Why call it "Mentality" if it really means "positions line on the pitch"?

It is baffling.

When I, or any reasonably minded football fan, sees the setting: Mentality: 1 defensive, 20 attacking, they naturally think: 20- my instruction to this player is not to worry about defending, and attack, and 1, not to attack, and their main job is to defend.

What I do NOT think about is: For Example- Di Mmatteo in CM 1/20 - HIS ACTUAL POSITION/LINE IS CLOSE TO WISE, 20/20 HIS ACTUAL POSITION (NOT THE ONE I PUT HIM IN ON THE PITCH), IS CLOSER TO SUPER FRANCO MYSTERY MAN.

.......................De goey.........................

...........................................................

Petrescu.....Lebeouf...Desailly....Le Saux

..........................................................

........................Wise............................

Poyet...............Di Matteo...........Italian Giggs

..........................................................

..........Super Franco..... The Fat man

Mentality should represent the players commitment to attack or to defend. He should neglect a defensive duty and push forward, make a forward run if the opportunity is there. But his actual position on the pitch should just be where i put him god damnit.

If you name it "Mentality" then what people are claiming it actually does (adjust the player's line on the pitch, not his actual "mentality") then it is totally counter-intuitive. No wonder nearly every single player has the "too much space between midfield and defense despite playing a DMC.

Also- if mentality effects the player's line on the pitch- then what on earth does "defensive line" do to the defenders? and isn't there some weird conflict/double setting range... like 1-20 within 14 defensive line:S

This is the type of thing that needs to be worked on to improve the game, not bloody "features" just simple footballing sense.

Either that or just rename the "Mentality" setting to reflect what it actually is and stop all this "gap between here and there" and WOEFUL attacking performances in my 352!

I have to say that I agree with you. Many of the current sliders are both confusing and counter intuative, particularly in terms of their relationships with each other.

That is my main complaint about the "gap between midfield and defence" tactical suggestion. It is only reading on these forums that I worked out that the positioning in this sense related to mentality settings.

I agree too, and I think the vast majority of FM players, who don't read these forums, are never going to get the most out of their game bacause of this.

The very least they should do is set up the default formations like 442 433 and 451 so that they are set up half decent to start with.

I agree too, and I think the vast majority of FM players, who don't read these forums, are never going to get the most out of their game bacause of this.

The very least they should do is set up the default formations like 442 433 and 451 so that they are set up half decent to start with.

Indeed. A default formation with the default mentality for each position (eg. setting the players' individual instructions to match their positions) should not be resulting in tactical warnings for every game. They obviously shouldn't be perfect for every situation, but they should not have what the game considers obvious flaws which require a lot of fiddling.

There are a lot of players, myself included, who are happy to almost never visit the tactics screen, and there should be at least a handful of default settings to cater for those people.

And why on earth do we need little dugout graphics on the pitch if you can't even train somebody in crossing without training them to take set pieces. (for the second, maybe third version running)

this is why the game is standing still. you need smart football people focusing on the match engine and enough of the crap

I think its because it doesn't just represent position, it is also aggressiveness of play and the higher it is set the more players will do to get a goal. these are my observations so i may not be 100% correct.

I agree too. The manual didn't help me one bit. I'm just lucky I read the forums to understand what everything "actually" means.

i agree as well. i think the whole slider system should be next in line for a big revamp

I think its because it doesn't just represent position, it is also aggressiveness of play and the higher it is set the more players will do to get a goal. these are my observations so i may not be 100% correct.

Yeah, probably, but it also has a massive effect on the thing we're talking about- one which is largely un-understandable relative to everything else.

i agree with what your saying, i was just trying to offer some kind of reasoning.

I thought that that was what mentality was? This is brand new information to me. You're saying that by moving the slider up or down it alters the position of the player up or down the pitch? That can't be right surely?

Mentality is not about positioning only. It has an effect on all sliders too.

I thought that that was what mentality was? This is brand new information to me. You're saying that by moving the slider up or down it alters the position of the player up or down the pitch? That can't be right surely?

It doesn't affect their position per se, it affects their willingness to adopt different positions throughout the pitch. A left back will remain in the left back position for a majority of the game, his attackign mentlaity affects whether or not he assumes the LW position and how often he does so.

Mentality is not about positioning only. It has an effect on all sliders too.

All sliders have an effect on the other sliders, that's the problem.

All sliders have an effect on the other sliders, that's the problem.

No- it effects their position within their position. That is why there is this necessity to play mentalities which are not too far apart and why many people get this "too far between lines" stuff. If you do you get bogus ratings in attack especially imo.

the worst thing is the conflict that it presents-

what is a player on forward runs often but mentality 1/20?

what is a player on 20/20 mentality but no forward runs?

bizarre.

