Why there aren't Arrows?

Sigames said that the people don't understand the arrows but I think that the people understand the arrows.

If there aren't arrows the tactics aren't better than in FM 2008, I think that one patch is necesary for correct this, an ''opcional'' patch

Sorry for my english, I am spanish..

There are arrows, but they've been changed a little, so that now you can only set players movement to "defensive" (back arrow) or "attacking" (forward arrow) - you can't set arrows side-to-side (which I quite liked in the last one, made for an easier 4-1-2-1-2 option [set CMs with side arrows so they play between the middle and the wing]) and now, you can't give your FB lung-bursting arrows going from one end of the pitch to the other, the max. arrow size is one position.

The arrows now refer only to the forward runs setting - rarely = back arrow, often = forward arrows.

A lot of people didn't understand the old system, but more to the point it was completely nonsensical from a football point of view. They told a player to have two positions: one when the team didn't have the ball, and one when they did. It made no sense. It did NOT refer to movement, simply to a mad charge between two positions irrespective of what was happening in the game. When the arrows were removed, the match engine suddenly started to play like real football.

The arrows are not coming back, ever. SI are looking at alternative ways of filling in what little gaps may be left by the lack of arrows, but truth be told most of the gaps left can be worked around already. SI did a lot of work to improve player positioning and movement as well, which covers many of the issues.

The side arrows can often be replicated by playing with the width slider, and getting players to cut inside can be dealt with in a few ways (cross ball rarely, or playing left footed players on the right wing etc).

If you want your full back to overlap, it's quite easy to achieve if you think about it - a forward runs 'often' and a more attacking mentality... kind of makes sense, rather than doing that AND dragging some random arrow up the pitch, eh

im liking the new system with no arrows. its actually alot more realistic in match and the players dont do stupid runs instead they do more intelligent runs.

Superblades, I bet that is only the official story. The old system was not hard to understand.

The real reason is you "removed" them or changed them if you will, was so people wouldn't poke holes in the match engine. Just like when 2D came you had to remove *wibble/wobble coz it let people "break the engine" and make supertactics that would trash all normal playing teams.

*Wibble/wobble = the with ball, without ball setup map. you could set each players position depending on where the ball was for both when you had the ball and when you where defending.

It is the official story - because it's true. I've been a moderator in FML for nearly a year now, and so was witness to the changeover from arrows to no-arrows. Immediately I saw a vast improvement in the gameplay, and in people's understanding of the tactics.

Before that, with the arrows, some of the tactics that some people were using were just nuts - and deliberately exploitative. It was clear that many other people didn't understand them, as I was having to explain tactics things to people every day...

Don't like where it's going. Sega/SI want as many players as possible so they will dumb the game down until 3 year olds can play it. Keep dumbing the game down until my dog can play it. Then I won't.

How is that dumbing it down? Without the arrows it's actually harder, man...lol

It's not harder, they dumb it down to make it easier not making mistakes, but at the same time limit your options.

This change was ok and I can live with it. What I don't like is the reasoning for changing it, they say the old system was to complicated for their players. And when developers start to thing like that the game will start getting dumbed down until it loses it original charm.

Don't like where it's going. Sega/SI want as many players as possible so they will dumb the game down until 3 year olds can play it. Keep dumbing the game down until my dog can play it. Then I won't.

in real life if a football player was running up the field next to the player who had the ball would he

A: use his intiative to move into a space where he could make it easier for the ball player to pass to him

B: follow a set arrow even if it meant he ran into the players box surrounded by 3 defenders???

its not dumbing it down, sometimes to make perfection u have to remove a few things just like a sculpture removes useless bits of clay to make a nice pot..........i should have been a philosopher.

without the arrows goin side to side it is hard

without the arrows going side ways its miles better you can win more matches now last years game was rubbish but this year im loving it

It is the official story - because it's true. I've been a moderator in FML for nearly a year now, and so was witness to the changeover from arrows to no-arrows. Immediately I saw a vast improvement in the gameplay, and in people's understanding of the tactics.

Before that, with the arrows, some of the tactics that some people were using were just nuts - and deliberately exploitative. It was clear that many other people didn't understand them, as I was having to explain tactics things to people every day...

I don't really agree with that - I was beta testing the whole time also (we had some good battles in the dfa!) and while some arrows were nonsensical, side arrows to increase width of an individual player add to the playablity and didn't really detract from my match experience.

I think it is a negative change.