Team Talks Ruining Game Experience

[Ackter]

Team talk effects rarely last more than a few minutes into the half btw - by that point, enough has happened to completely change the situation.

[darthrodent]

Streaks of form happen in relation to confidence and tactical decisions combined. A team can build form through getting a sequence of good results and, for a few matches, hit a sweet spot where the manager only needs to send the team out and let them get on with it. However, as a streak builds, other factors begin to come into play. Players can get over-confident and complacent, or nervous about continuing the streak, depending on the personality type. Once that happens, to further extend the streak a manager needs to consistently make the right decisions motivationally and tactically.

An awful lot of FMers build young, talented squads. They are inherently flaky as pressure tends to get to them earlier, and they are more prone to bad days. A manager needs to babysit such squads through pretty much everything. Once the squad matures, it might have a 3-4 season streak when the manager doesn't have to do much as the players are hard-headed professionals and can be trusted to get on with it. After a few seasons of constant success, players become less motivated and begin to want new challenges, forcing the manager to refresh his squad with young, hungry talent, and the cycle begins again.

A good manager can eke out longer streaks from green squads, turning bad performances into draws or wins. He can also keep a mature squad fresh by shifting personnel in and out on a reasonably regular basis. This will mean that he has to be a little more proactive in tactics and motivation as he'll always need to help the new players fit in, but will prevent the sudden unexpected bad season when motivation across the whole squad drops.

A bad manager sits on his hands and blames everything except himself. It is extremely easy to do well when you have the best squad. You can convince yourself you are a management god. It takes far more effort to extend streaks, reduce slumps and win things when you have less dominant squads. Overachievement takes thought and attention to detail. The worst thing anybody can do is assume that things are scripted. Everything is made yourself.

With all due respect—trust me when I say I want all of what you said to be true—how an earth do you know all of this? Do you have access to under-the-hood information? How are you able to make these assumptions while I am not. I've followed your work for a long time and from statements you've made I can logically assume I know a lot more about football than you having played at a pretty good level in England. If you're able to make these assumptions from the game itself than you truly have mystical abilities.

[hugo_rune]

I have always felt that the game must be "scripted" because if it wasn't there is no way the scorelines would be anywhere as realistic as they are.

The "6 - 0 up at half time, lose the second half 1-0" situation is as old as FM.

Actually, it's as old as football. It happens for a reason. FM takes these things into account in it's simulation. I have had games where I scored four goals in the first half, and went out and scored three more in the second. But it doesn't happen often in FM, it doesn't happen often in real football either. When a game result is (apparently) set in stone, the dynamics change.

[themadsheep2001]

With all due respect—trust me when I say I want all of what you said to be true—how an earth do you know all of this? Do you have access to under-the-hood information? How are you able to make these assumptions while I am not. I've followed your work for a long time and from statements you've made I can logically assume I know a lot more about football than you having played at a pretty good level in England. If you're able to make these assumptions from the game itself than you truly have mystical abilities.

He knows almost as much about the game and the ME as PaulC...

[Herbert Fandel]

With all due respect—trust me when I say I want all of what you said to be true—how an earth do you know all of this? Do you have access to under-the-hood information? How are you able to make these assumptions while I am not. I've followed your work for a long time and from statements you've made I can logically assume I know a lot more about football than you having played at a pretty good level in England. If you're able to make these assumptions from the game itself than you truly have mystical abilities.

I believe he was heavily invovled in the making of the tactics module, though I'm sure he can answer that bit himself.

I'm the same in that I want it to all be true but don't know for sure that it is.

As for the bit I've bolded, I'm pretty sure that only means you are better than football than him, not that you know more. Although for all you know he could be John Aloisi or something. Furthermore, realistic as the game is, don't confuse football knowlege with FM knowledge.

[RTHerringbone]

With all due respect—trust me when I say I want all of what you said to be true—how an earth do you know all of this? Do you have access to under-the-hood information? How are you able to make these assumptions while I am not. I've followed your work for a long time and from statements you've made I can logically assume I know a lot more about football than you having played at a pretty good level in England. If you're able to make these assumptions from the game itself than you truly have mystical abilities.

I believe that wwfan was directly involved with initial and ongoing development of the Tactics Creator.

Presumably you need to know a thing or two about the game mechanics to be able to have that level of involvement.

Note that playing football doesn't necessarily mean you know about football, whether in real life or FMs interpretation of it.

[hugo_rune]

To me, scripting, when used in the derogatory sense towards FM, is the practice whereby the game is deciding 100% who wins. That's quite vague I know, so using an example, I'd say it's a game whereby no matter what you do, the same result will happen 100% of the time. And by that I mean that, say you lose a game to a weaker side 3-0. You reload, because that can't be right. You lose 3-0 again. You reload, you change tactics, you lose 3-0. You reload another ten times, you change tactics, personnel, your water, gas and energy supplier, and you still lose 3-0. You could relax that and ignore the scorelines, but the point still stands. This is the game telling you you won't win.

Actually, the game detects when a save has been reloaded, and makes sure that the result is different than what was scripted, just to hide what it's doing from the user. You know it's true.

[Kenco]

With all due respect—trust me when I say I want all of what you said to be true—how an earth do you know all of this? Do you have access to under-the-hood information? How are you able to make these assumptions while I am not. I've followed your work for a long time and from statements you've made I can logically assume I know a lot more about football than you having played at a pretty good level in England. If you're able to make these assumptions from the game itself than you truly have mystical abilities.

Do you know more than AVB? Arrigo Sacchi? Carlos Alberto Parreira?

