Time Wasting - Is it more than simply wasting time?

Hello,

I thought I would start a thread on this as I was posting a little in SFraser's thread about it (seriously worth a read - his thread, not my comments) and I started observing results that were more positive than initially, so I wanted to both share and get some feedback.

First up, some background; I am playing a 442 with Spurs and I am currently using SFraser’s thread 'Tactics: A less is more perspective' as a foundation for my setup. I set up with a 12 mentality for the core of my team with DC's and MCD on -2 and WB's on +2 and I play around with the strikers depending on the match. Most PI's are mixed (in the spirit of SFraser’s thread). In game I make small adjustments according to my assistant manager and you can read more about those changes in my own thread 'I think I am onto something', whose URL is listed in my signature.

For those that follow my, SFraser’s and Heathxxx posts, you will know I am more of a 'lets throw it out there' person rather than 'let’s test this to death'. So, it’s in this spirit, that I have started this thread, I mean, how better to test something than to get most of the forum helping????

Now, my only disclaimer is that I have only tried this in 2 games, yes..... only 2.... please refer to above paragraph.

So.... with all that blathering behind us.... onto the topic of the thread.

I believe that like many people using these forums; 'Time Wasting' was something that you used if you wanted to chase a game or to close it out, i.e. low time wasting and high time wasting respectively. The flip side of this was to see the games either progressing very quickly and very slowly which in turn resulted in both teams either having energy to spare at any given point or not. Obviously the later being with a low time wasting setting.

My initial thoughts on using 'Time Wasting' (will stop using the speech marks soon) was to conserve energy for my team when I am using a fast tempo and high closing down game, this then moved onto a case of thinking that if it was conserving energy for my team then its likely to be doing the same for my opponent.

This line of thinking then moved me onto a new thought.... I could use this to tire inferior teams out or to conserve my own energies when playing superior teams. 'Ah....but that is what tempo does', I hear many of you say! and to a point, I agree. However, through observations I have started noticing that Tempo dictates the pace at which a ball is passed around during play.

Now, this is worth a new paragraph as it’s this interpretation that makes a difference here. When I say 'during play', I do not simply mean when a ball is on the pitch, I actually mean when the ball is in A play (heavy emphasis on 'A'). I.e. when 'something is on', when there is something that can be played out, an opportunity to be had etc etc.......

Once 'in A play' then this is where I believe that tempo comes into effect. The ball will then be buzzed around the pitch or not, depending on your settings. Now, some of you may disagree with me at this stage and that is fine, however, most of you, judging by your posts and by most of the downloadable tactics/comments on these forums will generally use a 'low time wasting game' and because of this you may not have observed what I have observed and I'll get on to why this is shortly.

I started playing with a relatively high time wasting setting, 14 to 16. Whilst generally playing with a high pressure but normal mentality. I setup like this in the middle of a game as the team I was playing against had decided to ‘park the bus’ so to speak.

I want to put pressure around the box without then taking pot shots being wastefull of opportunities. Therefore I made a number of changes to my tactic. I pushed up the defence line, I played very wide (19), I also decided that I didn’t want my wingers crossing into a packed box, so I turned off crossing (that’s a whole other thread!!!!) on both my wingers and wingbacks. With the high mentality that my wingbacks had, I found that I had 7, if not 8 players if the MCD pushed forward, in and around their box. However, I was taking silly pot shots or trying balls that were seriously ‘not on’. Therefore most of this pressure was lost through minor errors, but at a major cost.

At this stage, I then considered the effects of ‘Time Wasting’. Even if you have the highest possible setting for time wasting, your team will still play. Therefore something tells them to play when ‘something is on’. For the more observant of you, you may now see where I am going with this. So, with this in mind, I made a change.

I changed the time wasting from low (as I was trying a high pressure game) to high (16). What this resulted in was my players dallying on the ball a little, not a lot, but a little. However, if something was on, they did NOT dally at all. At 16 notches though, they were getting caught in possession a fair amount so I lowered this to 14 (the highest normal). The results of which were great. The pot shots at goal disappeared (as they did when I moved from low to 16), as did the getting caught in possession. With crossing off to, what was happening was that the team were passing the ball around the outside of the box, taking short runs in and if nothing was on, passing the ball back out.

There are obviously many factors impacting on this. My normal (ish) mentality will have an effect on possession vs. attacking play. However, that aside, what I have witnessed now for two games, is that with a fairly high level of time wasting your team seems to wait for opportunities to play the ball. Once an opportunity arises, you can then see the tempo kick in.

An example of this could be to play a short passing game with high tempo but with high time wasting, the team will play around with it for a bit, making slow short passes back and fourth between each other and then something is on and the pace of the passing seriously picks up.

The reverse is also true, which is why some of you may not have witnessed this (I told you I would explain why). If your time wasting is low, then effectively, your team are not waiting for opportunities to happen, they will play the ball regardless. Now, this is not a bad thing, as any team can ‘make’ something happen. However, to low a setting will see your team forcing things and many of these things will not come off.

I know its only been two games, but so far I have found that the extreme settings of little and lots are great for chasing or closing a game, whereas the mixed settings, high or low are great mentalities to use. A high mixed setting will tell you players to 'wait' for an opportunity, whereas a low mixed setting will tell them to 'get on with it'.

