The Ask-SI-Anything Thread

[YKW]

Thanks to the staff and mods for their responses to this, it's a very interesting thread.

This is perhaps not at the same level of quality questions that have been asked so far, but I would love to know if any 'red cards' have been shown in any development meetings recently, and what idea it was that got sent off.

I would also love to hear what the funniest/worst ideas or concepts that have been suggested internally are.

One area of the game that I think lags behind a lot of others is the opportunity for mods and user generated content. There is some great stuff in the form of databases especially, but I think there are some areas of the game that are a bit stale, namely the text commentary, press conferences, and news items. I can understand how those things won't be a priority for development, as they currently work well, but I think it would be a good idea if SI provided some kind of template that allowed people to write text items for the game. Obviously the translations would be an added challenge, but I'm sure the community could help here also. Would something like this appeal to SI at all?

Along the same lines, has SI considered making small changes to the game with the main purpose of allowing them to be customisable? For instance, some basic and generic sponsor names and logos (turn-offable) that would basically just be there so that the community could mod them into real life sponsors with little or no legal repercussions for SI. These could extend into personal and stadium sponsorship for example. Other things along these lines could be a space for an image of the trophy, fake by default but easily moddable into the real thing. Or is this risky territory from a legal standpoint?

[Duncan Greenwood]

Hey Duncan,

Let me be honest, the game documentation last updated 10 years ago gives many of us headaches. Some of them are unclear and that is why it creates "myths" as I said. Here are some examples:

1) Will determination influence the training level? If I am determined to pass my CFA exam, would I study my ass off? I think it does. => Myth

2) When I played FM 2013 with Valencia, I usually faced Falcao of AM. Considering the obvious size & jumping attributes, he can't compare to my Adil Rami. However, in our match, he outheaded Rami like hell. Even my assistant warned me about his "aerial prowess". It really confused me which factors could lead to those heading stats. And I am pretty sure it was not written anywhere. => Myth

I think you're right in that some of it can be considered unclear, but I think a lot of it is based on having some understanding of football and how you'd expect a player to react to a situation if they have certain attributes. Another issue is that many things in the game are situational and that can render certain attributes as less important in certain scenarios which again makes it harder for some users to really pinpoint what is going wrong but is often more of a one off issue which can appear more severe due to it causing an outcome of a goal or an important match event.

Regarding 1, the most important attribute when considering training is the players professionalism. It's worth keeping an eye on a players personality to work out how well they'll perform in training.

2. This is something that isn't solely related to jumping reach and height. You also need to look at the players mental attributes, was Falcao just out thinking Rami and getting himself in a better position to win the header? There isn't an exact science to it because of so many variables that make the situation happen in the way that it does. Unless you watch the game on full highlights you'll probably not see Rami winning a lot of headers against Falcao, but because some of the headers are leading to goals/chances then they'll be included more often in the highlights. It's worth reviewing your stats post game in the analysis tab to see if there is anything showing why he's losing headers or if it's just down to the superior movement and attacking instincts of Falcao.

I don't think this is something that is particularly easy to document. There's no cookie-cutter best player for winning every header. You can have a player that'll win most headers but there'll always be situations that headers won't be won. Much in the vein that you see Mertesacker losing the odd header despite being 13 foot tall, it can happen.

[Qwqwqw]

Hey Duncan,

Let me be honest, the game documentation last updated 10 years ago gives many of us headaches. Some of them are unclear and that is why it creates "myths" as I said. Here are some examples:

1) Will determination influence the training level? If I am determined to pass my CFA exam, would I study my ass off? I think it does. => Myth

2) When I played FM 2013 with Valencia, I usually faced Falcao of AM. Considering the obvious size & jumping attributes, he can't compare to my Adil Rami. However, in our match, he outheaded Rami like hell. Even my assistant warned me about his "aerial prowess". It really confused me which factors could lead to those heading stats. And I am pretty sure it was not written anywhere. => Myth

1) Determination, ambition and professionalism. Makes sense when you think about it, but the game won't spell it out for you. That's the mysterious part they're getting spot on.

2) Again, it comes down to more attributes than just the jumping one, and to other things as well (morale and the personality of the players, off the top of my head). These things, IMHO, shouldn't be modified.

[Duncan Greenwood]

Thanks to the staff and mods for their responses to this, it's a very interesting thread.

This is perhaps not at the same level of quality questions that have been asked so far, but I would love to know if any 'red cards' have been shown in any development meetings recently, and what idea it was that got sent off.

I would also love to hear what the funniest/worst ideas or concepts that have been suggested internally are.

One area of the game that I think lags behind a lot of others is the opportunity for mods and user generated content. There is some great stuff in the form of databases especially, but I think there are some areas of the game that are a bit stale, namely the text commentary, press conferences, and news items. I can understand how those things won't be a priority for development, as they currently work well, but I think it would be a good idea if SI provided some kind of template that allowed people to write text items for the game. Obviously the translations would be an added challenge, but I'm sure the community could help here also. Would something like this appeal to SI at all?