[tomtuck01]

I've followed your work for a long time and from statements you've made I can logically assume I know a lot more about football than you having played at a pretty good level in England.

I like how you think you know alot about football just because you played at a "pretty good level". (Whatever that means). It's as daft as talking to those who think they know best because they go and watch their team every week.

[Ackter]

Arsene Wenger played at a pretty poor level in France, do you know more about football than him?

Jose Mourinho...

[darthrodent]

Do you know more than AVB? Arrigo Sacchi? Carlos Alberto Parreira?

Having played under Colin Harvey and Mick O'Brien for Everton's youth team for several years (Leon Osman, Tony Hibbert, Franny Jeffers [yes I know he was rubbish], Peter Clarke [good career] were some familiar players I played with) under robust tactical instructions being trained in my position like a dog and worked like one, I would logically infer that I know more about the game of football than someone who hasn't. In the same way I could logically infer that Steven Gerrard knows more about the game of football than me. But that's besides the point and your petulant and puerile comment adds nothing to the thread. But nice try at trying to be smart; it's unfortunate you came across as stupid. But my question remains unanswered:

If Wwfan has access to this depth of knowledge then why don't I? He's either completely brilliant to be able to make such concrete statements from such ambiguity, or he's been privy to the development of the game (something I wasn't aware of).

Please focus on the point and not my footballing past, which quite easily could be a lie anyhow if I was as pathetic as one would have to be to fabricate such a thing. For all you know I may just be, but again that's not the point here. Please don't derail the thread, this has been interesting and very helpful for me.

[darthrodent]

Arsene Wenger played at a pretty poor level in France, do you know more about football than him?

Jose Mourinho...

Again, besides the point and petulant; particularly for a moderator. Grow up.

[tomtuck01]

If Wwfan has access to this depth of knowledge then why don't I? He's either completely brilliant to be able to make such concrete statements from such ambiguity, or he's been privy to the development of the game (something I wasn't aware of).

It has been answered.

He made the tactics creator, and thus had/has access to stuff us normal users don't.

[KevMaaan]

Again, besides the point and petulant; particularly for a moderator. Grow up.

Whats really petulant is people have explained why wwfan knows what he knows and you still blatantly refuse to read it and understand.

[darthrodent]

Whats really petulant is people have explained why wwfan knows what he knows and you still blatantly refuse to read it and understand.

Actually, it hasn't been definitively answered. Thus far, the following have been the only comments on the matter:

Herbert Fandel: I [believe] he was heavily invovled in the making of the tactics module, though I'm sure he can answer that bit himself.

RTHerringbone: I [believe] that wwfan was directly involved with initial and ongoing development of the Tactics Creator.

In my experience I've never come across a paradigm of science grounded in truth backed up only by belief. Besides religion of course, which is by no means a paradigm of science and is impossible to falsify, making it no good theory at all. Are these forums always like this?

[Cleon]

Actually, it hasn't been definitively answered. Thus far, the following have been the only comments on the matter:

Herbert Fandel: I [believe] he was heavily invovled in the making of the tactics module, though I'm sure he can answer that bit himself.

RTHerringbone: I [believe] that wwfan was directly involved with initial and ongoing development of the Tactics Creator.

In my experience I've never come across a paradigm of science grounded in truth backed up only by belief. Besides religion of course, which is impossible to falsify. Are these forums always like this?

It's a fact, he help create the TC.

You really want to change your tone though, you aren't better than anyone else on here so stop acting like you are by been dismissive and talking down to people. There is no need for it.

[ScotchWhisky]

SI just need to admit that the matches are scripted.

I really believe they are as well. There is a reason why you can dominate a game so often only to blow it in the last couple of minutes. Sometimes even multiple goal deficits are erased in the last five minutes just so the results is proper. You can tell this by replaying matches over and over. Often times the results are eerily similar even when tactics are changed. The scores may be different, but the margin of defeat is almost always the same unless you really change tactics.

[tomtuck01]

I really believe they are as well. There is a reason why you can dominate a game so often only to blow it in the last couple of minutes. Sometimes even multiple goal deficits are erased in the last five minutes just so the results is proper. You can tell this by replaying matches over and over. Often times the results are eerily similar even when tactics are changed. The scores may be different, but the margin of defeat is almost always the same unless you really change tactics.

Your belief is wrong.

[darthrodent]

I really believe they are as well. There is a reason why you can dominate a game so often only to blow it in the last couple of minutes. Sometimes even multiple goal deficits are erased in the last five minutes just so the results is proper. You can tell this by replaying matches over and over. Often times the results are eerily similar even when tactics are changed. The scores may be different, but the margin of defeat is almost always the same unless you really change tactics.

I have to disagree, mate. I did an experiment the other day with my Tottenham save. The Potters played that 4-4-2 with two DMs and for the life of me I couldn't win. I would either draw with them or lose; this happened for five games straight. On the sixth game I tried something I never do; I went ALL OUT ATTACK with a rather non-traditional 5-2-2-1 system: high line, high pressing, high tempo, high pressure, hard tackling. I've replayed the game five times already and I've won each time, twice by three goals to nil. I'm still in the process of interpreting the implications of it, but it taught me one thing: that if you're the superior team it's perfectly fine to attack. Before this point I never ventured higher than Control unless I was losing. It's opened up a whole new world for me, which I'm looking forward to get stuck into.

[darthrodent]

It's a fact, he help create the TC.

You really want to change your tone though, you aren't better than anyone else on here so stop acting like you are by been dismissive and talking down to people. There is no need for it.

