From what I understand playing gives your player a general development boost. What I'd like to see is something more specific.

When a player does something a lot in a match, then he should get a boost on the relevant attribute. For example if a player makes tackles very often, he'd eventually get better at tackling. And maybe even start to like it, thus getting a PPM dives into tackles. So, simply by using someone as a defensive winger he'd develop into a better defensive winger. Better at tackling, dribbling, crossing, maybe gains PPM's dives into tackles or runs with ball down left.

I'd just like to see the match experience tied to training in a more specific way, so that the things that the player does a lot in matches get the CA instead of more general distribution of it. And for PPM's to develop on their own if a player does something successfully in matches on consistent basis. It's only natural that they'd start to prefer such things.

So, I don't know how detailed training system we should be having really. But the stuff I wrote above boils down to setting up these things in-game:

Team training

General training: low---------------------high

Focus groups: low---------------------high (can be capped by lack of coaching personnel)

Fitness training: low---------------------high

Match preparation: low---------------------high + focus: _____(choose)

Individual training

Focus group: ______(choose)

Fitness focus: _______(choose) (one focusing on recovering faster, essentially less workload)

New position: _______

PPM:______

Overall workload shown somewhere.

Match experience: essentially using a player in a certain role would lead to him shaping into a player that is better in the role that he plays and could help develop PPM's organically.

EDIT: I forgot to cover the tactics familiarity. I think you'd gain that in the general training where the whole team is together. So you'd just gain the familiarity by sticking to your preset tactics and playing with them, times the amount of general training and the quality of coaches.

Also, what is needed is the staff making a racket of these things. More feedback from the game about how things are going and what is working well, what is working badly. This will make the training seem more important. ;)

Good post :)

In one of the ideas we have, we have removed the need for tactical familiarity and instead focused on systems/game plans for the coming games. Tactical familiarity doesn't exist in football, not in the way SI present it. Teams focus on concepts and situations in the build up to games instead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
One other point, and I don't know if the intention is to cover this topic here or not (ignore if not !) is Tutoring - especially in relation to personality development.

For me, Tutoring feels like it's been bolted on without feeling particularly integrated, which is a shame as I think a player's personality is actually a very integral part of the game. I believe this is then compounded by a very woolly tutoring interface of merely choosing between an on or off pitch tutoring "regime" which may or may not work out - and doesn't even tell you what these 2 woolly options will do or what actually makes a good tutor/tutee.

I have no idea how real clubs go about personality development or whether they using a tutoring system, and if they do whether it actually works. I don't however believe for a second that any club simply assigns a tutor to a young player and it is then solely the responsibility of that tutor to develop the youngster's personality - which is how FM works.

Perhaps someone with more knowledge of how clubs go about this can chip in here, but off the top of my head:

- Psychology and/or media training added (whether that be we can actually employ staff such as this or an additional 30 min "session" a week with a consultant for example)

- Further interaction between player and club management for management to help develop the player. I seem to remember a young Ryan Giggs being "protected" by SAF from the media while Giggs was developing

- Keep player tutoring (I do actually like the principle of it) but have it as part of an overall integrated player development plan, perhaps with semi-regular tutor/tutee/manager meetings to check progress and make changes if required - rather than just being told 6 months down the line the tutoring succeeded or failed.

For this bit I actually interviewed a lot of coaches to get a general idea on how or if tutoring really exists. So far I've interviewed 11 of the top coaches from the UK who completed the FA elite scheme a while back and got their ideas and thoughts on it. Without spoiling too much, tutoring did exists but not how the game does it. It was more in line with what you suggest above.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I like the current system. It's simple and easy to understand and requires little to no micromanagement. If the "complete forward" training schedule is always more advantageous to use than the "advanced forward" one in terms of total attribute growth (confirming this would make a good experiment!) then the solution to me is to fix it so that's not the case, rather than throw the baby out with the bathwater.

That training only makes a slight difference seems realistic to me - there's a reason top sports men and woman by and large take up their chosen sport at a young age. The vital shaping of their sporting abilities is done very young. By the time they're in our hands as managers of (virtual) adults they largely are what they are.

As far as match preparation goes, given it's not even documented what the mechanical effect of the current options are, I'm not real keen on expanding that area. Maybe I'm in the minority, but when given a choice where there's a lack of any real information just feels like making an arbitrary decision to me, and is not fun at all.