Along the same lines, has SI considered making small changes to the game with the main purpose of allowing them to be customisable? For instance, some basic and generic sponsor names and logos (turn-offable) that would basically just be there so that the community could mod them into real life sponsors with little or no legal repercussions for SI. These could extend into personal and stadium sponsorship for example. Other things along these lines could be a space for an image of the trophy, fake by default but easily moddable into the real thing. Or is this risky territory from a legal standpoint?

We have a list of features that can last until FM20 or so, probably even further. Every feature goes through an extensive vetting process which includes everyone in the company if they want to get involved in the decision making. I don't think we've had any really terrible ones come in from anyone internal that I can think of off the top of my head. Most people working here that think of features are long time players of the series and normally have their head screwed on when thinking of new features. I've read through the whole wishlist thread and I'll admit there are some more.. interesting feature requests in there but the majority of them are interesting and could well be seen in future versions of the game. Even if people think their ideas are stupid I'd encourage them to post in there because I like reading them and we've had some very good ideas from users before which have made it into the game.

I think modding is so prevalent on PC games these days that it's probably inevitable that more opportunities for modding will be explored in the future. Obviously we can't be seen to be encouraging people to create content that breaks our licencing agreements so it'd have to be done in a certain way, but I'm not sure how that'd be done currently. I think the template idea for people to be able to write news items/commentary/press conferences would be pretty interesting. If you're happy to raise it in the wishlist thread with some ideas of how you'd like to see it I'd be sure to take a look and try to work out if there's a feasible way I can put it forward to the rest of the team.

[Danchinaski]

Wow. What a thread this is turning out to be. Who'd have thunk it?

I'd like to ask about the reputation system. For as long as I've been playing FM I've started at the bottom and worked upwards. On recent versions I've used lower league databases and started as a Sunday League player in the bowels of the northern non-leagues. I'm interested to know more about how my rep grows from here to match that of other managers - obviously I have to work harder and achieve more to be considered on a par with managers with more illustrious histories, but what bumps it up more? I ask this because I've had a few problems with getting reasonable job offers after a period of over-achievement and have often been knocked back for candidates with a better playing history, but with fewer managerial achievements. This isn't an indirect criticism I must add, this is something I've reported a few bugs around and I'd like more info on how it actually works so I don't go around moaning and reporting oddities which aren't actually there. As I observe it, trophies and award wins do more for rep than prolonged over-achievement, for example I've won three promotions in five years with one club, but on no occasion was any silverware involved, and this left me behind in the rep stakes compared to, say, a manager who won a title with a much-fancied team and then won Manager of the Year.

I'd also like to ask if rep could be linked to the type of job the manager does. For example, Allardyce and Pulis have a Premier League rep IRL, but are also known for keeping teams up, and doing it the ugly way. The job Neil Warnock has done at Rotherham would be a significant boost to his 'rep', in that it's made him employable at Championship level again, even though on paper it's less of an achievement than his many promotions he won earlier in his career. The reason why I ask this is because on FM16 I got embroiled in a serious relegation scrap for the first time on FM, and it was genuinely thrilling, I enjoyed that season more than the promotion which preceded it, but didn't seem to gain anything in game from surviving it on the final day on goals scored (we were bookies favourites for the drop, serious underdogs, little cash to spend etc). Is it possible to have a rep based around what type of job you're expected to do? For example, some managers are very good at working with tight budgets, some managers have good reps for bringing through youth products, others because they're survival specialists. I often think managers IRL are hired not because they have a significant rep, but because they're the man for that particular job, and I think it'd be great if FM could make more of this. Would it be possible?

[Duncan Greenwood]

You can actually see on a managers profile screen that they have kind of staff PPM's. These are listed under their "tends to" and "tends not to" which are on their profile overview next to their attributes. This is probably more related to tactical and players signing compared to accepting jobs due to a teams circumstances but it does affect how they manage in the game regarding budgeting/signing youth players or lower league players etc. A good one to look at is Jose Mourinho, he has eight actions that he tends not to do and two that he does tend to do.

Regarding manager rep, it's pretty dynamic. I think it reflects pretty well on real life. If you are a manager that constantly gets promoted but you're doing it via the play-offs or something then your reputation will increase but not as much as a manager that will get the exposure of a league win or a big managerial award. Constant success that's not bringing in the trophies will accumulate an increase in rep at a steady pace, as you'd expect, while managers with trophy wins will see a more varied long term change in rep with big spikes around the times they win the trophies. This will push them up quicker, rep-wise, than the long term success manager. If you look at the reputation of Guardiola, who's basically only managed very good teams and has won trophies, he has an immense reputation that'd be very hard to match by anyone that's working their way up from the lower leagues with consistent results and success. You rarely see the top clubs, in real life, signing managers that haven't won trophies before or are ex players that have ended up in a big club role.

[0zymandias]

They change okay for me. The only attribute that changes is finishing which is removed when changed to a support role from attack.

Are you sure you land at PROFILE page, not ATTRIBUTE page? With the same position, when I switch role, the highlighted attributes do not change when they should. Would you try some of other players with some of other positions like Central Midfield D/S/A?

