The Ask-SI-Anything Thread

I think it is about time for some FM developer to come out of the dark to debug "myths" about the game. Hey, each of us all paid $49.99 every year, don't you think we have the right to ask for some gameplay support at least?

Let me shoot first:

1) Why does a shadow striker have "More Risky Passes" instruction?

When he "operates as the team's main scoring thread", probably everyone around him has support duty. So to whom would he want to make a risky pass?

2) Why does a false nine have "Finishing" as a recommended attribute?

Even though it is classified as a minor one, why it it there anyway? He is "only available with a support duty", "drops deep into midfield", and we still hope him to score?

3) Why could a full back have an attack duty and why could a wing back have a defense duty?

If someone is a full back, he should have a support mind or below. If someone is a wing back, he should have a support mind or above. If you want an attacking full back, why don't you choose a support/attack wing back?

You used to have the right, but the community abused it, now you don't. They don't really owe the users anything.

The community can cover most of the questions above though, particularly the more learned ones on the tactics forum.

I think it is about time for some FM developer to come out of the dark to debug "myths" about the game. Hey, each of us all paid $49.99 every year, don't you think we have the right to ask for some gameplay support at least?

Let me shoot first:

1) Why does a shadow striker have "More Risky Passes" instruction?

When he "operates as the team's main scoring thread", probably everyone around him has support duty. So to whom would he want to make a risky pass?

2) Why does a false nine have "Finishing" as a recommended attribute?

Even though it is classified as a minor one, why it it there anyway? He is "only available with a support duty", "drops deep into midfield", and we still hope him to score?

3) Why could a full back have an attack duty and why could a wing back have a defense duty?

If someone is a full back, he should have a support mind or below. If someone is a wing back, he should have a support mind or above. If you want an attacking full back, why don't you choose a support/attack wing back?

Firstly, these aren't myths, and why do you think this forum exists!? These are things you do not understand about football and/or the game.

Secondly, post these three questions in the tactics forum and I'm sure you'll get some helpful answers.

It is "myth" because even John Doe from a jungle in Tanzania can post an answer here, and people could believe it, but that answer may not be what the SI developer thought when he made it like that.

Yes, I can have some answers like "in my experience, it is because blah blah blah ...", yeah it is still your experience and if it does not match what SI thought, it is still irrelevant.

Let me give an example of a "myth": Do you think players with Determination 20 will train hard?

If he is driven to win the game, why would he train lightly? He needs to be fast enough to outrun his chaser, skillful enough to outbribble his marker so he needs to be out there, training hard to be that player.

Yeah, that reasonable explanation could make sense to a lot of players, but that is a myth. Determination has nothing to do with how hard a player trains. (Or maybe that last sentence could be wrong too, who knows?)

Just on number three, have a look at the key attributes and that will greatly inform your choice. A full back on attack with bomb on and try and cross the ball, perhaps with an overlapping instruction. A wing back can be an auxillary winger, they should be able to dribble past players and contribute to the overall flow of your team. A wing back is a more technically demanding role and even on defend they will be expected to be linking the play far more than a full back on attack.

On false nines - typically they do drop deep, but they drop deep to allow players to run on past them - if these players are on the flanks then the false nine suddenly becomes alive as the goalscorer through the middle, and should be competent at finishing as a result. Every false 9 I have known irl is expected to be in a position to score goals for the team, thus finishing is important. The beauty of the false 9 is that in that stage when he becomes the goalscorer he will cause confusion between the DMCs and the DCs as to who should pick him up.

And I'll take a guess at number 1. You can make a risky pass to a support player. If I make a risky pass to my winger who's not in a goal-scoring position, but upon succeeding there is an easy lay off back to the shadow striker, that's been a risky pass to a support player. The shadow striker is more withdrawn than a typical striker, but his job is to unlock the defence to allow a goal to be scored quickly, if they pick the ball up in a deeper position, a risky pass to someone who can then lay them an easy chance on a plate fulfills their role.

Just on number three, have a look at the key attributes and that will greatly inform your choice. A full back on attack with bomb on and try and cross the ball, perhaps with an overlapping instruction. A wing back can be an auxillary winger, they should be able to dribble past players and contribute to the overall flow of your team. A wing back is a more technically demanding role and even on defend they will be expected to be linking the play far more than a full back on attack.

On false nines - typically they do drop deep, but they drop deep to allow players to run on past them - if these players are on the flanks then the false nine suddenly becomes alive as the goalscorer through the middle, and should be competent at finishing as a result. Every false 9 I have known irl is expected to be in a position to score goals for the team, thus finishing is important. The beauty of the false 9 is that in that stage when he becomes the goalscorer he will cause confusion between the DMCs and the DCs as to who should pick him up.