I’ll keep posting back with my observations, but it would be great to get both some feedback, even if it’s your first thoughts and then some factual testing.

The only thing I would say is to fit it in with your style of play. It worked for me as the opposition in both games had packed the box out and I bided my time and something presented itself. If you play a highly aggressive game and the team are not too defensive, then I wouldn’t use the settings I did. Try and think of another combination.

Anyhow….. long explanation for a short statement.

LAM

wow!, i didn't think it was possible to write so much about time wasting

great post

I just wasted 5 minutes of my time in work by reading this

On a serious note, it does make sense what you're saying and you might be right about all this stuff...

Relevant if you want to play that slow build-up like play I suppose?

wow!, i didn't think it was possible to write so much about time wasting

great post

LOL. Its amazing what you can get done when you are not 'time wasting' 8O)

On another note. How many of your have watched when a team backs your team up and simply plays the ball around your box continually without shooting on goal, without making silly passes to your keeper?

Well... this is the result I got. My team backed theirs up and just played it around the box until something happened. Now, don't get me wrong. I didnt go on to score tons as on many occassions my team did make a bad pass or the opposition intercepted. However, this is the first time that I have had play around their box without it being wasted stupidly.

LAM

wow!, i didn't think it was possible to write so much about time wasting

great post

I just wasted 5 minutes of my time in work by reading this

On a serious note, it does make sense what you're saying and you might be right about all this stuff...

Relevant if you want to play that slow build-up like play I suppose?

I think I am onto a hiding about people wasting time readin this, arent I?

Seriously though, I am thinking of so many ways of using this now. Its really not limited to patient build up. I think the uses would be amazing with a counter attacking tactic. This may actualy enable you to get that counter attacking game without the counter attacking box being ticked.

Also.... think about a slow tempo game with very low time wasting, how much ball chasing would the opposition have to do.

Some of the points that are going to be made are obvious already, just like my last comment there. The reason for this is that I have yet to see a formation or tactic that favours a high(ish) time wasting setting. Therefore most tactics already seem to use a low level setting, therefore most people will be familiar with the effects of this setting. I am not saying that anyone should and I am not saying that I will be using a high setting from here on out, but its something that is seriously presenting its self now as an option when used correctly.

I mean, how many posts have we all seen on 'Time Wasting'? It is probably the lowest discussed setting in the game.

LAM

Well, a very good first post - all of which I agree with.

On FM08, if you were around, you'll remember Kimz tactic. 'The Perfect Tactic' to most. I regarded it in the same light, to be honest.

I just assumed that there would be a perfect tactic for FM09. But it seems that with the impact of an arrowless match engine, and things like weather and temperature having a bigger impact more than ever on FM, a perfect tactic is highly unlikely.

It came to my realisation that tactics were, by and large, made for English football, as it's the most common league to manage in.

So I decided to develop my own tactics. I was flicking through the sliders, when I came to the Time Wasting slider.

Now, speaking from experience, most tactics, or at least downloaded tactics, have Time Wasting somewhere around Rarely.

Now, this got me thinking. Was it just for when there was nothing happening? Basically, would they Time Waste when coming to corners/Free-kicks/throw-ins? Or was it in general play? When attacking, would my players time-waste?

So I came up with something which I thought was absurd to begin with. A Time Wasting setting of 'Often' would make my players have a slow, controlled build up.

So I tried this out, and whilst it's still very early, it appears to be working.

Instead of wasting time when at FKs, GKs, CKs and Throw-Ins, it appears that my team 'Waste' time when attacking. By Waste, I simply mean they take their time, and look to pick out passes.

And whilst it does appear, that like lam, having it at often means you relinquish possession too easy, it works for me. It's perhaps because my standard of players are better(Inter Milan, opposed to Tottenham. Not much, but it is visible.)

Another thing I thought of, perhaps the slider is just too sensitive?

lam said he had his at 16, and it was bad for Spurs. So he switched to 14, which wasn't on Often, but Time-Wasted more than 10, for example. Mines is only on 15 - the first of the Often slider.

It's working. I have, thus far, convincingly beaten Roma 3-0(controlled by a friend. It's an online game), and again, convincingly beaten Juventus 3-0(AI, this time).

I believe that I 'accidentally' stumbled across this treasure of a slider. I was only taking into account that when playing in Italy, it's warm. So by Time-Wasting often, my players would reserve some injury. And with Counter-Attack ticked, I thought that their energy could be saved for then.

Perhaps, I'm not sure, that my tactics are just working so well because of my other sliders, but who knows? I'm not willing to experiment when I'm doing so well.

My DMC and MCa have a massive impact, the DMC being a Holding Role, and the MCa having a Free Role. It has, thus far, been very effective. I don't know how it will fare without those two players, Javier Zanetti and Dejan Stankovic respectively. But, I suppose there will be a time when I will need to find out.

I have two tactics - one which is Time Wasting Often, and one which is Normal(11).

The Often is for bigger teams, which is proven to be successful. The Normal selection is still to be tried, as I haven't played a smaller team yet, but I'm happy with how it looks - as there is only two adjusted sliders. I go Attacking(+2 to the slider), and Time Wasting(-4 to the slider).

