Tactics Wizard versus Tactics Information.

As most of you know there is a new "Tactics Wizard" due out for FM10. This "Wizard" will present the user with options based upon footballing concepts found within the "Tactical Theorems and Frameworks" guide rather than the current tactical sliders for users to define their tactics in FM10. It has been met with great applause apparently, but throughout the debate over tactics Sports Interactive have maintained the stance that the tactical sliders are sound.

This "Wizard" will help users select more game logical and game relevant tactical slider settings without having to deal with the sliders, but according to someone elses tactical concepts.

I have held the stance that the problem with tactics is twofold. First people do not understand the sliders. Second people often produce inferior tactics.

My opinion is that this Wizard, though appreciated in the short term by those with severe tactical problems, is a profound error of judgement and a profound error of allocation of resources in the long term. This "Wizard" is a second interface ontop of the first interface. It is a vast elaboration ontop of what exists. It is fundamentally the tactical choices of a third party reduced to ideas and implimented as choices within the game.

Rather than explain these "ideal sliders" to the average player and rather than have the average player check the forums for information, Sports Interactive would rather devote development resources to producing a "Wizard" based on these guides for everyone to use inside the game.

This is a severe allocation of resources, not just this year, but for the entire existence of this feature. It will have to be balanced, tweaked, coded and tested every single year that it exists. All of this despite the fact that SI think that the current tactical sliders are fine.

I have deep problems with this.

Earlier today I read a post that contained a link to this website. Now while it does not explain the sliders, it explains a lot about the basic tactical principles of football. These principles do not change, do not alter, do not need tested, do not need tweaked etc.

To make a long story short, I have two questions:

How many of you would prefer ambiguous sliders and a tactical "Wizard" that works you through a forum guide?

How many of you would prefer accurate slider information and information about real life football tactics?

I myself think that this Wizard is superficial in the short term, especially considering that SI have stated the tactical sliders are sound. If they are sound then SI should not be developing ways to avoid them, to get around them, or developing forum guides for sliders directly into their game. SI should be helping us understand the sliders and making it easier to make managerial decisions.

Equally SI should be teaching us about football. Sports Interactive should be helping us learn to manage football clubs if they are making a football management game. Our staff should be teaching us tactical tricks and giving us proper, relevant tactical advice.

I don't want a "Tactical Wizard" based on a forum guide that has to be changed and tweaked and tested every season. What I want is clearer sliders and information about real life tactical principles. I would immediatly cancel this "Wizard" if it showed up, but I would spend hours reading an "Tactics Bible" developed by SI and that existed inside the game. I dont want someone else to make my tactics, I want to make them myself and have everyone elses knowledge.

Maybe I am alone here, but rather than a "Tactical Wizard" I want a "Tactical Encyclopaedia".

Teach us about football, don't do it for us. Anyone else agree?

My problem with the tactics was never a lack of success, but getting the team to play the way I want to. In a sense I want more options. The ability to make offensive and defensive formations (but that they are not as rigid as they were before with arrows or wibble/wobble). I would like also options for cutting for wingers, also an additional slider of pass vs. shoot (global and individual). I would also like to be able to "talk" to players about decisions they make and whether they are consistant with my tactics.

I must admit I found the slider system unintuitive at first. It seems that I'm not alone in this. From a marketing standpoint I'd think it's wise to make ways to help new users get into the game quickly and easily.

Reading the forums, including the TT&F guide, has helped me begin to get an appreciation of how to use the current system. Personally, I have found most "wizard" UIs initially useful but ultimately constrictive, so I would prefer the current system over any wizard in the longer-term.

However, if the underlying slider system is "sound" and not going to change, and the "wizard" is only a layer on top of the slider system, I hope the wizard can be designed as a UI option that can be enabled/disabled by the user.

When I first bought FM09 on April 24th, I was so overwhelmed, but then reading up on the forums and reading TT&F , I began using other people's tactics while changing settings here and there. What I'm trying to say is that the current system is overwhelming in the beginning, but after a bit it really becomes nice to have that much control. But I would welcome a 'wizard' system, as long as you can choose between the two.

Over on the Tactics & Training Forums, peter-evo started this thread. Basically, he would make the tactics you wanted using the wizard in the FML beta, export them, and let you import them into your FM09 game.

I would be of the opinion that I would try anything. Sometimes, after working all day, coming home, cooking dinner etc etc I don't want to spend hours pouring over a tactical encyclopaedia. I don't want to spend a week, reading an hour an night, studying, taking notes, until I can play the game. And, thanks to peter-evo I have seen what the wizard system will work like, and I am very impressed. I think it's a great addition to the game, especially for the more casual players like me who just want to be able to enjoy the game. In the end of the day, if you don't like the like the wizard, you can ignore it and build your own tactics.

I think the wizard is an either-or option. You can use the wizard and then tweak further, or just start from scratch.

It's a table cloth over the slider system, essentially replacing them with words and philosophy rather than raw maths, which the sliders can appear to be at times. Although I know a lot of people don't like the sliders, I do find them easy to use. I really don't understand why it's so hard to understand, but I guess that's just the drop in education standards since I were a nipper ;-) They said we'd never use algebra in the real world, but then they didn't have FM back then ("Menality slider at 25% + Tempo slider at 25% = keep ball but risk exposure at the back" sounds like algebra to me).

Anyway, speculating about it is pretty pointless at this stage. I say wait and see. Five months or so and we'll be itching to download a brand spanking new demo with a brand spanking new tactics wizard along with whatever else they throw at us. And if the rival game lives up to its billing, and FM wants to continue to be top dog, we can expect a few more features too.

I prefer using TT&F guide

I think the wizard is an either-or option. You can use the wizard and then tweak further, or just start from scratch.

It's a table cloth over the slider system, essentially replacing them with words and philosophy rather than raw maths, which the sliders can appear to be at times. Although I know a lot of people don't like the sliders, I do find them easy to use. I really don't understand why it's so hard to understand, but I guess that's just the drop in education standards since I were a nipper ;-) They said we'd never use algebra in the real world, but then they didn't have FM back then ("Menality slider at 25% + Tempo slider at 25% = keep ball but risk exposure at the back" sounds like algebra to me).

Anyway, speculating about it is pretty pointless at this stage. I say wait and see. Five months or so and we'll be itching to download a brand spanking new demo with a brand spanking new tactics wizard along with whatever else they throw at us. And if the rival game lives up to its billing, and FM wants to continue to be top dog, we can expect a few more features too.

I'm quite handy at 3D maths but can't for the life of me understand the slider system

I'm looking forward to the tactical wizard. As someone else quite rightly pointed out, it's just a system of presets that uses clear(er) English to define tactical options rather than a clunky, ugly slider system that is far to twitchy for its own good. I've wanted to have a box-to-box central midfielder for a long time. I don't really understand how to achieve that effect in FM in its current form. With the new options i'll be able to have one!

I think alot of people think this wizard will build tactics destined for instant success. This isn't true, if your basic knowledge of the game is flawed then you'll still be able to build inferior tactics, but for those of us that can appreciate the subtleties of the game then it'll allow us to create tactics in a different, more intuitive way.