You are being really naive if you believe the bolded bit to be true at all. You think Ronaldo was ready when he started to play for Man Utd and was the player he is today? No, René Meulensteen did a fantastic article on how he had to nurtured Ronaldo when he was playing week in and week out so he could understand just how good he could become. He didn't tell him to do this or that but instead he guided him and showed him others ways of doing things or how to time things differently etc. It's a fantastic read, I think its on the Guardian website somewhere. This happens a lot in football.

Match Prep is documented and its been clear since it was added how it worked etc. Just because you might not have seen it doesn't equate it not being properly explained.

You only seem to view training from a player development perspective too. Training goes a lot deeper than focusing on the attributes of a player, that's only a small proportion of how it works. And in its current form if you take training serious or want to develop the player the best you can then its very much a case of tedious micromanagement.

I knew you'd not like it anyway, you seem to be a really negative poster in general so your reply is expected :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some excellent points here, I've never really looked in-depth into real-life training and I tend to take quite a hands-off approach in the FM world, but I trust Cleon's suggestions and anything that can be done in that sense is an improvement. For me the training section lacks one thing more than any other to make it more interactive and useful, and that is feedback.

To take one example that I know best, in Argentine football (maybe other countries function slightly different, if so let me know). Training here takes the general shape of regenerative exercises for the day after a match, and in the week a mixture of drills with the ball and reduced-number games, leading up on the wednesday or thursday to a 10 vs. 10 or 11 vs. 11 40 minute match with first-teamers taking on a mix of subs and youth-team players (no Argentine team has the squad depth to field a wholly distinct reserve team). Here's the big part, however. These games are heavily covered by press, and the form in those games can influence the selection come matchday. So if sub centre-forward has a great training week and bangs in a hat-trick against the starters, that would mean (in FM terms) he goes into the game with superb morale and could well be picked on the back of his training performance.

At the present time there is no week-by-week feedback on training other than attribute shifts, and no noticeable shift in morale based on those week's practices. That essentially nullifies a part of the game which is at least 60% of a coach's role overall, monitoring training and observing which of his players are coming in to the weekend in the right frame of mind.

Slightly on a tangent but an overall training philosophy, i.e. on possession play or hoofing it up the pitch, hard tackling or standing off more, counter or control in each phase, separate but contributing to the overall training focuses is another option.

A new training feedback module that encompasses a brief report on those training exercises, morale shifts for specific players and more news on what players click during practices, and which players struggle more would be an excellent step forward to create a more involved game world in my opinion. What do people think of this, is it something feasible for the FM series?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would definitely be good if SI would rework the training. I didn't like the slider style because it was like 5 clicks here and 3 clicks for that is the best, etc. but the current one - basically I set Balanced and the rest is individual training.

I don't know how it works in reality but I would imagine having 2-3 training groups to which you can assign players to focusing on various aspects of the game. Depending on your facilities and number of coaches you could have more or less training groups available. For each training group you could maybe select specific exercises that they do - man on man marking, sprinting, crosses/corners/set pieces, strength training, etc. Basically you could set up your own training regime for the group and then assign the players you want to have there.

Maybe you could also have a group for light fitness training for those returning from injury. With these groups you basically would focus on the individual attributes but set them up in a way you want the group to focus on.

With that in mind you would have to set up how much time one spends in those group trainings or if they spend some of their own time honing a skill during individual training.

Edit:

I like the idea of monitoring their performance during training. If someone does well, they deserve a call up to the first team. Could also work with interaction - someone comes complain to you about first team chances, you tell them show me you deserve it in training and then they do well and you pick them.

As for regenerative training after matches, that would also be great, especially when one or two players really have low condition after the game and you could set them on a lighter group for that week.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it depends a lot on whether the direction is to be ease of use vs realism.

I actually quite liked the old system where you assigned specific drills which would train certain attributes in a Training Schedule. It was a long time ago and I don't really remember the details but I think there were categories like "Pig in the Middle"? Anyway I think that was a more realistic way of training people than the current system. Perhaps they could bring this back in some form.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh hell yes is all I can say to this...

Would love more input to the physio side of things too...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A manager should be able to decide how often and how long a training session is. FM treats every manager the same in this regard but in reality everyone trains a different length. I remember we had a manager at Sheffield United who liked his players to train two 2 hour sessions and we had another who linked two 1 hour and 20 minute sessions. I think Nigel Clough currently works longer than both those. So it should be down to us as the manager to decide upon these factors.

Should it? Or should we just say how much they train like we do now? This and many other things are something that you can decide on in real life, sometimes by yourself, sometimes with your coaching team. But what difference would this make in FM? I'm not sure anyone knows what is the right number of sessions and how long they should be. They need to be set in real life, I understand that, but to what end would you decide these things in FM, and how is it better than setting the overall workload?