Relax, man, you have no idea what type of tone I am taking. An objective, rational, skeptical, and mature tone is not synonymous with a dismissive, condescending one. I was the one who was provoked after making a harmless inference from a perhaps misguided assumption. The thread was then hijacked momentarily by people commenting on that assumption I made, consequently derailing the thread and obfuscating my main point. Adding a smiley face at the end of a mocking post does not "unmock" said post.

I'm not here to make enemies or argue for the sake of an argument; and I certainly don't consider myself above anybody. I came on here for help to which the response was mockery. I understand that Wwfan is somewhat of a deity around these parts—and rightly so for all the work he's put in—but not being permitted to question him is not in the posting rules.

[themadsheep2001]

Relax, man, you have no idea what type of tone I am taking. An objective, rational, skeptical, and mature tone is not synonymous with a dismissive, condescending one. I was the one who was provoked after making a harmless inference from a perhaps misguided assumption. The thread was then hijacked momentarily by people commenting on that assumption I made, consequently derailing the thread and obfuscating my main point. Adding a smiley face at the end of a mocking post does not "unmock" said post.

I'm not here to make enemies or argue for the sake of an argument; and I certainly don't consider myself above anybody. I came on here for help to which the response was mockery. I understand that Wwfan is somewhat of a deity around these parts—and rightly so for all the work he's put in—but not being permitted to question him is not in the posting rules.

Actually if you look at post #6 http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php/354390-Team-Talks-Ruining-Game-Experience?p=8782248&viewfull=1#post8782248 and post #8 http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php/354390-Team-Talks-Ruining-Game-Experience?p=8782253&viewfull=1#post8782253 were offering help, as opposed to mockery...

And if you really are looking for help/advice, virtually no one better to get it from than wwfan, though Cleon certainly knows a thing or two among others.

[QWERTYOP]

Just get to know your team & get to know what works. Although the one thing I think DOES desperately need changing is being able to give individual talks BEFORE addressing the whole room.

[themadsheep2001]

Just get to know your team & get to know what works. Although the one thing I think DOES desperately need changing is being able to give individual talks BEFORE addressing the whole room.

This is pretty much how I work, I buy/develop players of a certain type (the way Ferguson instills a certain mentality for example). So I already know roughly how each player will react to my set approach in team talks.

[jasse]

my team started to perform better AND dont seem to loose any mental morale crap once i actually stopped the idiotic team talks. its nothing but a waste of time and just upsetting players. again brilliant minds at SI managed to complicate and f**k up things as opposed to KISS. (keep it simple schmucks). why? it is beyond me. and why the hell would a one frase team-talk bs have more impact on the game and result then 30 odd different atributes and skills is again totally beyond me. my advice to you guys is ignore team talk crap and just go on with the match. not before, not at half time, not after. forget about it.

[darthrodent]

Actually if you look at post #6 http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php/354390-Team-Talks-Ruining-Game-Experience?p=8782248&viewfull=1#post8782248 and post #8 http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php/354390-Team-Talks-Ruining-Game-Experience?p=8782253&viewfull=1#post8782253 were offering help, as opposed to mockery...

And if you really are looking for help/advice, virtually no one better to get it from than wwfan, though Cleon certainly knows a thing or two among others.

Exactly why I came to this forum; because I know this is where all the better FM minds gather, including Cleon, whose rather lengthy, but deeply insightful threads have allowed me to view the game differently.

I did actually say as much regarding help/advice, #61: Please don't derail the thread, this has been interesting and very helpful for me. I'm 100% open to suggestion and advice.

[Ackter]

Again, besides the point and petulant; particularly for a moderator. Grow up.

Sorry Mr. Premier League star, just pointing out how patently ridiculous your claim was.

If you don't like it, not really my problem tbh.

[darthrodent]

my team started to perform better AND dont seem to loose any mental morale crap once i actually stopped the idiotic team talks. its nothing but a waste of time and just upsetting players. again brilliant minds at SI managed to complicate and f**k up things as opposed to KISS. (keep it simple schmucks). why? it is beyond me. and why the hell would a one frase team-talk bs have more impact on the game and result then 30 odd different atributes and skills is again totally beyond me. my advice to you guys is ignore team talk crap and just go on with the match. not before, not at half time, not after. forget about it.

To which he responded

To be frank, it actually is a bunch of brilliant minds who came up with this game. I'm a Java programmer and I'm utterly floored at the Development talent SI has at its disposal. The game is a marvel of coding. No offence, mate, but posts are supposed to be constructive. All I garnered from your post was rage.

[themadsheep2001]

Exactly why I came to this forum; because I know this is where all the better FM minds gather, including Cleon, whose rather lengthy, but deeply insightful threads have allowed me to view the game differently.

I did actually say as much regarding help/advice, #61: Please don't derail the thread, this has been interesting and very helpful for me. I'm 100% open to suggestion and advice.

My 2 cents:

Get to know your squad: For me this is the key to team talks. I build determined professional squads, players who can take pressure. So i know that I can demand more in my team talks. I'll be assertively demanding a win at home against everyone bar a top 3/4 side, Passionate against all rivals, but a little calmer away from home.

If we are on a good run we are at home I'll demand we keep it up. If/when they do a good job, I'll tell them they have played well. As long the win is decent, they'll get some form of praise, home draws are not accepted unless we have been unlucky. Away draws I'm more relaxed about.