And I'll take a guess at number 1. You can make a risky pass to a support player. If I make a risky pass to my winger who's not in a goal-scoring position, but upon succeeding there is an easy lay off back to the shadow striker, that's been a risky pass to a support player. The shadow striker is more withdrawn than a typical striker, but his job is to unlock the defence to allow a goal to be scored quickly, if they pick the ball up in a deeper position, a risky pass to someone who can then lay them an easy chance on a plate fulfills their role.

Perfect examples of questions that, while being answered by a Dev, can also be answered by knowledgable members of the community, partly because of Neil's first line.

Thank Neil, these discussions could make the game better, don't you think? Developers can hear from users, users can hear from developers. I strongly agree tactical perception is not something absolute, that's is why we need to listen to each other and maybe we can come up with a decent solution.

1) For SS: As you said, "If he's going to be in such an advanced position a shadow striker is liable to be looking for passes which lead to a goalscoring opportunity." Then why a Poacher will release "Fewer Risky Passes"? I don't think "the advanced position" between a SS and a P could be that much different to cause 2 opposite decisions.

2) For F9: As you said, "Just because they are down to support is irrelevant in regards to whether they can finish an opportunity which comes their way." So a support Target Man won't look to finish an opportunity which comes his way? A TM sits even higher than a F9 and but there is no Finishing highlighted.

3) I can agree with this one. In my own opinion, I would simplify by eliminating the attacking FB and the defending WB. But based on individual tactical perception, it could be explained your way.

Just on number three, have a look at the key attributes and that will greatly inform your choice. A full back on attack with bomb on and try and cross the ball, perhaps with an overlapping instruction. A wing back can be an auxillary winger, they should be able to dribble past players and contribute to the overall flow of your team. A wing back is a more technically demanding role and even on defend they will be expected to be linking the play far more than a full back on attack.

On false nines - typically they do drop deep, but they drop deep to allow players to run on past them - if these players are on the flanks then the false nine suddenly becomes alive as the goalscorer through the middle, and should be competent at finishing as a result. Every false 9 I have known irl is expected to be in a position to score goals for the team, thus finishing is important. The beauty of the false 9 is that in that stage when he becomes the goalscorer he will cause confusion between the DMCs and the DCs as to who should pick him up.

And I'll take a guess at number 1. You can make a risky pass to a support player. If I make a risky pass to my winger who's not in a goal-scoring position, but upon succeeding there is an easy lay off back to the shadow striker, that's been a risky pass to a support player. The shadow striker is more withdrawn than a typical striker, but his job is to unlock the defence to allow a goal to be scored quickly, if they pick the ball up in a deeper position, a risky pass to someone who can then lay them an easy chance on a plate fulfills their role.

So you're saying a F9 can operate as a F9 in the beginning of an attack then becoming a SS later? Is it some kind of "multiple level thinking"?

And for the SS, the problem is that none of your teammates are ready for that risky pass. If they have support duty, then they don't look to move forward. That risky pass will go wasted because nobody is there to pick it up. Why makes such a bad decision?

Putting aside the match engine;

One thing I'd moan about, or want to ask about, is why the UI is always so glitchy? I'll give an example;

In FM16, if I adjust a role on the Tactics screen, it'll show me the key attributes for that role. Simples. If I now switch to a different position, the key attributes for the OLD and NEW position will now merge, and you have to click out to reset the key attributes highlight.

Simple stuff like this really gets on my nerves because it a complete lack of polish that absolutely should have been caught before finalising the release/final patch.

Another example, is the add new manager stage. If you back out of it, it'll blank screen you, forcing you to save the game and re-do the 'add new manager' stage, instead of just defaulting to the select a profile/create profile screen.

There's others as well, such as the player selection screen hanging in the air and not snapping back, or roles jumbling up a bit.

I'm running a reasonable gaming rig, so I kind of expect the game not to have these graphical blips and issues! =)

1) is a fair point. I think it's more due to the fact a poachers attributes will be simply about goalscoring, so their vision and passing are generally lower than a SS. They're more suited to get into a position and score (good off the ball, composure, pace and finishing), hence why they wouldn't look for a 'risky pass' as they wouldn't be able to pull it off with their focused attributes. A SS as said before will have a touch of vision and can pick a pass, so if the opportunity arises, they could thread the eye of a needle so to speak.

I think for 2), although a TM may sit further forward, in my experience they're less likely to be in goalscoring positions as they'll often have their back to goal - the F9 is more likely to move into an advanced space, be facing the goal and generally would have better off the ball movement.

As I told Plachy, for the SS, the problem is that none of your teammates are ready for that risky pass. If they have support duty, then they don't look to move forward. That risky pass will go wasted because nobody is there to pick it up. Why makes such a bad decision?

That "have their back to goal" explanation sounds good enough to me, only for why support TM does not have finishing attributed highlighted. Still, F9 has support role, don't expect him to score, we can't have the best of both worlds. I can expect him to make a long shot, but not getting in there and score.

