Are PPMs just a replacement for tactical instructions? If so, what's there point?

[Nad]

Hi guys,

As the title says really, are PPMs just a replacement for instructions you can give in player instructions?

What I mean is that as far as I can see they just make players do what they would do anyway if you told them to via player nstructions. Eg:

Cut Inside = Cut Inside via Wideplay

Gets Forward Whenever Possible = Forward Runs Often

Dives Into Tackles = Hard Tackling

Stops Play = Hold Up Ball

Comes Deep To Get Ball = Lower Mentality

There are only a handful that I can think of where I can't see how you would instruct via the tactics instructions. They are:

Shoots with Power / Places Shots

Arrives Late In Opposition Area

Plays Way Out Of Trouble

Dwells On Ball

Argues With Officials

Plays With Back To Goal

Tries Long Range Freekicks / Hits Freekicks With Power

Tries First Time Shots

Have I got that right? Are there tactical instructions for these?

My thinking is that if the majority of these can be done anyway, what's the point in teaching players the PPM? Is there any advantage to them having the PPM rather than the instruction? And why would you waste 10% of training to teach something you can do anyway?

[Ampalaea4]

You make a very good point here.I think that ppm's give players some uniqueness.They determine their playstyle, whatever the tactic is.And that means you have to take under consideration your players ppm's before creating your tactic.

Don't forget that tactic is just what you ask from a player to do into the pitch, and don't neccery means that your player will follow your commands 100%.This happens to Football Manager also.How many times you see your players do what they want, and not what you asked for?

That mean, a player who likes to cut inside, he will cut inside some times, even if you want him to play cross often.From the other hand if you like your player to cut inside, then a player that have that ppm will follow your tactic 100%.

Thats my opinion.I think you understand, I am not from England and my English is not very good

[drhay53]

From my understanding having the PPM AND the instruction basically means the player is not very likely to ignore your instruction because he thinks there is a better option.

For instance, there may be a high-flair player with poor passing attributes that you really don't want playing through balls (or he could be a winger who is wasting possession with through balls from poor locations). So you instruct him to TTB rarely. However, he is a great dribbler and with his high flair you want him to create by running with the ball so you set RWB to often. If you give him low CF he will run with the ball but not really find anything to do with it. If you give high CF he will still be slightly biased towards running with the ball but he will sometimes frustrate the heck out of you by ignoring you and trying crazy through balls anyway.

This is where PPM's can really aid your tactical instruction. If you can get him to learn RWB often and Tries no through balls (or plays a simple passing game) you will be reinforcing your tactical instructions and you will be able to get him wreaking havoc with his dribbling but taking care to only try difficult passes when they're plain as day.

You are implying that the PPM's and Player instructions are fully redundant; however I believe that they reinforce each other when applied properly, and allow you to get exactly what you want from that player.

[gatrap69]

I have to agree with the OP. I find it hugely limiting to teach what seems to amount to a constant tactical instruction. I tinker a lot with my tactics depending on opposition and hence find it difficult to have a player insist on a particular move regardless (or at least in opposition to) my instructions. There are some cases where it saves time in tac development or when subbing; for example, somebody with great creativity and delivery and "tries throughballs often" PPM will do what he does best even if you forget to adjust the TTB slider when bringing him on. But mostly I don't only think it is redundant but even counter-productive as it limits your tactical degrees of freedom.

Please note that I refer to the PPMs that seem to replicate tactical instructions and not those that don't.

[heathxxx]

I think from the start of a save, they're intended to realistically reflect certain traits of the "real" players we know (or as the researchers know them ), thus giving them their individual characteristics. Obviously as we can potentially shape what PPM's players can have at their disposal, we can in effect bypass the need to use or change certain tactical instructions, if the player is naturally inclined to do them anyway.

Whilst researching Granada CF, I went to a number of pre-season matches (as they've signed a lot of new players) , not only to assess attributes, but to observe player tendencies. I made notes whilst watching some of these matches, based on my observations, so that I could modify the PPM's for these players, ready to submit for the database. Essentially, they're based purely on the observations of the researchers. As newgens/regens begine to appear, they're usually generated randomly, but linked to their positions.