I'm just saying that adding stuff because it exists in real life is only good if it has a real effect in the game and it's communicated well enough to the player.

Staff

The number of staff you employ should make a real difference on the game, but currently it doesn’t really matter if you have 30 coaches or 4. You can still see significant development irrespective of the number of coaches. Making staff actually play a bigger part in actual development or players needs to be added to the game. The more spread and poorer the coach, the less improvements I should see.The more quality coaches I have, the better/faster the development should be. All that matters for staff at the moment is the workload aside from that you can basically achieve the same development whether it’s a 5 star coach or a 3 star coach. (this bit actually did change for FM15)

If I decide to go the player development route then I should have to put actual thought into the backroom staff I’m assembling.

I agree. As I said above, things that exist or are added to the game, should really have an effect. And what I said earlier in the thread about the number of coaches and the related capacity for more focused training still holds. The lack of coaching numbers should boil down to more general training sessions as opposed to more individual focus.

The quality of a coach for me should affect a few things.

- Player happiness

- Rate of development, maybe, but to a small extent.

- The amount of development. Any coach can set up drills that will improve passing skills. A great coach, however, will be able to rise a player to another level, to not just set up basic drills but really teach a player better passing techniques and correct his bad habits. Stop the passing drill, give a little instruction, then let the player work with that. In FM the difference would be a player whose passing attribute stalls after 15, and a player whose passing reaches higher level of, say, 18. You really need that push from a great coach to reach the highest level.

Perhaps the star rating of a coach should correspond to the max level a player can reach in relevant skills?

Attributes

The development rate of these should be slowed down and happen at different times. It’s quite common currently to have a high potential player and have him hit that potential before he’s 22. It’s really a far too common occurrence for any top club. What I’d like to see is the mental side of development slowed down a little. This should come more with age and experience. I know the game kind of works like this now but its still all a bit too rapid and doesn’t make much sense. Some players will be mentally strong when they are younger but not every single one after a few years of development, which is what we currently see.

[/b]

Oh yes! I'm not sure how far you should go with this, but slowing down mental attributes at least until the player starts to play in the first team at a high level at consistent basis would be good.

A mechanical problem could pop up though, with players filling their potential with technical and physical attributes and so in this scenario something needs to be done. Mental attributes ignored by the CA/PA-system (no cap?) or splitting them up into their own separate CA/PA would be contenders. The latter would add a couple of entries (quite frequently accessed too) for each and every player into the database, so I can't imagine the database guys being thrilled about that. ;)

Communication

A fancy training module with intricate workings is all but useless if the game doesn't communicate well with the user. The player needs to understand the system or (s)he will mostly ignore it.

Think about team blending for example. It's hard to know what is going on if it's not well communicated. There is info about this (I don't know how it is in FM15) but it's a bit buried. There's assistant report that says something like "team is well and truly blended." There's match feedback from assistant that says things like "X has trouble communicating with others", "has serious trouble blending into team", "isn't used to so direct style", "is looking complacent"(before match). These things need to be forced on the manager to let him know that these features exist and that they matter and have an effect. Team selection screen for example would be a prime candidate for the bits I just mentioned. And of course they actually need to have an effect.

If in a backroom meeting your assistant says that "since you have bought 15 new players for the first team and only 2 regular starters remain from the last season, everything is not going to go swimmingly, so be prepared for an unsteady start to the season", it needs to actually be true. (I'm not sure if it works like this or not. I try not to take too much advantage of the transfer market and integrate new players slowly because it's sensible.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would like to add to this a bit. I feel the training and tactics modules and both...detached somewhat. You set a tactic to work with and then you have to train that via match training, with the team training and individual training concentrating on individual skills. Or so it seems.

I would like the ability to set a "specialty" or focus for a tactic and then work on the development and implementation of that on the training ground. So, for instance, if I took over at Tottenham and wanted to implement a high pressing game with swift interplay and quick transitions, I could work on it on the training ground, in the following way.

1) I could work on the thought process with small sided mini-games based upon closing down.

2) I could work on the tactical implementation with drills and full size "dress rehearsals".

3) I could work on the "sector" skills needed by specific groups of players (attackers, supporters, defenders).

4) I could work on the individual skills needed by each player to fit into this system (on their attributes).

This way, I could mould a team that would be able to perform my quick transition, high intensity pressing game. It would take time though, although that would depend on the suitability of the players at my disposal (as Pochettino is finding out IRL).

