how is this logical

[11v11]

playing manchester united at home against spurs....so far in my career ive never lost at old trafford, forth season, starting on my fifth. so in this particular game i wanted to win to remain on top and thought that it has to be at least positive mentality and then i would switch to attack when they dont appear to respond. so first half spurs had not a single attempt on goal. second half i started with an attack mentality as first half was still 0-0...so spurs start to control the match as maybe, my teams mentality was attacking, switch back to positive, nothing happened and the game was neautral..so guess how did i win 2-0? i switched to maximum defence mentality due to frustration and a closure to what is logic as i grew impatient and unable to improve chances, a wtf moment, if you will and it worked...reverse psychology?

i find it incredible that switching to this mode increased my attempts on goal much more than when i had a good first half with positive mentality..maybe s.i. should add a mentality mode called thick brick wall then i could have won 5-0

[Snorks]

Simple, you sat back, went defensive which drew Spurs out - you then exploited the space created.

Players will trigger a counter-attack when criteria are met regardless of your tactical mentality. 

Be careful though - the last manager who played that way at United got sacked!

[HUNT3R]

It's perfectly possible to be attacking even with a defensive/low risk Mentality, as you have found. Your roles, duties and instructions will all play a part in how the tactic functions. Either the Mentality suits the rest of your setup more than Positive did, or it suited your setup more in specifically this match.

[Mitja]

I think  mentality needs major changes or even better get rid of it. It's a dinosaur instruction from CM days when there was like 6 or 7 TIs. There's no need for it anymore

[XaW]

You executed a perfect Mourinho in the second half. Frustrating Spurs until they allow space that Mbappe can run in. Though since Sule got the first goal I expect a set piece goal. Even more Mourinoesque with the only thing missing is Fellaini poking out eyes with his elbows.

[sporadicsmiles]

5 hours ago, Mitja said:

I think  mentality needs major changes or even better get rid of it. It's a dinosaur instruction from CM days when there was like 6 or 7 TIs. There's no need for it anymore

It just needs to be clearer what it does. More like it used to be in FM18 actually. When you had a graphical representation how how changing your mentality affected the default values for everything else. It is just a catch-all for changing many TIs in one go.

The one thing I really dislike about the tactics screen in FM19 is that it no longer allows you to do this. Instructions such as "shorter passing" and "lower tempo", for instance, are all relative. But you really have little idea in the current engine what it is relative to. This actually leads to people not understanding what is happening when they choose a mentality.

I mean, would anyone unfamiliar with the game actually know what "attacking" or "cautious" actually means, in FM terms?

[Mitja]

2 minutes ago, sporadicsmiles said:

I mean, would anyone unfamiliar with the game actually know what "attacking" or "cautious" actually means, in FM terms?

The game description of those mentalities should be swaped to suit them better. They produce the opposite football to what they clsim.

[sporadicsmiles]

3 hours ago, Mitja said:

The game description of those mentalities should be swaped to suit them better. They produce the opposite football to what they clsim.

They should be improved, but maybe not entirely swapped. Attacking will make you more direct, and take more risks. Cautious make you play slower, and more risk free. So cautious can be very deadly in an attacking sense if you can draw a team onto you and create space to exploit, and it depends a lot on the roles you have.

What really needs to be expressed is how each mentality affects all the defaults for the TIs and PIs. There is currently no obvious way to know if a cautious mentality with more direct passing will have similar passing to all out attack with much shorter, for instance.

[Jack Joyce]

26 minutes ago, sporadicsmiles said:

What really needs to be expressed is how each mentality affects all the defaults for the TIs and PIs. There is currently no obvious way to know if a cautious mentality with more direct passing will have similar passing to all out attack with much shorter, for instance.

The text that displays in the TI UI will always reflect the current level of that setting. You should notice when changing to attacking mentality that the text updates to reflect the changes in levels e.g. tempo going from standard to higher.

[11v11]

2 hours ago, Jack Joyce said:

The text that displays in the TI UI will always reflect the current level of that setting. You should notice when changing to attacking mentality that the text updates to reflect the changes in levels e.g. tempo going from standard to higher.

so, indirectly, what you are saying. ive set my team up too attacking?

[Jack Joyce]

6 minutes ago, 11v11 said:

so, indirectly, what you are saying. ive set my team up too attacking?

