How to win games ?

I was jw because my mate says that the games is based on 50% team talk 35% players and 15% tactics is he right ?

All three have an effect but to try and quantify it is difficult as they are all intertwined.

I would say that % don't fit here but if I had to I would say...

20% players

40% all the "minor" aspects as team talks, morale, strategy etc

40% tactics

For me it's:

40% tactics

20% team talks

20% players

10% other things

You are overating team talks imo but that's ok!

i was jw because whenever he loses he says i lost because i gave the wrong team talk, and he also says that some goals are programmed to go in lol don't know if you understand what that means

Never thought about it in % but, for me:

70% players.

20% tactics - common sense - as long as you dont put a striker at right back etc.

10% morale/form.

Team talk - vastly overrated - only use at fulltime to avoid players getting unsettled when i dont praise them after a win.

How can it be 50% team talk? Against 35% players. Any poor team against a top team will get beaten easily 999/1000 - dont care what the team talk is. So player has to be the main reason.

How can it be 50% team talk? Against 35% players. Any poor team against a top team will get beaten easily 999/1000 - dont care what the team talk is. So player has to be the main reason.

Yet you can have success with crap players and a good tactic. Hence tactic > players.

How can it be 50% team talk? Against 35% players. Any poor team against a top team will get beaten easily 999/1000 - dont care what the team talk is. So player has to be the main reason.

Soooo wrong....

I challenge you, take Man Utd. Ask ass man to pick the tactics, talks etc. Then play a game against any mediocre EPL team (everton, Bolton etc). Now repeat tha game 10 times. I don't think you will win more than 5 of them.

Players are very important but tactics are a lot more

Yet you can have success with crap players and a good tactic. Hence tactic > players.

Soooo wrong....

I challenge you, take Man Utd. Ask ass man to pick the tactics, talks etc. Then play a game against any mediocre EPL team (everton, Bolton etc). Now repeat tha game 10 times. I don't think you will win more than 5 of them.

Players are very important but tactics are a lot more

Have to disagree guys! Take Man Utd - whether you play 4-4-2, 4-5-1, 4-3-3, 3-5,2 whether Rooney has complete forward or treq or deep lying forward the same for any other player - ultimatley they will still win. But having the right tactic and individual instructions could improve the player/team by 10-20%, but that would be the small difference against the very best teams in the world - separating the very good from the best not the very good from the average/poor.

How can you disagree if proof against you exists? Have you seen ANY member in here managing Man Utd, not setting up tactcics etc and winning the EPL with no losses? come on. Please show us your most recent achievements!

Right now I have the BEST teams in all EPL and still I struggle with Hull.

How can you disagree if proof against you exists? Have you seen ANY member in here managing Man Utd, not setting up tactcics etc and winning the EPL with no losses? come on. Please show us your most recent achievements!

Right now I have the BEST teams in all EPL and still I struggle with Hull.

Come on fella. Im saying that players on FM are more important than tactics, but that does not say tactics are not unimportant- far from it. If you have two very evenly matched teams then it is the finest margins that separates the teams and this could be the tactcis. But a tactic or tactics are used in order to get the best out of a set of 11 players - if you dont have a very good set of players then there is only so much you can do with any given tactic. You can have the best racing driver in the world against yourself - but if you have a sports car and he has a lorry then you will win - not becasue you have the better knowledge (tactic) but becasue you have the better car (players)- funny example i know but I'm saying tactics can only do so much given the players available.

Tactics cannot create miracles its the players who are out there on the pitch, but the correct tactic can make a given team 10-20% better but 10-20% of an average team will not beat a set of world-class players.

again lol. you avoid showing us what you have achieved in the game with this mentality. And I am telling you that If A member spends a good amount of time on tactics so they exploit all the advantages of their teams, ANY small team can win ANY big team. You will see that the vast majority of the members in these forums will agree with me on that

Tactics cannot create miracles its the players who are out there on the pitch, but the correct tactic can make a given team 10-20% better but 10-20% of an average team will not beat a set of world-class players.

You haven't heard about 10.2 4-4-2 narrow diamond, have you?

obviously he is either a very new fm player or a very low profile one without great achievements. Everyone stays awake at nights for tactics!

50% players

40% tactics

10% team-talks, morale, form etc.

I was jw because my mate says that the games is based on 50% team talk 35% players and 15% tactics is he right ?

90% of stats are made up on the spot

I would say its at least 70-80% tactics, you can have the 11 best players in the world that in the real world world beat any team, but on football manager you have to set up a tactic that plays to there strength. Players on FM are basically robots and will ONLY do what YOU tell them too. People who think that it is all about the players do not know Football Manager as well as you think you do. I suggest a trip over to the tactics and training forum and prepare yourselves for a lot of in depth analysis into how the game works. Trust me you will enjoy the game a lot more if you put the time in and create something that you made, and isn't just default.