Seeing as we're getting high quality answers here, I'd like to ask about the Prevent Short GK Distribution TI. I understand this to mean that my striker will close the keeper down and give him less time to distribute. I often use this TI but notice my striker isn't pressing the keeper, but is dropping back. I'd like to ask if the success of this TI is based on player roles, other TIs, whatever. For example, would a DF with defend duty be more or less likely to follow this instruction than, say, a Poacher. Essentially, is there something else I'm doing tactically that affects the successful use of this TI? Or am l completely misunderstanding the TI?

I know this is one for the tactics forum essentially, but l thought, well, seeing as this thread is here...

Seeing as we're getting high quality answers here, I'd like to ask about the Prevent Short GK Distribution TI. I understand this to mean that my striker will close the keeper down and give him less time to distribute. I often use this TI but notice my striker isn't pressing the keeper, but is dropping back. I'd like to ask if the success of this TI is based on player roles, other TIs, whatever. For example, would a DF with defend duty be more or less likely to follow this instruction than, say, a Poacher. Essentially, is there something else I'm doing tactically that affects the successful use of this TI? Or am l completely misunderstanding the TI?

I know this is one for the tactics forum essentially, but l thought, well, seeing as this thread is here...

I know you wanted a high quality answer, but I'll pick this one up.

Basically if you're playing a role that directly conflicts with the TI it'll reduce the efficiency of the TI. If you're player is playing in a role with minimal closing down then the TI will basically just push that up a little bit to increase the amount of closing down, but it'll still be low.

The instruction is for goal/free kicks & is only effective if you also have players in the AM strata, without them your players will not press up on the defenders to remove the short distribution option. To press the keeping in open play you need to use the OI to close down the keeper, set it to always & then look to use a striker with high work rate & closing down PI for their role.

Prompt response, thank you. To clarify, if l were to use the clise down much more TI, and give a striker the PI to also close down much more, combine this with appropriate shape and tempo, I'd see better results than if l simply used the TI on its own? Which, of course, makes perfect sense now. Thanks.

2) Why does a false nine have "Finishing" as a recommended attribute?

Even though it is classified as a minor one, why it it there anyway? He is "only available with a support duty", "drops deep into midfield", and we still hope him to score?

Just on the F9 issue. The original F9 was an Austrian player called Mattias Sindelar. We can then walk through history up to the present day Lionel Messi (reinvented as a F9 by Pep Guardiola).

Both were prolific goalscorers. The role of the F9 is essentially one of deception, in the build-up phase they drop off the front-line (so not a no. 9) but enter the attacking zone at the final phase, unmarked (see, I am a number 9 sometimes...), and BANG its a goal! Hence, finishing is vital.

I'd like to ask about the Prevent Short GK Distribution TI. I understand this to mean that my striker will close the keeper down and give him less time to distribute.

Just to chip in here. The TI isn't aimed at making your striker close down the goalie - it's aimed at getting your striker and/or other advanced players to cut off the keeper's short distribution options to near by players. So they'll put more pressure on the opposition back line for example rather than directly onto the keeper.

So, it "Prevents Short GK Distribution" by cutting off nearby passing options, rather than closing the keeper down.

Just to chip in here. The TI isn't aimed at making your striker close down the goalie - it's aimed at getting your striker and/or other advanced players to cut off the keeper's short distribution options to near by players. So they'll put more pressure on the opposition back line for example rather than directly onto the keeper.

So, it "Prevents Short GK Distribution" by cutting off nearby passing options, rather than closing the keeper down.

I'd 100% listen to this guy about anything relating to the ME or tactics. Swift return to the high quality replies from Herne and Barside!

Now I see there is some "myth" about Prevent Short GK Distribution even among Mods and FM Team: some says it presses the GK, some says it presses the defense line ..... That is why this thread is born: let the myths go.

Now I see there is some "myth" about Prevent Short GK Distribution even among Mods and FM Team: some says it presses the GK, some says it presses the defense line ..... That is why this thread is born: let the myths go.

There's not been anything conflicting. No one said it closed down the goalkeeper. Maybe my answer wasn't as transparent as those other two, to be fair, but they'll be far better explaining ME and it's usage than myself as it's not my area of expertise.

Now if someone can ask a non-ME related question I can help with.

As I told Plachy, for the SS, the problem is that none of your teammates are ready for that risky pass. If they have support duty, then they don't look to move forward. That risky pass will go wasted because nobody is there to pick it up. Why makes such a bad decision?

That "have their back to goal" explanation sounds good enough to me, only for why support TM does not have finishing attributed highlighted. Still, F9 has support role, don't expect him to score, we can't have the best of both worlds. I can expect him to make a long shot, but not getting in there and score.

If you are using a Shadow Striker then it is your job to make sure that your tactic results in other players being in positions where they can make the most of any passes that he plays. If you're finding that your SS is making passes for players who are not making the required runs then that's your fault, you're leaving your SS isolated and without the support around him that he needs to be effective in his role.