Anyway, I've ranted on a bit, but all I can say is, Time Wasting Often seems to be more effective than Time Wasting Rarely.

At least, from my point of view it does.

Ah.... its good to see that others have had success with it too.

I am trying to test ways of implementing it. However, I have started a new game and just trying to get a normal tactic right without testing others is hard enough.

Though.... I'll keep bashing away at it.

LAM

Hmm, then how is time wasting different from tempo? Tempo is to turn defence into attack quickly, right?

Tempo and timewasting can be two of the more difficult sliders to "get right", but can also make a great impact on your team's style of play once you begin to understand or see the different effects.

Often difficult to try describing the effects of the different settings, but you're off to a good start lam.

Out of interest, I'm using high tempo with low timewasting, clearly like lot's of other people do, but mainly because it suits the nature of the players I'm using. I tend to move the tempo and timewasting sliders more to the middle when I'm either trying to sit on a result or conserve player fitness. Something that's important to note though is that going to extremes with the timewasting slider will depend greatly upon the quality of players you have, just with any extremes for any of the sliders. I have a fairly good idea of what I look for in this respect, but would be interested to hear your thoughts.

I raised a point similar to this a while ago, and was subsequently shot down by a few of the more longer serving tactical posters, but I never received an explanation for Time Wasting that I considered a good definition for some of the quirks of it's behaviour.

The points you raise are points I myself have observed and considered, but since my own discussion a while back I accepted the longtimer "concensus" and lowered timewasting and really did not look into it in any further detail.

Obviously with a slider scale of 20 rather a Instruction choice of 3 it ought to be far less black and white than everyone assumes.

My point was that Tempo and Time Wasting were two mutually complimenting sliders, Tempo being control over the speed of general play while Time Wasting was control over the bias between possession/care and scoring goals. This was the point that was argued down, but since you raise the point again it is perhaps worth looking into.

Obviously with a slider scale of 20 rather (than an) Instruction choice of 3 it ought to be far less black and white than everyone assumes.

You been drinking again? Your grammar has gone to pot!

Anyway, totally agree. There's a huge amount of possibilities and I think anyone who claims to know them all intimately, is either lying or their name is PaulC.

It comes down to personal preference, experimentation and understanding. One of my pet hates is when someone says out of hand that an idea or tactic someone has presented is "wrong" or doesn't work. Literally any setting can work given the right circumstances, additional settings and suitable players. That's probably one of the main reasons that my own preference is to build a squad around a tactic rather than the reverse.

In the context of timewasting, as with any other sliders, the best understanding of it's effects might best be seen individually whilst experimenting, but having everything else set to "mixed". Then, trying different time wasting settings in tandem with different tempo settings.

Finally, one slider isn't specifically linked to one other alone. They're all linked.

I raised a point similar to this a while ago, and was subsequently shot down by a few of the more longer serving tactical posters, but I never received an explanation for Time Wasting that I considered a good definition for some of the quirks of it's behaviour.

The points you raise are points I myself have observed and considered, but since my own discussion a while back I accepted the longtimer "concensus" and lowered timewasting and really did not look into it in any further detail.

Obviously with a slider scale of 20 rather a Instruction choice of 3 it ought to be far less black and white than everyone assumes.

My point was that Tempo and Time Wasting were two mutually complimenting sliders, Tempo being control over the speed of general play while Time Wasting was control over the bias between possession/care and scoring goals. This was the point that was argued down, but since you raise the point again it is perhaps worth looking into.

Let me gess, it was wwfan who argued against, right? I remember the debate and how it was toned down by some members. My personal opinion is that argument against your stance was not eligible. It is difficult to argue when some "profiled" forum members believe the opposite. In situations like that you feel very "small". We really never get valid explanation on their view. I m glad lam bring it up again.

BTW lam, I like the direction of your OP. Certainly much more open than how I started a thread about Creative Freedom for FM08

I argued that minimal CF was essential for non-creative players, or player's who's freedom you wanted to restrict if you had other specific instructions you needed them to focus on more. It certainly presented a variety of opinions and good debate. Hopefully this thread will do the same and unlock some of the "secrets" of one of those sliders people either don't understand properly, or are afraid to mess around with because they misinterpret it's relationship with other settings.

Let me gess, it was wwfan who argued against, right? I remember the debate and how it was toned down by some members. My personal opinion is that argument against your stance was not eligible. It is difficult to argue when some "profiled" forum members believe the opposite. In situations like that you feel very "small". We really never get valid explanation on their view. I m glad lam bring it up again.

Nobody fully understands each and every setting the game has. That's the beauty of discussing them here in the forum. We can all share our thoughts and opinions. I personally don't like it when someone just dismisses another person's views without a detailed explaination of why. To be fair to wwfan, he will usually give a very good reason to back up his thoughts. Ultimately though, the weight of his tactical thoughts as I'm sure he will agree himself, shouldn't be given more "importance" just because he is who he is. They are after all, still opinions and thoughts.

The best posts in this forum are usually those that discuss observations of cause and effect. They usually make people think about things a little more and often inspire more willingness to experiment and thus actually see for themselves a point someone is making.

