FM 2015 must have classic tactics and sliders

I quit playing FM14 and back to FM13 becouse of the tactical sliders. I cant make the players to do what i told in FM14. They dribble more, shoots more, defensive problems, goalkeeper problems etc etc. But fm13 is more responsive to player tactics. When you watching a match in fm13, u feel your given tactics are working but in fm14 ... it makes me crazy.

And there r just 4 diffirences between fm13 and fm14 1st database 2nd tactical sliders(which is the worst one not in fm14 that made to back to fm13) 3rd player personal training that to develop his weaker foot 4th when tutoring; a suggestion appears by whom the player will be tutored. And fm14 match engine very poor against fm13.

Fm14 made for todays gaming habits. For players who doesnt want to spend much time and dont like to get into deeply to the game( Its the same FmLive which SI just kept alive for just 1.5 years which i was playing too). But me and like me the ones(i beleive the real fans are steadily decreasing) who played this habit since cm93 series like to full control of the game.

So i beg and call mercy to SI, company directors, developers, who are the real fans in team, someone who understands the like of me. Please make this game again a complete football simulator like the old ones. I wont buy fm15 if it ll be the same as fm14; although i m dying of it.

The most common complaint about FM14, especially the match engine, is that it is far too complex and requires a lot more work to succeed. I'm not sure you would have many agree that FM14 is a game for players who don't like to get deeply into the game.

Sliders are gone. It isn't coming back.

Oh well there you go SI, this chap says the sliders MUST come back, so I imagine you'll definitely be putting them back in now.

They haven't always been present throughout the CM/FM series, so you'll just have to adapt again if you want to keep playing each new game in the series.

Id be more worried that he went back to the shambles that was fm13

One thing tactics should have is the ability to change all player instructions...shouldnt be dependent on role with just some auto/not available for a role...all should be able to be controlled to have it more player oriented than role oriented

Without sliders, this game is a blinfolded gun fight.

One thing tactics should have is the ability to change all player instructions...shouldnt be dependent on role with just some auto/not available for a role...all should be able to be controlled to have it more player oriented than role oriented

Thye aren't available because that instruction is a key part of that role therefore "always on"

In terms of tactics its a case of tactics > players, you pick a style then drop the players in else you end up with 11 square pegs in round holes.

Without sliders, this game is a blinfolded gun fight.

There is next to nothing you can't do now that you couldn't do before.

What you can't do though is use exploits that were available in previous versions, the ME has been tightened up and that seems to be the root cause of most of the problems not the sliders.

Without sliders, this game is a blinfolded gun fight.

What about CM01/02, the game that many consider to be the best of the CM/FM series? Was that a "blindfolded gun fight"?

Without sliders, this game is a blinfolded gun fight.

Strange, that's how most people described the sliders as well.

What's also strange is that the people who understood how the sliders actually worked are having no problems with the new system. The only ones struggling are those people who thought one click to the right was what turned a bad tactic into a great one. Make of that what you will.

Sliders will never be coming back.

I am 100% in disagreement with the OP here. Sliders were always going to be removed, and it was the best move this series has made since introducing a 3D match mode. The sliders were unrealistic to the extreme, since when would you say to a player 'you are too wide, move from 15 to 13 width to combat that please'. Now you think someone is too wide, you ask them to sit narrower. The system is much simpler to understand for everyone, and much more realistic. The game is however no easier than it was before. There is no longer a magic combination of sliders, you have to pay attention to the match to see what is going on and adjust accordingly. In contrast to what the OP suggests, to be very successful on this game you have to get really involved in the game; no more wondering off and trusting my tactic to give me a result during a match!

To the OP, if you are struggling with tactics I would suggest that you go and have a look in the tactics forum, perhaps post what you have been doing and ask for some help. If you are willing to listen to advice and understand what you are not doing correct those guys can be extremely helpful. I have learnt a lot just from reading some of threads over there.

Next thing to go, hopefully, is the old school positions so they can be replaced by fully integrated roles.

Strange, that's how most people described the sliders as well.

What's also strange is that the people who understood how the sliders actually worked are having no problems with the new system. The only ones struggling are those people who thought one click to the right was what turned a bad tactic into a great one. Make of that what you will.

Sliders will never be coming back.

Quite a broad statement I'd disagree with - never felt I had a problem understanding the sliders but cannot get teams to play the way I want on FM14.

I appreciate sliders aren't coming back, but to suggest that no-one who previously understood now struggles isn't right.

The problem isn't the sliders being gone. The problem is with the lack of explanation of the instructions, roles, mentalities etc.

Next thing to go, hopefully, is the old school positions so they can be replaced by fully integrated roles.

Agree with this change though.

Sliders were always a daft way of doing things.

IRL you can't say to a player I want your passes to be 12/20.

As for getting players to do what YOU want? I'm a real life manager and trust me YOU CAN'T! You have to employ tactics based on their traits or bring in players with traits that are more to your liking.

Strange, that's how most people described the sliders as well.

What's also strange is that the people who understood how the sliders actually worked are having no problems with the new system. The only ones struggling are those people who thought one click to the right was what turned a bad tactic into a great one. Make of that what you will.