No, it's impossible to say from just a couple of screenshots. As others have said you could have drawn the opposition out and countered with pace in behind. Or maybe your other TIs were set to extreme levels and got lowered by the mentality switch to more reasonable levels.

[Novem9]

4 часа назад, Jack Joyce сказал:

The text that displays in the TI UI will always reflect the current level of that setting. You should notice when changing to attacking mentality that the text updates to reflect the changes in levels e.g. tempo going from standard to higher.

Even fluidity changes in FM19 relatively mentality. But honestly I still do it on experience and feeling, have no direct knowledge about this.

It will be nice to give more desription about this into game. For newbie it's a zone of delusions at all

[iMan]

It doesn’t make any logical sense. No way you should be better offensively at home with Manchester United by switching to the defensive mentality.

This isn’t a logical and realistic game. The most effective tactics usually make no sense.

[Piperita]

I think the key is the change in Tempo created by the switch in mentality. The spurs are a good team with a defense with pretty good positioning and mental stats. If you play an aggressive mentality, your players are instructed to play faster and more direct which the Spurs could easier deflect or block.

When you played more defensively, your players took more time in attack and tried a more patient approach. Roles and duties and TIs still told them where to run and what the general idea was. But with more patience and the Spurs lured forwards, your higher quality shined through and you had a bit more space to use. 

[Mitja]

13 hours ago, sporadicsmiles said:

What really needs to be expressed is how each mentality affects all the defaults for the TIs and PIs. There is currently no obvious way to know if a cautious mentality with more direct passing will have similar passing to all out attack with much shorter, for instance.

What I want to say is there's no need for mentality to interfere with decision making, it is contradictory to have micro level adjuster that overrides other perfectly logical instructions. If you want to achieve fast direct style of play mentality shouldn't have any  influence here. Even bigger problem especially for AI tis that particular tactics doesn't produce football it should and claims in game description. 

There are more than enough TIs. PIs, ppms and different player roles and duties that create behaviour. I really don't think any manager has so much influence on players behaviour let alone having ability to micro tweak particular instruction. Example, player with TTB set to often will execute that instruction totally different on defensive and attacking mentality. This kind of micro management is something no manager can have influence over. I see no reason why this micro tweaking should exist in the game. It's something AI will never be able to learn and manage.

Also I think currently tactics have too  much influence on behaviour for example irl you need sufficient player quality to play short passing game in FM any team can play tiki taka -  and AI won't even realise it. On contrary AI Guardiola also won't realise he's playing something totally different than what's been set in db. If this long term issue can't be fixed and it looks like it can't then remove it, there's simply no need anymore for mentality interfering in (passing) decision making and you'll have one part of the game working properly and there won't be any confusion about what affects what and how to achieve particular style of play, which is equally important for AI and human manager.

[sporadicsmiles]

15 hours ago, Jack Joyce said:

The text that displays in the TI UI will always reflect the current level of that setting. You should notice when changing to attacking mentality that the text updates to reflect the changes in levels e.g. tempo going from standard to higher.

I still preferred the visual representation, it was far more intuitive to me. The problem with words is that "standard" and "higher" do not really convey that much meaning. Especially higher. Higher than what? (obviously than standard, but what does this mean, how high is high?). Now I have played the game long enough that I kinda know what is going on, and I do understand what "higher" means, and how this affects other things. A new user (I have been playing for 20 years, so I learnt this with a huge background knowledge) will not know what it means. This is why I preferred the visual representation, and very much liked the tactical creator in FM18 (do not get me wrong though, I think the additional options added in FM19 are a huge step in the right direction, it is their visual representation only I dislike). I can add something like this into the features thread, perhaps, rather than discuss it here.

1 hour ago, Mitja said:

If you want to achieve fast direct style of play mentality shouldn't have any  influence here.

I cannot really agree here. I think mentality has to influence your play style. If you see mentality only as a risk ladder, then having low risk and high risk should play differently. A low risk defender may smack the ball clear under pressure, while a high risk defender may try to dribble or pass out of trouble. This is how I view mentality, more or less.

1 hour ago, Mitja said:

I really don't think any manager has so much influence on players behaviour let alone having ability to micro tweak particular instruction.

Oh all managers want to have this level of control over their players, at least any I have played under have (I played rugby rather than football though). Whether a player has the quality to execute those instructions is a completely different thing. I'd argue all managers drill exactly what they want from a player in different situations. To me it is so obviously the case - perhaps because I played in several teams and experienced this first hand - that I cannot see how it could not be true.

