Lack of depth to the game

Having played FM since 05 I've bought every year but lately and particularly this year, I haven't had anywhere near the same enjoyment out of it. To me it feels like FM has become routine with a real lack of variety in how to go about it. I've actually dallied with FIFA Manager this year and while it's not as realistic in some ways, it really is fun where FM for me anyway is starting to drag a little.

At the end of the day, playing FM comes down to tactics, transfers and teamtalks. Once you've set up things like training and staff, it gets monotonous quite quickly. Especially if you create a couple of good tactics early and don't need to tinker. Principally the thing that frustrates me most is teamtalks. I feel like no matter what if I get them right then everything will be fine but get them wrong and no amount of tactical tinkering will solve the problem. The game turns into a simple multiple choice option and having read posts on carrying out teamtalks successfully there is no difficulty left in the game.

I would like to see an FM where adjusting tactics on the fly will see me win games not letting teamtalks do the work. The day to day managing of the team can become mundane so fast if you are experienced. I don't want pointless gimicks but added layers to tasks like training and youth development to make the weeks more interesting. Most importantly a match engine where rather than use exploits the ai can't deal with, the user must react to what opposition do, or be cut apart. I shouldn't be able to play the same way week in week out without someone figuring me out and cutting me apart once in a while.

I am a huge fan of the game and I really want to get back into it again but there is a balance between realism and being fun, at the moment the match engine and monotony of teamtalk success misses on both counts.

I would like to see an FM where adjusting tactics on the fly will see me win games not letting teamtalks do the work

You already can do this.

The only reason people think teamtalks are vital is because their tactic isn't solid to begin with. Get a solid formation and invest time in that and you can basically ignore teamtalks.

If you have great tactic then the emphasis on teamtalks and players don't need to be that great.

Have an okay tactic and you need to have good teams and decent players.

If you're weak in one of those areas then you have to make up for it by been stronger in one of the others.

Exactly as cleon says, if you have a very good tactical set up, team talks are almost unnecessary except in certain situations, the weaker the tactic the more other fields come into play. It is very possible to win a game having upset your team with a team talk, much like its possible to lose a game when you have pleased them all, one of the biggest issues i read on here is people expecting a good team talk to lead to a win, or being the be all and end all of a match. They are just one (small) part of the overall formula for winning a game. Tactics are vital in FM, anyone who says different doesnt have a solid tactic in the first place.

Users frequently blame team talks for unexpected losses, but it's actually the opposite. Team talks don't have a very large effect in 2012 compared to prior versions. This means that, in terms of your players' mental state, results are more heavily influenced by the natural rhythms and random events of the underlying psychology engine than ever before. Thus, when your players get too nervous or complacent, there's less you're actually able to do about it by the time you get to the team talk screen, so if you go into a match with a low probability of victory due to error-prone defenders or edgy strikers, a team talk isn't going to change things much one way or the other. Of course, this also means that, with a balanced tactic and good long-term management of player confidence, a poor team talk isn't going to destroy your game either.

Additionally, team talk responses and individual player confidence levels have a significant random element, so even if team talks were more powerful, there's never necessarily a "right" talk and there's always a probability that one of your players will go out and make a random error or lack the nerve to get his shots on target.

The only reason people think teamtalks are vital is because their tactic isn't solid to begin with. Get a solid formation and invest time in that and you can basically ignore teamtalks.

While I generally agree that you don't have to fret too much about team talks (spamming "Have Faith" does the job in all but the most extreme situations), this doesn't mean that a sudden confluence of negative psychological factors can't neuter an otherwise balanced tactic. Players can get nervous for many reasons beyond team talks and visible morale levels, and this will have a significant adverse effect on their decision-making and technical ability.

I find this FM has as much depth as the others. I tend to spend quite a bit of time early on in my save setting certain things up, but my club is constantly evolving, and my tactical ideas change in time as my team improves, or something doesn't have as much of an effect as I would like.

The only dull bit of FM is pre-season where I'm just pressing continue and playing friendlies. Otherwise the game has as much enjoyment as ever.

Exactly as cleon says, if you have a very good tactical set up, team talks are almost unnecessary except in certain situations, the weaker the tactic the more other fields come into play. It is very possible to win a game having upset your team with a team talk, much like its possible to lose a game when you have pleased them all, one of the biggest issues i read on here is people expecting a good team talk to lead to a win, or being the be all and end all of a match. They are just one (small) part of the overall formula for winning a game. Tactics are vital in FM, anyone who says different doesnt have a solid tactic in the first place.

I agree with you, and i also think people think that, but that's SI fault.

We must not forget that, when FM2012 came out, the "morale issue" play a big part on how we could win games. In fact, even with a bad tactic we could win, provided that you could keep your team with great morale, and team talks were a good and easy way to do that!

Now, after the patches, the game is more balanced, and you need a good tactic to win.

I agree with you, and i also think people think that, but that's SI fault.

We must not forget that, when FM2012 came out, the "morale issue" play a big part on how we could win games. In fact, even with a bad tactic we could win, provided that you could keep your team with great morale, and team talks were a good and easy way to do that!