I think the wizard will be a great addition, purely because I know how I want the team to play based on RL football, but I can never quite get the sliders perfected. This results in heavy defeats against good opposition and scraping wins/draws against others.

I thought having the Ass Man advice would be great so it would advise us on where our tactics are wrong, but after playing on this, the AI still seems to learn the way we play and still beat us, then we are back to square one.

I don't like the sliders one bit, as it feels like the difference between 16 and 17 in attacking is the same. I still prefer the old CM way (5 options).

I understand what the OP is saying but I think most of TT&F is sound and there is no harm in having a wizard along side the current system. Although I will say that giving position sets such as Box-to-Box midfielder and assigning individual instructions is making it too easy. If the wizard was for overall team instructions at a high level it would be fine and would therefore ensure the user had a basis to work from so they can tweak the tactic with their own individual instructions.

Waow this was the point I acutally wanted to get across in my thread about Chelsea parking the bus thing... Cool hope it offers a big differeence!

As far as I'm aware it is tested in FML with good success.

Now, a lot of people argue and complain that the default tactics are not good enough to have success using them. According to the OP, those are third party choices as well and should consequently go altogether. I think already here you can see that the original argument is flawed.

All the wizard does is making creating a tactic easier. By just doing a few clicks, the far more detailed settings are set to sensible values, according to the input made by the user. It saves people from having to dig in deep if they don't want to while not depriving those who do of the opportunity to micro-manage. I can see nothing wrong with that.

Finally, if the wizard is just doing that, translating a certain amount of pre-set options into slider values, it doesn't take all that much development resources, I'd say. There are a few choices to make, but it doesn't mean SI have to develop a tactical model from scratch. Beta-testing is carried out by the paying FML community already and SI can concentrate on whatever they regard as important. (also the OP's argument is strange here, because if the wizard was not based on the current system, then it would be a lot of work)

I don't see why there is a need for the word 'or' here. SI can provide more explanation for the sliders AND produce a wizard.

But what are you expecting SI to do? If they offer a 50 page compendium on the meaning and the effect of the sliders, people will complain about having to read that much stuff (as they do now regarding the need for TT&F - it doesn't make a difference if TT&F is made by SI or a third party really). The information provided now isn't all that bad. The problem is rather that now you do need to have an understanding of tactics which the average user does not have.

So the only thing to make things easier with no need for reading through 50 pages, is to decrease the need for real life tactical knowledge. And voila: There comes the wizard, which lets you create a reasonable tactic with just a few clicks and does not even sacrifice the depth for anyone who wants to know or do more.

Sorry, cannot agree with the OP at all.

Tbh, SFraser, I think the words 'horse' and 'bolted' spring to mind. However, the argument is still a very important one.

For me, I think PaddyBrophy in post #5 expresses the view of the casual gamer very well, and that they will comprise the large majority of the FM10 buyers. He points out what would appear to most to be the obvious retort, "If you don't like the wizard, you can turn it off and stick with the traditional route."

In fairness to SFraser, if I understand him correctly, this misses his point. His concern is with the focus of SI's R&D (research and development). If they focus their efforts on implementing TT&F into FM and neglect real deeper development of the actual tactical side (as opposed to its presentation), the game will evolve into a shallow cul-de-sac.

I'm sure that the wizard will be implemented and I welcome it, but at the same time I hope that SI heed SFraser's warning. They need to focus on developing BOTH aspects - presentation for the casual gamers, AND evolving depth for the more 'serious' gamer.

Allow me an analogy: an EPL club might focus on buying world-class established stars to make an immediate impact - Chelsea and Man City. Another might focus on long-term development - Arsenal and Everton. Man United possibly stand out as one of the few that achieves a balance.

Please don't get sidetracked by the analogy and go off-topic with comments about ManU's youth policy etc.; my point is that SI need to commit staff to both projects and not neglect SFraser's concerns.

I welcome the idea of the tactical wizard personally. I understand the need for it to work with something initially that's well recognised within the FM community, such as TT&F, simply because there are many who have read the document every year and understand the principals.

Where I do agree with SFraser however, is that there should be focus, if not immediately then for other future releases, on "real" footballing tactics and systems. One way of doing this to my mind would be to include default tactics that both sensibly work with the match engine and game system, whilst also being reflective of the "real" tactical world. At present some of the default tactics settings are fine, whilst others are wildly off the mark and anyone who uses them will see glaring problems. My suggestion would be to incorporate things like a "Barcelona" tactic, an "Arsenal" tactic, even a "Man Utd" or "Liverpool" tactic, that people can use as a base from the default menus, which also have a sensible mentality framework that will in fact work with the match engine.

Some might see my idea as giving people a ready-made tactic on a plate, but isn't that part of the idea of the Tactical Wizard?

As for the way the sliders work, there's very little I myself feel that I can't do with them to get what I want. Ok, not everyone enjoys the same ease of use, which I understand completely and is why I welcome the Tactical Wizard concept. What I do believe though, is that it's a stepping stone that has great potential to incorporate more realistic tactics into the game long-term and is certainly something SI should (and I'm sure will) consider expanding over time.

Phnompenhandy describes my point better than I did in my initial post.

My point was not that any kind of improved access, improved education, or improved interface is a waste of time or casual player friendly. My point was that the Wizard covers the tracks of poor slider understanding and contradictory tactics which provides a sense of improved control without ever improving understanding. This is not a one-off feature but a feature that will have to keep up-to-date with the game engine, sliders tweaks, tactical possibilites etc. as they are developed.

My point was that the same thing could be achieved, perhaps to a lesser extent, by a far better introduction to the sliders, like a tutorial rather than a wizard, and this would require less development resources over the long term. Alongside this slider tutorial the game could present tactical theory like a tactical library which could either stand on its own or be linked into the club staff. Equal work in the short term, but far less development resources in the future, as these things would be developed once and require far less updates.

Giving a player easier access to the tools and surrounding him with footballing information is in my opinion a far greater premise for involvement, creativity and individuality than any tactical Wizard. This Wizard does not expand upon a users understanding of the game mechanics or of footballing knowledge, and it comes with the cost of perpetual fine tuning.

There is one final question however. How many trully new and inexperienced players are testing this Wizard? If players are inexperienced in the concepts of football let alone the concepts of TT&F then all that will have been done here is grant those that already understand these ideas a faster way to impliment them. The new player or the struggling player will still be searching for guides as to the actual meaning of the options and theories as to how to get them working properly. Very little will have been done to address the fundamental problems.

To make a long story short, I have two questions:

How many of you would prefer ambiguous sliders and a tactical "Wizard" that works you through a forum guide?

How many of you would prefer accurate slider information and information about real life football tactics?

I'd like to have both.

All the questions of learning, tweaking, improving are the same questions as relevant to the sliders, but with the added crux that conceptualising the Wizard and conceptualising the sliders are now two different things. Added to this is the fact the game will still give us zero information as to the theory behind tactics.

I am a worried man because I don't see how this wizard improves a players understanding of what is actually going on. Nor does this Wizard help people to understand the actual tactical issues of football.

If all problems with FM09 could be reduced to two statements they would these:

1. People don't understand how your game works.

2. They don't understand football.

Okay sure instead of personally choosing each slider option for a FullBack, the new player can now choose some abstract concepts based on TT&F that will eliminate much of the contradictory options, but how exactly does this Wizard address either of the two issues I raised?