[Duncan Greenwood]

Yeah, just checked again on the profile page and tried with a couple of different positions for different players and they seem to be fine. Tried all the CM roles too and can't see it happening. This sounds like you could be experiencing a UI bug and would be worth raising in the UI bug section.

[YKW]

Thanks for the response Duncan.

My favourite area of the game is the network game, and I basically play no other mode. So fantasy draft mode really caught my attention, and I think it's fantastic for a first incarnation. I would be interested in hearing from SI whether or not I can be excited about possible improvements to this mode. Does SI share my general enthusiasm toward the mode, especially moving into the future?

Would SI ever "host" a tournament to be played through fantasy draft mode? Or otherwise endorse specific competitions? This is most social area of the game, and I think it could benefit hugely from the involvement of SI in creating one or two "high rep" contests.

[Duncan Greenwood]

I too am a big fan of network games and I love fantasy draft. We have people here that put a lot of focus on fantasy draft but I obviously can't tell you what we're planning on doing exactly but I can assure you it's not something we're just going to leave now we've added it.

Regarding tournaments, they would be pretty fun to do. I'm not really sure on the logistics but I'll ask the people that'll know when I'm back in work tomorrow and hopefully get back to you.

[Hilly27]

Just on the F9 issue. The original F9 was an Austrian player called Mattias Sindelar. We can then walk through history up to the present day Lionel Messi (reinvented as a F9 by Pep Guardiola).

Both were prolific goalscorers. The role of the F9 is essentially one of deception, in the build-up phase they drop off the front-line (so not a no. 9) but enter the attacking zone at the final phase, unmarked (see, I am a number 9 sometimes...), and BANG its a goal! Hence, finishing is vital.

This is over complicated!! In my day the 'false 9' was called an inside forward, the greatest of which was Jimmy Greaves, and he banged a few in.

[Der General]

Why does Defensive Midfielder on Support duty have Hard tackling hardcoded, but on Defend duty not. Shouldn't it be the other way around?

Thank you.

[RorysRocketThrow]

I think the idea of the coaching badges style tutorial is superb, original and well in theme with the game. If I could make one heartfelt request it would be for this, whether it be SI or one of the community that do it I would be very grateful. I very rarely post on here because I spend most of my time reading through pages and pages of posts and/or other websites and watching youtube video's to try and glean every last bit of information...mostly to no avail.

I hold my hands up, post FM12 I am absolutely useless at this game and normally give up after one or two in game seasons, even though I buy every version. I can't get my head around the tactics and match engine at all. I read so many times from so many people that this game is simple yet I can't seem to get it. I struggle a lot with what settings and instructions affects each other despite reading pages and pages.

I appreciate that probably makes me appear very thick and yes, I probably am!

Please can someone do this. As we all do, I spend a lot on these games and despite not being very successful, I enjoy what time I spend on them and fully support SI (and have done from day one) in everything they do.

Anyway, carry on with the quality discussion as I exit stage left...

[Footix]

I will probably come along as grumpy by posting this. Actually I am not, I just don't understand..

It's more about the business model. Why don't you fix bugs in the current game before moving on to the next? I understand that I can't expect new features to be added to my old game, that is fair, but I'd expect you to keep supporting old releases by fixing downright bugs. It doesn't feel fair at all getting the message "sorry, no more development for this year's game - stay tuned for FM 16". Having to purchase a new game and hope for the bug to be sorted is ... well, you understand.

One example is the information columns on the tactic screen in FM 15. If I try to edit the default settings (adding, removing, rearranging columns), the user experience is a real PITA. It simply doesn't work properly; columns fall off screen, it forgets the order of what column should go where etc etc. So I just leave it at default and accept it is broken. I know this was raised in the bugs forum for FM15. Would it be too much work for you to fix things like this? I also understand that there is a life cycle to software, but could you please consider extending your current level..?

Other than that I enjoy your games, so thank you.

[forameuss]

I will probably come along as grumpy by posting this. Actually I am not, I just don't understand..

It's more about the business model. Why don't you fix bugs in the current game before moving on to the next? I understand that I can't expect new features to be added to my old game, that is fair, but I'd expect you to keep supporting old releases by fixing downright bugs. It doesn't feel fair at all getting the message "sorry, no more development for this year's game - stay tuned for FM 16". Having to purchase a new game and hope for the bug to be sorted is ... well, you understand.

One example is the information columns on the tactic screen in FM 15. If I try to edit the default settings (adding, removing, rearranging columns), the user experience is a real PITA. It simply doesn't work properly; columns fall off screen, it forgets the order of what column should go where etc etc. So I just leave it at default and accept it is broken. I know this was raised in the bugs forum for FM15. Would it be too much work for you to fix things like this? I also understand that there is a life cycle to software, but could you please consider extending your current level..?

Other than that I enjoy your games, so thank you.

If they kept supporting previous games, they would never get to the new one. While it's annoying if you're affected by a particular bug, they have to make the cut somewhere.