There's not been anything conflicting. No one said it closed down the goalkeeper. Maybe my answer wasn't as transparent as those other two, to be fair, but they'll be far better explaining ME and it's usage than myself as it's not my area of expertise.

Now if someone can ask a non-ME related question I can help with.

Nice, this one is for you. Of course it can be placed at bug forum but still: we know that a DLF has different suggested attributes, based on duty. Now if you click on Messi's profile page and choose role DLF, then choose Support/Attack, the suggested attributes do not change. Bug?

If you are using a Shadow Striker then it is your job to make sure that your tactic results in other players being in positions where they can make the most of any passes that he plays. If you're finding that your SS is making passes for players who are not making the required runs then that's your fault, you're leaving your SS isolated and without the support around him that he needs to be effective in his role.

So basically you're saying because SI sets SS has "More Risky Passes", I have to set other attacking players. Supports around him aim to create chances for him, that is the meaning of support. Supports around him do not mean to pick up his risky passes. If it happens like you say, we should name this role Shadow Striker-and-Creator.

So basically you're saying because SI sets SS has "More Risky Passes", I have to set other attacking players. Supports around him aim to create chances for him, that is the meaning of support. Supports around him do not mean to pick up his risky passes. If it happens like you say, we should name this role Shadow Striker-and-Creator.

No need for a new role name, you just need to spend time using the role & assessing what a player assigned to it is doing within your tactical system & then make changes to get more out of the player if that is required.

Or SI will just erase the default "More Risky Passes" from SS. By giving that "mythy" answers with general terms like "spend time", "assessing what a player assigned", "get more out of the player", you're basically saying, we won't change what we set, live with it.

Let me give you an example. Let's say I play 4-3-1-2 with 2 world class strikers who I am pretty sure will be marked tightly even when they go to toilet. So I decide to be deceptive by setting a decent U19 youngster as an SS and the 2 famous strikers as F9's. I plan to confuse their defenders by letting them mark the 2 famous strikers and when they are busy, the SS will finish them.

Now, the SS has "More Risky Passes". The main role I plan for him fades because whenever he picks up the ball and can't shoot, he just pass it riskily to nobody when he should at least try to retain the ball.

If you can, please read again the descriptions of AM and SS.

Description of AM contains phrases like "fashion chances", while description of SS contains nothing than "goalscoring", "aggressively pushes forward". But SS has "More Risky Passes", AM does not. WHAT?

Or SI will just erase the default "More Risky Passes" from SS. By giving that "mythy" answers with general terms like "spend time", "assessing what a player assigned", "get more out of the player", you're basically saying, we won't change what we set, live with it.

Let me give you an example. Let's say I play 4-3-1-2 with 2 world class strikers who I am pretty sure will be marked tightly even when they go to toilet. So I decide to be deceptive by setting a decent U19 youngster as an SS and the 2 famous strikers as F9's. I plan to confuse their defenders by letting them mark the 2 famous strikers and when they are busy, the SS will finish them.

Now, the SS has "More Risky Passes". The main role I plan for him fades because whenever he picks up the ball and can't shoot, he just pass it riskily to nobody when he should at least try to retain the ball.

There's no need to be ridiculous, a couple of SI employees have taken the time to reply in this thread & I'd hate to close it.

I really like to contribute to FM to make it better. When others explain reasonably like Neil, I still agree. Even he said the claim I made about SS is fair. But if the attitude I receive is "SI is absolutely right, you are wrong", please help close it. There is no point for discussion anymore.

I really like to contribute to FM to make it better. When others explain reasonably like Neil, I still agree. Even he said the claim I made about SS is fair. But if the attitude I receive is "SI is absolutely right, you are wrong", please help close it. There is no point for discussion anymore.

You've started a good thread here matey, please don't get it canned because you don't like the answers, eh?

Or SI will just erase the default "More Risky Passes" from SS. By giving that "mythy" answers with general terms like "spend time", "assessing what a player assigned", "get more out of the player", you're basically saying, we won't change what we set, live with it.

Let me give you an example. Let's say I play 4-3-1-2 with 2 world class strikers who I am pretty sure will be marked tightly even when they go to toilet. So I decide to be deceptive by setting a decent U19 youngster as an SS and the 2 famous strikers as F9's. I plan to confuse their defenders by letting them mark the 2 famous strikers and when they are busy, the SS will finish them.

Now, the SS has "More Risky Passes". The main role I plan for him fades because whenever he picks up the ball and can't shoot, he just pass it riskily to nobody when he should at least try to retain the ball.