I demand high standards, but don't necessarily keep them consistently highly strung, ive noticed that doing so can bring stress (understandably) to even the most driven of players

[jasse]

To which he responded

To be frank, it actually is a bunch of brilliant minds who came up with this game. I'm a Java programmer and I'm utterly floored at the Development talent SI has at its disposal. The game is a marvel of coding. No offence, mate, but posts are supposed to be constructive. All I garnered from your post was rage.

well, i did say my team plays better without me doing team talks? you dont find it constructive? or is it that only sucking up to SI, like you do, telling everybody what a marvelous piece of java coding this is, like you do, is considered "constructive"?

[darthrodent]

Arsene Wenger played at a pretty poor level in France, do you know more about football than him?

Jose Mourinho...

Wenger played for RC Strasbourg; how is that a poor level? I played for Merseyside Boys and Everton's youth team—as I said a decent level. But compared to Wenger I'm NOT EVEN CLOSE. And Mourinho played for Rio Ave and Belenenses, respectable Portugese teams. I would have given anything to play at that level of football. But thank you for unwittingly proving my point.

[darthrodent]

well, i did say my team plays better without me doing team talks? you dont find it constructive? or is it that only sucking up to SI, like you do, telling everybody what a marvelous piece of java coding this is, like you do, is considered "constructive"?

I'm quite literally beside myself. For how long has it not been possible to have an adult discussion on these forums? It says in the forum rules that responses should be constructive. The fact you used the words "crap", "waste of time", and "idiotic" points to the opposite. You were clearly being facetious regarding SI's 'brilliant minds'. With me being especially interested in coding and software development since it is, after all my job, I am in awe (not to mention extremely jealous) of what they've managed to do. If that's sucking up then I'm a hexagonal platypus.

[RTHerringbone]

Another GD thread turns into a slanging match, incredible.

[Kriss]

Everybody grow up and stop with the condescension and general anti social stuff, it doesn't add to the conversation.

[KevMaaan]

I have to disagree, mate. I did an experiment the other day with my Tottenham save. The Potters played that 4-4-2 with two DMs and for the life of me I couldn't win. I would either draw with them or lose; this happened for five games straight. On the sixth game I tried something I never do; I went ALL OUT ATTACK with a rather non-traditional 5-2-2-1 system: high line, high pressing, high tempo, high pressure, hard tackling. I've replayed the game five times already and I've won each time, twice by three goals to nil. I'm still in the process of interpreting the implications of it, but it taught me one thing: that if you're the superior team it's perfectly fine to attack. Before this point I never ventured higher than Control unless I was losing. It's opened up a whole new world for me, which I'm looking forward to get stuck into.

Thats pretty wierd, in my spurs save the only player i have bought is lewandowski and find my results are SIGNIFICANTLY better when, i too, opt for an attacking mentality. I play attacking away from home and still yield great results vs better opposition. I do, however, stand off my opponents, but with an attacking mentality. The amount of CCC's i creat per game is sick.

[wwfan]

That's what "scripted" means. It means that patterns of player behaviour are pre-set, so that factors beyond tactics and team management influence the results in a predictable fashion. We are supposed to deal with sudden bad performances/attitudes tactically because team talks don't actually influence them enough to help us overcome the scripted events. That's how the unending winning streaks of previous versions are now stopped. Through a deus-ex-machina sabotaging whatever success has been built up over time. Now, it is possible to prevent all that, but only through abandoning the philosophy that has brought you success in the first place (unless that is to go full Hard Counter tactics every game of course). Well perhaps not only that but definitely not only through team talks.

Why abandon a successful tactic? I play the same tactic against everyone and I create more big chances than any of my opponents, and I often do change some minor stuff to improve whatever I see don't function properly. Then why do my players enter the pitch like if they would rather be home watching the telly and eat popcorn, and that without warning? Because I should have said Assertive for the Fans rather than Passionate for the Fans? No. Because the standard 442 I encounter suddenly is perfectly suited to stop my 343? Very unlikely since I still create 3x more big chances than they are so they don't in fact stop me. Because the strikers suddenly can't score? If so, why? Not because, as I said, they are stopped effectively from doing so. Because they parked the bus and scored on the counter? No - everyone parks the bus and tries to score on the counter, but this doesn't mean that they should automatically succeed at doing so regardless of player quality and form, especially since my superior defenders do actually succeed at stopping them. Statisics don't lie - or do they?

So the question remains: why do I observe every sign of poor form in my matches when I continue winning, retain excellent morale, continue to dominate and continue having full control in my matches except for that one chance they get straight from kick-off (ish) that for two months game-time has resulted in a conceded goal?

You are conflating more shots and possession with 'always winning'. That doesn't happen in real life and it shouldn't happen in FM. I've posted the below elsewhere, but it is worth bringing up again.

Reading the Match: As many frequenters of these forums are undoubtedly aware, Football Manager's ME has long been criticised by a vocal minority as being inherently unfair. The gist of this argument is that while they can accept that teams lose matches in which they've dominated possession and the shot count, it happens far too often in FM. On most occasions, these people are losing slightly over a handful of matches this way per season. Out of this argument come theories about AI super-keepers, a cheating AI, the AI "knowing" and "cracking" your tactic, matches being pre-determined as it is "just time you lost", etc, etc.

CCCs: Thanks to OPTA, we know that most players convert less than 50% of their CCCs. Of the 33 players having 10 or more CCCs in last season's EPL, only 8 scored with 50% or more of them. In contrast, 11 converted 30% or less. Further, some strikers are almost completely reliant on CCCs for their goals, normally Target Man or Poacher types. As we've explained in these forums for FM13, that is one reason why they generally don't make good lone forwards. In contrast, as page two of the article illustrates, more complete strikers can fashion chances out of nothing.