1 hour ago, Mitja said:

Also I think currently tactics have too  much influence on behaviour for example irl you need sufficient player quality to play short passing game in FM any team can play tiki taka

Well, every team can try to play tiki taka, but the quality of your players will influence that a lot. I am currently playing around with a direct passing game with Molde. It was going great when teams were not scared of me and attacked me. Now, as soon as they have realised I am a threat, they drop deep and what was once penetrating possession has become sterile possession. That is down to my players being crappy, and the opposition letting me have the ball. I am Martinez, not Guardiola right now.

You point about AI playing style is spot on though. The tactics in the game lack a certain flavour to them. If you did a blind test on me, where you showed me a video of a team playing but not the manager in FM, I probably would not be able to tell you who was the manager (this would be a great little test actually). This is something I would love to see change in the future, but I guess it is very difficult to replicate real life in FM down to every single pass and run.

[Mitja]

But more defensive tactics already use more direct passing from back which gives defenders more freedom to clear the ball or attempt long ball. In same tactics there will be far more long balls with attacking tactics than defensive. Which is contradictory to basic football logics and game  description. There's enough instructions that affect passing decisions.

Re micro tweaking, while I agree with some of what you're saying, no manager would ever try to apply the FM logics of instructing player to do something "often" for example and then micro tweak "often" to something else just because he wants team to play 20% less attacking. This kind of logics doesn't exist in reality. Also I truly doubt any real life manager uses mentality instruction like in FM. Mentality irl is sum of all other instructions, behaviour and patterns which are practiced in training ground.

I agree any team can try to play short passing game but in FM it happens (especially for AI) that particular tactics isn't what it's supposed to be and you have teams parking the bus playing completely different tactics than it is supposed to play (and even dominate possession stats unintentionally which is totally absurd) or attacking team that's supposed to recycle possession smartly and dictate play in opponents area play something else than it is supposed. Mentality is core issue for all the confusion and tactical contradictory factors in FM.

[themadsheep2001]

Mentality isn't about offensive or defensive. It's about levels of risk. 

It's really straightforward forward in itself but people overcomplicate things because they think too rigidly 

[Mitja]

10 minutes ago, themadsheep2001 said:

Mentality isn't about offensive or defensive. It's about levels of risk. 

It's really straightforward forward in itself but people overcomplicate things because they think too rigidly 

Risk includes specific event or action, there is no risk without certain passing decision, off or on the ball movement, tackling, closing down decision, dribbling, shooting etc. And mentality affects all that. So it is anything but straightforward. 

[GerdMuller]

vor 21 Stunden schrieb sporadicsmiles:

It just needs to be clearer what it does. More like it used to be in FM18 actually. When you had a graphical representation how how changing your mentality affected the default values for everything else. It is just a catch-all for changing many TIs in one go.

The one thing I really dislike about the tactics screen in FM19 is that it no longer allows you to do this. Instructions such as "shorter passing" and "lower tempo", for instance, are all relative. But you really have little idea in the current engine what it is relative to. This actually leads to people not understanding what is happening when they choose a mentality.

I mean, would anyone unfamiliar with the game actually know what "attacking" or "cautious" actually means, in FM terms?

Thats why, and i wonder how so many seem to hate them , i miss the sliders...they gave me a good summary on which setting an individual Player actually was on and let me adjust them to their needs.

[sporadicsmiles]

3 hours ago, GerdMuller said:

Thats why, and i wonder how so many seem to hate them , i miss the sliders...they gave me a good summary on which setting an individual Player actually was on and let me adjust them to their needs.

I definitely do not miss sliders and wibble wobble setups. That is definitely over complicated things, and leads to people just tuning sliders without thinking about why. I really like the way tactics are made right now, I just am not as big a fan of how they are graphically represented.

[Mitja]

18 hours ago, sporadicsmiles said:

I cannot really agree here. I think mentality has to influence your play style. If you see mentality only as a risk ladder, then having low risk and high risk should play differently.

This risk is nothing else than urgency with which players execute instructions. That's why there are more long balls, through balls, dribbling, shooting with more attacking mentality. But such tactics also include all other TIs being on more attacking side, there's "double" attacking intent which is totally unnecessary. This makes attacking teams too impatient and defensive too sterile and not interested in scoring. 

It is unnecessary for mentality to interfere with decision making and player urgency level since this is already covered with instructions like passing style and tempo, different levels of creative freedom and roles or time wasting. The same is true for defensive part of tactics. Why does mentality interfere into tackling intensity if there's a specific instruction for that?