[Plachy]

It's a huge problem with modern gaming and I don't think the above argument really stacks up. The right thing to do is to have a slightly longer cycle which allows the data updates we see now plus bug fixes for a little longer. While consumers as a group have perhaps killed their right to make demands of gaming companies because of rampant piracy there's also a culture of releasing incomplete games to those of us willing to pay £30 for an edition of a game every year. No one is saying 'FIX ALL DA BUGS AND WEN PERFECKT RELEASE A NEW ONE', the sensible approach is to have a couple of staffers working on FM16 up until FM17 is released, there are minor bugs that will arise in FM16 post-16.3 and a few hours dev time + testing would fix them. Lobotomising consumers to demand they don't get annoyed with defects in software will only make the problem worse.

As a disclaimer, none of us have the right to demand anything from SI, they produce what I would regard as the best annually released game of the last 10 years. I'd rate this edition as a 9/10 in terms of quality, but there are probably some fixable bugs that are left because of an extremely rigid development schedule. Not a problem SI should take ownership of as 'everyone is doing it' but to deny it's a problem is silly.

[Duncan Greenwood]

I think the problem with too many regular updates with our game is the amount of knock ons that could arise. I think it's sometimes a little hard to appreciate just how much QA goes in to every game and update. We have a pretty large QA team here that gets boosted in the summer (to around 40 people or so) to help with the new game coming out and it's a year long process. Every fix that goes in can cause issues in other areas of the game, I'm sure you're aware that when we release an update sometimes a crash or bug will occur that wasn't seen in the game before and if you wanted to push out more updates, with a reduced time for QA to do their job, then I think you'd just end up with a much less stable game. Our game is vast and needs a lot of testing as there are so many ways you can play the game, so many leagues and set ups that can be used and if these were just released willy-nilly I'd be surprised if it wasn't detrimental to the end user experience. Once we release our 16.3 update our focus will move on from FM16 but if there are crashes stopping people from playing we'll always look at a way to fix them in the same game cycle. Obviously this is only my opinion rather than an SI view, but it's how it looks from the inside looking out and I'm sure people will disagree with me but that's okay and I'm happy for that to be a point of discussion as long as it's constructive or well thought out.

Its a little disappointing our game is considered incomplete by some customers when it's released though. We always push new features out and if we get crashes/bugs early we usually push out an update to address them. I suppose again though this is quite subjective and if you play the game in a particular way and it's not working I can appreciate that'd be frustrating and not something you'd consider to be up to standard. Considering the amount of players we have on Steam playing at any one time I'd think the amount suffering from crashes and major bugs would be pretty low. I don't think we ever want people to not be annoyed by bugs, we always strive to make the best game we can and if people get annoyed by an issue then they're more likely to report them and then we've got more of a chance of fixing them.

[talhak]

Q: Will FM17 be released? Do not say "are you serious?", listen what Miles says from the link below (seek to 02:17). This is the first time I have heard something like this. Of course it is respectable if SI takes a decision to provide major features and improvements in the following game after comprehensive tests.

https://twitter.com/milesSI/status/736174825299906564

[Duncan Greenwood]

We've not currently announced any future games and I'm definitely not the person that can or will announce any in the future, if we do. Saying that, I don't think we ever announce if we're doing any more games until much later in the year, so I wouldn't get too worried just yet.

[Plachy]

I think the problem with too many regular updates with our game is the amount of knock ons that could arise. I think it's sometimes a little hard to appreciate just how much QA goes in to every game and update. We have a pretty large QA team here that gets boosted in the summer (to around 40 people or so) to help with the new game coming out and it's a year long process. Every fix that goes in can cause issues in other areas of the game, I'm sure you're aware that when we release an update sometimes a crash or bug will occur that wasn't seen in the game before and if you wanted to push out more updates, with a reduced time for QA to do their job, then I think you'd just end up with a much less stable game. Our game is vast and needs a lot of testing as there are so many ways you can play the game, so many leagues and set ups that can be used and if these were just released willy-nilly I'd be surprised if it wasn't detrimental to the end user experience. Once we release our 16.3 update our focus will move on from FM16 but if there are crashes stopping people from playing we'll always look at a way to fix them in the same game cycle. Obviously this is only my opinion rather than an SI view, but it's how it looks from the inside looking out and I'm sure people will disagree with me but that's okay and I'm happy for that to be a point of discussion as long as it's constructive or well thought out.

Its a little disappointing our game is considered incomplete by some customers when it's released though. We always push new features out and if we get crashes/bugs early we usually push out an update to address them. I suppose again though this is quite subjective and if you play the game in a particular way and it's not working I can appreciate that'd be frustrating and not something you'd consider to be up to standard. Considering the amount of players we have on Steam playing at any one time I'd think the amount suffering from crashes and major bugs would be pretty low. I don't think we ever want people to not be annoyed by bugs, we always strive to make the best game we can and if people get annoyed by an issue then they're more likely to report them and then we've got more of a chance of fixing them.

I totally appreciate that and working as a QA tester in another industry I have so much respect for the level of testing that must be required for a game so vast (and the better testers I have worked with have invariably got experience in the games industry). And FM as a cyclical game needs more and more ambitious titles to justify the yearly cost to it's fans, which might well feed into the 'incomplete' tag it can be burdened with, if there was a pact made with the users to release a new set of features every two years and have a more evolutionary game in the other years, sales wouldn't be as good, it's a very difficult balance and new features can quite often break under the millions of different ways they are used by the player base.