In this Guardian article, OPTA even go so far as to determine a probability conversion for each chance. In a match in which Newcastle outshot Reading by 16 to 7 and had 56% of possession, they lost 2-1. The OPTA analyst suggests that Reading deserved to win, for they had the two best chances in the match with a 49% and 69% probability of conversion, compared to Newcastle's best chance, which had a 34% probability. In actuality, Reading won because they scored from a 17% probability chance. Across the match the data suggested Reading should score 1.6 goals and Newcastle 1.4, so the 2-1 result was a fair one. Whereas FM doesn't yet have that level of analysis, an educated subjective eye on the match analysis screen should be a good substitute.

Possession: Thanks to OPTA stats and The Guardian, we have exact knowledge of how often a team wins when having more possession (57%) and more shots (71%). Even if you always dominate the shot count, over a 60 match season you should expect to fail to win circa 18 times. Obviously, you will win some matches very easily. The key to being good at FM is not those matches, but reducing this 30-40% figure to one that will ensure you win some trophies.

A Holistic Approach to Tactics: Doing that takes a holistic approach. You must have good strategic skills and manage your squad so you buy the right players and keep them fit for the right matches. You must have good tactical skills and make the correct pre and in match decisions to ensure that the conditions, opposition players and formation, and the narrative of the match are under your control as often as possible. You must have good man and media management skills to ensure as many of your players as possible are mentally prepared for the game, extending your streaks and preventing slumps.

We've long argued that a subjective and contextual reading of a match is far more important than a statistical one (at least at FM's statistical level). We now have the data to back that up. You need to understand what is going on at a tactical and motivational level, not merely keep possession high and count shots. That only goes so far. Learning to win on the counter, in horrible conditions, against teams that park the bus, and when your players are nervous or frustrated is part of the management experience. Grasp that and you will master FM.

Winning and Losing Streaks: You embark on winning and losing streaks because you do not make logical tactical changes and/or are not god enough at other aspects of the game, such as media and man management. No matter how good your tactics, at some point, the players will play better or worse than expected. If they player better than expected, and you turn it into a win, morale will go up and you should be able to turn it into a streak. That's the easy part. If they play worse than expected, you firstly need to try to turn things around at half time and turn a draw into a win or a loss into a draw. If that fails, you need to have a man/media management strategy that stops the bad performance turning into a slump. If you don't have that, then you will consistently experience seemingly random winning and losing streaks. At other times, you will simply lose to the better team. You need to work out how to stop that defeat from badly affecting your players, so you can forget about it and move on. Again, a poor managerial strategy here can knock onto a losing streak.

[wwfan]

This is interesting. In FM12, I built a squad which consisted entirely of young players, probably the oldest being 22. However, in this years FM I haven't done this mainly due to the fact that I've been teams which have needed promotion. Anyway, my question is, in previous versions, did it have the very same effect that it has in this years FM?

It did, but has become more sophisticated and nuanced over time. The biggest difference between 12 and 13 is the collision detection in the ME, which has almost completely prevented users being able to channel play to a quick, lone FC and beat the ME rather than AI. If you did that, you'd never have noticed the nuances as you'd be winning through ME hole exploitation a lot of the time the team was having an off day.

[wwfan]

Actually, it hasn't been definitively answered. Thus far, the following have been the only comments on the matter:

Herbert Fandel: I [believe] he was heavily invovled in the making of the tactics module, though I'm sure he can answer that bit himself.

RTHerringbone: I [believe] that wwfan was directly involved with initial and ongoing development of the Tactics Creator.

In my experience I've never come across a paradigm of science grounded in truth backed up only by belief. Besides religion of course, which is by no means a paradigm of science and is impossible to falsify, making it no good theory at all. Are these forums always like this?

I've long been involved with the tactics module and ME (at design level) and do have access to a fair bit of in depth information that might not be immediately noticeable to the casual observer. In terms of qualifications and an experience, I am a doctorially qualified management researcher by trade and have worked with cutting edge management psychology researchers on motivation and efficacy, so possibly understand more about that aspect of sport and management than an ex trainee footballer . In FM terms, when working on the TC , I took it upon myself to read as much football related research as I had access to, which, given my job, is a lot. So, although I haven't trialled for professional clubs, I've probably read more football research than almost anybody on the planet.

I've professionally coached high level sport, although not football, working on in-match motivation/performance and tactical development of my students. Alongside my management research, I now manage one of the most successful sports clubs in Sydney (circa 25 teams and nominated for the 2013 club of the year), so deal with sporting performance issues / personality clashes on a regular basis. In all honesty, FM provides the patterns of motivation and performance I'd expect to and do see in reality. It would be less of a game if it didn't.

Is that enough to satisfy, or do I have to throw more qualifications and experience around?

[MichaelBrown]

It did, but has become more sophisticated and nuanced over time. The biggest difference between 12 and 13 is the collision detection in the ME, which has almost completely prevented users being able to channel play to a quick, lone FC and beat the ME rather than AI. If you did that, you'd never have noticed the nuances as you'd be winning through ME hole exploitation a lot of the time the team was having an off day.

I understand that. I hardly ever played with a lone striker anyway IIRC, especially on poacher. Likewise, I don't think that building a team of youngsters suddenly means that I played formation with the lone striker. Definitely no correlation there.

[wwfan]

I understand that. I hardly ever played with a lone striker anyway IIRC, especially on poacher. Likewise, I don't think that building a team of youngsters suddenly means that I played formation with the lone striker. Definitely no correlation there.