Never be frightened to add your opinion to these forums (so long as it's within the forum rules and guidelines of course ) and don't worry about other people putting your ideas down. Just ask them to prove exactly why there's any reason why your idea won't work. It's often the case they won't have a reply.

Nobody fully understands each and every setting the game has. That's the beauty of discussing them here in the forum. We can all share our thoughts and opinions. I personally don't like it when someone just dismisses another person's views without a detailed explaination of why. To be fair to wwfan, he will usually give a very good reason to back up his thoughts. Ultimately though, the weight of his tactical thoughts as I'm sure he will agree himself, shouldn't be given more "importance" just because he is who he is. They are after all, still opinions and thoughts.

The best posts in this forum are usually those that discuss observations of cause and effect. They usually make people think about things a little more and often inspire more willingness to experiment and thus actually see for themselves a point someone is making.

Never be frightened to add your opinion to these forums (so long as it's within the forum rules and guidelines of course ) and don't worry about other people putting your ideas down. Just ask them to prove exactly why there's any reason why your idea won't work. It's often the case they won't have a reply.

Well, to be honest, it was one of the few times where wwfan more or less rejected arguments without a valid explanation. But unfortunately this has become more and more usely behavior from his side recently. I understand that he is tired because of all critics against him as a person. At the same time, it is important to emphasize that such behavior can be linked with his status here in the forum that has almost developed into a cult. Some of this has simply contributed to a fact that he no longer wants to be as active as before. It is a shame because rest of us lose on this. When he doesnt wish to lead a rational discourse on the basis of some derision at him than we never know what was his justification for his opinion in relation to the question about time-wasting.

Personally, I am not afraid to discuss in a rational manner but there are so few rational debates here on the forum recently. The forum has lost little of its role as it had before, especially since both rashidi, cleon and wwfan are not active as before. They'll have their reasons why they can not or do not want to contribute more, but the entire board suffer under such conditions. All honor to you, lam, SFraser and 3-4 other members who are contributing much, but even you must admit that the quality here on the forum has fallen considerably recently. This results that I personally do not have preferences to contribute with something positive.

I apologize to lam for too much off-topic.

You been drinking again? Your grammar has gone to pot!

Ha no, that is what happens when you type what you are thinking when you are thinking it, you get a garbled mess.

Anyway I did some testing. 3 matches at first notch of rarely timewasting, 3 matches at middle notch and 3 matches at first notch of often timewasting.

All matches against the same opponent under same match conditions with the same players, same tactics and identical teamtalks where possible, otherwise as close to similar as I could use.

Here are the results. Left 3 results are low timewasting, middle three medium, right 3 results are often.

It seems to me that as time wasting increased so did passing accuracy, distance ran and finishing condition, implying that there was a greater control of the ball and less violence/tackling/clashes/high speed closing down. Alternatively the weather which was drizzly and 1 degree C could have had an effect on condition.

Ratings, motivation and goals all seem to be lower as time wasting increased from low to medium, however my team has spent 3 seasons playing at low time wasting so it is very possible the first set of results are through gelling. Otherwise high timewasting seems to have produced superior performances than medium timewasting. Medium timewasting was clearly a disappointment.

The evidence would seem to support the hypothesis that low time wasting means an aggressive attacking game, whereas high timewasting means a more controlled and careful game. Medium timewasting for my team seems to have produced a kind of "caught in two minds" effect. Indeed from the results the only time Medium Timewasting ever really threatened was the game when both my strikers scored, which I think was the game where the opponents first choice CentreBack was stretchered off.

Edit: Just to nip this in the bud, I don't remember discussing this issue with WWFan and I wasn't thinking of him in my previous post. Nor do I see the benefit in continuing this particular discussion. I simply pointed out that others that had been around here longer than me did not think Time Wasting had an effect outside of "Often" and then it was only relevant to set peices or falling over when tackled. I assumed they were right, and they may yet be proven right.

Have often wondered about this myself, will test it out.

One thing i do know though from watching full matches and extended highlights is that high time wasting does affect out of play moments as well.

If its set low your players run to take FKs & corners and goalies dont hang about getting the ball up the pitch, conversely if you set it at high ive had goalies booed by the opposition crowd for wasting time standing there before kicking it.

Edit: Just to nip this in the bud, I don't remember discussing this issue with WWFan and I wasn't thinking of him in my previous post. Nor do I see the benefit in continuing this particular discussion. I simply pointed out that others that had been around here longer than me did not think Time Wasting had an effect outside of "Often" and then it was only relevant to set peices or falling over when tackled. I assumed they were right, and they may yet be proven right.

I m not sure if it was wwfan (and I apologize to wwfan if I m wrong) or someone else, is not important, but I do remember that main point from the others was that time-wasting had nothing to do with what actualy happeneds when the ball is in the game, only when the ball was - as we call it - "death". Speed of the game was not determined by time-wasting, wich was something that I didnt agree up on. I still belive that time-wasting has something to do with pace and urgency of the attack, something that your experiment could to some degree confirme.

As always gentlemen, thank you for your support. It does seem to be interesting especially so with some of the figures posted by SFraser.

Despite not playing any games since the earlier ones (been to see 'Wolverine'..... disapointingly average to be honest). I do beleive that it is going to be tactic/opposition dependant.

Hmm, then how is time wasting different from tempo? Tempo is to turn defence into attack quickly, right?