And your first sentence is important and it's why I would always caution people saying "this one is easy to fix" who don't work on the game. However it's also probably true that things that are easy to fix to go unsolved and I think consumers do need to give feedback to game companies that it can be infuriating to hear 'there'll be no more fixes unless the game explodes' relatively soon after the release of a game.

I don't think you guys are the worst (the guys who made THPS5 are for the record), FM is bloody great, I just took a umbrage with the suggestion above that a company supporting previous iterations of a game that they made and are hopefully very proud of wouldn't have any reason to support it for a little longer into it's life cycle. There's probably a little bit of 'rod for your own back' karma with the data updates and bug fixes being in the same patch - the data updates are a necessary scheduled task that you guys are in no control over, by bug fixes also being tacked onto this, I guess it could wrongly be perceived that you are accepting the game needing a large number of fixes post-release as an equal necessity.

[leonavich]

It varies from industry to industry, but my opinion on it is, in an annually released game, one year as a life cycle for updates \ patches is pretty standard and I am pretty happy with that most of the time (FM and other games included). The longer between release windows, the longer that time frame is, hence biannually or franchise titles that come out every 5 years or so get years of patching, updates and additional content as opposed to just the one year prior to the next release. Of course there are exceptions to the rule on either side of that, as with either side, there are pros and cons and user feedback supporting for or against that gets taken in to account.

what I perceive as life cycle is overall support, so in this instance, that would include servers for online games, hosting and general support \ response, which I think SI keep open for a number of years (I don't know, nor do I play online much, but I participate in the community and play FM14 more regularly than the newer versions and feel there is adequate support and options available for that iteration)

Is there any provided life cycle support \ timeline, officially or unofficially, for FM versions by SI?

[Duncan Greenwood]

I think it's pretty much as to when I'd expect a game to receive it's perceived final update in the way we release FM, the life-cycle of the game is pretty much predetermined due to the nature of the content, plus we don't stop supporting users who play older games. We have forums where people raise issues with older iterations of the game where the moderators and myself will try to find out what the issue is and help them. Sometimes it is a case of it's a known issue that's been fixed in a later version of the game, but it's not really cost effective to be able to push out updates to older games. It's different with other gaming titles that aren't in the same cycle as they normally put out DLC and other such updates which can mean the game is updated and evolves over a couple of years while we are rather confined to the football season and don't have a product that uses DLC to bring in money outside of the prior decision to buy the game (unless you want to buy IGE etc). Plenty of releases these days cause severe detriment to the user experience if they don't purchase the DLC options, something that I'm personally quite proud that we haven't even contemplated with FM.

In a perfect world we'd release the game with no need to update but software just isn't that simple. We have a lot of users that find more updates frustrating too, we often change the ME in updates which can cause issues with users tactics and this too can cause frustration. It's about finding a balance between making the game as good as we can while not overloading the users with constant updates that could alter the way they play or introduce new issues. I think it's one of those things that is down to personal preference where no one is really right, it just comes down to how we want to do it and we do it in a way that we think is going to be the most positive for the majority of customers.

Appreciate your post, it's well thought out and put across.

[YKW]

Sometimes I wish that FM was a game about pro-wrestling. The match engine especially. If SI was bought out by Ted Turner, would there be any chance of this happening?

In fact, wishing that other games were like FM is one of the things that always reassures me about how good FM is. My question would be if anyone at SI has a dream game that doesn't exist and isn't about football (or another major sport, preferably)? And how would it work.

My dream game mentioned above, "Pro Wrestling Manager," would play just like FM, with media and newgens and stuff, but the match engine would simulate a wrestling event. Various venues from school gyms to MSG all modeled in 3D, with crowds reacting realistically to the events that unfolded. 1000s of motion captured moves etc. A "spot creator" where you could queue up moves and events etc. And network game capability. Then on top of that, the ability to "export" your final show, and edit it for upload. Possibly after having done the voice acting for the promos and commentary.

[Duncan Greenwood]

Well, we have quite a few wrestling fans in the office but I'd be surprised if we went that route. Although never say never. I know quite a lot of the mods on the forum are also big wrestling fans so you're not alone.

We've also produced EHM, which is a ice hockey simulation game much in the same vein as FM. The forums are here and you can pick the game up on Steam so I'd definitely recommend giving that a try. Personally, I'd think the design and gameplay of FM could be transferred to any sport really and I'd quite like a basketball or cricket game designed like FM. Again though, I doubt that's something that'll ever happen but we can all dream, right!

[herne79]

Giant Haystacks was always my favourite.

[Plachy]

An FM style game that starts in the territory days of the 70s and allows you to rewrite the history books as you progress to the present day trying to either muscle in on the emerging WWE/WCW rivalry or succeed as an indie fed during the early 90s lull would be so brill. Users furious that there's a Terry Funk bug that allows him to wrestle every 3rd match as a retirement match from his late 30s into his 70s.

Do it.