Switching between Wizard options is going to give you even less detail for figuring out the exact workings of tactics and attributes. You are giving players a head start at the expense of ever understanding this game, and it is going to take up resources that a tutorial would not.

My points are these:

1. You are not increasing the ability for players to understand how this game works. You are adding to the problem at entry level.

2. You are constructing a Wizard based upon a forum guide that would do the same job if read. Facilitating intermediate level.

3. You make no allowances for inferior tactical concepts in the first place and do not assist players in understanding football unless they learn from the AI across multiple games which would educate those players in the sliders as well under the current method. Hindering intermediate level.

4. This will cost development time and resources every development cycle between now and the removal of this feature. Impacting all.

5. Those using the Wizard and unfamiliar with TT&F are going to ask for help and guidance on the forums and if they fail will say the system is broken. Returning to the current situation.

It is a superficial tweak. You are adding a feature that is going to suffer from exactly the same problems as the TT&F guide. No slider explanation, no holistic tactical explanation. If you know football to a reasonable degree and understand the game to a reasonable degree this Wizard will solidify your team. If you have no interest in experimenting or you know nothing about football you will be back here complaining.

Ov have you looked past the first 3 months of FM10? Have you asked how to keep the players of FM09 playing FM12? How is 3-D coming along?

No one wants gimmicks. Everyone wants solutions and improvements.

(Firstly, if anybody has replied since SFraser's last post I apologise as I'll be ignoring any points they make. My sincere and humble apologies)

Tactics in Football Manager used to be far more logical.

In FM07, you just had to make sure a) everything corresponded logically, b) the tactic suited the players and c) any problems with your tactic were sorted out. Certain sliders worked together in tandem- "tempo" and "passing style" being the prime example. There was no point having a player with low crossing set to "cross often".Now, that's all gone.

Correspondence

A very easy concept to understand that relates mostly to the initial set up of a tactic. If you wanted to work the ball up to the wingers quickly and get it in the box, you played a fast and direct (but not long) game, with a lot of width and passing focused "down both flanks". You gave the wingers farrows, crossing "often" and "from byline", and "run with ball" and "forward runs" also often. Basically, everything did what it said on the tin. The only slight concern at this initial stage was whether you would get the sliders "wobbled" correctly (i.e. would 16 or 17 clicks be better?) but I found that the difference was minimal.

Now, we have a situation where tactics aren't logical, don't do what they claim to, and in some cases have little or no effect at all. I cite "passing style" and "tempo". These two sliders should shape your play. However, I find that they now do little or nothing. Regardless of what you set them to, your side will play a short, slow game. "Direct" or "long" passing may see your defenders try an occasional "hoof", but that's it. They'll still dally on the ball if they're under no pressure rather than going for a speedy attack. May I point out that "direct" football (at say 16 notches) is not "hoof" football- it's working the ball up the pitch in less steps than "short" passing. It's possibly the difference between Man United and Arsenal, though United do play a "short" game when the occasion calls for it.

The lack of logic- read TT&F. On "Passing Options", wwfan and millie write that you should make sure that you don't set your players to too short a passing style in case their options are running away (ok, that isn't exactly it...). That's how it works in the game, I'm not shooting the messengers. Surely, however, if you are playing a short passing game, players should be looking for the ball and making themselves avalible?

I'm now going to fall into that risky pitfall of a real life antology.

Arsenal play an attacking, short passing game. When Clichy or Sagna get the ball, they have more options than just the centre back. Whilst Fabregas and co arent't playing defensively by any stretch of the imagination, they will make themselves avalible when a player is in possession, normally further up the pitch than said player. A "short" passing game with "attacking" mentality should encompass this. At the moment, the opposite happens- midfielders don't want to know and run away.

Tactics suiting the players

Bit obvious this. No point asking that lump of a centre half to play a short passing game, take shots from distance or dribble. It makes sense to get that winger to dribble and cross if he's good at these things, and if your winger is crossing and your defenders are hitting long balls, it follows that your strikers will need to be good in the air.

Fixing tactics

This is the stage after "tactic creation" for me. Here, you need to sort out any issues you may have. If your defenders are being caught up the pitch, then give your centre backs a more defensive mentality and drop the d-line. When I was managing Chesterfield, I found that one of my strikers was playing a lot of aimless balls forward. I fixed this by stopping him playing through balls.

On 09, there isn't that chance to fix tactics, as the options are ineffective and illogical.

What I'm saying is that a new wizard won't change much. It may stop people being confused by the sliders, but when tactics are so flawed, it's a cosmetic addition (as I said to ahmufcwafc when he offered to make me a tactic using it). The match engine needs to be returned to a state like the one it was in before (i.e. 7.0.2). Crossing needs to be less aimless and ineffective. Passing style and tempo need to have an effect. Mentality should stop being clumped together and go back to the more logical "defenders get defensive mentalities, attackers get attacking mentalities". Ideally arrows (which were one of the more... understandable, tools) would come back in, but that isn't going to happen as the people with a voice feel they are unrealistic and changing their minds is about as likely as getting an athiest to believe in God.

In short, tactical systems and the ME have done little but regress over the past two years, and IMO they should be reverted to 07's equivalents, but with height incorporated into the ME (something I remember PaulC saying had been added for 09).

SCIAG

The way I see the wizard is a tool to use in companion to the regular tactical screen. The individual player stats are not taken into account by a wizard so I think you will still need to go back and tinker but to give you the basis of your tactic I think it will be invaluable

Will this tactics wizard be linked to your assistant's ability? For example, would an ass man with crap tactical knowledge produce worse tactics than one with good tactical knowledge?

It's you the manager who sets up the tactics, not the assman.

But the game is helping you by interpreting your instructions. Wouldn't it be too easy if it wasn't possible to implement your ideas incorrectly?

I haven't read ahead of SFraser's post, so apologies if I'm duplicating anything that others might have said.

It strikes me that the fundamental problem with FM2009's tactics, is not necessarily that people can't or won't understand how tactics are constructed in football, but simply that people do not respond well to lists of settings, and 'sliders'.

And also, why should they? We are in 2009, we should have a logically-designed UI where people can design tactics on a pitch-view, graphically, in a way that they can relate to.

I think a lot of FM's sliders can be represented graphically on the pitch. I'm not saying that it wouldn't be a challenge to re-design the tactics UI to accommodate such an ideal, but ultimately, the ideal is to present something that makes sense.

As such, I guess I'm not sure that the wizard will do that. I think it's a good idea, as long as the underlying settings are still there for the more advanced tactical manager so that he / she can tweak in a way that you won't be able to do in a wizard - by it's very nature the wizard will collate more than one individual setting into some logical groupings that apply to a particular tactical framework (i.e. I will say that I want to play passing, attacking football with a medium tempo, and it will change a number of slider settings for me).

In my view this is not the solution to tactical interface of sliders, that people do not relate to. But I think it would be a good addition, as on option for the player, on top of the existing system.

But if what is trying to be achieved is to make the existing tactical system more accessible to the casual / new player, then please, lay as much of it out on the pitch as possible, then I think people will lose their fear-factor of a big bunch of sliders and perhaps will be able to delve more into the tactical aspect of the game at as and when they feel they are getting more accustomed to the game.