Priviet Vasilli, cak de la? In answer to your question, I can only give my opinion at this stage. I beleive the following:

Tempo dictates how quickly you pass the ball around once you are in a given play.

Time wasting dictates how long your team will wait for a play to come about before making that first pass.

You could in theory be playing with a very high time wasting setting, yet still see plays starting early if your team have created them.

The best example I can give is the one I made earlier.

I had overloaded the oppositions box. I had a wide setting and I had my two strikers, two wingers, two wing backs and two MC's all hanging around their box. Now previously, when I used to have a mixed/low setting for time wasting, someone would have taken a stupid pot shot at goal or tried a killer ball through the feet of 20 defenders. This would obviously have completely wasted what in essence would have been a fantastic build up.

There were a few things I changed, and I did comment that these too would have an effect on the way my team played around the box. I turned off all crossing as my thoughts were that I didnt want my players crossing into what would have been an incredibly busy box.

The other thing I also changed was the time wasting. I increased it from something like 5/6 to 15(ish) and what this saw was my players continually passing the ball from wing to wing through the midfield, essentially, playing the ball until an opportunity presented its self. The pot shots at goal disapeared as did the silly through ball attempts.

This then led me to beleive (rather thinly at this stage nevertheless) that time wasting not only dictates how quick the ball gets into play but how quickly your team will look for that opening.

Whilst I have been typing this I have thought of another example that highlights this extreamly well that I had previously discussed with Heathxxx. With a very low time wasting setting, your keeper will make ridiculous quick passes out of his box following a save. On many many occassions, you will see that your players and especially those of the opposition have not even left your box yet. What this then results in on some occasssions is your players losing possession as they are immediatley under pressure and a resulting shot on goal.

Hopefully you would have seen my point in there. With teh very low setting the keeper is not looking for an opening, or due to the low setting, his interpretation of an opening is tiny. Therefore he puts the ball back into play way to early.

I've been trying to create my own tactic for a long time now. I gave up for a while and started using ohter people's tactics. But about 3 weeks ago I started reading the threads in the forum and feeling inspirated by all of you. Lovesleaper, Hethxxxx, SFraser, etc. Now (I'm really saying right now) I'm playing around with my new tactic. Playing with the sliders and instructions. And, after reading this, and finally understanding a bit of what "Time Wasting" means, I played with the Time Wasting slide. One thing I've noticed is that my players tend to play more inteligentelly. They stop to think. They are more accurate. I think you, lam, showed us a point that for the majority was not very clear. I'm gonna keep playing with the tactics I'm using and see how these sliders work.

Cheers.

I think you, lam, showed us a point that for the majority was not very clear. I'm gonna keep playing with the tactics I'm using and see how these sliders work.

Cheers.

As heath pointed out... that the beauty of the forums..... please ensure you keep us posted on your thoughts. Even the smallest suggestions can turn into something big!

LAM

I'll try. I tend to give up very easily. lol

Well i just played 3 games with my time wasting set to 14/15 (previously on about 7/8) and we won 4-3, 2-0, 2-0

Now of course 3 games do not prove the point but we do seem to be controlling the ball better, creating better chances. I havent played away yet so im not sure what effect it will have, but at home when teams park the bus or 'do a chelsea' lol, well then it does at first glance seem to make for more patient play.

Without proof I'm inclined to say that time-wasting as long as its not in its extreme will dictate not the tempo but the urgency or if you want the quality of play.

Low time-wasting means rushed play, take every chance etc, usually meaning more chances but often of poor quality, while a High time-wasting says take your time to pick out the pass, dont shoot unless you have a good opportunity, look to see if there is better options etc usually leading to fewer chances but of higher quality. It probably acts in very close relation to mentality.

I'n relation to the GE I'm inclined to think that mentality dictatates the order of priority for testing certain decisions while time-wasting modifies the threshold for them - in essence making a test more or less likely to succed. I'm not sure if this is applicable also for the decisions that have theire own sliders (TTB, FWR, RWB, etc ) but im inclined to think that it is.

If taken to the extreme, with max time-wasting the likelyhood of anything but "safe moves" ( hold up the ball, simple pass, run into space, put the ball over the line, etc ) goes towards zero. With minimum time-wasting there is an extremly high chance that the player will go ahead with the first available decision as set by the players position and mentality. Somewhere the creativefreedom also kicks in but im not yet convinced how this actually work.

One teory would be that CF is a test that is done before "a play", that decides if to follow the table of instruction as set up by player instructions or if to use another that are based maybe on the players mentality (here in the meaning attributes rather than mentality slider), another possibility is that creativefreedom just unlocks more flamboyant options that otherwise would be unavailable.

I'm not sure if I have managed to explain how I think that the GE might work but I'll try to make a small very simplified example.

Lets take "try long shoot" as the example and because loongshot have 3 different settings lets assume that there is 3 different groups of action that are available to "choose" from at any given moment and that the try longshot slider moves this option between these 3 groups, lets call them A, B and C and that they take the form of a list ordered by priority.

The player will try all the option on the A list before it tries any on list B and finaly it will try the actions on list C.

As long shoot is an aggresive action it gets higher priority by a higher mentality, meaning that with a high mentality long shoot will be found somewhere near the top of its assigned list and with a low mentality it will be found somewhere near the bottom.