[Danchinaski]

This has probably been asked and answered elsewhere, but regarding board takeovers, is the type of takeover essentially random? Is there anything in game that influences whether the new board will be a Texan oil baron, or a poxy supporter collective? When takeovers go wrong, and a buyer backs out, is there something under the hood which causes this, or is it essentially a random thing? And what are the factors which make a chairman more or less likely to sell up?

[0zymandias]

This is an annoying part every time I sign a youngster for my U19 team: when he arrives, he automatically lands at the first team and he drags the tactic fluency and team cohesion down.

Imagine when 10 such guys are coming in at the same time: MADNESS!

[Guest]

Just a thought but are you signing them to a status higher than hot prospect?

[0zymandias]

Just a thought but are you signing them to a status higher than hot prospect?

I don't pay more than $1-2 millions for a kid like this, equivalently his salary demand should be fall into the range of youngster-hot prospect at most.

[Guest]

Does the team mentality actually have any bearing on finishing? Assuming a player is in the same amount of space on the pitch, same position, attributes, morale, etc and there's no difference in any of the variables with the opposition, is he more likely to score depending on the mentality of the team?

[Spurs08]

I don't pay more than $1-2 millions for a kid like this, equivalently his salary demand should be fall into the range of youngster-hot prospect at most.

It's not about his salary though. It's about his squad status. If you give him a squad status that suggests he's going to be part of the first-team squad, that's where he'll be!

[0zymandias]

It's not about his salary though. It's about his squad status. If you give him a squad status that suggests he's going to be part of the first-team squad, that's where he'll be!

You don't get it from the context? If I said I sign him for my U19 team, and he does not require huge salary, why should I give him Rotation status? At most case, you are supposed to degrade a player's squad status as low as possible when you sign him because he will be less likely whining if he is given less play time. Try one yourself, sign someone from Qatar with youngster/hot prospect status and then look where he will end up.

Anyone from SI can tell me if this should be fixed?

[herne79]

Does the team mentality actually have any bearing on finishing? Assuming a player is in the same amount of space on the pitch, same position, attributes, morale, etc and there's no difference in any of the variables with the opposition, is he more likely to score depending on the mentality of the team?

That question is kind of like asking how long is a piece of string .

I'll have to give a very generalised answer, which won't always apply (which is why it's always better to be specific about certain scenarios). Anyway, choosing a mentality not only impacts your team's overall way of playing, but also affects individual player mentality. So, more attacking mentalities ask your team to play at a higher tempo with your players being slightly more attack minded.

This "can" (and this is the generalisation) lead your team to making more attempts on goal, but of lesser quality - kind of a scatter gun approach: shoot often enough in the general direction of the goal and one will go in eventually. It "can" (again, generalisation) also lead to your strikers being a bit more rushed in their shots, which "may" lead to poorer finishing.

So, generally speaking, with everything being equal as you mention, I'd "expect" to see see poorer finishing because players will be more rushed, but at the same time I'd also "expect" to see a similar amount of goals scored simply because you'd have more shots. Lower (more defensive) mentalities tend to produce fewer chances but of better quality, whilst higher (more attacking) mentalities tend to be the opposite.

But that is easily altered using tactical settings - for example in a recent match where I play with a Control mentality (which is a quite attack minded mentality) my team only had 10 attempts at goal, but 7 were on target and we scored 4 - simply because of the other tactical settings I employed.

It's hard to be specific with a question such as this, hopefully you see what I mean.

[Guest]

That question is kind of like asking how long is a piece of string .

I'll have to give a very generalised answer, which won't always apply (which is why it's always better to be specific about certain scenarios). Anyway, choosing a mentality not only impacts your team's overall way of playing, but also affects individual player mentality. So, more attacking mentalities ask your team to play at a higher tempo with your players being slightly more attack minded.

This "can" (and this is the generalisation) lead your team to making more attempts on goal, but of lesser quality - kind of a scatter gun approach: shoot often enough in the general direction of the goal and one will go in eventually. It "can" (again, generalisation) also lead to your strikers being a bit more rushed in their shots, which "may" lead to poorer finishing.

So, generally speaking, with everything being equal, you "could" see poorer finishing because players will be more rushed, but at the same time you "could" see a similar amount of goals scored simply because you'd have more shots. Lower (more defensive) mentalities tend to produce fewer chances but of better quality, whilst higher (more attacking) mentalities tend to be the opposite.

But that is easily altered using tactical settings - for example in a recent match where I play with a Control mentality (which is a quite attack minded mentality) my team only had 10 attempts at goal, but 7 were on target and we scored 4 - simply because of the other tactical settings I employed.

It's hard to be specific with a question such as this, hopefully you see what I mean.

Interesting answer. I play with an attacking mentality and score a LOT of goals, but I see the oft mentioned issue where players who are much worse than mine being way more clinical against my team in front of goal, which I assume is because of the lower mentality of the opposition. I can understand that passes would be rushed and players would be less likely to make measured decisions on the ball with a more attacking mentality, but if someone is a finisher, they're a finisher. If you put Aguero (for example) clean through in 10 yards of space, his finishing shouldn't be influenced by the mentality of the team that put him in that position. Passing, sure, but finishing I wouldn't expect to be affected by mentality.