It doesn't affect their position per se, it affects their willingness to adopt different positions throughout the pitch. A left back will remain in the left back position for a majority of the game, his attackign mentlaity affects whether or not he assumes the LW position and how often he does so.

I understand.

All sliders have an effect on the other sliders, that's the problem.

I'm confused.

No- it effects their position within their position. That is why there is this necessity to play mentalities which are not too far apart and why many people get this "too far between lines" stuff.

I wasn't disagreeing with you I was just making the point that IMO mentality isn't the only slider that has too much affect and isn't clearly labelled.

I'm confused.

A number of the sliders have affects on similar things, which means that one click of the mouse can override a previous tactical setting and make the tactic over complicated. They are all interlinked and work together, having the correct setting for mentality is useless if you are one click off with tempo.

A number of the sliders have affects on similar things, which means that one click of the mouse can override a previous tactical setting and make the tactic over complicated. They are all interlinked and work together, having the correct setting for mentality is useless if you are one click off with tempo.

But i thought tempo was linked to passing style?

But i thought tempo was linked to passing style?

It is, but it's linked to a number of other situations as well.

Finishing, for example, is affected by mentality and the style of finish depends on the menality setting e.g. all out attack and the striker will be shooting on site, trying to break the net.

Finishing is also affected by tempo, if you have asked your team to play with a quick tempo then the striker may rush his shot, playing with a slow tempo and he may dilly dally.

AFAIC that's the problem with tactics, to get your strikers firing on all cylinders you have to take a number of sliders into consideration for each position nevermind the overall team tactics

It is, but it's linked to a number of other situations as well.

Finishing, for example, is affected by mentality and the style of finish depends on the menality setting e.g. all out attack and the striker will be shooting on site, trying to break the net.

Finishing is also affected by tempo, if you have asked your team to play with a quick tempo then the striker may rush his shot, playing with a slow tempo and he may dilly dally.

AFAIC that's the problem with tactics, to get your strikers firing on all cylinders you have to take a number of sliders into consideration for each position nevermind the overall team tactics

Wow, i never knew any of that! How do you know that? The points about finishing in particular i find odd though. Why should mentality or tempo have an effect on the way a player shoots? Surely that is down to the player himself taking the decision of how to shoot and also having the ability to score from where he shoots?. Eg. Henry, Rooney place some of their shots, blast some, backheel, chip etc. because they can and decide to. Others like Van Nistelrooy rarely score/ choose to shoot from outside the box or do anything else flamboyant because its not their game but can finish well inside the box. Anyway, thanks for the info, just makes me wonder how much else i don't know about the game!

So based on what is said above I get the feeling that we are not playing football, we are playing sliders and in fact, we are being played by the game.

It is, but it's linked to a number of other situations as well.

Finishing, for example, is affected by mentality and the style of finish depends on the menality setting e.g. all out attack and the striker will be shooting on site, trying to break the net.

Finishing is also affected by tempo, if you have asked your team to play with a quick tempo then the striker may rush his shot, playing with a slow tempo and he may dilly dally.

AFAIC that's the problem with tactics, to get your strikers firing on all cylinders you have to take a number of sliders into consideration for each position nevermind the overall team tactics

I have to agree with that, and its one of the biggest reasons fm09 is getting less and less play time, my tactics should dictate how many chances my striker gets NOT how many of those chances he puts away

If say torres played for my sunday league team , and got 5 chances through on goal, would he miss them because its sunday league and our tactics are crap , or would he score them because a strikers ability in front of goal has nothing to do with tactics

So based on what is said above I get the feeling that we are not playing football, we are playing sliders and in fact, we are being played by the game.

Hahahahahaha!

Don't take my word for it, these are just things i've picked up on the forums over time

While I find the sliders irritating and at times difficult to decipher, we have to understand that they are an essential part of the game and very difficult to change. What would be realistic is for the strikers to play to our tactics, but when it comes to the crunch, for them to make up their own mind about how to finish, which would be extremely hard to code.

Ultimately your asking for the game to recognise situations where attributes override tactics and vice versa.

Apologies to the OP for going a bit off topic.

Don't take my word for it, these are just things i've picked up on the forums over time

While I find the sliders irritating and at times difficult to decipher, we have to understand that they are an essential part of the game and very difficult to change. What would be realistic is for the strikers to play to our tactics, but when it comes to the crunch, for them to make up their own mind about how to finish, which would be extremely hard to code.

Ultimately your asking for the game to recognise situations where attributes override tactics and vice versa.

Apologies to the OP for going a bit off topic.

