Does complexity ruin an intuitive approach?

[scholesisking22]

I’ve just started FM19 having not played a version properly since FM14. Obviously there has been a fair bit of overhaul in tactics, training schedules, squad cohesion etc. since then.

As with the calculation of DDM plus relevant coaching stats to achieve 5 star coaching ratings, I feel as if a large part of the game is now requiring me to undertake research on “how to do it right” rather than rely on intuition and trying to work it out.

I want to try and work out what training schedules to put together, and how to mentor players effectively etc. without needing to look it up, but I feel that, as with needing to research the importance of hidden stats like professionalism and ambition and how you can identify them by player personalities/media handling styles/other cues, some of these things are simply too long-winded to learn. They need to be researched on forums and guides to know the way to approach them rather than approaching it blindly yourself and hoping to rely on common sense and learned knowledge.

Does anyone feel the same/understand where I’m coming from? I have tried to look up as little as possible so far and maybe I’m just overthinking the whole thing but I like there to be a certain sense of unknown that you can try to make sense of as you go along. I’m wondering if now it’s simply a case of researching “the best” training schedules and the tactics that are proven to work, rather than attempting to make sense of all these things yourself. There seems to be too complex a web of “rules” that one wouldn’t naturally come to the conclusion of, which reduces learning and discovering by intuition and experience. Maybe I’m simply overwhelmed and failing to try and adapt! But rather than borrowing “solutions” off the internet, having the tools to know a bit but needing creativity and logic to improve shiuld all be part of the fun right?  Otherwise someone is simply telling you where to put the pieces in the jigsaw puzzle. 

[WorcesterLegend]

Well, intuition gets u more far than u think, i started playing at FM16, that one was a utter disaster of me making city dead last every single try (both manchester and worcester) game was just too overwhelming when my only knowledge of football managing was pes/fifa

Practice makes perfect even if someone tell u to do x, u will derail of that after u find something u feel works better, personally, i leave general training to my assistant since i don't like changing those every week depending on competitions

But its the same as how people learn the hard way to not pay 350k a week to a 34 year old +

[sporadicsmiles]

Honestly, I think it is entirely possible to use intuition in the game and still be successful. Indeed, I think it is vital. People see complexity and think it requires complexity. Which is exactly what it does not need. If this were science (and I am a scientist, so I think this way) you would break a complex problem into a series of isolated simpler problems. You can absolutely treat FM this way (although really most things are linked so they are not really separate).

When it comes to training, I just get a competent AM who has coaching ideas similar to my own, and leave him to his devices. I am not yet at a stage where I want to tackle training, so I just ignore team training. It is on my to do list. I sign good coaches (or as good as I can get just looking at the stats, you do not need to research everything first, just go with your gut), and do individual training (which I do care about). I have consistently great feedback from players on the training, and everyone gets better as appropriate. So delegation is a genuine solution here.

In terms of how it works, like I said I have not really played around with it. I would say it is quite straight forward though, just time consuming. You train your players in the way to make them play your tactical style better. If you play passing football, you make that better. If you are Pulis, you aim to create a team of muscular giants, etc. It comes back to my first point. It looks complicated (and very daunting) so you think you should answer with complexity. Do not. Go at it simply and see what happens.

[XaW]

I actually think you can get quite far using intuition in FM. Of course, research and study makes you better, but it's the same for all games. You don't need to know about how players train to be successful, if you see a player is marked as a professional, you know what that means if you compare that to a player with the description "Slack". You don't need to research it to know who will train better on average.

But there is a balance act SI needs to carefully handle. How much help to too much and how little is too little? How much knowledge should they expect from the player? Do we need to explain the rules of the game? Do we expect players to understand how a 4-4-2 defends compared to a 3-5-2/5-3-2 wing back variant? It is a tricky thing that, in regards to strategy and simulation games.

I've seen a lot of tactics in here that players claim should work when they have, in my opinion, glaring holes that is easy to spot. Like lack of a pivot-type player to recycle possession, or lack of lateral movement between the lines (two of the main issues people struggle with as far as I've seen). But while that might be easy for me to spot, it's almost impossible for new players who aren't familiar with football from a tactical point of view. If you have only seen football as an enjoyment of goals and skills, then it might be very hard to spot. And I've come to terms with being one of a few who can really enjoy a 0-0 match with few chances because of how the managers are aiming to disarm the other team.