At the moment, I feel there is something lacking in FM to keep me completely interested. There seems to be a bit much focus on "dip in, dip out", which makes sense from a business perspective...

Perhaps if they wanted to keep FM as it is, they could make an FM "elite" mode, much like they made Classic. Then, in here it could have much more realistic tactics and training, with less focus on the transfer market and buying the best.

Someone also mentioned tutors. I would like to see a kind of "mentor" system, whereby you can choose to assign new players a mentor to show them around and integrate them. Look at Real Madrid and how quickly Bale has improved thanks to spending so much time with Ronaldo.

Lastly, tying into your "renegade training" post, I'd like to see a situation where players with 20 for professionalism work extra hard on their physical stats and perhaps improve them quicker. Again, looking at Ronaldo: he puts in so much extra work physically and it makes a real difference both on the pitch and in recovery and injury prevention.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Match Prep is documented and its been clear since it was added how it worked etc. Just because you might not have seen it doesn't equate it not being properly explained.

Where could a person find this documentation?

Edit -Realised that sounded like an OT question. Match Prep is an area i am not really satisfied with in FM, but before i comment further it would be good to understand what i have missed "in the public domain" as one of my main complaints is that it is really unclear what aspects of the game this actually impacts. I admit i have not searched far and wide, but the in-game tips and official SI documentation dont seem to cover it in any detail.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Where could a person find this documentation?

Edit -Realised that sounded like an OT question. Match Prep is an area i am not really satisfied with in FM, but before i comment further it would be good to understand what i have missed "in the public domain" as one of my main complaints is that it is really unclear what aspects of the game this actually impacts. I admit i have not searched far and wide, but the in-game tips and official SI documentation dont seem to cover it in any detail.

It was in the online manual and posted by SI in general section of forums on many occasions. Not sure if its still in the online manual as it seems to have changed but match prep hasn't. There is nothing in depth as its not in depth and nothing to discuss really its very basic and simple. All match prep does is give a very slight boost for whatever aspect you choose for the next game only, it does not stack with the exception of team cohesion which only works until the team is fully blended.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It was in the online manual and posted by SI in general section of forums on many occasions. Not sure if its still in the online manual as it seems to have changed but match prep hasn't. There is nothing in depth as its not in depth and nothing to discuss really its very basic and simple. All match prep does is give a very slight boost for whatever aspect you choose for the next game only, it does not stack with the exception of team cohesion which only works until the team is fully blended.

Thanks, I did try the online manual (for both Fm15 and going back to the FM14 one) and after much hunting around, i found the section that apparently explains it. Except it doesnt really. I suppose the "Set Peices" options are reasonably self explanatory, but it would be good to understand what "attacking movement" or "defensive positioning" actually mean in terms of preparing for the next opposition. Its non-descript at the moment and as with a lot of things, i would have to search the forums many times over to find an answer.

So there is my first training suggestion for 16 - Make the match prep far clearer in what it does. For example, if i select "defensive positioning" it should matter if i had scouted the next oppposition or not. If i train expecting a front 2, and they play a front 3, then my match prep should be less effective (for a real example, look at Scotland v Georgia last month. Strachan admitted that he trained the team to deal with a back 4 but they went with a 3 which meant Scotlands prep was worthless).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You are being really naive if you believe the bolded bit to be true at all. You think Ronaldo was ready when he started to play for Man Utd and was the player he is today? No, René Meulensteen did a fantastic article on how he had to nurtured Ronaldo when he was playing week in and week out so he could understand just how good he could become. He didn't tell him to do this or that but instead he guided him and showed him others ways of doing things or how to time things differently etc. It's a fantastic read, I think its on the Guardian website somewhere. This happens a lot in football.

I didn't say players were the finished article, obviously they improve over time, but the basic template of who they are is already there. If Rondaldo had never kicked a ball until his mid-teens there's no way he'd ever be a world class player, despite his obvious athletic ability. We've seen some pretty good examples of this recently here in Australia - new teams in Australian Rules in Brisbane and Sydney recruited Rugby League stars for marketing reasons, and despite being obviously great athletes picking up new skills at a late age is just too hard, they were crap Aussie Rules players and have left the code.

Match Prep is documented and its been clear since it was added how it worked etc. Just because you might not have seen it doesn't equate it not being properly explained.