No, we are asking for a game where the attributes dictate how the tactic is played out ,

right now tactic > player ability

I don't think it should be too difficult to have striking situations where attributes over-ride tactics, surely this happens already. An example is centre backs, your tactics will play a part in dictating where they are positioned but when it comes to trying to tackle a striker then surely it's all down to their attributes vs the strikers attributes as too who comes out on top.

This should be the same for strikers imo, the tactics should create the chances (or not if you're not very good) and help decide whether the striker will be in the correct position to make the most of those chances. From that point it should all be down to the strikers various attributes vs the GK's various attributes (including hidden attriutes, moral, luck and all other things that go into it but are not tactic based).

No, we are asking for a game where the attributes dictate how the tactic is played out ,

right now tactic > player ability

Yes, but only in situations that suit us. The shoe would be on the other foot if we had a really good tactic that meant average players played beyond their actual ability, but the attributes overrode the tactics. It's a double edged sword.

This should be the same for strikers imo, the tactics should create the chances (or not if you're not very good) and help decide whether the striker will be in the correct position to make the most of those chances. From that point it should all be down to the strikers various attributes vs the GK's various attributes (including hidden attriutes, moral, luck and all other things that go into it but are not tactic based).

Ideally yes, but then again should the tactics really decide on the players position and surely that should be down to "off the ball" etc. If we are saying that the tactics decide where the player is going to be, then what's the point in the "off the ball" attribute and there should be an "ability to adhere to tactics" attribute

Ideally yes, but then again should the tactics really decide on the players position and surely that should be down to "off the ball" etc. If we are saying that the tactics decide where the player is going to be, then what's the point in the "off the ball" attribute and there should be an "ability to adhere to tactics" attribute

Damn you and your logic

I agree that it is a very fine line, and not something I'd like to be given the task of attempting to program (especially as I don't know the first thing about programming ) but I think some attempt needs to be made to reduce the effect of tactics on a strikers finishing.

You're right though, it may be difficult to get right, but should be possible considering the difficult things already programmed into the game.

I agree, it would be a major improvement to the game.

It raises so many issues though. In a way i'm coming round to the belief that the old tactics (CM01/02 etc) would be ideal because the game would rely on attributes, but it made the game too easy. The new tactics are more immersive and probably realistic, but to the detriment of attributes.

I don't envy the job SI have to try and "improve" tactics.

well, now the game is adjusting arrows for us and forward runs automatically with mentality adjustments...

the whole thing is conflicting and ridiculous, it's not football

I don't even want to get started on the removal of arrows

This post is another moan, I thought. But after reading it, I agree.

Spot on my friend, mentality should be just that, not the players line on the pitch, that's what my formation if for.

:THUMBSUP:

I like this thread. Many of the sliders don't seem to do what their textual description implies and this needs to be looked at in detail.

First post on this forum and i must say im completely baffled and this thread explains why.

I thought 50% Attributes+ 50% Tactics = Result? where as actually it sounds more like 20% Attributes + 80% Tactics actually achieve the result?

If what this thread says is true then the engine either needs adjusting or the sliders need renaming because they dont seem to actually mean what 99% perception of them would.

Tactics should be important with regards to the team's style of play but at the end of the day player attributes are the most important thing. No matter how good a manager is in real life, it's the players that determine what happens. Yes, a good/great manager can improve a team with tactics but only to an extent. That's why we've had the same top 4 in England for years and years and no other club have broken in. Those clubs have the most money and can buy the best players every year and its those players that make the difference in important moments. Yes, the managers the clubs have had have been good too but avram grant (no disrespect) nearly taking chelsea to the league and champ's league shows how much the players matter. Look at Arsenal. Same tactics for last ten years but the reason we are struggling now is because we have got rid of world class players and replaced them with worse ones. Quite simple.

All i'm saying is that i shouldn't have to move a slider to tell my striker whether to take a snapshot or take an extra touch. If he's good enough more often than not he'll do the right thing, if he's not he won't as often. Football is a simple game, the game i feel is a bit too complicated in trying to mimic it. Also, a manager in real life has a job at a club. As much as we want to, we don't, we have other jobs and I for one don't want to have to spend ages before and during games moving sliders up and down and worrying what they are actually doing. I'd like to enjoy the game a bit more.

I think SI should add a 'Create-a-tactic' wizard as the default ones are far from useful and without some serious internet research, you have no chance.

Once your tactic is ready, you can obviously experiment from there, but just from reading the manual you would never understand the exact functions of all the sliders.

As for the strikers knowing what kid of shot to take, I always wondered why there wasn't an individual tempo slider for players which I think would solve that issue.