I didn't suggest there was. Much forum angst this year has happened because people are having to come to grips with the game holistic because they can't overachieve with an ME breaking tactic. However, a lot of people have been avoiding such tactics for years and have already grasped the nuances of managing a squad tactically and motivationally. If you are one of those, you'd have already worked out how to eke the most out of a green squad. If not, and you'd relied on ME busting, you wouldn't have needed to.

[wwfan]

For those that are interested, we had almost exactly the same discussion in Tactics roughly this time last year. Thread is:

http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php/310622-Pre-Match-Press-Conferences-and-Team-Talks-Heavily-Influencing-The-Match-Engine

[MichaelBrown]

I didn't suggest there was. Much forum angst this year has happened because people are having to come to grips with the game holistic because they can't overachieve with an ME breaking tactic. However, a lot of people have been avoiding such tactics for years and have already grasped the nuances of managing a squad tactically and motivationally. If you are one of those, you'd have already worked out how to eke the most out of a green squad. If not, and you'd relied on ME busting, you wouldn't have needed to.

I don't really know how I fit into this. I found FM12 easy and I usually get bored of the 4-2-3-1/4-1-2-2-1/4-1-2-1-2 formations that are popular. Much of the fun after the third patch for me revolves around weird formations. Admittedly, I struggled at the start of FM13 but it didn't take me long to figure out why and then put it right. Now, I couldn't go back to FM12.

As such, I'm not sure where the team talks came into play for me.

[wwfan]

I don't really know how I fit into this. I found FM12 easy and I usually get bored of the 4-2-3-1/4-1-2-2-1/4-1-2-1-2 formations that are popular. Much of the fun after the third patch for me revolves around weird formations. Admittedly, I struggled at the start of FM13 but it didn't take me long to figure out why and then put it right. Now, I couldn't go back to FM12.

As such, I'm not sure where the team talks came into play for me.

Successful green squad management mainly involves reducing pressure and having good tactical solutions to see out tight matches. As nerves and losses of concentration are more prevalent to green squads, working out how to hold onto that 1-0 lead is tantamount. If you had a tactical solution to that and were generally calm and controlled in media and man management, you'd have done well.

[jefflackey]

I've long been involved with the tactics module and ME (at design level) and do have access to a fair bit of in depth information that might not be immediately noticeable to the casual observer. In terms of qualifications and an experience, I am a doctorially qualified management researcher by trade and have worked with cutting edge management psychology researchers on motivation and efficacy, so possibly understand more about that aspect of sport and management than an ex trainee footballer . In FM terms, when working on the TC , I took it upon myself to read as much football related research as I had access to, which, given my job, is a lot. So, although I haven't trialled for professional clubs, I've probably read more football research than almost anybody on the planet.

I've professionally coached high level sport, although not football, working on in-match motivation/performance and tactical development of my students. Alongside my management research, I now manage one of the most successful sports clubs in Sydney (circa 25 teams and nominated for the 2013 club of the year), so deal with sporting performance issues / personality clashes on a regular basis. In all honesty, FM provides the patterns of motivation and performance I'd expect to and do see in reality. It would be less of a game if it didn't.

Is that enough to satisfy, or do I have to throw more qualifications and experience around?

Jumping in here, I've managed both sports clubs and people in other arenas for about 30 years. All I am looking for in the game is the ability to make choices and do and say what I'd do in real life and not have to "crack" the code to get realistic results, whether it is the team talk, the individual talks (which I think are more important in real life than team talks,) press conferences, etc.

I'm kind of "eh" on the team talks. Overall not bad, I suppose, but I don't think they add much. Individual talks feel more real to me - e.g. a player is anxious or nervous, finding a way to calm him down, or a good player is underperforming and complacent and you find a way to get his attention, etc.

But here and there are things that are "off." I had a team talk in which the team played poorly and lost to a weaker team and I let them know that was unacceptable. They were fired up and motivated. But one player actually won man of the match with an 8+ rating, so after the team talk I told him I was happy with his play. Which you'd do in real life. Most of the team immediately went into the red - upset. OK, in real life, you play like crap and the coach chews you out but tells one player who DID play very well, OK, you are the exception, they get it. Especially professionals at a high level. So one player has become unhappy, due to that one team talk, and even though everyone else is cool, high morale, we're winning, this guy remains unhappy "due to team talk."

Numerous examples but they are, admittedly, the exception. I realize this is a game, and it is perhaps a sign of how well designed it is that our expectations are so high. For me, I want to role play the role of a manager and make my decisions and choices based on what I'd actually do and say in the situation, not based on some "guide."

[wwfan]

I'm not sure the "one guy unhappy" is entirely unrealistic. We have a few difficult personality types who need constant kid gloves and take everything personally. There's an awful lot of evidence that football clubs do too, and and equal amount that they are not professional and disciplined across the board.

[jefflackey]

I'm not sure the "one guy unhappy" is entirely unrealistic. We have a few difficult personality types who need constant kid gloves and take everything personally. There's an awful lot of evidence that football clubs do too, and and equal amount that they are not professional and disciplined across the board.

Yeah, I don't disagree as I think about it. If somehow this guy is programmed to be one of those guys who is always looking for a reason to gripe, and any of us who have managed - whether sports, or in business - know those people.

[darthrodent]

I've long been involved with the tactics module and ME (at design level) and do have access to a fair bit of in depth information that might not be immediately noticeable to the casual observer. In terms of qualifications and an experience, I am a doctorially qualified management researcher by trade and have worked with cutting edge management psychology researchers on motivation and efficacy, so possibly understand more about that aspect of sport and management than an ex trainee footballer . In FM terms, when working on the TC , I took it upon myself to read as much football related research as I had access to, which, given my job, is a lot. So, although I haven't trialled for professional clubs, I've probably read more football research than almost anybody on the planet.