These are player roles, with structures that are associated, but not concrete. Just because he can't shoot, doesn't mean he will necessarily pass to no one. In your example, his vision, as just one example, would most likely come in to play to determine if he passes, retains or resets the play. Let's assume there is a player - possibly one of the false 9's, making a run. Should his vision be high, he may notice a player making a run behind the opposition and attempt a "risky pass" behind the opposition to that player. However, if his vision is low, he may not see that opportunity and not play that "risky pass" and hold it, or look for an easier alternative.

Then there would be other factors that determine things like how accurate the pass is, whether he chooses on the ground or in the air, power, etc.

This is just based on my understanding of how I imagine it would work and how players would interpret a situation. Just because they look for the risky pass does not mean they do it every time, rather when the situation is present based on the players ability.

I'm sure someone can provide a better example than I, but there are a multitude of factors that determine outcomes, which I think is what people are getting at here.

I have enjoyed the discussions going on thus far and its been a very good thread.

Nice, this one is for you. Of course it can be placed at bug forum but still: we know that a DLF has different suggested attributes, based on duty. Now if you click on Messi's profile page and choose role DLF, then choose Support/Attack, the suggested attributes do not change. Bug?

They change okay for me. The only attribute that changes is finishing which is removed when changed to a support role from attack.

Not sure if I missed it but it seems to be flying over some's heads sometimes. There's roles that are supposed to be specific jobs, such as the aforementioned shadow striker. However each position has more general roles as well which are tweakably to your heart's content. If you don't like how he's configured you could as well go with an attacking midfielder and tweak him to your liking.

There's players that wouldn't pick certain roles simply based on the assistant advice (i.e. player is best suited to be a shadow striker so go down that route.) However the recommendations (which goes for the highlighted attributes as well) are meant to display key attributes linked to the "default" instructions of a role, i.e. players locked to look for risky passes/through balls typically have key creative attributes such as flair/vision highlighted as key. However they are neither strict rules nor is it recommended to just following the ass man's advice step by step as obviously you're going to end up with something terribly incoherent straight out of the bat (defend duty players all over the shop depending on which, no holding mids, etc. etc. etc.) It's not holistic advice, it is solely guidelines/opinion based on that player available.

I see roles as being essentially little more than a label given for a set of instructions, any position can be set to its default and then tweaked until I'm satisfied. For example, l can use an attack minded midfielder with a preferred role as an AP, but set him to CM with automatic duty, and then tweak that role to suit my strategy and his attributes and ability, and this generally works just as well. I've always considered the roles to have too much emphasis placed on them by the user, l see them as just being there to make it easy for tjose FM players who don't like to endlessly tweak PIs. But maybe that's just me.

You used to have the right, but the community abused it, now you don't. They don't really owe the users anything.

The community can cover most of the questions above though, particularly the more learned ones on the tactics forum.

I hope no one from SI agrees with what you just said. You can't sell something to someone and then tell them to buzz off. Besides, if you buy something, and it doesn't work as it should or as you thought it would, would you ask for an explanation and should the seller be obliged to give you one? Of course. Software is no different, regardless of the insanely complicated EULAs. It's bad enough it's almost impossible to get a refund on software, it's a whole new level to not hold software companies accountable for what they do. And your reasoning is terrible - some users "abused the right", so the "right" was revoked for all of us? Your idea about what "rights" are is a funny one.

To stay on topic, the team instructions panel could be worded more clearly - higher tempo (higher than what?), "sometimes" closing down (when? and why is closing down only present in defence, but not in attack?). Do "be more expressive" and "retain possession" affect one another? What happens when neither "hit early crosses" or "look for overlap" are selected? I learned many of these things by (a very frustrating!) trial and error, but they really should be explained in more detail by whoever designed and implemented them, because it is basically theirs (not mine or anyone else's) idea of all these things that is in the game.

I would love a TI to be added where we can tell one fullback to drop back when the other full back is up the pitch.

I hope no one from SI agrees with what you just said. You can't sell something to someone and then tell them to buzz off. Besides, if you buy something, and it doesn't work as it should or as you thought it would, would you ask for an explanation and should the seller be obliged to give you one? Of course. Software is no different, regardless of the insanely complicated EULAs. It's bad enough it's almost impossible to get a refund on software, it's a whole new level to not hold software companies accountable for what they do. And your reasoning is terrible - some users "abused the right", so the "right" was revoked for all of us? Your idea about what "rights" are is a funny one.

SI used to be very active in the general discussion areas, far more than they are now. They ended up getting a boat load of abuse from users, so they withdrew and only really observe this forum now, only really conversing in detail in the bugs forum. So I stand by exactly what I said - SI developers used to come here a lot, now they don't, because users. Maybe I'm just being fanciful in thinking that developers who put in long hours to develop a product don't really deserve abuse from people who largely don't know what they're talking about.

And in that particular case, no they don't really owe users anything. I'm not talking about things not working the way they shouldn't - there's a number of bugs forums where you can usually talk directly to a dev/tester about those things. I'm talking about having an open dialogue with developers on this very board. You know, what the OP talked about.