Also, a manager in real life has a job at a club. As much as we want to, we don't, we have other jobs and I for one don't want to have to spend ages before and during games moving sliders up and down and worrying what they are actually doing. I'd like to enjoy the game a bit more.

Precisely, I only get about 30 mins playing time a night and I do not want to spend it getting frustrated with tactics and constantly tweaking. People may say that if I want an easier game then play something else, but why should I? I got through 3-4 games in 30 mins with 08 and it was pretty hard and the tactics were pretty much the same. It just lloks like 09 has overcomplicated things.

All sliders have an effect on the other sliders, that's the problem.

You are missing my point. If you are playing DL 10 and mentality 20, the defensive line will be pushed up. So if want to stay deep you have to make the DL deeper than you usually play.

i understand the difficulty but i think its moreso a case of SI having resources available to teach us about the new frameworks. they're available on the forum now and maybe for FM2010, they'll include the frameworks + explanations WITH the game.

im personally glad, its more difficult but more enjoyable. for the past 3 years, i've been doing any old tactics and winning with ease. now its actually challenging. well done SI imo. too much negativity here. the only big mistake they made was a lack of explanation but its all here on the forum and hopefully next year they'll include a tutorial OR they'll include a more intense guide.

These slider things on mentality passing closing down ect have spoilt the game on 07 and 08 ive never used them only ever used the player instructions forward runs ect now this time its the most important thing is he mentality its crap.

So what would the effect of playing an overall attacking formation, but having your strikers as ultra defensive?

So what would the effect of playing an overall attacking formation, but having your strikers as ultra defensive?

TBH I have tried this It wasn't a success, put it that way. However, I have noticed a distinct difference when I have played an all out attack team mentlaity and a normal striker mentality.

I think SI should add a 'Create-a-tactic' wizard as the default ones are far from useful and without some serious internet research, you have no chance.

Once your tactic is ready, you can obviously experiment from there, but just from reading the manual you would never understand the exact functions of all the sliders.

As for the strikers knowing what kid of shot to take, I always wondered why there wasn't an individual tempo slider for players which I think would solve that issue.

That is a really neat idea. Especially since atm the "pre-set" position settings seem to open up glaring weaknesses!

This is what I've always done: and it seems obvious to me that it's sensible, but now it also seems obvious to me that it's the reason I've been having so many problems.

I play an attacking side- A striker on 19 or 20, midfield balanced but generally attacking, dmc and so on.

Therefore I know I have to have a high defensive line to avoid an obvious gap, so i push them up and play offside trap to avoid this massive gap between an attacking midfield and defense.

Because the rest of my side is really attacking, i know I can't have my 3 defenders making any attacking moves at any stage, so I give them 1-3 mentality. Obvious, right? No. Apparently I must make them attacking too, to make sure i don't create a big gap with them being too far back, despite push the defensive line to high.

I have to play my defenders on 10/20 mentality. I'll say it again- counter intuitive, baffling and not football. Does this mean they're going to have the idea to attack now because of this mixture of the meaning of mentality?

Can I just bump this to get a response from SI on some of the questions...

namely:

What happens if I Play a defender on 1/20 mentality with a high line, or 20/20 mentality with a deep line for example.

Thanks

Tactics should be important with regards to the team's style of play but at the end of the day player attributes are the most important thing. No matter how good a manager is in real life, it's the players that determine what happens. Yes, a good/great manager can improve a team with tactics but only to an extent. That's why we've had the same top 4 in England for years and years and no other club have broken in. Those clubs have the most money and can buy the best players every year and its those players that make the difference in important moments. Yes, the managers the clubs have had have been good too but avram grant (no disrespect) nearly taking chelsea to the league and champ's league shows how much the players matter. Look at Arsenal. Same tactics for last ten years but the reason we are struggling now is because we have got rid of world class players and replaced them with worse ones. Quite simple.

All i'm saying is that i shouldn't have to move a slider to tell my striker whether to take a snapshot or take an extra touch. If he's good enough more often than not he'll do the right thing, if he's not he won't as often. Football is a simple game, the game i feel is a bit too complicated in trying to mimic it. Also, a manager in real life has a job at a club. As much as we want to, we don't, we have other jobs and I for one don't want to have to spend ages before and during games moving sliders up and down and worrying what they are actually doing. I'd like to enjoy the game a bit more.

Wait, wait, wait, WAIT a second....

This makes too much sense. Forum will now self-terminate.

So based on what is said above I get the feeling that we are not playing football, we are playing sliders and in fact, we are being played by the game.

In soviet russia, game plays you.

Judging by the forums and rants and raves, I think the game is having a fun time with us!