That said, I think the game lacks a bit of contextual advise to players who don't know such things. Not just what to change but why. Of course, everyone can find this out by trial and error, but that tenacity isn't all that common. And I know that this is not an easy task and also reflects back to the earlier point, how much help is enough?

Personally, I like how it is, but that might be because I've played the game for so many year that I'm used to it. Or that I'm not one for instant gratification and despise all the whistles and bells of mobile games.... I just realized how old I sound... sigh.... 

[Baodan]

I don't think it's just you being overwhelmed and I share your concern.

[RBKalle]

10 ore fa, scholesisking22 ha scritto:

I want to try and work out what training schedules to put together, and how to mentor players effectively

Just delegate to the AssMan...

Training is, simply put, not worth your time or effort.

Mentoring can be worth it but it's a longer-term progress so it's hard to tell if it works or not. Frankly I've got enough success with "the general traits of the team have had a positive impact on the player" kind of automatic mentoring.

I'd focus more on the tactical aspect of FM, as it's the only part that has a noticeable impact on your performances. And it requires a lot of dedication to get it right anyway, so you'd be better off delegating most of the "extreme realism" bits and pieces

[Seb Wassell]

I think there is a difference between playing "intuitively" and "min/maxing".

You mention hidden attributes, that's an example of min/maxing. Those attributes are hidden for a reason, they should be intuitively brought to the the fore throughout the game (if you've suggestions on how to improve on that please do shout) but you're not actually meant to be become aware of the precise numbers at any point. In reality you can only judge a player's personality by their actions, the intention is to tread a line between simulating that and creating a system that works in a (simulation) game. Of course under the hood there needs to be some rules and if you wish to look-up/work those out then absolutely fair enough but this is not intended to be necessary for a good relationship with the gameworld.

Speaking specifically about Training it was designed in such a way that approaching it logically as a football fan should yield a positive response. Even leaving it to your Assistant will not negatively affect your game. However, if you wish to squeeze every drop out of it then the ability to do so is there. For example, no default schedule includes a Match Review session. If you want a little extra in this area then simply add one to your schedule as desired. As the person who designed the system however I do not believe you need to be inside my head to do that, everything that the Match Review session does is stated on the in-game card itself, as with every session and its effects there's nothing hidden. I do not believe there is a "perfect" schedule out there for you to download and for me this is a great thing. The intention was not to create a win/lose scenario but rather a system that allows you to deal with the same "questions" (matches, injuries, development) in a variety of differing ways, all of which, if logically applied, will have different but not necessarily "better" or "worse" outcomes. The inspiration and intention for the new training module is to allow you the stage to act as a real manager would (without the coaching qualifications) on the training pitch.

FM is intended as a simulation of the living, breathing football world. Bringing that to life in a sophisticated but intuitive way is always going to be a complicated task but our goal is to nail that. As ever, if you have suggestions on how better to marry the reality of football with the functionality of a simulated game then please do head over to our Feature Request area, tag me if you'd like, the more specific the better 

[scholesisking22]

Thanks all, I think I was quick to jump the gun on this one to be honest, purely because I've found there is a hell of a lot of new stuff to get my head around. At first it seems like hassle but I'm sure the features are valuable in the long-run. As some of you have mentioned, delegation can always be used too. I think in an effort to get a hold on some of the complexity, I was annoyed at myself for looking a bit more in depth into player personalities and killing some of the mystery for myself. I guess it's always a balance of trying to know enough for the game to not be a slog but trying to leave yourself enough to discover (for which there is plenty for me!)

Cheers for the insights.

[XaW]

36 minutes ago, scholesisking22 said:

Thanks all, I think I was quick to jump the gun on this one to be honest, purely because I've found there is a hell of a lot of new stuff to get my head around. At first it seems like hassle but I'm sure the features are valuable in the long-run. As some of you have mentioned, delegation can always be used too. I think in an effort to get a hold on some of the complexity, I was annoyed at myself for looking a bit more in depth into player personalities and killing some of the mystery for myself. I guess it's always a balance of trying to know enough for the game to not be a slog but trying to leave yourself enough to discover (for which there is plenty for me!)

Cheers for the insights.