Maybe I can explain my perspective. I work in software development and often we'll find a bug where something hasn't worked in years, maybe it never worked, but nobody has noticed. When you see this, you wonder if customers are even using the feature, or if they are whether it does enough to justify being there. Match prep strikes me as just that sort of feature - if there was a bug that made it do absolutely nothing, would anyone actually be able to tell without looking at the code? I suspect not, therefore it doesn't meet the bar of what I would consider a worthwhile feature.

I knew you'd not like it anyway, you seem to be a really negative poster in general so your reply is expected :D

Personal attacks are pretty unbecoming for a moderator.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After reading and ruminating on this for a day here are my thoughts. As it turns out some of these have already been posted:

I'm totally for an overhaul. I like the ideas about the mental attributes developing more slowly - perhaps that could be tied to some of the hidden attributes and the PA value somehow.

With regards to user input:

Although I understand and think it's a good concept in theory, I disagree with implementing different lengths of training. I think it should be the same amount of time for everyone (see #2), but perhaps allow for training intensity to vary instead. However, I do like the idea of extra sessions for the physical/fitness attributes.

1. Setting ratio of training time spent on team training - similar to the light <-> very heavy continuum currently used. Kinda lame, but some type of time quantifier needs to remain in order to give the coders something to give numbers to.

2. I really like the idea of small groups training a few attributes. I think that you should be able to shift the percentage of time spent on group and teamwork. Spend more time on developing attributes in group sessions, you won't have as much time for team-based training. I think there needs to be a tradeoff here. So that's why I'm against different lengths of training.

3. Either pre-defined training groups (attackers, midfielders, defenders, keepers) or custom groups - or possibly a way to create a several additional (think specialized) groups in addition to the predefined ones - there should probably be a cap on the number for ease of use/coding implementation. This allows for default use and more in depth training. You could for instance create a group that works on wide play involving fullbacks and wide mids or wingers (training off the ball, crossing, decisions, etc.) as opposed to lumping them only in defenders and midfielders.

4. Binding players to a training group (e.g. attackers, midfielders, defenders) - could be as simple as a 'Training Group' dropdown on the squad/individual training page.

5. Having a weekly 'Training Calendar' for the team training and the groups - team | group1 | group2 | group3 | group4 could be tabs at the top of the training GUI section to navigate between each one.

6. Using check boxes on the week-long training calendar, indicate the group training sessions for each day:

a) The sessions available for each group would have to be thought out and defined well enough so that there isn't a one-way to success ala the complete forward syndrome Cleon alluded to.

b) However these sessions might be named - actual names of drills or generic classes of training (e.g. ball-control) - the description of what attributes may benefit from said training needs to be crystal clear on a pop-up. I also like the idea of a film session being available the day after a match, if only in name, for tactics training.

c) You can set up the group session training and forget it by making a balanced schedule or you can tweak each day if you like. The settings should remain in place (roll over week to week) until they are changed. This way, people who are really into development can get their hands dirtier, but people who aren't can leave things alone once set up. Maybe there should be a default fairly balanced setting so people can see what will net them an average approach. I can imagine a whole lot of 'leave training to assistant manager' clicks for some reason.

d) This would allow you to prioritize training based on the upcoming opponents. I think this kind of ties in with the idea of concepts and situations which will follow up in #8.

7. The ability to add extra training sessions as posted before. I like the idea of an extra lifting session or agility drills. I think they should have implications on morale, fitness levels, and possibly longer term implications as well. I'm thinking natural fitness or attribute decline delay or severity of decline... just some ideas. You could run a player into the ground if you screw it all up and go crazy, risk the squad not adapting and adopting your Magathian methods, or play it right and you could extend a career by a couple seasons.

8. Ideally for me, the training in between games should take the place of match prep. If you've done your homework, examined the weaknesses and strengths of your opponents, and send your squad out with tactics to suppress the opposition's strengths and exploit their weaknesses, you ought to have a boost without a penalty to tactical familiarity. It reminds me of Everton v. Arsenal last April where Martinez switched from a 4-2-3-1 to a 4-3-3 and deployed Lukaku on the right wing to target Monreal - master stroke.

9. Speaking of tactical familiarity, I would prefer if after each match it kind of had a soft reset (akin to a slight dip) of sorts where the training you implement leading up to the next match influenced that modifier in the ME. That way you could apply specific tactical tweaks to your opposition without worrying about 'tactical familiarity'. Granted if you want to play 3 at the back after 30 matches with a back 4, there's likely going to be some confusion, but if you want to use the same formation changing from a control style to a counter attacking against a stronger opponent, It would be nice to devote more time to team training that week in order to increase that without having to devote a tactic slot for it. Just another idea... maybe the wrong place for it, but it would tie in with training.