In my experience of playing and watching football, if a lesser finisher is playing for a team who is defending all match and then gets one chance he's likely to snatch at that chance because he knows he won't be getting many (if any) more chances. In FM, a team playing a defensive mentality seems to result in the opposite, with players being a lot more composed and clinical in front of goal.

Personally, I do would do away with team mentality completely and let your tactical choices dictate that... but that's a whole other story.

[herne79]

Interesting answer. I play with an attacking mentality and score a LOT of goals, but I see the oft mentioned issue where players who are much worse than mine being way more clinical against my team in front of goal, which I assume is because of the lower mentality of the opposition. I can understand that passes would be rushed and players would be less likely to make measured decisions on the ball with a more attacking mentality, but if someone is a finisher, they're a finisher. If you put Aguero (for example) clean through in 10 yards of space, his finishing shouldn't be influenced by the mentality of the team that put him in that position. Passing, sure, but finishing I wouldn't expect to be affected by mentality.

In my experience of playing and watching football, if a lesser finisher is playing for a team who is defending all match and then gets one chance he's likely to snatch at that chance because he knows he won't be getting many (if any) more chances. In FM, a team playing a defensive mentality seems to result in the opposite, with players being a lot more composed and clinical in front of goal.

Personally, I do would do away with team mentality completely and let your tactical choices dictate that... but that's a whole other story.

And in FM terms, scoring a goal isn't just about a player's Finishing attribute. All sorts of other factors will be taken into account including, but not limited to, mentality.

You mention the Aguero example - and now you're getting into a specific example which goes back to what I was saying about making generalisations rather than talking specifics. Look at my opening sentence "I'll have to give a very generalised answer, which won't always apply (which is why it's always better to be specific about certain scenarios)".

[Guest]

And in FM terms, scoring a goal isn't just about a player's Finishing attribute. All sorts of other factors will be taken into account including, but not limited to, mentality.

You mention the Aguero example - and now you're getting into a specific example which goes back to what I was saying about making generalisations rather than talking specifics. Look at my opening sentence "I'll have to give a very generalised answer, which won't always apply (which is why it's always better to be specific about certain scenarios)".

I know there's a whole bunch of factors, not saying there isn't. But if all other factors are the same, I don't think team mentality should have any bearing on finishing ability.

[themadsheep2001]

I know there's a whole bunch of factors, not saying there isn't. But if all other factors are the same, I don't think team mentality should have any bearing on finishing ability.

Speed of play will have a direct impact on factors. As it would in real life

[Guest]

Speed of play will have a direct impact on factors. As it would in real life

If it's a slow passing build up or a quick ball into space, if the forward then finds himself in 5 yards of space with just the keeper to beat, it should come down to his attributes/morale and not the mentality of the team or tactics that put him in that position.

[herne79]

Just wondering if there is a definition issue here.

@tubbycrabs - in FM terms, what is "finishing"?

[Guest]

Just wondering if there is a definition issue here.

@tubbycrabs - in FM terms, what is "finishing"?

The ability to put the ball in the net. My basic question is, assuming all other factors are identical (morale, score, player condition, player positions at the point of the chance, etc), if you have a player one on one with the keeper will the mentality of the team have any bearing on his ability to score.

[herne79]

The ability to put the ball in the net. My basic question is, assuming all other factors are identical (morale, score, player condition, player positions at the point of the chance, etc), if you have a player one on one with the keeper will the mentality of the team have any bearing on his ability to score.

This is why I asked the question - it's not the ability to put the ball in the net. The ability to put the ball in the net is a combination of all sorts of factors, including mentality.

"Finishing" is simply shot accuracy.

So, if you have instructed your team to play with a more attacking mentality, which increases things such as tempo and attacking directness, the ability of a player to shoot accurately will be affected. However, other things will also come into play - look at Composure for example. In your example, where you have a player clear on goal, his Composure is going to have a big impact, especially if you have given your team an attacking mentality. That can help to mitigate any inaccuracy he may suffer through rushing his shot.

Can you see how it all starts to link together? You can't just look at Finishing in isolation when hoping for a player to put the ball in the net.

So to specifically answer your question here, yes, mentality does have a bearing on a player's ability to score, because a player's ability to score is about far more than just "finishing".

[Guest]

This is why I asked the question - it's not the ability to put the ball in the net. The ability to put the ball in the net is a combination of all sorts of factors, including mentality.

"Finishing" is simply shot accuracy.

So, if you have instructed your team to play with a more attacking mentality, which increases things such as tempo and attacking directness, the ability of a player to shoot accurately will be affected. However, other things will also come into play - look at Composure for example. In your example, where you have a player clear on goal, his Composure is going to have a big impact, especially if you have given your team an attacking mentality. That can help to mitigate any inaccuracy he may suffer through rushing his shot.

Can you see how it all starts to link together? You can't just look at Finishing in isolation when hoping for a player to put the ball in the net.

So to specifically answer your question here, yes, mentality does have a bearing on a player's ability to score, because a player's ability to score is about far more than just "finishing".