Examples

Team Settings

Defensive Line - let me drag a line up and down the pitch. Simple.

Width - let me move the extremities of a translucent coloured box in and out, on the pitch. Simple

Focus Passing - let me create and move a coloured 'cone' to the left, right, centre of the pitch. Simple.

Target Man Supply - let me snap a coloured band either to the Target Man's feet, his head (represent the band as slightly curved vertically in that case), or ahead of him.

Marking - a simple toggle of Man or Zonal, which leaves either semi-translucent coloured box-zones on the pitch, or semi-translucent circles, representing Man-Marking.

The tick-box settings would just stay is tick-boxes..

Corners - let me drag and drop any from a mix of the options onto the pitch, and represent them in different solid bands of colour (allows selecting of 2 or 3, not 1 or all, types of corners).

Free-kicks - same principle as for corners

I'll stop there, but once you start thinking about presenting this in graphical format, then some of it becomes readily apparent. It would have to be designed well; I'm thinking you'd be able to hover over each setting, which would then alter the pitch layout so you'd see that setting represented graphically on the pitch.

Perhaps you'd be able to see all Defensive settings laid out together; all attacking settings laid out together (so cones and bands of colours for attacking ball distribution, bands for corner styles used, same for free-kicks, all shown together, so that you get a visual idea of your attacking settings together laid out over the pitch).

Now that's hardly a complete specification, and only a starter, but I wonder if what is trying to be solved here, is the 'fear-factor' and lack of positive response that people have to a bunch of sliders.

But what are SI trying to solve? Definitions...

Importantly, I think there are 2 complexities to resolve in FM's tactics designer.

(1) is the complexity of the slider system; the interface in place required to construct good, detailed, accurate, realistic tactics.

(2) is the complexity of actually understanding how to construct a good, detailed, accurate, realistic tactic, given that FM is a detailed Management Simulation, and that this requires a good knowledge of football and of combinations of instructions, in order to get the best out of it

The wizard will resolve (2), but it sounds like perhaps SI believe that it will resolve (1) as well, in a single stroke. I don't think that it will.

Do SI plan to leave the slider system in for the advanced user, with the wizard as an option for the newbie / casual?

If not, then an opportunity to address (1) will have been overlooked and thus missed out on, whilst potentially dumbing down the product for everyone else (and therefore redicing the game's longevity as a result of removing tactical depth from it).

Having now sat and read the whole thread, after commenting on it... I see that the existing sliders will remain... also, intriguingly, that Oliver C states that the wizard has a graphical representation of your tactics as I was hoping.

I have to say, this sounds very promising.

This graphical representation of your tactics could go some way to being a completely new interface (in FM11, perhaps?), to the current slider-based one. As I said above, you don't actually need sliders for a lot of the settings once you start thinking about representing the tactics in clear graphical form.

So it strikes me it would be possible to build on this graphical interface after FM2010, in order to move all slider settings to a graphical click/set/drag/drop-type interface, with the wizard offering something additional to that whereby groups of settings are changed in one shot depending on your choices in the wizard and the type and the effect of tactic that you are trying to achieve.

So it sounds like the latter of that sentence will be in place for FM2010 - which is great - but then I'd think it would be possible to port over all slider settings to this new graphical pitch-view, and voila, no more sliders but the exact same functionality, but in a much more complete visible way that the novice, once he has his tactics set up using the Wizard, could then dip into the main interface, which will have the same graphical pitch representation as the wizard, and tweak individual settings by dragging things onto and around the pitch, whilst not having to get into a whole new world of sliders and their interactions...

(I admit there would still need to be 'sliders' for Closing Down, Mentality, Creative Freedom, Time Wasting, etc.., but with a little creativity these could be represented in a very different (more graphical) way, which is clear to the user and fits in with the rest of the graphical tactics interface (e.g. move the hands on a clock for time-wasting, showing a coloured-out pie-section behind the hand)... Mentality could be represented with a fading coloured bar running adjacent to the pitch, for example, which fades to nothing on the half-way line if it is set to 50%... you drag this up and down at the side of the pitch... )

etc. etc.

I'm pretty hopeful about this wizard, from Oliver C's description.

Yes, I think this is what people have been clamouring for, especially with 09. The tactics model, per se, isn't the problem - it's the lack of intuition. EG, forward runs/mentality being similar but not necessarily the same. From the wizard pics, it looks like a case of you telling the game HOW you wish to play (defensive, attacking, counter-attacking, etc) and what you hope to achieve (keep the ball, stifle the play, hoof it to the big man), and the wizard sets your sliders accordingly. You can then tweak them yourself if you feel the need to.

The ass man will have input in a seperate screen. Also, if you have a scout that tells you to use fast defenders or a deep defensive line, you should, hopefully, be able to build this into the tactics too.

I Have to say that one thing that I've read recently on these forums is the relationship between tempo/passing style and pitch size. You know, if you're playing in a bigger pitch play more direct football, on a smaller pitch more short passing. Now, maybe I'm wrong but surely that's not what happens IRL? I mean, I don't think that Barca or Arsenal play more direct football just because they're playing in a bigger pitch. Or that Porto will play less direct football just because the pitch is small. I mean, the whole point of managing a team is to create a tactical mindset that suits your players and your conception of what type of football you want to play. It seems counter-intuitive to me that you have to change your style of play according to pitch sizes so much.

Oh, and I completely agree with SCIAG, it seems like the tactical frameworks have become a lot less clear and more convoluted in these later builds of FM.

Yes, I think this is what people have been clamouring for, especially with 09. The tactics model, per se, isn't the problem - it's the lack of intuition. EG, forward runs/mentality being similar but not necessarily the same. From the wizard pics, it looks like a case of you telling the game HOW you wish to play (defensive, attacking, counter-attacking, etc) and what you hope to achieve (keep the ball, stifle the play, hoof it to the big man), and the wizard sets your sliders accordingly. You can then tweak them yourself if you feel the need to.

The ass man will have input in a seperate screen. Also, if you have a scout that tells you to use fast defenders or a deep defensive line, you should, hopefully, be able to build this into the tactics too.

hmmm... there are pictures of this wizard about? Did I miss them on this thread, or are they elsewhere?

You raise a good point about the Assistant Manager feedback - if you have this graphical view in place, then you could be able to select to show the Ass Man's feedback on the pitch layout.... for example... the Defensive Line could flash, and a new marker appear where the Ass Man suggests you change it to... pretty much the same would go for all of the now graphically-represented elements of your tactical system.

And I guess the Assistant Manager's feedback will be a wizard of it's own, or incorporated into the main wizard, as you'd want to click through all of his suggestions and say 'yes' or 'no' to his proposals, and then move onto his next suggestion..

I think the options are wide-ranging, and it could really tie in the existing Ass Man functionality with a really improved, intuitive, graphically-represented Tactics Designer... and couple that with a new improved 3d Match Engine and I think SI really send out a strong response to the new CM... an evolution to existing, really solidified, well-rounded features that are central to the game experience of a modern Football Management sim, rather than CM's revolution - which, whilst exciting, might not turn out to be so well-rounded in its first incarnation.

hmmm... there are pictures of this wizard about? Did I miss them on this thread, or are they elsewhere?