Well, if there is anything you want help with anyone in here are more than happy to point you in the right direction. Though, remember that there as many ways to play as there are players. So while some things will make you more successful, it doesn't mean you will enjoy the game as much!

There is a lot to do if you are doing everything 100%, but delegation is the key to leave the stuff you don't like out. I'd say, for a start, make a basic tactic and concentrate on getting in players that fit your tactic (you don't want Fellaini if you want to play a Guardiola style tiki-taka, but if you are more into Sean Dyche's line of thinking, then he might fit right in!) and get to know the UI.

[SD]

I for one am in the camp that the game already gives us players too much info as it is, but I agree that the info the UI gives us on player personalities is too scarce.

From a design point of view, I assume the attributes and descriptions are intended to represent the manager's own perception - watching the players in matches, in training or just interacting with them as people, as well as third party accounts of these things.

Judging other people is what we all do instinctively at all times and humans in general are surprisingly good at reading other humans.

Now, it doesn't have to be as granular as the 1-20 values attributes are, but it's strange that our manager personnas cannot perceive anything more than a short description of the personality of someone they are presumably working with daily. This is just something that's universal, be it right or wrong, justified or not, I for one can sure find more than one word to describe the people I interact with regularly.

There's the legal aspect here of course, having the game slapping unambitious or unprofessional tags left and right would quickly get SI in hot water, but even so a compromise can be reached by only emphasizing the positive traits - not too dissimilar in this regard to how balanced personality is used now.

Of course, my argument holds true for our own players, there should be a thick fog of war over most players, except perhaps the highest reputation ones. It's part of the general criticism I have of the game, that there isn't enough asymmetry in what we know about our own players and team, and what we know about the rest of the game world.

[scholesisking22]

1 hour ago, XaW said:

Well, if there is anything you want help with anyone in here are more than happy to point you in the right direction. Though, remember that there as many ways to play as there are players. So while some things will make you more successful, it doesn't mean you will enjoy the game as much!

There is a lot to do if you are doing everything 100%, but delegation is the key to leave the stuff you don't like out. I'd say, for a start, make a basic tactic and concentrate on getting in players that fit your tactic (you don't want Fellaini if you want to play a Guardiola style tiki-taka, but if you are more into Sean Dyche's line of thinking, then he might fit right in!) and get to know the UI.

Thanks XaW, I was relatively capable on '13 and '14 so I'm hoping I will get by OK, but if it's literally a case of not understanding how to use something, I won't hesitate to ask on the forums. I agree that getting players to fit my desired tactic is my first port of call.

1 hour ago, SD said:

I for one am in the camp that the game already gives us players too much info as it is, but I agree that the info the UI gives us on player personalities is too scarce.

From a design point of view, I assume the attributes and descriptions are intended to represent the manager's own perception - watching the players in matches, in training or just interacting with them as people, as well as third party accounts of these things.

Judging other people is what we all do instinctively at all times and humans in general are surprisingly good at reading other humans.

Now, it doesn't have to be as granular as the 1-20 values attributes are, but it's strange that our manager personnas cannot perceive anything more than a short description of the personality of someone they are presumably working with daily. This is just something that's universal, be it right or wrong, justified or not, I for one can sure find more than one word to describe the people I interact with regularly.

There's the legal aspect here of course, having the game slapping unambitious or unprofessional tags left and right would quickly get SI in hot water, but even so a compromise can be reached by only emphasizing the positive traits - not too dissimilar in this regard to how balanced personality is used now.

Of course, my argument holds true for our own players, there should be a thick fog of war over most players, except perhaps the highest reputation ones. It's part of the general criticism I have of the game, that there isn't enough asymmetry in what we know about our own players and team, and what we know about the rest of the game world.

Whilst it might seem contradictory to my original rant, I actually agree with you here with relation to being in the camp of too much player info for those you don't have in your own squad. Whilst attribute masking means a hell of a lot more scouting needs to be done for example, it is not realistic to know a player's exact granular statistics for every attribute simply because a scout has had a look at them, as well as finding out how ambitious they are for example. 

Conversely, once you observe a player day to day, these attributes along with their personality would become observable. But they would still be fluid and you may not ever get a full idea of their personality until managing them for a period of years. 

Then again, saying all this, I often like to play the game with attribute masking off as I like to search for players myself. I suppose this highlights the difficulty SI have in keeping everyone happy!