ice

Sorry for double post. Just wanting to put it more simply.

What factors do you think determine whether tutoring works?

retired_cherylvano

I have to admit to still being confused about PPM's in general.
For instance, Plays Short Simple Passes, I don't know whether it's best to put that player on short passing, or whether it means that the player will have a tendancy to play short passes regardless of what instructions I give him.

retired_wenbieblue

just a question:

the dive into and not dive into.

Isn't that the schwalbe thingy? Like Robben would have dives into tackles. And a player who keeps running at all times 'does not dive' ?

I always thought it was this what it meant .

ice

Well I myself always assumed 'Does not dive into tackles' to be a good thing, based on the sole fact John Terry has it

James1226

I think a lot of factors are involved. The two most important things seems to be:

1. The more mental attributes the two players have in common (not just ambition - that was merely an example) the better the chance of a succefull learning experience.

2. It also seems to be important how well the tutor is playing. Youngsters seems to be eager to learn from players that do well in the first team, while they can not really be bothered to be like a first team player that struggle.

ice

I see where you are coming from with this one, but at the same time, aren't you tutoring the young player so those mental stats that need increasing, increase? What good is it if you have to have similar mental stats to begin with to succeed?

James1226

I agree. But I think that is why this new feature works so well: Your main aim in tutoring is to make the youngster different, but if the difference is too big to begin with, you only have a slim chance of success.

I been more succefull with my tutoring since I began taking small steps.

Among the things that decide whatever a tutoring will be succesfull I forgot to mention, something which is logical but which I can not say I have tested.

3) If the tutor has low controversy and high professionalisme, one would assume that he is a better tutor. Perhaps loyalty also play a part (the tutor will do as he is told by his boss).

This factor would allay your fears Smurf, because is means that the tutors with good mental attributes in general is better suited to be tutors. It also seems sensible because the best answer you can get, when you ask for tutoring is the "Y thinks that tutoring is part of every professional footballers job".

That said, the player that has disappointed me most in tutoring is Brian Mcbride (who is a "Model professional" (20 in professionalism)), while the best tutor I've had was Berbatov (who started out as "Spirirted", but later became "Jovial").

ice

All good points indeed.

Another possible discussion. If it is better to have 'similar' mental stats, couldn't you argue that having the player 'linked' (able to tutor) be reason enough that they are similar enough to be tutored successfully, and that with the 3 options of tutoring, the success is at random, getting easier to succeed with the latter choices.

James1226

I do not think that the mere possibilty for tutoring indicate that the two players mental attributes are similar.

First of all, it would make tutoring a win - win situation, and that is no good.

Secondly, I trust the messages I get from the game (They are all we have to guess from really). And right now, my young keeper has just told me that he was to different from my very professional 1st team keeper, to benefit from the learning proces.

ice

The last point you just made does seem to favour your opinion on the matter.

But i was not suggesting a win-win situation, just assuming that maybe the possibility of tutorial means they are similar enough, and all the options do is have bigger effects with harder success.

IE:
1st option: 25%
2nd option: 50%
etc.