I've professionally coached high level sport, although not football, working on in-match motivation/performance and tactical development of my students. Alongside my management research, I now manage one of the most successful sports clubs in Sydney (circa 25 teams and nominated for the 2013 club of the year), so deal with sporting performance issues / personality clashes on a regular basis. In all honesty, FM provides the patterns of motivation and performance I'd expect to and do see in reality. It would be less of a game if it didn't.

Is that enough to satisfy, or do I have to throw more qualifications and experience around?

Errr, no, I think that should just about do it

So perhaps you would be kind enough then to shed some light on the team-talk module as it currently stands? You may or may not be aware of my ongoing tussle with team-talks (I don't know how much of this thread you've actually read), but to reiterate my earlier sentiments, I've likened team-talks to rolling a die. As much as I analyse them and search for patterns of logic the more my conviction is renewed that they are so far removed from reality and coherence that they do a disservice to a great game.

I have some authority on the subject of team-talks, having been on the receiving end of literally hundreds upon hundreds during my playing career: school teams, Everton's youth team, Wirral Boys, Merseyside Boys, TNS (when they were called Total Network Solutions), Cammell Lairds, and finally several pub teams. Quite honestly, there has never EVER been a team-talk that has caused me to lose or gain morale to the extent it occurs in Football Manager. It's not like managers really "rally the troops" in hair-raising Braveheart-esque fashion in which dressing rooms are moved to tears. Team-talks, from my experience, are much less profound and effectual than perhaps the stereotypes that have been conveyed, and more to do with tactics than high-fives and chest pumps. In fact they are very similar to Brendan Rodgers' team-talks for those of you who watched the reality TV show on Liverpool FC. Kind of uninspiring really.

Conveniently for me, a wonderful example surfaced not too long ago this evening while playing my Tottenham save. A respectable 4th after 17 games, I faced Wigan away who were 18th at the time. Far from being out the ordinary I told my team 'Passionately' that I would like then to win for the fans, which was fair enough I thought; to which my world class centre back, Alvaro Dominguez (this is my sixth season if you don't agree with my assessment of him) took offence to. 'In the red' he went and 'Seemed to Lose Focus' he did. For me, this defies logic on the grounds that it was not possible for me to predict the outcome. What if I had said the same thing Calmly or Assertively? Would it have made a difference? I have no clue, and that's my point about it being a dice roll. It simply beggars belief—from my own playing experience—that I would lose focus and confidence in a match because my manager 'Assertively' told our team he expected us to win rather than passionately; we're splitting arbitrary hairs with each talk it seems, but I digress. Almost inevitably, after just five minutes:

Dominguez receives the ball under no pressure, and for a good few seconds inexplicably holds on to the ball

My DLP, #7 is wide open; a pass the CB makes time and time again.

Then out of nowhere he plays a defence-splitting through ball…to the opponent's striker; 1-0 Wigan and I go on to lose the game

I play with an attacking mentality, a direct passing system and a quick Tempo. Dominguez is left footed, does not Dwell on the Ball, and #7 is my Deep Lying Playmaker. I see no reason why he wouldn't just give it off to the DLP as he does approximately 60 times a game usually. Standing out like a sore thumb, it stands to reason then that Dominguez played that ludicrous pass as a consequence of a misguided team-talk. After all, team-talks must do something; and that certainly appeared to be a pass from a man who had lost focus.

I take defeat on the chin pretty well usually and always try and take something away from a loss. However, when a botched team-talk is the antecedent to that defeat, I feel quite sorely cheated. I should explain that I use the term loosely. It's not that I think the game has a nefarious agenda or that there is anything conspiratorial about it in the slightest, it's more to do with my being so in the dark with team-talks and how whimsical and downright inconsistent they appear to me.

To continue with a few more examples—that very same game against Wigan—I aggressively let them know at half-time that their performance was not good enough because it wasn't (a reaction I use fairly frequently). Near enough the whole team—other than Holtby (bless him) who was Fired Up and 'green'—either lost confidence, or became stressed, or both. As one might expect, I went on to lose the game 2-0; but most surprising was that at full-time I used exactly the same shout as I did, tone and all, as I did at half-time, but this time the whole team was 'in the green' and either Fired Up and Motivated. Rationally abhorrent, it appears my team lose focus and confidence if I'm angry at them for trailing a game, yet are positively inspired if I rip into them after a defeat.

[wwfan]

The problem with team talks is the limitation of a computer game. You shouldn't think of them as "just" a team talk, but the opportunity to sum up what your general attitude towards and expectations for the match are. In reality, this would have been transmitted in interactions with the training staff and players during your match preparation interactions, as would tactical approaches and details on the opposition. However, as that kind of interaction does not occur in FM, it gets reduced to a short summing up during the team talk.

The best way to interpret it is as follows:

1: End of match team talk: sets the base expectations for the next match based on the performance in the current match.

2: Media interaction: tells the world what you expect from the match and your players

3: Pre-match team talk: draws attention back to those expectations or changes them if you feel that needs to happen (which you can plot by seeing if morale has shifted). As such, pre-match team talks are backwards compatible, in that they set the attitude and expectations of the whole approach to the match at the club.

4: Half-time team talks: the only one that is explicitly focused on what is happening during the match.

So, in your above example, you will have been passionately communicating to your players about the importance of winning the match for the fans during your entire match preparation, rather than focusing on being calm and professional, which is all that should be required for such a fixture. Consequently, one of your star players has lost focus as he doesn't understand his manager's passion towards what should be a relatively straightforward fixture. This results in his making a foolish mistake in the game.