You seem to have a massive bee in your bonnet about very little to be honest.

SI used to be very active in the general discussion areas, far more than they are now. They ended up getting a boat load of abuse from users, so they withdrew and only really observe this forum now, only really conversing in detail in the bugs forum. So I stand by exactly what I said - SI developers used to come here a lot, now they don't, because users. Maybe I'm just being fanciful in thinking that developers who put in long hours to develop a product don't really deserve abuse from people who largely don't know what they're talking about.

And in that particular case, no they don't really owe users anything. I'm not talking about things not working the way they shouldn't - there's a number of bugs forums where you can usually talk directly to a dev/tester about those things. I'm talking about having an open dialogue with developers on this very board. You know, what the OP talked about.

You seem to have a massive bee in your bonnet about very little to be honest.

It really isn't "because users", but because "SI can't handle a few obvious idiots, so now no one gets to talk to SI any more", if it really is the case what you are saying. No one deserves abuse from anyone, especially not someone who makes good products, but everything has its ups and downs. How high the level of communication and involvement should be is up for debate, obviously, but I feel that quitting on your entire user base because of an immature minority is the wrong way to go.

I would love a TI to be added where we can tell one fullback to drop back when the other full back is up the pitch.

Honestly, what I miss the most is the clear-cut "with" and "without ball" instructions, that we used to have back in the day. You can now sort-of do the same with player and team instructions, but it was much more simple just to draw the players where they should be in every situation.

Please try and stay on topic.

To stay on topic, the team instructions panel could be worded more clearly - higher tempo (higher than what?), "sometimes" closing down (when? and why is closing down only present in defence, but not in attack?). Do "be more expressive" and "retain possession" affect one another? What happens when neither "hit early crosses" or "look for overlap" are selected? I learned many of these things by (a very frustrating!) trial and error, but they really should be explained in more detail by whoever designed and implemented them, because it is basically theirs (not mine or anyone else's) idea of all these things that is in the game.

Documentation and explanation of tactical terms are always something we look to improve on between versions and I agree it could be better worded. There's not a lot of feedback from the game outlining issues with a tactic which can be frustrating for users, again something I think we'll be looking to address in the near future. Saying that, we do like to encourage people to use our forums though and use the people we have here that know a lot about the tactics and ME to help and explain, which they are usually very good at. The ME will always contain a certain amount of mystery because at the end of the day it's supposed to be a football simulation and there is always subjectivity within football, and tactics especially, which is why you see so many varied tactics being used around the world which is something we're always keen to encourage in our series of games.

Please try and stay on topic.

Documentation and explanation of tactical terms are always something we look to improve on between versions and I agree it could be better worded. There's not a lot of feedback from the game outlining issues with a tactic which can be frustrating for users, again something I think we'll be looking to address in the near future. Saying that, we do like to encourage people to use our forums though and use the people we have here that know a lot about the tactics and ME to help and explain, which they are usually very good at. The ME will always contain a certain amount of mystery because at the end of the day it's supposed to be a football simulation and there is always subjectivity within football, and tactics especially, which is why you see so many varied tactics being used around the world which is something we're always keen to encourage in our series of games.

Duncan, I've probably said this in a roundabout way a few times, either here or on other forums.

But has there ever been thought considered to implementing a tutorial, a guided tutorial so to speak, based around the tactical side of the game? Let's face it, we're all armchair managers, we all have our own preconceptions of how tactics work. A lot of people are misguided or misinformed thanks to the media (in Britain in particular). The work I see on the Tactics forum is fantastic, particularly from the mods team (former and new), but I *still* see a lot of misconceptions outside of the forums, and I think we still see it with certain fansites or websites uploading some very strange tactics. In fact, there's one place actually selling plug and play tactics now.

There's obviously only so much that can be done to convince people to come here, and only so much can be done to get people to read/learn or ask questions, and even then there can be some clashes personality-wise, or the wearing thin of patience between people who are basically repeating themselves and those who are letting frustration get in the way.

My idea for the scenario/tutorial for example, would just be a sort of role-play thing; You could even make it about the coaching badges, if you do the 'National C tutorial' it'll cover the absolute basics, such as telling you the formation is the defensive shape and roles are the offensive shape, pointing out the basic elements of a system without going too nuts - like covering concepts of having a holding midfielder and such. Or even a warning that if you're going 'attacking' on the mentality you absolutely don't need to be adding five thousand team instructions basically telling the team to camp in the opposition goal. - You know, something that makes the user stop, think and realise that they have to look at the whole, rather than the individual bits and bobs - which I think some of us, even myself, still get hung up on.

Maybe that is too ambitious? Maybe that would take a lot of resources away from the game? It doesn't necessarily have to focus entirely on tactics either, it could be good to cover psychology, team talks, tutoring, little things that have crept into the game but maybe won't be entirely clear for both newer players and the older groups?