Am sure I saw some somewhere but they may have been from FMLive. Or mockups. But SI definitely said they are looking to implement a wizard, which is more info that we've been given about a release before.

I'd like to see the ass man's feedback broken into sections and an "implement" button next to each suggestion. So if he says, "We should show Rooney and Tevez onto their weaker foot" you can just hit an "Apply" button and this feeds into your tactics.

Tactical wizard doesn't do the change justice as the wizard aspect is a tiny element of the whole concept. High-level tactical interface is a much better description.

Irrespective of the higher tactical functions of this new feature, my arguement is that most users do not come equipped with basic tactical concepts in the first place. A perfect translation through any interface of a flawed tactical appreciation of the situation will always result in failure and frustration. In an ideal world an interface that is easier to understand will make it easier for a user to understand that the mistake lies with their basic tactical concepts. The other side of the coin is that lacking an abstract interface to blame it will be the implimentation of tactics and the match engine itself that will bear the brunt of user frustration if users do not understand how, where and why their tactics are flawed and if users have no alternative ideas.

Several recent threads have shown just have far divorced many users from an understanding of tactics in the first place, how small a conceptual tactical arsenal users have for understanding problems and envisioning means of defeating those problems. The single biggest hurdle for myself personally in Football Manager was gaining that first understanding of tactical basics. No amount of slider tweaking would fix the errors that arose from for example instructing a midfield duo of Carrick and Scholes to close down opponents. Likewise the issues with defending wingers or defender possession and passing in recent topics do not arise from slider translation issues or slightly inferior slider settings but from fundamental errors in the conception of solutions to be translated into formations, personell, sliders and instructions.

As you yourself very well know "It's Your Tactics" does not simply mean that a users brilliant tactical concepts have been poorly translated into slider settings but that the very thing that is being attempted is often profoundly flawed. This is a fundamental problem that is always going to exist for Football Manager unless users are educated in basic principles of tactics by some means. There is no getting past this issue with an improved interface or tighter coding. Users are going to have to learn one way or another, and they either learn through a long period of trial and error, or they come to these forums or find some other source of basic tactical information.

If the intention is to make this game easy to grasp but hard to master, to make the initial experience of first time users a far more pleasurable and rewarding experience, or to allow long suffering users to get to grips with the game in an easier and more understanding manner, then alongside improvements in the tactical interface must come an improvement in the means of understanding tactics. Expecting an improved interface to increase the rate at which tactical pennies drop is disingenuous. It will no doubt facilitate experimentation and improve the ability to produce what is conceived, but for the 15 year old FIFA crowd as an example it is still a long hard road to finding some sound tactical basics and understanding the underlying problems with what you see.

As I have said elsewhere the game is in need of a method of helping users get to grips with tactics that is not outright failure and trial and error. It can by all means be a game that increasingly simplifies and improves its interface, making tactics ever easier to impliment and alter according to what a user has in mind, but this will be of limited additional help to users actively seeking knowledge of tactic basics. Either users use trial and error and full match replays to re-invent the history of tactical development in their own minds from a starting point of near null, or they go to the forums looking for information and advice on tactics basics that the forum simply does not have.

If the game does not seek to educate users in tactics in a productive or non frustrating fashion it is in danger of alienating newcomers and the perpetually frustrated despite its best efforts to improve the game with these users in mind. The fundamental general problem in Football Manager in my opinion is not translating ideas to instructions, it is in understanding tactics in the first place and educating yourself about tactics via the game in a non-frustrating way. If you do not have some appreciation of real world football tactics this game will punish you untill your learn. The game should assist you in understanding the basics. Ignore this issue and the very best that can be hoped for in the future is that some of the edge will taken off those complaints directed at the sliders that were entireally down to sliders and sliders alone. This time next year we will know whether or not the overwhelming majority of users raising issues with FM were indeed as tactically astute and slider frustrated as they claimed and as SI judged.

SFraser, I have responded to your issue with the proposed wizard in another thread, but I think it is worth revisiting here. I have great respect, nigh awe, for your tactical understanding and your ability to reproduce it in the game. As regards the FM Wizard, though, I have two fundamental issues with your stance.

1)You are placing a burden on the game that is completely outside its scope. Its purpose is to give regular people a chance to pretend they are managing a football team. Now, can the game do better at presenting the laws of the game and fundamental strategy for newcomers? Perhaps, and I have seen this once or twice in other sports games. Really, though, if the user wants to increase his knowledge, there is an entire market of books, videos, lectures, and other goods and services available to learn the game. Better yet, he can pick up a ball and join a rec league. Or buy tickets/watch games on TV. Or talk to other football fans or FM players (such as are found on this forum). However he does it, once the very basics of the game are learned, his knowledge can only grow over time. And he will always be learning because the sport is always changing.

2)You are concerned for the football novice, but you clearly are not one. I think this blunts your authority to be against the idea in such an outspoken manner. I have never played FM before 09 (or even heard of it) and have next to nothing in terms of background, experience, and knowledge of the sport of football. I have many priorities over playing a computer game. I am the audience this wizard is trying to reach and I think it is an outstanding idea. Even without my computer problems, I have a hard time getting traction with FM09 and feel I cannot, in the time I have to play, climb the hurdle of my ignorance and reach the point where I can actually enjoy the game. The wizard gives me a reason to purchase FM10, which I otherwise would not have done, assuming I can get my computer fixed.

As it stands right now, I can watch my games in full detail and take all the notes I want. But I don't know if the problem is my rudimentary tactical understanding, or my failure to properly translate my ideas into Slider Speak. So what do I change? My ideas or my settings? With the wizard, my ideas are translated into Slider Speak for me. Now I know for certain that my problems are my own doing. Do I have flawed concepts, poor or ill-used players, or did I fail to adjust for conditions and opponent? Well . . . that's management. That's what FM is about.

After having seen the screen shots, I'm pretty pleased with what SI have come up with. However, I do still encourage the use of more accurately descriptive labels for the sliders, and the in game tutorial could still be made much more helpful.

This doesn't just limit itself to the tactical side of the game either. I notice in CM they have a pop-up that describes exactly what each attribute means, rather than leaving the player guessing. No reason why this couldn't be incorporated into FM

It's a good idea but it should go in tandem with an explanation of why or how the tactics are failing.

The wizard in itself will be a great tool in teaching the users how to use the sliders. A player can look at how sliders are effected by what they've chosen using the wizard then put 2 and 2 together. Sfraser is right though, it's not a solution for a far bigger problem. SI can take two approaches here. They can either say it's not our fault that you don't understand tactics (which will be perfectly fine) or they can make the wizard/ass man a little more helpful. Have it/him highlight certain issues that might arise from the choices a user makes while using the wizard. This would need some ability by whoever is in charge of this wizard to tell beforehand what weakness might exist by combining certain things together. Giving a final summary something that'll look like this:-

Pros

Can open tight defenses up.

Exploiting space behind defenders.

Cons

Team will be vulnerable to quick counter attacks.

Vulnerable out on the wings.

It'll need constant updating of course to add things that might have been missed but eventually it'll cover most if not all possibilities. If you make it easy enough to edit the wizard the community can do it themselves. People have already devoted time to write 50 page documents I'm sure there are some out there who'll aid the developers in coming up with updates for the wizard.