Now, after the patches, the game is more balanced, and you need a good tactic to win.

Yes and no. Whilst your right it was possible to get long run of form going because of moral, if you did not have a good enough tactic to win the games when moral was around average, you would never get to that point. The patch has probably exaggerated these situations but the underlying issue was always there. Lets also not mix up moral and team talks, whilst they are connected, they're not the same thing. Even before the patch, team talks did not have that much of an effect, not to the point where they were the difference between winning and losing, its also worthwhile mentioning the effect of team talks outwith the first 15 minutes of a half are almost negligible, but obviously if something goes really well or badly in those 15 minutes it can have an knock on effect for the rest of the half.

Yes, but before the patch it was very easy to motivate your players with the team talk, and because of that you could win games even with bad tactics.

I know morale and team talks are different things, but i'm sure you remember when with team talk you could easy "fired up" all your team and get a fantastic result against a bigger team.

Despite morale not being too high, with the team talk you could get a "morale boost" for the game.

In the current version, this is much more difficult, much more balanced... much more real!

Lack of depth? Is the original poster for real? FM is one of the most in depth games around on any system.

Lack of depth? Is the original poster for real? FM is one of the most in depth games around on any system.

You confuse lots of things to do with depth. There really isnt much depth at all in this game. Most features are simplistic and one size fits all. Tactics? Very general and no ability to adjust tactics to exploit certain individual opposition players. Talks? Psychobabble and quite gamey..SI added them to make the game harder. Virtually nothing is optional/user adjustable in this game. Imagine if users could mod FM like the other big games? FM would be much better. Stop trying to ram it down our throats SI.

joey barton

You confuse lots of things to do with depth. There really isnt much depth at all in this game. Most features are simplistic and one size fits all. Tactics? Very general and no ability to adjust tactics to exploit certain individual opposition players. Talks? Psychobabble and quite gamey..SI added them to make the game harder. Virtually nothing is optional/user adjustable in this game. Imagine if users could mod FM like the other big games? FM would be much better. Stop trying to ram it down our throats SI.

Tactics are far from general, and you can certainly attack individual opposition players.

You certainly cannot. There is no ability to tell your team to attack opposition DC X.

You confuse lots of things to do with depth. There really isnt much depth at all in this game. Most features are simplistic and one size fits all. Tactics? Very general and no ability to adjust tactics to exploit certain individual opposition players. Talks? Psychobabble and quite gamey..SI added them to make the game harder. Virtually nothing is optional/user adjustable in this game. Imagine if users could mod FM like the other big games? FM would be much better. Stop trying to ram it down our throats SI.

What BIG games can you mod and its makes a real difference?

You certainly cannot. There is no ability to tell your team to attack opposition DC X.

Yes you can. I'd explain how but the game isn't that much indepth so I'm sure you can find it by yourself ;)

You certainly cannot. There is no ability to tell your team to attack opposition DC X.

Yes there is, by adjusting a role of a player, or changing the of attack but choosing which flank to attack.

Having played FM since 05 I've bought every year but lately and particularly this year, I haven't had anywhere near the same enjoyment out of it. To me it feels like FM has become routine with a real lack of variety in how to go about it. I've actually dallied with FIFA Manager this year and while it's not as realistic in some ways, it really is fun where FM for me anyway is starting to drag a little.

I started in 05 as well and even with FM07 I felt similarly but I've gradually re-warmed to the game. I think many of us feel a bit romantic about our first year with FM. Then the romance wears off and a bit of disenchantment is simply to be expected. When things are bright and new there's just something more to the experience. I think you should consider that it may be that you've changed and that the "same old FM" doesn't capture your imagination the way it did because you've simply been there and done that.

Once you've set up things like training and staff, it gets monotonous quite quickly. Especially if you create a couple of good tactics early and don't need to tinker.

You're always free to start tinkering. There's plenty of depth to be had in trying to get some alternative tactics to suit your team and this can vary year to year easily.

I would like to see an FM where adjusting tactics on the fly will see me win games not letting teamtalks do the work. The day to day managing of the team can become mundane so fast if you are experienced. I don't want pointless gimicks but added layers to tasks like training and youth development to make the weeks more interesting. Most importantly a match engine where rather than use exploits the ai can't deal with, the user must react to what opposition do, or be cut apart. I shouldn't be able to play the same way week in week out without someone figuring me out and cutting me apart once in a while.

I do agree with both points. There is a bit more that needs to be done to the ME so that it draws the player into tweaking their tactics just about every week. Less intimidating, more engaging, and yes, less exploitable. I also don't like the "pointless gimmicks" which for me include: Talking to the press, exploiting the match preparation widget, offloading players (especially loans), rotating my reserves and U18s manually because my assistant won't, getting tutors to match up with their prom dates, and several other things. I don't see them as particularly pointless, just not fun and/or lacking a bit of zest. Adding "layers to tasks" like training and development would be one way to increase the immersion and depth. I'd be interested to know what you imagine for that. But if the "pointless gimmicks" were made a bit more fun then I think the whole game could be brought to a new level.