That would dispel any "myths", or maybe it would open up a can of worms again, though if a link was given at the end of the tutorial to come to these forums, maybe that would help things too?

I would love a TI to be added where we can tell one fullback to drop back when the other full back is up the pitch.

I like this idea. Just like we separate the left/right wing exploitation, we should separate left/right FB overlap too. Juanfran defends and Felipe Luis attacks.

You could even make it about the coaching badges, if you do the 'National C tutorial' it'll cover the absolute basics, such as telling you the formation is the defensive shape and roles are the offensive shape, pointing out the basic elements of a system without going too nuts - like covering concepts of having a holding midfielder and such. Or even a warning that if you're going 'attacking' on the mentality you absolutely don't need to be adding five thousand team instructions basically telling the team to camp in the opposition goal. - You know, something that makes the user stop, think and realise that they have to look at the whole, rather than the individual bits and bobs - which I think some of us, even myself, still get hung up on.

Maybe that is too ambitious? Maybe that would take a lot of resources away from the game? It doesn't necessarily have to focus entirely on tactics either, it could be good to cover psychology, team talks, tutoring, little things that have crept into the game but maybe won't be entirely clear for both newer players and the older groups?

That would dispel any "myths", or maybe it would open up a can of worms again, though if a link was given at the end of the tutorial to come to these forums, maybe that would help things too?

Just throwing my two cents in, but I absolutely love that idea. Give the coaching badges some real meaning.

Please try and stay on topic.

Documentation and explanation of tactical terms are always something we look to improve on between versions and I agree it could be better worded. There's not a lot of feedback from the game outlining issues with a tactic which can be frustrating for users, again something I think we'll be looking to address in the near future. Saying that, we do like to encourage people to use our forums though and use the people we have here that know a lot about the tactics and ME to help and explain, which they are usually very good at. The ME will always contain a certain amount of mystery because at the end of the day it's supposed to be a football simulation and there is always subjectivity within football, and tactics especially, which is why you see so many varied tactics being used around the world which is something we're always keen to encourage in our series of games.

I understand, but at the moment, the "mystery" is more due to a confusing user interface, and less so due to the football itself (though it's getting better and better with every release), and the forums really aren't a part of the game, so it may be too much to ask from your users to come here in order to be able to play the game as intended.

However, it should be (?) very basic - FM should just give all ingredients to the user with an explanation of what every ingredient is, and then let the user mix them together. The mix itself is the mysterious part, anyway. It is football (not strict rules, so not easy to simulate on a computer), but it really isn't rocket science, neither. The way I see it, this is what you are trying to do, but the ingredients are vague and unclear. What does the "progress bar" (?) for mentality in the player instructions screen even mean and represent? Closing down set to "more"? Mark "tighter"? There are quite a few cases like this. Once you learn what they mean, it gets easy, but the process of learning is unnecessary complicated and adds nothing but frustration to the game (and that process is also the "mysterious" bit I think you're talking about).

Still, thanks for the 300+ hours of FM16 gameplay so far. A nice result, I'd say, considering the fact that real life keeps getting in the way.

Duncan, I've probably said this in a roundabout way a few times, either here or on other forums.

But has there ever been thought considered to implementing a tutorial, a guided tutorial so to speak, based around the tactical side of the game? Let's face it, we're all armchair managers, we all have our own preconceptions of how tactics work. A lot of people are misguided or misinformed thanks to the media (in Britain in particular). The work I see on the Tactics forum is fantastic, particularly from the mods team (former and new), but I *still* see a lot of misconceptions outside of the forums, and I think we still see it with certain fansites or websites uploading some very strange tactics. In fact, there's one place actually selling plug and play tactics now.

There's obviously only so much that can be done to convince people to come here, and only so much can be done to get people to read/learn or ask questions, and even then there can be some clashes personality-wise, or the wearing thin of patience between people who are basically repeating themselves and those who are letting frustration get in the way.

My idea for the scenario/tutorial for example, would just be a sort of role-play thing; You could even make it about the coaching badges, if you do the 'National C tutorial' it'll cover the absolute basics, such as telling you the formation is the defensive shape and roles are the offensive shape, pointing out the basic elements of a system without going too nuts - like covering concepts of having a holding midfielder and such. Or even a warning that if you're going 'attacking' on the mentality you absolutely don't need to be adding five thousand team instructions basically telling the team to camp in the opposition goal. - You know, something that makes the user stop, think and realise that they have to look at the whole, rather than the individual bits and bobs - which I think some of us, even myself, still get hung up on.

Maybe that is too ambitious? Maybe that would take a lot of resources away from the game? It doesn't necessarily have to focus entirely on tactics either, it could be good to cover psychology, team talks, tutoring, little things that have crept into the game but maybe won't be entirely clear for both newer players and the older groups?