The half-time team talk is more difficult for me to interpret and I'd need more data from the match to approach accuracy. My best guess is that the team wasn't actually playing that badly and was only behind because of one player's stupid mistake. To harshly criticise them is thus the wrong approach. Calmly telling them that they were unlucky and to keep it up might have worked better. However, they obviously had a bad second half (perhaps prompted by that negative team talk) and were thus open to such criticism at the end of the game.

This now takes you into the preparation for the next game. You've already assertively or aggressively expressed yourself and have made it clear that you expect a better performance next match. Your interaction strategy in the media and pre-match team talk needs to bounce of those expectations.

[RTHerringbone]

This has broken out into a longest response thread.

Your approach in the Wigan game is indicative of a flawed interpretation of how tone should be used. If you have this wrong, then it isn't a surprise that you see some volatile hits to morale. If you are able to consider the fact that you may therefore be wrong, in spite of such a glittering footballing past from which you learned so much, you may be able to move on.

[Contexx]

For what it's worth, this is an interesting discussion and I have to say, in my nearly ten years of playing the game, I find the squad management in this version to be the best so far, and really engaging overall. Sure, there are some baffling things that happen from time to time, but as someone who micromanages his squad and focuses a lot on morale, I am not complaining.

In my Wolfsburg save, I had an utter rollercoaster of a sequence I'd like to share. In my second season, with a squad of very determined, hard working players, I managed to win the title and make it to the semi-final of the CL. It was mostly scrappy 1:0 wins, counterattacking against the odds football, led by Ivica Olic as captain. As IRL, Olic is not the most skilled player, but makes things happen through his sheer determination and workrate.

The next season, with Olic leaving on a free (he chose it and couldn't be convinced), I got some younger, more skilled players, and had Milan Badelj (Infl. 18) as my new captain. We were flying through the league and CL, until six games before the end, when we lost our first match, then got the lumps kicked out of us in the CL by Gasperinni's Juventus. With morale suddenly down, particularly that of my youngish captain, we somehow contrived to lose four of the next five matches in the league, in spite of outplaying the opposition. It was typical stuff - woodwork, missed penalties, and conceding two goals from three shots. We threw away the title! Funnily enough, the team made a spirited push in the CL, all the way to the final, losing to ManCiteh on penalties.

Never in my ten years had I experienced a breakdown like that, especially as I would watch the highlights and there really didn't seem to be anything tactically wrong. Morale would even usually turn pretty green with positive feedback in team talks. My only conclusion was that the squad, which is pretty young, got cocky in the domestic league, and cracked under pressure. How else to explain fighting back and beating Juventus away from home, but losing to a midtable team when a draw would have sufficied to wrap up the title? During that run, I was (inadvertantly) giving a mix of "no pressure" and more harsh team talks, and they, by and large, seemed to work as reaction was good, though morale still wasn't.

It was not pre-determined. Perhaps I should have been more cautious tactically, or noticed that my star striker is missing too many chances, or my CB is uncomfortable playing against a physical lump. Perhaps it would have been wiser to throw in a more experienced, less skilled, but more composed midfielder to finish the job.

My theory is that the squad was young, got complacent, and lacked a "leader". My captain, Badelj, as I mentioned, has 18 for influence, but a paltry 10 for Determination. More significantly, his "important matches" rating is low - an oversight I hadn't really noticed the effect of blatantly, though it did seem to have an effect on the team as a whole. I will not bother you too much with the rest of the details, although the next season, I gave a pre-season team talk of "I know you're still hurting from last year...." and the team steamrolled to a treble!

Most importantly, on the very last game of the season, needing a draw, we got a red card early in the match. Not only did the team hang on, but actually won 5:3. Yes, there were tactical switches I had to make, but I firmly believe it was the team talk and squad determination that rescued the result. After that victory, the team went on to cruise through the dcup final and clinically destroy Barcelona in the CL final. For those interested, I would be happy to upload that match, as it clearly shows the reactions of the players when going a man down, a goal down, and then the hot streak to get the job done.

As in previous versions, you get "watershed moments" where certain players either step up or screw up - sometimes you can have other members of the squad comment "angry at xxx's error" or the player becoming a "favorite" among the others after such a performance. These things do simulate luck/fate/r the sheer difference between hitting the underside of the bar and the ball going in or out...

In real life, we see results and performances that defy logic all the time. Unfancied Greece winning a Euro Championship, Baggio missing a penalty in the final, or certain players going through hot patches they themselves can't explain. Also, we see Celtic beating Barca, Chelsea winning the CL, watercarriers managing egos with the captain's armband etc. I struggle to understand what "scripted" would mean, but we've all watched matches in real life where one team is throwing the kitchen sink at another, and you just "know" the team getting battered will sneak a win...

In FM, it seems you can get by through getting a good AssMan, having him do team talks, setting up a reliable tactic, and going on autopilot. Conversely, you can really delve into the man management side of things, get to know your squad and how to get the best out of them. It may not work all the time, nor should it, but we've all experienced those moments when you get the intangible element right (or wrong) - though it's so much easier to praise the game when it goes your way and criticize it when it goes wrong than just shrug your shoulders and think "football, bloody h...."

[Phippsy]

Interesting read guys. I believe that to assume a series such as FM, which as been running for over 10 years now, has not developed sufficiently enough to not need to rely on a 'scripted' match engine is slightly naive.

Furthermore, for a bloke who thinks he grew up playing youth team football for Everton and is now a programmer, to not understand how a range of variables can influence match events is also very interesting...