Until recently mentality defined if counters will be triggered in me but after introduction of transitioning instructions it is not needed in this area. 

There's also the  question of having so many mentality levels. There can only be three such levels. We want to score, we are ok with draw and in between mentality. There can't be we want to score 25% more mentality. Most teams use all three mentalities during game. But particular style of football has nothing to do with mentality and it is about all the instructions team executes on the pitch. Also risk and urgency levels are result of those instructions and playing style not vice versa. When team concedes goal they change mentality but it includes tactical changes like increasing defensive pressure, they might try to control possession in opponents half a little more etc. Increased attacking intent and urgency to score is result of tactical changes not the opposite. 

And finally there's a most interesting part, how different mentality styles represent real life football. Epecially with FM 19 where AI displays too defensive tactics more than before. All I see in modern football is games full of tempo and urgency to score. Even teams and managers that invented tiki taka adopted to modern mentality in football.

[optimusprimal82]

I know many of you saw/read/liked the 'Mentality Masterplan' I drew up recently (and admittedly some may not have done); in order to create that I played an obscene number of games using a multitude of tactics and different mentalities so feel I've got a good handle on mentality this year - at least from a players perspective - and what I will say is;

 

Ignore mentality at your peril - thinking "I'm a top team, I will attack regardless" is a good way to throw away a lead (sometimes multiple goals worth)

Lower is often better in terms of quality chances created/control of the match (as noted by OP and others subsequently) - people never seem to believe how many goals you can (and do) score on cautious/balanced (and even defensive!)

Defensive/Ultra Defensive are often misleading in terms of their names and actually tend to enable better quality counter attacks

The majority of people (that I have helped/spoken to - so maybe 0.01% of the FM players globally! ) having issues with few goals vs a tremendously high number of shots tend to play attacking/very attacking mentality, unaware that against a stubborn defence this can actually be working against them (you can see why they'd be confused)

Using defensive/ultra defensive or attacking/very attacking alone with an incorrectly skewed formation/tactic is counter-intuitive (could write 25 paragraphs on this bit, but is playing an ultra defensive 4-2-4 really that defensive/as solid as a cautious/balanced 4-5-1? Likewise, is an ultra attacking 4-1-4-1 going to be as good at breaking buses as a balanced 4-2-3-1?)

 

I'm spending a lot of my playing time helping/working with people now on having multiple tact sets - like a lot of us used to back in the earlier FM days - specifically tailored to attacking, control and defence; specialist tactics for specific times in the game (jack of all trades vs argument). It's only one way to do it, but I'm in the position now I can often use the AI's aggression etc against it to great effect (as are others).

Fwiw, despite writing the guide and all the rest of it, I actually don't like mentality all that much in this years game - i think it has far too much effect, a lot of it unexplained or in the case of defensive/ultra defensive maybe doesn't explain enough to the player what is - or indeed what isn't - being changed by activating them. I don't mind as the manager making subtle changes in-game, but players - top level especially - should have a better understanding of game management than for me to have to specifically change everything if I go a goal ahead or two. No problems bringing a defender on for a striker in the last 15 minutes, but almost being forced change mentality/tactic framework entirely if you score 2-3 clear goals else you risk a comeback is pushing it a little - so many teams in-game are capable of regularly coming back from 2-3 down which I'm not sure is entirely reflective of real world?

[Mitja]

Yes decision making is horrible on attacking mentalities this year, for me it's unplayable. Urgency is too huge, instructions are executed too quickly. Human manager can tweak tactics, usually it will include dropping mentality level but for AI who won't be able to do that mentality is limiting factor that ruins the game for me. You have Burnleys of FM playing City style and Cities playing Burnleys.

 

[HUNT3R]

2 hours ago, Mitja said:

This risk is nothing else than urgency with which players execute instructions.

It isn't. Urgency is tempo. Risk isn't about the speed of the execution - it's about how risky it is. An easy example is a FB/A. He has an attack duty, so you're expecting him to bomb forward and he will. What Mentality will decide, is when. Watch when he decides to bomb forward. On a very attacking mentality, you'd see him start bombing forward immediately. On a very defensive mentality, he may only start once the ball crosses the halfway line. In both cases he is executing his instructions. In the first example, he's taking risks by bombing forward so quickly and in the second, he's playing it safer.