Then say that with a certain mentality there is a threshold of a 50% probability to hit the target for the player to try a long shot, but then this is modified by "time-wasting" and if we assume that this slider can add or subtract 50% to the threshold then by setting it all the way Right we now need 100% probability to try a long shoot and if we take the slider all the way to the Left we lower the treshold to 0% probability meaning we will always try a longshoot.

I'm guessing that the GE in reality is alot more complicated than this example but at least I hope it can illustrate how I think that these sliders might effect it.

Well this is my theory, what do you think?

great thread, I'm reading with interest, but as usual my thoughts won't clarify themselves into anything meaningful, so I'll give it a go tonight and see what I can come up with.

nicely done though chaps

I'm liking this more and more. My team creates more danger with high time wasting. They may have fewer shots, but only a few are off target. I also keep possession. It's doing great. I'm still trying to work with the other sliders, to see how they influence each other. But this time wasting thing is really not only to waste time and old results, but is also a tool that helps the players to make good decisions.

Great thread! A recurring problem I had was the number of blocked shots. Though I was winning games the amount of blocked shots I had always left a sour taste in my mouth. I first thought this was directly linked to free kicks being blocked by the opposition wall, but on observation I pinned this down to many long shots being blocked.

My natural reaction was to lower tempo AND long shot taking for all the culprits, not only did this not reduce the number of blocked shots but frankly telling Gerrard not to shoot from range is limiting your options.

So I stumble upon this post and I’m like this could be the key to the mystery, and indeed it is. I increased time wasting to 15, and set tempo to 7. Results, loads of patient build up and finally, oh finally only 3 blocked shots!!

Further testing pending, I think Lam deserves my thanks!

interesting

I've only played one friendly with a new formation I am trying out and with an increase in time wasting I noticed my players were holding onto the ball and not rushing a pass or a shot. It was nice to see a long cross field ball rather than a hopefull punt into the area!!

Whether it's down to the increase in TW i don't know but an interesting idea all the same. I certainly thought TW was holding onto the ball in the corner with 2 mins left, that sort of thing!

I've only played one friendly with a new formation I am trying out and with an increase in time wasting I noticed my players were holding onto the ball and not rushing a pass or a shot. It was nice to see a long cross field ball rather than a hopefull punt into the area!!

Whether it's down to the increase in TW i don't know but an interesting idea all the same. I certainly thought TW was holding onto the ball in the corner with 2 mins left, that sort of thing!

Agreed

I've thinking this a while. Time wasting is really what?!

And i think i have an answer. I'm realy exciting now to see how high time wasting effecting my team. I love barcelona and their tactic. I try to play like barcelona but there is always something missing. I play low short passing, simple player instruction, attacking mentality, high tempo, push up backline but the link between defence-midfield-attack is broken. Now i think i find what is missing. Thanks to all and especially Iam.

I'll keep posting.

**Sorry about my bad english

Great thread! I have just lately gotten really interested about the "finer points" of the game, that is Tempo, Mentality,,Creativity, Passing & Time Wasting in relation to each other. That is because I want to create tactic that'd dominate the game by ball possession and pass accuracy...so far looks good. My Man City definitely plays quite good passing football right now and is leading the league after 20 games.

Now i playe one game and want to share with you. I play gloabl mentality attacking game. Short pass quick tempo and wide. When i set my team to high time wasting they are really start to waste time but not passing ball each other by hitting the ball to throw-in or my dc's start to play long balls to forward. And i don't want my player to "waste time" by kick the ball regardlessly to throw-in or to forward. I want them to "waste time" by passing each other travel the ball all over the pitch until they find a "chance" to try through ball or shoot. This is my first observation but i keep trying high time waste approach cause i believe time wasting will make difference in passing ball each other. I'll keep posting.

If my teory of time-wasting is right there is a point where time-wasting becomes destructive and your team can no longer perform any creative play because the requirement for such move are to high - by your description you are over that point. Try to lower your time-wasting say two notches and see if it helps, if not lower it again. At some point you will start to create play again and hopefully with a minimum of wasted plays. As with everything else about FM tactics its all about the balance.

It might also be because ur limiting your players to short passes while playing a wide game giving your players very few options for a pass.

Wow...... some really positive responses out there. Looks like we are all onto something here. Please keep the feedback coming!!!

Now i playe one game and want to share with you. I play gloabl mentality attacking game. Short pass quick tempo and wide. When i set my team to high time wasting they are really start to waste time but not passing ball each other by hitting the ball to throw-in or my dc's start to play long balls to forward. And i don't want my player to "waste time" by kick the ball regardlessly to throw-in or to forward. I want them to "waste time" by passing each other travel the ball all over the pitch until they find a "chance" to try through ball or shoot. This is my first observation but i keep trying high time waste approach cause i believe time wasting will make difference in passing ball each other. I'll keep posting.

Daral - with this new informaiton about time wasting in mind, it sounds to me like you might want to try a very low time wasting, but a mixed tempo game with short passing and a normal mentality. I beleive that the normal mentality and short passing and mixed tempo mixed with a low timewasting will see the ball being constantly moved around within the team (forced by the low time wasting). So rather than waiting for that key pass to emerge, it looks like the team will go out and try to make it happen (which should be created by the continual movement of the ball).