Thanks for confirming, I meant finishing in general, not the isolated finishing attribute. I know there's a lot of other factors, other mental attributes, technique, morale, etc. I'm just of the opinion that the overall team mentality shouldn't have an impact on a player's ability to score. Sure, it'll affect the type of chances created for him and the speed in which those chances fall to him, that's how it should work, but for the actual action of putting the ball in the net once the forward has the ball, I don't think it should have any bearing.

[Dave Fairbairn]

Ignore this, silly sod here missed the second page.

[samuelawachie]

1st of, I play FM 2014. And I'm a vastly experienced player in the game as some of my questions will probably indicate.

1. Do referees retire? If they make a mistake that's very costly in a huge Derby match, are they penalized? How does the game choose the referee for a game?

2. I noticed that playing in some pitches like Wembley, even though the size is listed as 105 by 68,same as mine ,i get the feeling the pitch is bigger and wider. The spaces the players cover is more, etc. Is this really so, or just my imagination.

3. Do AI managers train PPMs? I haven't seen evidence of that yet.

4. Do the arguments we have with the opposition managers b4 the game have an effect on our players when there's no icon indicating anything happened?

5. I feel my players are more involved in the game when we are facing opposition that beat us last time out and I tell them to Take Revenge. Do the AI take advantage of these opportunities like we do to extract that extra 1%

6. When a player is carded, does he automatically calm down a bit? I think they do, but I wanna be sure..

7. The legends of the club that retire and still tell you tactical insights b4 rival games, do they finally die out and new legends take over later in future like 30 to 60 years later.

[Rashidi]

1st of, I play FM 2014. And I'm a vastly experienced player in the game as some of my questions will probably indicate.

My answers in bold

1. Do referees retire? If they make a mistake that's very costly in a huge Derby match, are they penalized? How does the game choose the referee for a game?

I doubt they get penalized in the game, not too sure about the other questions cos it doesn't factor highly in my enjoyment of the game

2. I noticed that playing in some pitches like Wembley, even though the size is listed as 105 by 68,same as mine ,i get the feeling the pitch is bigger and wider. The spaces the players cover is more, etc. Is this really so, or just my imagination.

Yes they are really coded in.

3. Do AI managers train PPMs? I haven't seen evidence of that yet?

When I buy some regen youngsters, they come with ppms. So they must have been trained somewhere, I'd assume it was from one of their previous clubs.

4. Do the arguments we have with the opposition managers b4 the game have an effect on our players when there's no icon indicating anything happened

It may not have an effect on your team, it could have an effect on the AI's team. Personally though, if a tactic is balanced and well thought out, it should be able to handle these small bumps. I have often said some "mental" things in press conferences and been able to ride the effect of bad press.

5. I feel my players are more involved in the game when we are facing opposition that beat us last time out and I tell them to Take Revenge. Do the AI take advantage of these opportunities like we do to extract that extra 1

I am not sure if its hardcoded into the game, though you will notice that some derby games are harder, and there will be times if the odds are close, and its a big match, the AI could throw the whole kaboodle at you in a last ditch attempt to win by going Overload. I'd pay attention to ingame commentary for clues and look at the AI changing mentality during the match.

6. When a player is carded, does he automatically calm down a bit? I think they do, but I wanna be sure..

I don't think so, he does NOT automatically cool down. You need to look at attributes like aggression and whether he has PPMs that would suggest your terrier is turning into a rottweiler. Furthermore in your individual half time team talks you have the option to tell him to "calm down". So all this suggests he doesn't do it automatically. Things you can do include changing his role or telling him to tackle easy.

7. The legends of the club that retire and still tell you tactical insights b4 rival games, do they finally die out and new legends take over later in future like 30 to 60 years later

Such a sad question. Legends live forever in my books.

[Guest]

To add to #1 there is a hierarchy for officials which defines the level of match that they are assigned & they can be promoted or demoted between levels based on their season performance.

[samuelawachie]

Wow, thanks guys. The answers to most of those questions could only be known if you have extensive knowledge of the game or involved in its development. So I'm pleased I got them. Well appreciated.

[HUNT3R]

Players are a bit more cautious when on a yellow card. That is coded in. Still though, if he has high aggression and/or Get Stick In etc, it may not be enough to just expect him to calm down and not still get a 2nd yellow. He will be a bit more cautious though.

[leonavich]

To add to #1 there is a hierarchy for officials which defines the level of match that they are assigned & they can be promoted or demoted between levels based on their season performance.

I have noted that managers get ratings and statistics credited to them throughout the course of the season. This goes to the Referee award at the end of the year. Not sure if this plays any part in which league they will be refereeing in for the following season.

Checking this page does show that referees retire as the age is usually between early 40s and mid 50s.

It would be nice if there was some media attention around referees - ones that are well known world wide, ones that are notorious for serving out cards and ones that let play carry on and don't pull up some of the harder tackles.

I pay a bit of attention to this in some of my games, especially if it's a team I need t try and close down some players. If his history shows that he doesn't lay out too many cards, I will attack a bit more aggressively, and the opposite for the reverse, but ill drop my defensive line to cater for the less in your face approach.

Not sure how much of an impact this has or whether its random in the way a ref will control a game, but I like to think they have their own set of characteristics even if not displayed. Plus it adds to the enjoyment for me a little.