I'm not saying you don't have a point about urgency being too much at the more attacking mentalities. I have no opinion on it. I just wanted to make the clear distinction between tempo and mentality/risk. If you do have issues with urgency being too much and you have examples of it, please do report it. I'm sure it'll be of interest to SI. 

[Mitja]

I really don't think you said anything different than me. But I think urgency is affected by more than just one instruction. Mentality, tempo, passing style and time wasting being most important. Mentality influences other instructions so it's a little  more complicated, we can't talk only about one instruction here. Same tactics will play differently on different mentalities.

[HUNT3R]

3 minutes ago, Mitja said:

I really don't think you said anything different than me. But I think urgency is affected by more than just one instruction. Mentality, tempo, passing style and time wasting being most important. Mentality influences other instructions so it's a little  more complicated, we can't talk only about one instruction here. Same tactics will play differently on different mentalities.

This is what you said:

2 hours ago, Mitja said:

This risk is nothing else than urgency with which players execute instructions. That's why there are more long balls, through balls, dribbling, shooting with more attacking mentality.

 

The first sentence is incorrect as they are two separate things. The second (assuming you're correct with every one of those) could be both risk and the higher tempo affecting it.

If we assume you are correct that there's more of everything you mentioned on higher mentalities:

- Long balls depends on the situation, so I can't comment on that.

- Through balls being more is likely tied to the increase in risk taking. Another factor could be the increased risk taking when making forward runs, perhaps giving more opportunities for through balls.

- Dribbling would also be down to increased risk taking. It's risky to dribble at a defender - you're risking him stealing the ball off you.

- Shooting, I will concede, could be both the increase in tempo and the increase in risk taking. The higher tempo will mean less time to decide what to do, so if a player doesn't quickly see an option, he'll shoot. And of course, players will be a bit more adventurous in their decisions to shoot, with the higher risk mentality.

[Mitja]

Ok but I can't understand how speed of execution doesn't include risk? There is no risk without some specific action. 

[HUNT3R]

3 minutes ago, Mitja said:

Ok but I can't understand how speed of execution doesn't include risk? There is no risk without some specific action. 

What you do mean exactly when you say "speed of execution"? Let's start by defining it.  

[Mitja]

With more attacking mentality players will be more inclined to attempt adventures moves like shooting from distance, dribbles, long and killer passes,  they will tackle earlier etc. 

This is hardly relevant you took that sentence out of context a little I'm afraid. What's important is there are specific instructions which mentality shouldn't affect as then it changes those instructions to something else. And it is unnecessary and many times contradictory to what it should according to basic football logics and game description of different playing styles. It creates confusion which many people won't be aware of and more importantly - AI certainly won't. 

[HUNT3R]

1 hour ago, Mitja said:

With more attacking mentality players will be more inclined to attempt adventures moves like shooting from distance, dribbles, long and killer passes,  they will tackle earlier etc.

That's different to urgency of doing something, so with that definition, I agree mostly. It's still important to be aware that the risk that Mentality influences is different to Tempo. So they won't necessarily tackle earlier, but rather attempt more tackles where they're less sure of winning it. Same with killer passes. They'll still attempt (all things being equal) the same amount of low risk killer passes, but some of the unexpected or more difficult/risky passes, they won't attempt much on the lower Mentalities. That sort of thing.

[Mitja]

45 minutes ago, HUNT3R said:

So they won't necessarily tackle earlier, but rather attempt more tackles where they're less sure of winning it. 

^^^^That's the same thing. 

And I repeat you took unimportant part of what I said out of context. And try to win language battle here over me to prove me wrong? Everyone knows more attacking mentality means more long shots, through balls, tackles and similar.

[themadsheep2001]

47 minutes ago, HUNT3R said:

That's different to urgency of doing something, so with that definition, I agree mostly. It's still important to be aware that the risk that Mentality influences is different to Tempo. So they won't necessarily tackle earlier, but rather attempt more tackles where they're less sure of winning it. Same with killer passes. They'll still attempt (all things being equal) the same amount of low risk killer passes, but some of the unexpected or more difficult/risky passes, they won't attempt much on the lower Mentalities. That sort of thing.

The problem starts with people not actually understanding what mentality controls, largely through a lot of myths. Something SI will may have to clarify in future in game. Even now when you try to apprise people of this, some actively refuse to listen. 

[HUNT3R]

Just now, Mitja said:

^^^^That's the same thing. 