Sliders will never be coming back.

people who thought one click to the right was what turned a bad tactic into a great one.

very superficial understanding.

very superficial understanding.

If you are struggling to enact the changes you want in FM14, it may well be that your tactical aptitude isn't what you believe it to be.

If you want any advice, please seek it in the Tactics Forum. As has been pointed out in here, sliders will not be coming back in FM15.

The problem isn't the sliders being gone. The problem is with the lack of explanation of the instructions, roles, mentalities etc.

This, a hundred times this.

Sliders were always a daft way of doing things.

IRL you can't say to a player I want your passes to be 12/20.

As for getting players to do what YOU want? I'm a real life manager and trust me YOU CAN'T! You have to employ tactics based on their traits or bring in players with traits that are more to your liking.

This is an excellent point & deserves to be highlighted.

Agreed with this point.

Yeah if they did that I don't know how I would feel. Since this is the first edition of FM I've ever played having sliders would turn me off to the game. I say that but it probly wouldn't be the case. FM has ruined playing FIFA or PES for me. So I would have nothing to turn too. Lol

Sliders made no sense, don't want them back. There are inadequacies I think in the tactical setup of FM but a lack of sliders isn't one.

I loved the sliders but do accept that they were hit and miss to many and I tended not to tinker too much with them generally going with a global approach which served me well at the time but I accept that they have had their day.

The way it is now has potential "but" positions and roles have work as they should do. The example of this I shall give on what I have seen many times in the tactics forum.

User asks for advice because his 4231 with two CM's, three AM's and an Advanced forward concedes too many goals. Advice usually includes dropping the CM's back to DM and the AM'S into the CM strata to become more solid. This now has a knock on effect with the Advanced Forward because he is now isolated so another piece of advice comes in to change the forward to a supporting role. Then someone will pip in with change your wingers to wide midfielders because you can PPM the role in many ways. Suddenly after a couple of bits of advice albeit advice with the intention to help the poor OP now has a completely different tactic probably needing a different strategy and style of play. All because the original roles picked don't work as they should do.

There should be options or ME coding changes to make AM's track back, to allow users to sit a CM a bit deeper, to relinquish the advice to have one full back on attack and a midfielder on support so play occurs between the lines and all the stuff that a fair bit of advice in the tactics section is merely a workaround because something doesn't work as it should do.

Once we have roles and duties that perform as they would in real football then the moaning might stop!!

I've never got the AM issue tbh.

AMs by definition are an attacking position so their defensive work should be expected to be less than a player at ML/MR. Combine that with the less defensive nature of most of the players in these positions (Attributes) and you have players who do track back but not as quickly as a lot of users seem to want. If you compare that to real life though the players that do play in the AML/AMR position are slower to track back so its perfectly normal IMO.

The choice whether to have the attacking threat of an AM or the more defensive ML/MR is part of a managers choice when they create the tactic.

The two issues with your example Sussex IMO are playing an AF as a lone forward and that the two MCs should be DMs by default. 4231 IRL is almost always played with DMs IMO.

I loved the sliders but do accept that they were hit and miss to many and I tended not to tinker too much with them generally going with a global approach which served me well at the time but I accept that they have had their day.

The way it is now has potential "but" positions and roles have work as they should do. The example of this I shall give on what I have seen many times in the tactics forum.

User asks for advice because his 4231 with two CM's, three AM's and an Advanced forward concedes too many goals. Advice usually includes dropping the CM's back to DM and the AM'S into the CM strata to become more solid. This now has a knock on effect with the Advanced Forward because he is now isolated so another piece of advice comes in to change the forward to a supporting role. Then someone will pip in with change your wingers to wide midfielders because you can PPM the role in many ways. Suddenly after a couple of bits of advice albeit advice with the intention to help the poor OP now has a completely different tactic probably needing a different strategy and style of play. All because the original roles picked don't work as they should do.

There should be options or ME coding changes to make AM's track back, to allow users to sit a CM a bit deeper, to relinquish the advice to have one full back on attack and a midfielder on support so play occurs between the lines and all the stuff that a fair bit of advice in the tactics section is merely a workaround because something doesn't work as it should do.

Once we have roles and duties that perform as they would in real football then the moaning might stop!!

Part of the point is that no system can ever do everything perfectly. The trade offs you are highlighting as weaknesses I see as strengths. You also have to have to be able to get things horribly, horribly wrong, such as failing to encourage adequate movement between the lines. If it all "just happened" then you'd lose a vital game-playing and learning element.

I've never got the AM issue tbh.

AMs by definition are an attacking position so their defensive work should be expected to be less than a player at ML/MR. Combine that with the less defensive nature of most of the players in these positions (Attributes) and you have players who do track back but not as quickly as a lot of users seem to want. If you compare that to real life though the players that do play in the AML/AMR position are slower to track back so its perfectly normal IMO.

The choice whether to have the attacking threat of an AM or the more defensive ML/MR is part of a managers choice when they create the tactic.