That would dispel any "myths", or maybe it would open up a can of worms again, though if a link was given at the end of the tutorial to come to these forums, maybe that would help things too?

I actually quite like your idea of tutorials and having them set up like players earning coaching badges. I think the main problem with having a tutorial is that there is so much content to cover within tactics it'd probably end up being very long and tedious. It's probably fairly easy to define words used within the tactic creation process but a while longer to help people understand the mechanics behind their choices. I'd be interested to know if you, or anyone else, could come up with an interesting and streamlined way we could do them that would be both engaging and informative. I'd happily read through them and try and work out a way using your ideas that we could put forward as a future feature in the game, but obviously they'd have to be reasonable ideas. Aside from that, any other ideas on this are welcome to be put in the wishlist thread which is monitored by SI staff and features are often directly pulled out of that thread if they're the kind of thing that we know would enhance the game and are well put across by the user.

I'm not sure how much more in-game exposer we plan on giving to the forums to be honest, but I'd say it's hard to find the right balance. Obviously you want people to understand what's happening in their game and this is the best resource for content and knowledgeable users we have but I don't think we want to be in a position where we make people feel like they need to come here just to understand the game. There needs to be a balance of enough information in game for casual players while offering much more in-depth game play mechanic discussion here, with the in-game information always something we look to improve and again I'd encourage any suggestions on how people think we can improve it to be added to the wishlist thread.

I understand, but at the moment, the "mystery" is more due to a confusing user interface, and less so due to the football itself (though it's getting better and better with every release), and the forums really aren't a part of the game, so it may be too much to ask from your users to come here in order to be able to play the game as intended.

However, it should be (?) very basic - FM should just give all ingredients to the user with an explanation of what every ingredient is, and then let the user mix them together. The mix itself is the mysterious part, anyway. It is football (not strict rules, so not easy to simulate on a computer), but it really isn't rocket science, neither. The way I see it, this is what you are trying to do, but the ingredients are vague and unclear. What does the "progress bar" (?) for mentality in the player instructions screen even mean and represent? Closing down set to "more"? Mark "tighter"? There are quite a few cases like this. Once you learn what they mean, it gets easy, but the process of learning is unnecessary complicated and adds nothing but frustration to the game (and that process is also the "mysterious" bit I think you're talking about).

Still, thanks for the 300+ hours of FM16 gameplay so far. A nice result, I'd say, considering the fact that real life keeps getting in the way.

I think there's a fair amount of information in the tooltips for player/team instructions that should give most casual users a good overview of what each option does. Sure, it doesn't really delve too deep into the explanation but I'm not sure many causal fans want to be reading too much documentation and often trial and error approaches to the tactical side of the game can be quite good fun for some users. Admittedly this isn't fun for other users but I think if you're someone that want's to get deeply involved in the tactical side of the game you're going to want to use other sources of information and ideas from other people, which will hopefully lead them to here or many of the high quality FM blogs or YouTube channels that are around currently. Even if you head onto twitter it's quite easy to engage with successful FM players, many of them having amassed a good amount of followers due to their knowledge of the game. I don't think this is something we'd ever want to completely remove from the game, we don't want to hold every users hand through the game but to encourage them to seek information and develop their own understanding of the game through interaction with other FM users.

As mentioned above, I'm happy to hear ideas on how we can make the experience more user friendly, I'm always monitoring the wishlist thread and you're always more than welcome to drop me a PM if you have any questions or want anything raised that you feel has been missed.

Please try and stay on topic.

Documentation and explanation of tactical terms are always something we look to improve on between versions and I agree it could be better worded. There's not a lot of feedback from the game outlining issues with a tactic which can be frustrating for users, again something I think we'll be looking to address in the near future. Saying that, we do like to encourage people to use our forums though and use the people we have here that know a lot about the tactics and ME to help and explain, which they are usually very good at. The ME will always contain a certain amount of mystery because at the end of the day it's supposed to be a football simulation and there is always subjectivity within football, and tactics especially, which is why you see so many varied tactics being used around the world which is something we're always keen to encourage in our series of games.

Hey Duncan,

Let me be honest, the game documentation last updated 10 years ago gives many of us headaches. Some of them are unclear and that is why it creates "myths" as I said. Here are some examples:

1) Will determination influence the training level? If I am determined to pass my CFA exam, would I study my ass off? I think it does. => Myth

2) When I played FM 2013 with Valencia, I usually faced Falcao of AM. Considering the obvious size & jumping attributes, he can't compare to my Adil Rami. However, in our match, he outheaded Rami like hell. Even my assistant warned me about his "aerial prowess". It really confused me which factors could lead to those heading stats. And I am pretty sure it was not written anywhere. => Myth

I've deleted one post now. Please stay on topic. Here is a thread to ask SI questions and they are doing that as well. You can't ask for more. Take advantage of it.