If my teory of time-wasting is right there is a point where time-wasting becomes destructive and your team can no longer perform any creative play because the requirement for such move are to high - by your description you are over that point. Try to lower your time-wasting say two notches and see if it helps, if not lower it again. At some point you will start to create play again and hopefully with a minimum of wasted plays. As with everything else about FM tactics its all about the balance.

Agreed. I alluded to this earlier. I initially had it on 16 which is often and I felt that I was being caught in possession so I lowered it to 14 which is high normal and for me, this worked much better. Although I need to test further and I do beleive that it will be different for all teams, I did feel that the extreams ie little and often (rather than normal) were for closing out or getting back into games.

Please keep the responses coming, even if you dont agree. I could be wrong here and if I am, I apologise, but for Daral it wasnt working, however, I felt a different setup was required in order to acheive what he wanted. Of course, everyone has differing views, but this is how we all learn!!

LAM

Like zag said i tried set "time wasting" to rare. And my team start to play better but not like i want. They stop kicking the ball to throw-in but still my defenders play a long ball to forward. At least i can say my defenders long ball isn't cause of time wasting but kicking ball to throw-in is. With high time wasting they try to waste time by death balls. When i find my right tactic i'll try hight time wasting again and then i can make a right comment about time wasting.

My defenders long kicks may be cause of quick tempo or attacking mentality i dont think short pass will cause this at least i think like this.

I'll keep posting.

I think its worth mentioning here that there is nothing wrong with a normal time wasting setting. This is how I start presently as I am still trying to get to grips with its use.

I did find something that worked, which I adapted from a post in SFrasers thread. I scored a goal and I think increase tempo and lowered time wasting and then scored another 5 mins later.

The aim was to keep continual pressure on them and at a fast pace. This was acheived with the low time wasting and high tempo respectively.

LAM

I think the combination of short passes and wide game, rather than the settings of time wasting is your biggest problem

I would try a mixed or even low direct passing game or if you want to play as Barca play a more narrow game and i would probably also concider a high medium mentality rather than attacking except maybe on a few key players like maybe a playmaker and your main finnisher.

Finally i have an idea. My tactic is sucks

For finding your right tactic you must be really lucky cause every thing is linked with each other and every notch effect the game. First of all you need to learn what is what but for this game (i think this is not game more like simulation) you must know every thing and this forum is for this.

I'll follow this thread carefully because there should be something that no one ever think about "time wasting".

P.S. I cant stop my defenders to play long balls by normal mentality, narrow width, short passing and quick tempo. May be cause of quick tempo or may be cause of little creative freedom. Like i said this game has hundreds of different variations and you must think all of these. Creative freedom?! May be?! )

Thanks to all for your thoughts, suggestions and helps.

Cheers:thup:

Iam - Interesting thoughts. You've explained that very well, because I'm parp at tactics but even I understand what you are saying. I guess high time-wasting would be good to use on a "control" tactic?

zaq - I like the way you have tried to almost "reverse engineer" the GE a few posts up. I have some difficulty understanding what the sliders and other tactical options do, and I cannot "read" the match engine at all. It would be very nice if there was a way of thinking about the match engine in that way that helps explain what the sliders do and why the players act the way they do. I'm at work at the moment, but I may start a thread along those lines later assuming I can get interest from people who know the engine better than I do (most people) - interested?

Always interested although I dont claim to be an expert and I'm usually to lazy to take a real sceintific approach to testing things, I guess I have a basic grasp but I'm very much still learning and the best way to learn is to play the game, try teorys and discuss them here on the forum for feedback... as I said I'm still very much learning and hopefully I will still be learning when the next version are released....

Finally i have an idea. My tactic is sucks

For finding your right tactic you must be really lucky cause every thing is linked with each other and every notch effect the game. First of all you need to learn what is what but for this game (i think this is not game more like simulation) you must know every thing and this forum is for this.

I'll follow this thread carefully because there should be something that no one ever think about "time wasting".

P.S. I cant stop my defenders to play long balls by normal mentality, narrow width, short passing and quick tempo. May be cause of quick tempo or may be cause of little creative freedom. Like i said this game has hundreds of different variations and you must think all of these. Creative freedom?! May be?! )

Thanks to all for your thoughts, suggestions and helps.

Cheers:thup:

Daral - The best way to learn is to start from a base tactic which generally works for you. Do not start creating your own at this stage as you will not understand them fully. Almost all my comments and posts stem from playing from a base set of tactics, be those of my own initial thread of using defaults and working with the assistant manager or from the more advanced set of SFrasers. Just because I have made a few observations, it in no way makes me an expert. I still struggle to get going in this game and teh amount of restarts I have had is phenonimal.

Anyhows... on to my point of quoting your thread. By giving your defenders short passing and no creative freedom, if there is not a short pass 'on', then they will simply clear their lines.... ie hood it upfield, which looks like a long pass. Normaly its not, its normaly a clearance pass. You need to support your DC's. you can do this with some of the following: DM, MCD, WB's. Which ever you chose, the less forward runs they make the more supportive they will be.