As it stands right now, I can watch my games in full detail and take all the notes I want. But I don't know if the problem is my rudimentary tactical understanding, or my failure to properly translate my ideas into Slider Speak. So what do I change? My ideas or my settings? With the wizard, my ideas are translated into Slider Speak for me. Now I know for certain that my problems are my own doing. Do I have flawed concepts, poor or ill-used players, or did I fail to adjust for conditions and opponent? Well . . . that's management. That's what FM is about.

Nail on the head :thup:.

The same applies for those who do 'understand' football but can't get the sliders doing what they want or don't have the time/inclination to test in order to discover if there is a combination to get what they want. It's a football management sim not an out and out strategy game where the mechanics of playing are linked to understanding the underlying theories. Anything that makes giving instructions to players more akin to real life is a good thing. As you said, success should not be about the sliders but about the football. I want to fail for footballing reasons (as much as is possible in a game) and not because I couldn't get my winger to cut in or my striker to drop deeper or etc. etc., independent of his ability to do those things or his decision making to do so within a given scenario.

As for SI teaching football, I've always felt that even with the slider translation issue potentially reduced via the wizard they should have a video of a pkm with footballing analysis (Ray Houghton?) and how to adjust the sliders. Obviously you can't cover everything but it could help with 'teaching' a methodology (not meant to be condescending so apologies if that's how it appears, but in my time in the tactics forum some posters have appeared to lack in the basic approach that I'm sure many people reading this apply).

I haven’t had the time to read the whole thread; sorry if I’ am posting something that has already been posted in this thread (or another).

There are various issues here but I want to focus on the 2 issue raised by the original poster.

1. People don't understand how your game works.

2. They don't understand football.

I think the game (and therefore Si) must do more to improve these issues. I have skim read a few points from posters regarding target audience, time to play games, etc all valid points.

Both issues could be address through improved scout feedback. At the moment the (scout) information we get is comical, less than half of an A4 page for ability, potential and more importantly tactical information. How are people meant to improve their tactical knowledge when they get very little information through the scout report (which should be a key phase from which to plan for the next match, in terms of personal and tactics)!

Around 2005 there was a leaked scout report from Chelsea (vs. Newcastle), which then got mentioned on the forums. The community was so fascinated with what goes on in real football that they also demanded an improvement within the game. On TV screens its can be seen that managers, assistant managers/coaches sometime go through part of a scout dossier (tactical threats and weakness with regards to who is on the pitch) with the players who are coming on as subs.

The game should scout/process the opponents’ possible line-ups (last 5-6 matches); same for the users’ team as it would need that info to analyse. As the users info, is partly internal, maybe an option could be given to drop players in and out of your current tactic screen, even altering the formation and instructions to see what the scout thinks (tactical feedback).

Potential threads and weakness could be highlighted on something similar to the tactic screen (several tactic screens for the various T&W). But with added icons, which highlight threads and weakness (ability, potential and tactical) for both the opposition and users team.

By placing the mouse cursor over the icon, text could further explain the potential threat or weakness (and which sliders are involved; perhaps give pros & cons as suggested by other people). This is one area where tactical learning could be helped, and the sliders could be further explained.

Wizzard will defenetly be a good addition to tactical interface as it will translate our ideas to slider language. but I still think we should understand the basic mechanisms more.

what I would finally wish to see in FM10 is change in AI tactics. with this new wizzard comming out, it would feel really weird that we will be able to make sophisticated tactics even more than now and the AI will still be on 'all team instructions'?!

if the game wants to improve, this wizzard needs to be part of AI tactical behaviour. there's no point in a race between F1 and regular car..

if the game wants to improve, this wizzard needs to be part of AI tactical behaviour. there's no point in a race between F1 and regular car..

That's interesting that you perceive it like that. They dont, and for me AI underachieve in FM, something I want to improve at the same time as making tactics more approachable to the user, so we get a nice difficulty balance and learning curve.

Which was posted in the "Ditch the "mentality" slider altogether" thread. In response to my post:-

My perception is that the AI teams already have this understanding, although there is scope for improvement (especially with AI Managers who are supposed to have 20 for tactical knowledge).

In terms of people not understanding what each slider does at the low level, I concede we can make this clearer in future ...

Ideally we will, over time, make both the low level controls clearer ...

Thank you; this is greatly needed. Clear explanations of what each slider does, in the ME. I.e., Tempo tells the ME to do X, and Time Wasting tells the ME to do Y, etc... Please remove the mystery and 'hmmmm' factor. The hmmmm factor should be in pondering over *what* tactics to use, not in figuring out *HOW* to get a tactic implemented.

Please follow through on this and get some very very clear definitions and details on the sliders out. Goal should be to never see another forum thread debating what a slider does.

Also, very glad to hear more specific tactical control options are going into the ME (you mentioned cutting wingers, hugging the touch line). Very welcome. I'm sure there are a dozen dozen things people could suggest for this. A a few I'd like are:

** Shoot/Pass preference (mentioned in this thread above, love that idea immensely)

** Under Pressure (i.e., let us define what the team/player considers enough pressure as 'time to make a decision and take a shoot/pass action because the defense is all over me'; ideally this would give us the ability to set players to skew towards getting out of danger vs trying to Hero it and get something done on their own as Ronaldo often seems to try to do).

** Outlet Option (i.e., current ME has players "without an available pass option, who are under defensive pressure" usually just turning and booting the ball straight into touch. Why not let us give instructions as to what they should be attempting to do in such circumstances. Some obvious options are A) Into Touch, B) Attempt to force pass to closest open teammate, C) Boot the ball upfield (instead of into Touch), D) Attempt to dribble out of trouble.)

More control is good. Just explain the controls clearly, so we're not guessing and debating what they do! After all, it's a game and should be fun. Not everyone likes mysteries!

Have not read the full comments but i would like to add one thing(which i think many of those who are at least better than average in designing tactics wont like)...remove the numbers. Rather than giving 6-7 variations/steps for each state, make it just three...so mentality would be defensive, normal, attacking (though mentality could have two more...ultra defensive and gung ho) while creativity would be less, mixed more etc...it will completely remove the confusion regarding sliders since i believe is the main cause for frustration among newbies/novices.

(Firstly, if anybody has replied since SFraser's last post I apologise as I'll be ignoring any points they make. My sincere and humble apologies)

Tactics in Football Manager used to be far more logical.

In FM07, you just had to make sure a) everything corresponded logically, b) the tactic suited the players and c) any problems with your tactic were sorted out. Certain sliders worked together in tandem- "tempo" and "passing style" being the prime example. There was no point having a player with low crossing set to "cross often".Now, that's all gone.

Correspondence

A very easy concept to understand that relates mostly to the initial set up of a tactic. If you wanted to work the ball up to the wingers quickly and get it in the box, you played a fast and direct (but not long) game, with a lot of width and passing focused "down both flanks". You gave the wingers farrows, crossing "often" and "from byline", and "run with ball" and "forward runs" also often. Basically, everything did what it said on the tin. The only slight concern at this initial stage was whether you would get the sliders "wobbled" correctly (i.e. would 16 or 17 clicks be better?) but I found that the difference was minimal.