When it comes to us as "managers" looking to modify player PPM's in the game, I think it's mostly based on what we assume will suit the given role and position of the player. I for example, always look to get my inside forwards to learn the "cuts inside", "Moves into channels" PPMs. This is only because it suits my overall tactical approach. Likewise though, I don't have to get them to learn those particular PPMs if I want to get something different from them. I have one player that I've resisted even coach suggestions to learn them, simply because I want him to offer me something different during open play.

So although I understand what people are referring to with what appears to be an overlap between PPMs and certain tactical instructions, I don't believe they're intended to replace tactical instructions. More aptly, they're there to offer individual traits to players and/or complement different tactical settings. Having the interaction option for players to learn/unlearn PPMs (providing they approve of course...) offers further tactical customisation and player interaction, which I think is a good thing.

[gatrap69]

Whilst researching Granada CF, I went to a number of pre-season matches (as they've signed a lot of new players) , not only to assess attributes, but to observe player tendencies. I made notes whilst watching some of these matches, based on my observations, so that I could modify the PPM's for these players, ready to submit for the database. Essentially, they're based purely on the observations of the researchers.

How do you know what is based on player preference and what is manager instruction?

[heathxxx]

How do you know what is based on player preference and what is manager instruction?

Good question.

For my own part, as well as watching matches for the team I've researched, I've also been lucky enough to visit some pre-season training sessions. I was able to speak with some of the players and coaching staff.

Obviously not every researcher gets to observe training sessions, or is able to speak directly with players and coaches, so mostly it's based on match observations and researcher interpretations. I can say though, that a lot of voluntary time and effort goes into research. Researchers also communicate with each other to discuss different aspects and elements of research. Sometimes though, it's fairly obvious with some players, what's instructed and what's more a natural element of their own style of play.

In either case, if it's observed in research, then it's fair to say that whether it's instructed or more instinctive to the player, I think it's right the PPM's players have on the database are as they are. It's then over to you as the manager, to shape the players and the tactics as you see fit.

[heathxxx]

Have I got that right? Are there tactical instructions for these?

My thinking is that if the majority of these can be done anyway, what's the point in teaching players the PPM? Is there any advantage to them having the PPM rather than the instruction? And why would you waste 10% of training to teach something you can do anyway?

There are indeed tactical instructions for the first list of PPM's you highlighted. The ability to have players learn/unlearn PPM's gives extra depth and customisation, offers additional options to utilise within your tactics.

After all, if you don't have this sort of detailed customisation available in FM, where do you go Nad.

[Nad]

There are indeed tactical instructions for the first list of PPM's you highlighted. The ability to have players learn/unlearn PPM's gives extra depth and customisation, offers additional options to utilise within your tactics.

After all, if you don't have this sort of detailed customisation available in FM, where do you go Nad.

I'm not criticising, I'm just asking . I quite like these little quirks which make certain players different, and yes, it's good to see that you can have 2 players with identical stats who might play the game a little differently due to their PPMs. So from a flavour perspective I have no problem.

However looking at this from a tactical point of view, it seems that teaching players a new PPM from the first list is pointless. Or at least, if not pointless, then mostly redundant. If you want a player to cut inside, you might as well tell him to in his player instructions rather than by teaching the PPM. Because giving the player the instruction costs you nothing and is instant, while teaching the PPM takes up 10% of training time, 6 months +, and is not guaranteed to be accepted or succeed. I'm failing to see why anybody would teach the PPM rather than give the instruction?

I accept the point that if the player has the PPM AND the instruction, they will basically do that move at every opportunity but unless you want your player to be totally predicatable that might not be a good idea.

This is what I wanted to find out about, and possibly if there were tactical instructions that replicate some of the PPMs in the second list.

For now, I don't think I'll be accepting my coach's recommendations that player x should be instructed to dive into tackles...

[heathxxx]

For now, I don't think I'll be accepting my coach's recommendations that player x should be instructed to dive into tackles...

That's one I never usually accept myself... unless he's a ginger-haired regen midfielder