You certainly cannot. There is no ability to tell your team to attack opposition DC X.

ST as a target man, play through middle, close down CB often and tackle hard, target man run with ball often, man mark CB with TM. That is a few things you could try to start with.

Personally I prefer to make the opposition worry about me rather than the other way round but surely by thinking about it logically and trialing it this should not be that hard to achieve.

Most importantly a match engine where rather than use exploits the ai can't deal with, the user must react to what opposition do, or be cut apart. I shouldn't be able to play the same way week in week out without someone figuring me out and cutting me apart once in a while.

I may be reading this wrong but it sounds like you are exploiting the match engine knowingly and then complaining it is too easy? An experienced player probably can exploit the match engine but it can be avoided if you want to.

Initially after taking over a team I will do everything myself but once the right staff are in place I start to delegate. My assman controls team talks, match prep, opp instructions(with occasional exceptions) and usually press conferences also. Obviously if you require more depth then you probably won't want to do this but it proves, to me at least, that these have limited influence on results.

I use basic tactics with the creator and don't manually adjust any sliders and the only way for me to be really successful is to use shouts and mentality changes during matches otherwise poor form begins to creep in. Maybe this is an approach that would suit you as it feels more like a tactical game then IMO.

I may be reading this wrong but it sounds like you are exploiting the match engine knowingly and then complaining it is too easy? An experienced player probably can exploit the match engine but it can be avoided if you want to.

Initially after taking over a team I will do everything myself but once the right staff are in place I start to delegate. My assman controls team talks, match prep, opp instructions(with occasional exceptions) and usually press conferences also. Obviously if you require more depth then you probably won't want to do this but it proves, to me at least, that these have limited influence on results.

I use basic tactics with the creator and don't manually adjust any sliders and the only way for me to be really successful is to use shouts and mentality changes during matches otherwise poor form begins to creep in. Maybe this is an approach that would suit you as it feels more like a tactical game then IMO.

Great post.

For the OP - Which version did you prefer? Why do you think 2012 is monotonous but 05 isn't as an example?

Been away all day and so quite a few things to respond to. As for which version I prefer, I would have to say I have enjoyed every year at the start for a number of saves but the last couple of editions I've found I've been less enthusiastic about sooner, I would put this down to the fact the game hasn't changed in 7 years greatly, not an issue in some ways, I mean I'm looking for a football game but outside of added quality to the match engine and transfer systems it is largely the same activities being carried out.

Avoiding exploiting the match engine is a strange one, on the one hand the corner trick as a basic example is a bit demoralising to use but it feels like you're being taken advantage of when you don't use it. In an ideal world there would be no ways of exploiting the match engine, football is a simple game at the end of the day and if you can pass a ball and control it better than the opposition then that should make a difference, not moving a slider a click to the left.

As for adding layers to training and the like, well personally I would love to get the sense from training in FM that it's something a bit more real and organic that you are out on a training pitch with a group of players and you're getting them to do 5 a sides or run all day or learn how to finish a one on one. For me the current system is way to computer-y and it doesn't give you any sense of real life. For me training is where a good manager makes their mark, good training is where tactics come across, not on a whiteboard in the changing rooms. I quite liked the old system of making a schedule from tasks and possibly a way to interact with the players while they train to get your ideals across.

And the tactics v team talk v morale is a familiar and much travelled route to go down, as I said earlier for me tactics should be taught on the training pitch not with sliders but of course there must be room for adjustments. I think I'd like to see more logic or feedback in the game than the match engine can provide on why a match was successful or why not. If I lost 6-0 to a poor quality team, analysis like where they were shooting from isn't necessarily as helpful as knowing the breakdown of whether it was the fault of my tactics, my team selection or teamtalk.

Again just my thoughts...

Don't disagree with the fact that their should be more feedback from performances. It can be confusing sometimes especially if you are new to the game (As I was in FM09). It would be nice to see an aftermatch assistant report which tells us weaknesses/strengths in our tactic. While most of the information is probably there if you watch the matches and work through the analysis tabs etc it would be a helpful tool if your assman gave you tips on where you are going wrong/right. It would need to be a tool that can be turned off though I think as some already find it too easy.

In long term games where you have won so much it can be hard not feeling tedious. I feel developing unknown newgens will always keep me going.

I think improvement of AI club team building would help with long term games. In my current save Celtic bought two new left backs while having two on the books. Some of the signings can be stupid.

Maybe having more player interaction could spice up those 'boring weeks'. More instances where you need to use man management would make it more interesting. You just need to look at real life examples and apply that to FM.

You confuse lots of things to do with depth. There really isnt much depth at all in this game. Most features are simplistic and one size fits all. Tactics? Very general and no ability to adjust tactics to exploit certain individual opposition players. Talks? Psychobabble and quite gamey..SI added them to make the game harder. Virtually nothing is optional/user adjustable in this game. Imagine if users could mod FM like the other big games? FM would be much better. Stop trying to ram it down our throats SI.

Previous CM/FM games were very shallow then.

lower league management is the way to go,its way more challenging and requires much more focus.

i find playing with major teams tedius and repetiteve