With regards to feedback:

1. I'd like to see feedback along the lines of 'Player X has been on fire this week on the training pitch' or 'Player Y has been slacking off in training' or 'The squad has looked good/fair/poor during training this week' delivered to the inbox the day before each match. This could even be a subscription so people could turn it off if they wanted. Having this come through the inbox gives people a better opportunity to grant first team football to someone who may be on the fringe but is putting forth the effort over someone else who is taking a week off every now and then. It also gives a manager ammunition should they choose to initiate crticisms of training level or if a player comes to them wanting to know why they've been left out of the starting 11. For me this would be infinity better than looking at colored arrows next to a name. Or waiting til the month-end report. I think it would allow people to better motivate the players or move them on if needed. This could also be based off of whatever currently generates those arrows on the Training->Individual page if it turns out to be applicable.

That's all I have right now, I can't even wrap my head around coaching or tutoring right now

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With regards to feedback:

1. I'd like to see feedback along the lines of 'Player X has been on fire this week on the training pitch' or 'Player Y has been slacking off in training' or 'The squad has looked good/fair/poor during training this week' delivered to the inbox the day before each match. This could even be a subscription so people could turn it off if they wanted. Having this come through the inbox gives people a better opportunity to grant first team football to someone who may be on the fringe but is putting forth the effort over someone else who is taking a week off every now and then. It also gives a manager ammunition should they choose to initiate crticisms of training level or if a player comes to them wanting to know why they've been left out of the starting 11. For me this would be infinity better than looking at colored arrows next to a name. Or waiting til the month-end report. I think it would allow people to better motivate the players or move them on if needed. This could also be based off of whatever currently generates those arrows on the Training->Individual page if it turns out to be applicable.

Also to really make it a big deal the player that has been on fire in the training for a while, and still hasn't got any game time and maybe wasn't completely professional, should confront you and demand a chance because he feels he deserves it. And if someone is doing poorly, then it would be nice if you could get an explanation out of him, like "I feel a bit down as I feel that you don't appreciate my talents" or "I think our captain is an a-hole and I'm finding it affects my training performance."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Training is preparation for match situations, but in a tactical system.

Therefore I think training should be linked up more to the tactics. If you're going to play a high pressing game, the training should improve this in attributes and tactical familiarity in the same time. I think we should get more options in the different aspects of tactics. Setting up how the team should attack, defend and transitions between those. In which the training is used to build the foundations in the tactic. This way you will see big difference in the playing style through your own football philosophy, like Stoke under Mark Hughes.

Hopefully someone understand the idea and can probably put better and larger words into this, but have this idea from Mourinho's tactical periodization, and this might make you understand:

http://www.slideshare.net/PedMenCoach/tactical-periodization-mourinhos-secret

It's probably easier writing this, than programming it and making it work in game though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do agree about it all tying into tactics. I was going off of memory for the current system, so things may be missing there. Something like this is how I was envisioning at least the rough framework of training:

OTKK53B.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very interesting thread and a topic I actually had complained for quite some time about but was too lazy to really write my thoughts down on the topic and start a discussion on it but this will change over the weekend. Ever since I spent three years during as a amateur youth coach during the time I was a student I actually started to realize that nothing will have a bigger effect on how your team plays than what you practice with the kids in training and while there sure are differences to professional senior football I firmly believe that this holds true even for grown professionals.

Sacchi for example was famous for his shadow play practice he used to make his team move as a cohesive unit. Guardiola these days is a manager who gets involved in trainings sessions unlike almost any other big club manager just to make his team better understand his ideas of how ball and players should move in correlation to each other.

In short training I believe is one of most neglected aspects in FM at this stage and deserves a complete overhaul as it's significance to what your team will actually play like can't be stressed enough imo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I actually would like a simpler method of training, but with more far reaching consequences. For example, you may have the ability to train either defensive, buildup or attacking play, either on an individual or group/team basis, which would then influence the individual stats as well as influencing how well the team adapts to certain styles. For example, if you chose to focus on buildup play for a couple of months, as well as influencing the individuals first touch, vision, anticipation and passing, maybe it also affects how well the team performs shouts such as build from back and affects how good they are at a higher tempo etc.

Does that make sense? I remember Michels talking in his book about counter, possession and defensive strategies, as well as the play-making strategy etc, shouldn't the training be centred around how the team plays, and therefore how the team plays affects the individuals stats? Ronaldo under pulis would have worked on different skills then he did under Fergie etc.