It isn't. Whether it's an early or late or whenever tackle isn't what this is about. It's about the risk of it. When a tackle happens or is attempted isn't what risk is. It's about the actual chance of winning the ball. If you're 100% sure of winning the ball, there's little to no risk in the attempt. If you're only 50% (half) sure of your chances, it's a risk to attempt the tackle.

Just now, Mitja said:

And I repeat you took unimportant part of what I said out of context. And try to win language battle here over me to prove me wrong?

I want to make sure there isn't confusion and that there's a clear difference between risk and tempo. It isn't the same thing and I've explained why.

[HUNT3R]

Just now, themadsheep2001 said:

The problem starts with people not actually understanding what mentality controls, largely through a lot of myths. Something SI will may have to clarify in future in game. Even now when you try to apprise people of this, some actively refuse to listen. 

Yes, this. That's why I'm trying to make it clear @Mitja. It's not about winning anything. English is my 2nd language, if that's worth anything to you. I am just careful around creating misunderstandings around this. As the sheep says, misinformation and myths can start this way.

[Mitja]

15 minutes ago, HUNT3R said:

It isn't. Whether it's an early or late or whenever tackle isn't what this is about. It's about the risk of it. When a tackle happens or is attempted isn't what risk is. It's about the actual chance of winning the ball. If you're 100% sure of winning the ball, there's little to no risk in the attempt. If you're only 50% (half) sure of your chances, it's a risk to attempt the tackle.

I want to make sure there isn't confusion and that there's a clear difference between risk and tempo. It isn't the same thing and I've explained why.

Tempo doesn't affect tackling -mentality does. And you're putting things in my mouth I didn't say. 

[HUNT3R]

Just now, Mitja said:

Tempo doesn't affect tackling -mentality does.

On that we agree.

[optimusprimal82]

24 minutes ago, themadsheep2001 said:

The problem starts with people not actually understanding what mentality controls, largely through a lot of myths. Something SI will may have to clarify in future in game. Even now when you try to apprise people of this, some actively refuse to listen. 

Perhaps it's the 'how' rather than the 'what' you're telling them? 

I've helped a lot of people out lately - specifically with mentality - and they've been nothing but appreciative? People are both willing, receptive and - more often than not (there's always an idiot) - want to understand/get better at the game.

I don't disagree that theorising without fact perpetuates myth and creates/spreads the confusion - I've waxed lyrical myself about mentality needing to be made more transparent/less obfuscating as it shouldn't need to be broken down quite so much for most people to understand - but hinting that people don't know what they're talking about and then failing to explain to them because 'people don't listen' is - at best - poor form.

All; If anyone is seriously struggling with mentality and associated quirks, head across to the tactics forum (or your local FM discord group/fm site) - there are people happy to help out! 

[Mitja]

I don't think anyone in this thread is looking for mentality doctor.

I just used this thread which clearly points out absurdity of current tactical system to express my thoughts about mentality and why the game doesn't need it anymore. 

[themadsheep2001]

3 hours ago, optimusprimal82 said:

Perhaps it's the 'how' rather than the 'what' you're telling them? 

I've helped a lot of people out lately - specifically with mentality - and they've been nothing but appreciative? People are both willing, receptive and - more often than not (there's always an idiot) - want to understand/get better at the game.

I don't disagree that theorising without fact perpetuates myth and creates/spreads the confusion - I've waxed lyrical myself about mentality needing to be made more transparent/less obfuscating as it shouldn't need to be broken down quite so much for most people to understand - but hinting that people don't know what they're talking about and then failing to explain to them because 'people don't listen' is - at best - poor form.

All; If anyone is seriously struggling with mentality and associated quirks, head across to the tactics forum (or your local FM discord group/fm site) - there are people happy to help out! 

There's only so many ways you can tell the same people the same thing. Most people are receptive, we've been doing this a pretty long time and we wouldn't be if we weren't good at it. But when people actively turn advice into a battle there's only so much you can do 

[Snorks]

12 hours ago, Mitja said:

I don't think anyone in this thread is looking for mentality doctor.

I am, having read the entire thread.

[Snorks]

11 hours ago, themadsheep2001 said:

There's only so many ways you can tell the same people the same thing. Most people are receptive, we've been doing this a pretty long time and we wouldn't be if we weren't good at it. But when people actively turn advice into a battle there's only so much you can do 

You guys have patience beyond mine...