Help Some advice please.

[ron1hy]

Hi. If a player's condition is 100%, does it automatically mean that they are in top condition? Also, how much does moral come into it in terms of team selection?

Thanks

[FuddledFox]

9 minutes ago, ron1hy said:

player's condition is 100%, does it automatically mean that they are in top condition?

Well they are 100% so they can't get any better.

10 minutes ago, ron1hy said:

how much does moral come into it in terms of team selection

I personally don't worry about morale much. If you're winning games and they are playing they will be happy if they aren't playing chances are they will be unhappy. Maybe if you have 2 identical players and 1 has high morale then play him but I have had players with low morale and they still do the job when called on.

[Nucleus]

In my opinion 87% condition is better than 100%. Don’t ask me why, it just is

[FuddledFox]

7 minutes ago, Nucleus said:

In my opinion 87% condition is better than 100%. Don’t ask me why, it just is

69 is best imo

[Peely]

28 minutes ago, Foxy said:

Maybe if you have 2 identical players and 1 has high morale then play him but I have had players with low morale and they still do the job when called on.

I'd assume that 100% with high morale is better than 100% with low morale, at least in most cases, but I've never worried about it. I suppose that someone with high morale but with the "over-confident" status might be worse than the same player with lower morale.

To be honest, I barely notice morale unless it's severely negative and, even then, I've never noticed it have an effect on a player's performance.

[ron1hy]

Wow. I'm surprised to hear that 69 and 89% condition is better. Why is that?

I suppose the reason I'm asking about moral and condition is more often than not, I end up playing the same 11 for a lot of matches in a row and I want to rotate to give others a chance because they become unhappy and impatient. Any advice for this? Thanks 

[Peely]

I normally try to have two and a bit teams worth of first team players, who end up forming an "A Team" a "B Team" and a small backup group of either young players or old-timers who get called on when the main players are injured. The "A Team" will be the ones that get most match time and will be the squad that I make sure are fit and ready for the really important matches. Given the fixture congestion in mosts leagues, however, the "A Team" ends up playing in maybe two thirds of matches, while the "B Team" do the rest - very few players can be expected to play two matches per week, every week (goalies and strikers aside).

The B Team gets enough games to keep them happy, while the "reserves" are either young enough to be happy for any game time they see or at the end of their careers and content with the occasional run-out.

[ron1hy]

Thanks for the advice. It's a good idea.

[ron1hy]

I have another question - in terms of a player's best role, is it best to go by a player's stats for that role, or by the role that the game thinks the player should have?

Thanks

[Nucleus]

37 minutes ago, ron1hy said:

I have another question - in terms of a player's best role, is it best to go by a player's stats for that role, or by the role that the game thinks the player should have?

Thanks

Definitely use your own judgement on this matter mate. The games preferred role for a player is not necessarily the best role 

[ron1hy]

Thanks. That's all I needed to hear.