I think UI wise, when you set up your tactics it affects the basic outline of the training, and you then have the option to fine tune it. Putting a rigid strategy in your tactics makes the training rigid with more individual training - defenders train defence, midfielders train build-up, however a fluid strategy would make the training more broader with defenders training more buildup and defensive skills etc. it would bugger up having three different styled tactics, but would probably be more realistic anyway.

Match Prep for me looks like an afterthought. I think it has promise but not in the current incarnation. For example, if you study set pieces attacking, maybe you have the option to be adept at two or more set pieces.

I like the idea of a wizard, where you first choose your strategy, then you choose a focus such as buildup, defensive etc and split the team into groups, then you choose some individual training depending on how many coaches you have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with Deserter that has expressed in several posts what I interpret as a skepticism against unnecessary complexity. I think we should look to create the simplest model possible which captures the spirit we're after. If it's deemed too simplistic, SI can add features to it in time, but to start out with loads of complicated models and options will most likely result in a concept that is

1) too hard for new/casual players to wrap their head around

2) too complicated to work into the game for SI to think it's worth it

Basically, all I'm saying is that instead of looking at all that is and isn't possible in real life, we should focus on boiling down the player development to some clear concepts. Then we should try to come up with the simplest possible models that captures the spirit of those concepts. Only then will we come up with something that is actually feasible for SI to implement in such a short amount of time that they are likely to have.

I don't have a clear view on what I want from the player development part of the game yet, but will try to contribute as much as I can.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm happy with the options available to us when training players tbh. In terms of player development I don't feel there is anything egregious that is out of my control*.

The major, glaring issue is that training needs to be visible to us. Not necessarily in a match engine sense, but as managers we need to be aware of everything going on in training in order to properly do our job on match day. Who's playing well, who's playing badly, who's not putting the effort in, is our pressing working, is everyone confused by the new strikerless system, is everyone happy, what cliques have formed?

Has the week's heavy workload produced results, or just tired everyone out? This is information every real life manager has first hand, but is sketchy at best for us. A thumbs up or down for a handful of players once a month. How insightful.

We need to have the opportunity to get to know our players and how they can perform when 3pts aren't on the line in order to effectively fight for them when they are (we all know friendlies don't reflect real game performances in game or in real life).

* I don't play long term development games, and my typical career winds down after 4/5/6 seasons. Once real players get outnumbered by regens I lose all interest. So it's obviously the short term effects of training that are most valuable to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree. I think that the current frameworks are all reasonably sound. I tried to think about all the aspects of player development that I would want in the game and I find that there are systems in place to deal with pretty much all of them. They might not be perfect, but if SI really took the time to fine tune them, I think they can work.

That said, if I were to change anything, it would be the following:

1) Staff should not be able to see PA, but instead judge a player based on CA and the personality traits important for CA growth (professionalism, ambition). (Possibly those that can be detrimental such as injury proneness.)

2) CA growth should be less linear and include more sudden (dramatic) bursts (possibly both up and down).

That way, we would be left to judging players based on the same criteria we are IRL - current performance and willingness to improve. It would also be less obvious which players could become stars and which couldn't.

Couple that with a rebalanced and better documented training module, and I think we'd have a very fun game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I disagree, I don't and plenty of others don't want to end up micromanaging and figuring out a more complex training module. The majority of players still don't have a good grasp of tactics, I cannot fathom SI wanting to make the game even more inaccessible.

Also, while simulating and maintain reality is all nice and good, what really should be kept in mind is ultimately it's a game, realistic =/= fun.

Still, I do agree the training module, tutoring and so on warrants some form of refining, but I'd actually like to see it tied into the youth regen set up. In fact I would love the ability to define to the youth academy exactly what type of youth players I want 'trained'; So for example I would like to tell the academy I want RB's who play the WB role, therefore any kids with atrocious flair should be re-assigned to a different position. Same for defenders who aren't brave, shift them, or boot them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whenever people talk about making training more realistic I always shudder thinking of how horrific the CM03/04 system used to be:

Treinocm03-04.JPG

Good in theory, awful in reality where it was a ton of work to set it up, and hugely overcomplicated as to which routines improve which attributes. Please don't bring it back. Ever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I posted on the topic of training in the wishlist thread. Since it's relevant, I'll quote it here to add to the discussion:

...roll development and match prep into one unit. A selection of real-life drills, selected and fit together to produce training "modules" like those we have currently; these modules would have varying difficulty levels for coaching staff. So, if you have highly technical drills, you need a better coach to have full impact with them, but they have a bigger impact on development for youngsters and on enhancing the learning of your tactics for seniors.