Now, we have a situation where tactics aren't logical, don't do what they claim to, and in some cases have little or no effect at all. I cite "passing style" and "tempo". These two sliders should shape your play. However, I find that they now do little or nothing. Regardless of what you set them to, your side will play a short, slow game. "Direct" or "long" passing may see your defenders try an occasional "hoof", but that's it. They'll still dally on the ball if they're under no pressure rather than going for a speedy attack. May I point out that "direct" football (at say 16 notches) is not "hoof" football- it's working the ball up the pitch in less steps than "short" passing. It's possibly the difference between Man United and Arsenal, though United do play a "short" game when the occasion calls for it.

The lack of logic- read TT&F. On "Passing Options", wwfan and millie write that you should make sure that you don't set your players to too short a passing style in case their options are running away (ok, that isn't exactly it...). That's how it works in the game, I'm not shooting the messengers. Surely, however, if you are playing a short passing game, players should be looking for the ball and making themselves avalible?

I'm now going to fall into that risky pitfall of a real life antology.

Arsenal play an attacking, short passing game. When Clichy or Sagna get the ball, they have more options than just the centre back. Whilst Fabregas and co arent't playing defensively by any stretch of the imagination, they will make themselves avalible when a player is in possession, normally further up the pitch than said player. A "short" passing game with "attacking" mentality should encompass this. At the moment, the opposite happens- midfielders don't want to know and run away.

Tactics suiting the players

Bit obvious this. No point asking that lump of a centre half to play a short passing game, take shots from distance or dribble. It makes sense to get that winger to dribble and cross if he's good at these things, and if your winger is crossing and your defenders are hitting long balls, it follows that your strikers will need to be good in the air.

Fixing tactics

This is the stage after "tactic creation" for me. Here, you need to sort out any issues you may have. If your defenders are being caught up the pitch, then give your centre backs a more defensive mentality and drop the d-line. When I was managing Chesterfield, I found that one of my strikers was playing a lot of aimless balls forward. I fixed this by stopping him playing through balls.

On 09, there isn't that chance to fix tactics, as the options are ineffective and illogical.

What I'm saying is that a new wizard won't change much. It may stop people being confused by the sliders, but when tactics are so flawed, it's a cosmetic addition (as I said to ahmufcwafc when he offered to make me a tactic using it). The match engine needs to be returned to a state like the one it was in before (i.e. 7.0.2). Crossing needs to be less aimless and ineffective. Passing style and tempo need to have an effect. Mentality should stop being clumped together and go back to the more logical "defenders get defensive mentalities, attackers get attacking mentalities". Ideally arrows (which were one of the more... understandable, tools) would come back in, but that isn't going to happen as the people with a voice feel they are unrealistic and changing their minds is about as likely as getting an athiest to believe in God.

In short, tactical systems and the ME have done little but regress over the past two years, and IMO they should be reverted to 07's equivalents, but with height incorporated into the ME (something I remember PaulC saying had been added for 09).

SCIAG

That is a superb post SCIAG and I wholeheartidly agree with what you are saying hence the reason I have just reinstalled FM 07.

Thought that I'd bring up my own issues about the introduction of the wizard in this thread.

Firstly, let me just say that I believe the idea behind the wizard is good. It is widely thought among the Football Manager Community that the tactics are very difficult to understand for a variety of reasons. Firstly, you do not understand how each option affects the match. For example, I still do not thoroughly understand exacly what the 'time wasting' setting does and how many areas of my teams play it effects. I actually agree that we should be told what they do but that still has not come about.

So, what can be done to help me? A new, easy-to-use wizard that uses well known football terminology to help me put my thoughts and theories into the game with minimal fuss. A tool that helps me get my player playing as close to how I imagined than I could ever have done with the sliders.

Almost sounds too good to be true. It also looks to good to be true. Everything seems perfect from the outside. Then I get told about what theories are being used underneath; the well known and well used tactical theorems and frameworks that is written by our very own WWFan. A detailed look through this guide then gets me scratching my head as I try to understand how this eloquently written guide actually works. I know for sure that certain aspects of this tactical theory would not work in real life matches, therefore, it should not work in a simulated match either.

In a lone striker formation, one of the MCs or AMCs plays the role of FCa. The idea here is that the lone striker’s role is more similar to an FCd than to a true FCa

I quote this from the TT&F guide because it is something that does not happen in a real life match. I will now bring up a well known Premier League lone striker and his 'partner': Fernando Torres and Steven Gerrard. Can someone point me toward the last time that Gerrard was in front of Torres, leading the line, while Torres was significantly deeper than Gerrard matching play? It just doesn't happen. The AMC is the one that sits in the whole while the striker pushes the line.

08=Global passing settings work very well

09=Global passings do not work so well and passing should be set up individually

You will see here that I have only put summaries and that is because the sections are too long to quote in. My biggest problem here is the fact that I should be able to tell my players to play a short passing game without dramatic implications. Infact, when I play through the simulated matches, I don't see any significant problems, so why the passing in TT&F is so over-complicated is, infact beyond me.

What does any of this have to do with the wizard you ask? This is why:

• I've got a mixed marking scheme, which isn't anything like real life.
  

• Nearly every player on my team is taking long shots, including my strikers (one of them often).
  

• I've gone for the more rigid approach and yet I've still got more than one free role in the team.
  

• Nearly all of my players are running with the ball.
  

• Mixed passing strategy that makes little sense to me from the point of view of logic.
  

• My most offensive striker is making no forward runs and my deeper striker is making forward runs often.
  

• Most of my players have unrealistic instructions unless I was playing with a world class team with the highest quality in every position.

These are some of the settings that cropped up when a fellow FML tester used the wizard to set up his system. To me, these are all unrealistic. I don't see these ideas being used in real life football matches and that is because they don't work.

The real problem here is; these unrealistic settings are what we are going to be using in the next version of Football Manager. Not only will these be our settings, it is what our opponents will use aswell. This is not how real football plays, and it is not how our game should play. I really do not want to be playing against 38 WWFan's a season. I want to be playing against the settings the AI use now which seem to be fairly realistic from what is shown on the pitch.

Also, the fact that every team from Braintree to United will be using a limited amount of TT&F methods is really quite worrying. At one end of the scale, the results will be disasterous as, as far as I am aware, the wizard doesn't take in: Condition, ability and Physical attributes. This means that teams will either be pushed too hard, not hard enough, or will be playing systems that do not meet there squad quota.

Is this really how we want the future of FM to play out?

Peter

I think in all fairness that post shows exactly why a Wizard is needed to some extent and why people cannot get to grips with the instruction system as it stands.

I quote this from the TT&F guide because it is something that does not happen in a real life match. I will now bring up a well known Premier League lone striker and his 'partner': Fernando Torres and Steven Gerrard. Can someone point me toward the last time that Gerrard was in front of Torres, leading the line, while Torres was significantly deeper than Gerrard matching play? It just doesn't happen. The AMC is the one that sits in the whole while the striker pushes the line.

When Vidic was sent off at Old Trafford.

I've got a mixed marking scheme, which isn't anything like real life.