Iam - Interesting thoughts. You've explained that very well, because I'm parp at tactics but even I understand what you are saying. I guess high time-wasting would be good to use on a "control" tactic?

zaq - I like the way you have tried to almost "reverse engineer" the GE a few posts up. I have some difficulty understanding what the sliders and other tactical options do, and I cannot "read" the match engine at all. It would be very nice if there was a way of thinking about the match engine in that way that helps explain what the sliders do and why the players act the way they do. I'm at work at the moment, but I may start a thread along those lines later assuming I can get interest from people who know the engine better than I do (most people) - interested?

Sure. I was thinking about this last night.... trying to rename and phrase what the sliders do... I have a few ideas. Iwll post htem here later for you to see and then you can build on them and I am sure heathxxx and SFrasers amongst many others will assist.

LAM

I think its worth mentioning here that there is nothing wrong with a normal time wasting setting. This is how I start presently as I am still trying to get to grips with its use.

I did find something that worked, which I adapted from a post in SFrasers thread. I scored a goal and I think increase tempo and lowered time wasting and then scored another 5 mins later.

The aim was to keep continual pressure on them and at a fast pace. This was acheived with the low time wasting and high tempo respectively.

LAM

I said that

It's always something that has worked very well for me is all. Became relevent when discussing tactics for Man Utd as I try to emulate what I see from them IRL. Note how often this season United have scored two goals in quick succession. Take the Champions League Semi against Arsenal for example. Arsenal we're rattled due to the mistake by the young lad Gibbs. (his head went after that and they subbed him at half-time). But whilst they were rattled, United kept at them. How well SI have tried to include such events in the game is unclear, but doing what you suggest LAM, does seem to work quite frequently.

This is an extremely impressive post for those getting involved with match strategies.

Agreed. A very good thread. Shame about the grammar as I think some of the points might be lost in translation (so to speak).

The opposition morale during play is a realling interesting point. Brings me back to my old thread...... all the information is there, its just whether we choose to use it or not.

Its ironic really as my team speaches during a game a purely based on performance and morale feedback, yet, I have never used the oppositions to my advantage.

Does anyone else think its funny recently how there is some really key information coming through in some posts. I dont mean downloadable tactics (although, praise is due where its warranted), but there are really some quality posts coming through that I know at least are making a huge difference to my gameplay and more importantly, my enjoyment.

It seems that we are playing as a unit and although we may be 1-0 down at half time, we get the positive team talk and we come out fighting the second half 8O)

and on that speculative note....... good night.

LAM

This is an extremely impressive post for those getting involved with match strategies.

I think I would have to agree with you there, whether it is all coded into FM09 is a different question, but worth taking on board

I think I would have to agree with you there, whether it is all coded into FM09 is a different question, but worth taking on board

At first glance it seems to be closer to a theory of real life management than FM, but if you read it through you will notice that all the necessary elements of the strategy already exist in FM.

Indeed I have been playing along lines similar to those in that post, with tempo strategy and man mangement and manipulation of relationships. If you read the motivation sticky and some of my tactic posts you will see that I have already mentioned all the elements as being possible to exploit. Joor just takes it further and turns it all into a guide for what I would consider the actual gameplay of FM09 once you have a basic grasp of all the details.

It is a great post because when you sit back and look at all the tweaks you make or all the possibilities you consider but shrink away from because you are afraid you don't understand the mechanics, you realise that that post describes exactly how you are playing.

Just a thought, lam, but would it not be better to implement a flat 4-4-2 diamond if you're not using your wingers to cross? This would create more defensive stability in the midfield. You could also focus passing through the middle.

Also realised that if Time wasting works as it should on FM09, it might frustrate opponents into silly mistakes.

Just a thought, lam, but would it not be better to implement a flat 4-4-2 diamond if you're not using your wingers to cross? This would create more defensive stability in the midfield. You could also focus passing through the middle.

I considered this.

I play a 4-1-4-1(DM, Flat 4 through the middle, a Striker). Now, I could have played a 4-1-2-1-2/4-1-2-2-1, but I didn't. Simply because I still like the idea of width. I have my team playing very wide, and there is only 2 players who do not have 'Run With Ball: Rarely', the rest have this. The two are my MCa, and Striker. And it's purely because I want my wingers to link up with my Central midfield, hopefully play One-Two's, and generally cut in, to lay off my striker/MCa for a long distanced shot.

Now, even though I am playing differently - in the sense that I already have the Defensive stability - it has the same type of effect, because I not don't have the Attacking prowess that a 4-4-2 would have. But because of the Time Wasting being high, and the already Defensive Stability, it works well for me. It allows my entire team to get forward, bar my 2 CBs, DMC and, occasionally, my FBs. So although I lack a 2 man Attack from the offset, I have it gradually, through my Time Wasting and Slow Tempo sliders.

Basically, what I'm trying to say is, a narrow, 4-1-2-1-2 would probably work, but not for me. I would lose out on my desired width(my wingers are cross: Rarely, btw) just for a slightly more attacking formation, which I don't need, as results have proven( Inter 3-0 Roma, Inter 3-0 Juventus).

So, if you don't wish to play the flat 4-4-2, my advice is to play a 4-1-4-1, and have the DMC on a Holding Role, and hope that he does this well.

At least, it works well for me.