How to win? Score more than your opponent.

Seriously though, players are by far the most important thing, I'd say at least 80% importance. In an extreme sceanrio, let's say you had AFC Wimbledon against Real Madrid, no matter how good a tactician you were, you would lose to Madrid because they have superior players.

At last another proper opinion! Also I would suggest him the tactical theoremes book...

again lol. you avoid showing us what you have achieved in the game with this mentality. And I am telling you that If A member spends a good amount of time on tactics so they exploit all the advantages of their teams, ANY small team can win ANY big team. You will see that the vast majority of the members in these forums will agree with me on that

This is not about what a manager has achieved, not our respective managerial qualities. You think tactics are more important I think its the players - thats fine. So you are saying more often than not Barcelona (on a default formation) will get beat by York City more often than not with this miracle tactic that you seem to think that exists - your opinion. Also in relation to people on this forum - having spent a fair bit of time this weekend on here I have seen some of your posts - it seems if someone does not agree with you, you are very confrontational - with the attitude its my way or the highway! With no regard for other peoples opinions and comming up with your very well rounded assumption below. And a few people have picked up on this matter.

You haven't heard about 10.2 4-4-2 narrow diamond, have you?

obviously he is either a very new fm player or a very low profile one without great achievements. Everyone stays awake at nights for tactics!

Edit your last post says it all really. :o

Where is luck's % ?

Where is luck's % ?

Yeah very good point!

edit what and why?

At last another proper opinion! Also I would suggest him the tactical theoremes book...

edit what and why?

Edit's are placed at the bottom of a post once that post has been submitted and the person wants to add something to that original post. To let people know it was not part of the original post and written at a later date.

When I previewed my previous post I saw your post and then wrote the edit at the bottom of my post after I had submitted it.

You said quote ' At last another proper opinion!' refering to bluemoon's post. An opinion is a personal belief or judgement not founded on proof nor certainty. So basically you think an opinion can only be proper, if it agrees with your opinion? Thats a rhetorical question - not sure if I want you to know what that means - I hope you don't, as that may be the reason for your outburst - the exuberance of youth!

first of all i don't burst. I am not arguing and if you are, then it is your problem! I am just trying to "teach" you some things about the game. As for the "rhetorical" word I can proudly tell you that my people invented this word among others that you use in your daily life

Kenco that is a very extreme and obvious answer, of course real madrid would win. And as AFC Wimbledon you would never expect to beat Real Madrid. But in any league i belive that the bottom team can beat a top team with the right tactic.

Kenco that is a very extreme and obvious answer, of course real madrid would win. And as AFC Wimbledon you would never expect to beat Real Madrid. But in any league i belive that the bottom team can beat a top team with the right tactic.

My point was showing that players are more important than tactics or team talks, it didn't state anything about the relative quality of the opposition, so I stand by my post. Do you disagree?

Many members in here disagree and it shows in the posts. It is a shared opinion by all experienced fm players that tactics are more important. Let me set something straight though. tactcics are more important when we compare players like Messi to Bullard. In this case Messi's team can easily lose if Bullard's team has studied the tactics a lot. When we compare Messi's team with Nickos georgakodoropoulos from my village in Greece, then tactics cannot do anything.

Many members in here disagree and it shows in the posts. It is a shared opinion by all experienced fm players that tactics are more important. Let me set something straight though. tactcics are more important when we compare players like Messi to Bullard. In this case Messi's team can easily lose if Bullard's team has studied the tactics a lot. When we compare Messi's team with Nickos georgakodoropoulos from my village in Greece, then tactics cannot do anything.

Which proves that players are more important!

Thank you, and good night.

Hm, that is what you understood? Ok, by me!

Tactics before players? Probably correct in FM but not in real life. I've always thought FM has over-rated tactics. Annoys me.

of course! In real life is another thing. For example If Real Madrid plays 10 times against Olympiakos I would say that real would win 8, draw once and lose once regardless of the teactics. In fm, If Olympiakos has the proper tactics then they can manage to lose less than 3-4 games

It's difficult to quantify because of the two very different methods people use when playing FM. If you are trying to 'break' the ME by using tactics the AI struggles against, then tactics become far more important than players. However, if you are playing within AI parameters (i.e. no corner cheat, using a formation shape the AI has access to, no manual slider adjustments) then players gain in importance.

What becomes more important in the second scenario is decision making. When to change strategy, what shouts to use against different formations and in extreme weather conditions, which players to pick and which to rest, how to keep them playing well rather than nervously, badly or complacently. If you are trying to overpower the ME, all of the above loses importance against getting your tactics just right. However, I believe the game loses richness by doing so.