Unless you happen to have actually watched football at the highest levels in the last couple of months where for example Chelsea employed Zonal + Man Marking against both Liverpool and Barcelona.

Nearly every player on my team is taking long shots, including my strikers (one of them often).

They are not taking Long Shots unless they are actually taking them. Mixed Long Shots allows long shots to be attempted when the risk is reasonable and other options are lacking.

I've gone for the more rigid approach and yet I've still got more than one free role in the team.

Hence the lack of gaps down the flanks for your Free Role player to run into, therefore he remains relatively close to his original position, where there is space to move into.

Nearly all of my players are running with the ball.

Again being instructed to do something Often means it is an option with a heavy bias. Unless players are always running with the ball, then they are not all running with the ball.

Mixed passing strategy that makes little sense to me from the point of view of logic.

What could be more logical than a passing strategy that biases neither extreme?

My most offensive striker is making no forward runs and my deeper striker is making forward runs often.

So you have a guy uptop staying on-side and keeping in touch with play making advanced runs only when the opportunity is clear cut, while you have a supporting striker making runs from deep on a regular basis. Pretty basic, simple, effective football.

Most of my players have unrealistic instructions unless I was playing with a world class team with the highest quality in every position.

This is the point. The apparently "unrealistic" instructions exist because as mentioned before users have a limited conception of football tactics and are themselves producing unrealistic instructions and unrealistic football. The Free Role AMC playmaker is a perfect example of the conflict of tactical conceptions from the average user. A player told to exploit space all over the pitch, that is the most technically and mentally gifted attacking player, and who is all the passing option of choice for inferior players. They cannot get the ball to him and he is in no position to bring team mates into play.

The bullet points within the post above show that the user in question does not understand functional tactics nor their translation into tactical options. The problem does not begin with the game itself, but it is not made easier by the game. As I said before the Wizard may facilitate improved instructions and a degree of "penny dropping" tactically, but if the userbase is in general niaive about football tactics in the first place the fundamental issues will remain.

SFraser. Firstly, regarding the Torres/Gerrard setup, do you really believe this is how the setup should work? Unless you can find multiple matches with the pair playing in a totally different role to what logic shows then I will stand by the fact that the theory in question is extremely bizzare.

The free-role part that you mention is so confusing. Why have free-role ticked if he stays relatively close to his position anyway?

The long-shots and run-with ball, I believe, are match engine observations which, again, are unrealistic. You don't often see players that consistantly run with the ball; especially in central areas of the field.

The passing, I believe, is talking about individual passing instructions where certain players have completely different passing styles to those around him which isn't realistic at all. You rarely see a team outside of the big four that play this style of football.

When I assign my forwards, I always want one forward on the shoulder of the last man and another dropping deep to link up play. That is the most common of FC strategys and is easy to notice if you watch football week in, week out. For example, Cameron Jerome plays on the shoulder of the last defender and makes lots of forward runs to get in behind his opponents. James McFadden uses his technical skill to make clever passes to link up play. What has forward runs got to do with off-sides? I really hope my players have the knowledge to make forward runs while keeping himself onside rather than making stupid runs when there is no chance of the run being legal.

Trust me, this player understands football and his bullet points point that out. All of the options he provided are unrealistic and are something you don't see in football.

Finally, you compounded the users last point by only bringing up examples of top 4 clubs.

The bullet points within the post above show that the user in question does not understand functional tactics nor their translation into tactical options. The problem does not begin with the game itself, but it is not made easier by the game. As I said before the Wizard may facilitate improved instructions and a degree of "penny dropping" tactically, but if the userbase is in general niaive about football tactics in the first place the fundamental issues will remain.

Hang on a second, the guy (or girl) is testing the wizard. If there are problems, it isn't because he's using the wizard incorrectly. It's because there's something wrong with the instructions assigned by the wizard.

As most of you know there is a new "Tactics Wizard" due out for FM10. This "Wizard" will present the user with options based upon footballing concepts found within the "Tactical Theorems and Frameworks" guide rather than the current tactical sliders for users to define their tactics in FM10. It has been met with great applause apparently, but throughout the debate over tactics Sports Interactive have maintained the stance that the tactical sliders are sound.

This "Wizard" will help users select more game logical and game relevant tactical slider settings without having to deal with the sliders, but according to someone elses tactical concepts.

I have held the stance that the problem with tactics is twofold. First people do not understand the sliders. Second people often produce inferior tactics.

My opinion is that this Wizard, though appreciated in the short term by those with severe tactical problems, is a profound error of judgement and a profound error of allocation of resources in the long term. This "Wizard" is a second interface ontop of the first interface. It is a vast elaboration ontop of what exists. It is fundamentally the tactical choices of a third party reduced to ideas and implimented as choices within the game.

Rather than explain these "ideal sliders" to the average player and rather than have the average player check the forums for information, Sports Interactive would rather devote development resources to producing a "Wizard" based on these guides for everyone to use inside the game.

This is a severe allocation of resources, not just this year, but for the entire existence of this feature. It will have to be balanced, tweaked, coded and tested every single year that it exists. All of this despite the fact that SI think that the current tactical sliders are fine.

I have deep problems with this.

Earlier today I read a post that contained a link to this website. Now while it does not explain the sliders, it explains a lot about the basic tactical principles of football. These principles do not change, do not alter, do not need tested, do not need tweaked etc.

To make a long story short, I have two questions:

How many of you would prefer ambiguous sliders and a tactical "Wizard" that works you through a forum guide?

How many of you would prefer accurate slider information and information about real life football tactics?

I myself think that this Wizard is superficial in the short term, especially considering that SI have stated the tactical sliders are sound. If they are sound then SI should not be developing ways to avoid them, to get around them, or developing forum guides for sliders directly into their game. SI should be helping us understand the sliders and making it easier to make managerial decisions.

Equally SI should be teaching us about football. Sports Interactive should be helping us learn to manage football clubs if they are making a football management game. Our staff should be teaching us tactical tricks and giving us proper, relevant tactical advice.

I don't want a "Tactical Wizard" based on a forum guide that has to be changed and tweaked and tested every season. What I want is clearer sliders and information about real life tactical principles. I would immediatly cancel this "Wizard" if it showed up, but I would spend hours reading an "Tactics Bible" developed by SI and that existed inside the game. I dont want someone else to make my tactics, I want to make them myself and have everyone elses knowledge.

Maybe I am alone here, but rather than a "Tactical Wizard" I want a "Tactical Encyclopaedia".

Teach us about football, don't do it for us. Anyone else agree?

Wait, that's exactly how I feel. I wouldn't have put it like a C-Grade GCSE persuasive writing piece myself, but you're spot on. Except that I'd hope the vast majority of people playing this game actually know about football already. There needs to be greater clarification on how to implement real life into a tactic, which in theory this wizard could do. In practice it won't, because the workings behind it are flawed.

Hang on a second, the guy (or girl) is testing the wizard. If there are problems, it isn't because he's using the wizard incorrectly. It's because there's something wrong with the instructions assigned by the wizard.

Correct. They are not what he was expecting, which is the entire reason the Wizard exists.

Correct. They are not what he was expecting, which is the entire reason the Wizard exists.

But the instructions are extremely unrealistic. A football sim should use football tactics and the tactics listed are not used in the real life game.