The point of the modularity is so that people can be as detailed or as hands-off as they want. The system would come with a bunch of pre-built modules for different levels of the game or users could build them themselves (and share them via the Steam Workshop, I suppose, like with tactics). It would also mean that people really could go the tracksuit manager route and specifically train a team instead of just lead them.

But there's more! Drills would tie in with tactical instructions. So, for example, if you have a 5 v 3 overload drill where defenders outnumber attackers, this improves the "innate understanding" of short passing tactics for players doing it (temporarily, sort of like the short-term boosts you get for match prep; but ideally the boost would scale with mental attributes, so that players with higher attributes get a more slender boost than those without, or perhaps base the boost on the PA/CA difference, so that players with higher potential show that potential by their response to training on match day... potentially allowing you to actually scout for potential yourself). There could be specific modules for match prep - for dealing with different types of opponents, for example. Picking drills (or modules) which don't match your tactical setup would, however, have the opposite effect - making your players less familiar with your instructions. This would make it critical to ensure the correct training approach to match your tactical setup, as in the modern game, this is very much true: teams train specifically to play the way they play, and the difference between a good manager or head coach and a bad one may well often revolve around planning sessions that aid the team prepare for upcoming fixtures or to play the way the vision dictates.

You could also have players "buying into" the training regime for greater loyalty depending on personality etc (possibly tactical personalities could develop based on the player's exposure to different training styles?) - it could quite complexly tie in with existing systems, I think.

tl;dr version: The idea above was essentially to fold a realistic system into modules that would allow people to either be "finely detailed" (like that old system that some people in this thread hated and some [like myself] loved), but also allow people to share methods or take a more simplistic cut&paste approach for simplicities sake.

The idea of difficulty levels for training is one I really like especially - I think it's a "better" approach than the current star-system-represented one, at least in terms of seeming realism. More technical drills require better knowledge/skill to design and apply, after all, and are more likely to be implemented at a top club with top coaches rather than, say, Exeter (no offense to Exeter!).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ill start with the development model

I've wanted a split of CA/PAs into the three categories (technical, mental, physical) for a long time.

It would make more sense in the types of players you get, whether its technical/intelligent types, or intelligent racehorses, that sort of thing.

Also the CA rates of growth should be different. Say Physical being quicker to go up/down and mental being a lot slower.

It would explain why some players are late bloomers as they finally get their mental/technical attributes up to scratch despite having their physicals maxed out for the last few years, or the types that peak early and decline just as quickly.

It would also affect how players go at the end of their careers, as the physicals decline it affects players that are limited in the other areas of their game, whereas mental attributes maybe wont decline and clever players can play longer.

I would like this to tie in to their post playing careers with the more intelligent players being better in say tactics training, leadership tying into man management and motivation etc.

In regards to the training itself I like the set up in 77caddie's diagram, with the players that are in the same training groups being more blended i.e. two strikers that train together all week should have a better blend than two that might end up in two different groups.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it was up to me, training in FM would sort of just "happen", without much input at all. I'm perfectly fine with training as it is now. Basic training + training for a particular role or training for separate attributes, all of which can be somewhat shaped by the manager - it's all that's needed, in my opinion. If training was to be much changed, it should only be in the direction of making it even simpler, and/or make better training feedback (via the coaches) to the manager. Conveying to the user what's really going on in their different modules, what the effects are, and why - including training - is not something that SI is very good at, but that is where they should have their priorities.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting post OP. I want to comment on something small you said.

You said it doesn't make sense for someone to train a player in a role with fewer highlighted attributes than one with more, like Complete Forward. I disagree. The remaining potential attribute points a player have a total limit to how much they fill up. If you want a more well rounded forward you can choose complete forward (e.g. He gets 1 attribute in all the highlighted attributes within a year) or you can specialize them with a role with fewer highlighted attributes (e.g. He gets 2 attributes in all the highlighted attributes within a year). As far as I know that is how potential ability works.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just thought of something else...

As FM has just introduced this "manager type", then they should really increase the AI's expertise when it comes to training. I want my Assistant or my 1st team coach to be an astute trainer, and you can just tell him what aspects you want the team to work on and he'll go and do it.

You should also be able to then tell him about individual players, too. That way you can remain a manager/DoF type without sacrificing the top quality training you need to implement yourself nowadays.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...