The two issues with your example Sussex IMO are playing an AF as a lone forward and that the two MCs should be DMs by default. 4231 IRL is almost always played with DMs IMO.

I agree to an extent but I still think they can track back a lot more. Sure you will get players whose attributes go against that like say Mata IRL but you will get others who play more as an attacking wide player IRL who do track back. I just think it could be a lot better than it presently is. For instance I don't see a great difference in a player who has great work rate and one with poor work rate in the AM slots with their tracking back. Maybe more instructions like "track back more", "track back less" would help I don't know.

I would say IRL 4231 is probably a hybrid in many ways. I think you probably have a DM of some sort along with a more attacking DM maybe. I have said for a long time that FM needed more positional discs specially in say a variant of a diamond. You get either a narrow diamond with CM's or a wide one with wide midfielders. IRL I would say it's somewhere between the two so as I say another disc somewhere between a CM and a WM.

I just think some of the roles could play better than they currently do. In fact a stopper / cover combo in the CM strata is the sort of thing I mean. In days gone by the old style 442 would have a more defensive central midfielder and a more attacking one but I certainly wouldn't have put that player in a full on DM category yet CM's in FM are pretty hopeless defensively even when playing against another team playing a flat midfield.

One prime example of a role potentially being better is better lateral movement of strikers and that has been accepted by quite a few so as I say just some tweaks to make some roles better would help.

Not saying I am right, it's all about opinions.

Part of the point is that no system can ever do everything perfectly. The trade offs you are highlighting as weaknesses I see as strengths. You also have to have to be able to get things horribly, horribly wrong, such as failing to encourage adequate movement between the lines. If it all "just happened" then you'd lose a vital game-playing and learning element.

Fair point wwfan but what I mean is that the game right now needs roles and duties to perform as they should perform for the user to have that learning element. Prime example is a thread on the tactics page right now about wide men shooting constantly at the near post. Granted at times a set up can help slightly but on the whole surely no-one can argue about the fact that too often wingers will shoot straight into the side netting at the near post even when a striker is merely a rolled pass across goal away. Whether this is because otherwise strikers would score too many goals because wingers are in that position a lot due to the amateurish nature of full back defending I don't know but straight away without thinking too hard there are three examples of clear deficiencies in the game. 1. Wingers shooting at narrow angles too often despite PPM's or PI's to try and make them stop doing this. 2. A clear issue with strikers lateral movement and attacking moves through the middle and 3. Poor defending coding for full backs albeit for both AI and user.

Whilst not "broken" surely no-one can argue that there are issues with these parts of the game and this means that it can affect a system a user wants to play in a negative way. Yes if you have two wingers with fantastic finishing stats and great mental/decision attributes it could be argued that it may affect you positively but on the whole it is a negative effect because it can stop your team from playing the way you want it to.

That's why I say that the ME is a work in progress but to take it to the next level roles and duties should perform the way they should. If a players attributes mean he over rules that then fine (maybe a problem due to the lack of an individual creative freedom setting) but otherwise if you have asked your winger to cross more than they shoot then they should cross more and not shoot into the side netting even if it means crossing into an empty penalty area because you haven't set your striker up correctly!!

Fair point wwfan but what I mean is that the game right now needs roles and duties to perform as they should perform for the user to have that learning element. Prime example is a thread on the tactics page right now about wide men shooting constantly at the near post. Granted at times a set up can help slightly but on the whole surely no-one can argue about the fact that too often wingers will shoot straight into the side netting at the near post even when a striker is merely a rolled pass across goal away. Whether this is because otherwise strikers would score too many goals because wingers are in that position a lot due to the amateurish nature of full back defending I don't know but straight away without thinking too hard there are three examples of clear deficiencies in the game. 1. Wingers shooting at narrow angles too often despite PPM's or PI's to try and make them stop doing this. 2. A clear issue with strikers lateral movement and attacking moves through the middle and 3. Poor defending coding for full backs albeit for both AI and user.

Whilst not "broken" surely no-one can argue that there are issues with these parts of the game and this means that it can affect a system a user wants to play in a negative way. Yes if you have two wingers with fantastic finishing stats and great mental/decision attributes it could be argued that it may affect you positively but on the whole it is a negative effect because it can stop your team from playing the way you want it to.

That's why I say that the ME is a work in progress but to take it to the next level roles and duties should perform the way they should. If a players attributes mean he over rules that then fine (maybe a problem due to the lack of an individual creative freedom setting) but otherwise if you have asked your winger to cross more than they shoot then they should cross more and not shoot into the side netting even if it means crossing into an empty penalty area because you haven't set your striker up correctly!!

Accept these are bugs, but they are ME bugs, not anything to do with the tactical module per se. They wouldn't go away by bringing back sliders, which is what this thread is about.

If AM strata players tracked back more than they currently do they would essentially be MLRC strata players, I don't understand how this simple fact is so difficult to grasp. You can't be an attacking outlet high up the pitch and track back all the way to your own box at the same time. The only valid issue here is the disconnect in research that sees players like Antonio Valencia being natural AMR and less accomplished in deeper positions. I agree with Ackter that it's about time the positional system in FM got a rethink.