The Football Manager Tactics Podcast - updated for every show

[Millie]

GetSacked! is back the Football Manager tactics podcast from FM-Britain. We answer your questions about everything FM related, including:

• The new tactics creator – is this the death of downloaded tactics?
  
• Tactics in the lower leagues – why is the jump from the regional leagues to the Conference so darn tricky?
  
• And we talk sweepers – they may be on strike in Leeds, but are they alive and kicking in FM defences?
  

Plus, we discuss real life football and how it relates to the game, answer more of your questions in the quick-hits section, and general footballing goodness. All on GetSacked! The Football Manager Tactics Podcast.

Listen to the show right now!

Send your questions to us via:

• Twitter @FMBritain
  
• Our Facebook page
  
• Our e-mail inbox – thinktank@fm-britain.co.uk

And we also keep track of the goings on in the various scene forums!

With thanks, as ever, to those who submitted the questions for this week: Juan McMuffin; sound of eden; Fantastic; LeeCovFox; Mike Sherwin; @m_beyer; @tom_flatt; @linkinstreet; Jamie Scfc Willis

[SFraser]

Love the podcast. The irreverent Gareth Millward has held many a show together with his unique brand of humour.

Regarding the current vein of debate I do have one question that you might find worthwhile discussing with your next guest, whoever that may be.

Q: Do you think that the increased accessibility brought about by the Tactics Creator will expose the flaws and therefore demand a huge push in development of the AI in coming versions of FM?

And a few minor "other" questions:

Q: Do you think that the Tactics Creator and Touchline Shouts and direction of development spells the death knell for support for complex and individual "personality based" tactics?

Q: Are you concerned at all by the speed at which so many "Diablo" tactics have emerged for FM10?

Q: What do you make of the results of the "Diablo" poll, where 56% of over 300 voters in 3 weeks on this forum voted in favour of a single SI "Diablo" tactic?

[Millie]

Cheers, SFraser. There's definitely a lot to discuss there. We'll add them to the list. Especially the one about the Diablo poll. I wasn't shocked by the results, but they're definitely a window into the psyche of the average FM player.

[TheBetterHalf]

Cheers, SFraser. There's definitely a lot to discuss there. We'll add them to the list. Especially the one about the Diablo poll. I wasn't shocked by the results, but they're definitely a window into the psyche of the average FM player.

I think that poll only shows that people dont understand the question and the consequence's of their choice. Its like asking " Would you like to be rich and famous". I suspect that a majority would answer Yes, but when realizing that they would have that life Instead of their current and all that it includes, most people would give anything to have their normal life back.

[Nenad.F]

i dont want any diablo tactic i just want one tactic that is balanced, and if i got better players than opponent i expect to dominate. i just want to be able to win home with milan against atalanta and not lose by 3 goal .

[Millie]

Maybe that's an issue. Why do you expect ONE balanced tactic to dominate? Why do you not expect the right tactical instructions for the right situation to dominate? What dominates one side may not dominate another. The answers to those questions determine how good you are as a manager, surely?

I think we might run over our 35 minute target run time with this.

[Nenad.F]

sorry i didnt meant balanced in that meaning i was thinking about some normal tactic not these aggressive that we can download here.

[Loversleaper]

I think that poll only shows that people dont understand the question and the consequence's of their choice. Its like asking " Would you like to be rich and famous". I suspect that a majority would answer Yes, but when realizing that they would have that life Instead of their current and all that it includes, most people would give anything to have their normal life back.

The reason for all this is due to them not knowing how to work the ME mechanism. If they had an idea how to use the sliders or the wizard then I think it would have turned out different. The problem with the wizard though is that it does not always possess enough depth/accuracy to actually cover all the area's (as the slider does) that is required to be able to match/overpower the AI settings. Judging by the absolute absence of high quality threads and the normal ones who create them can cause one to have a little concern, are they all suffering from the same symptoms?...

[Nenad.F]

and i can win in some games with these tactics and i try to tweak them, and i have a feeling that i won bcoz of luck not some my instructions.

[Millie]

This is one of the reasons why I've been trying to get people to e-mail me PKMs. I want to see the problems people face so we can try and find solutions together. I find in a lot of cases, learning how to see an issue is the biggest problem. Once you know what's wrong, finding a solution is usually pretty easy (or at least far easier than identifying the initial issue).

So far, I've only received them from two people, but I am seeing some common threads. Next week, I should release a video using one of these PKMs as an example, so we can all work out if we're seeing the same things.

[Nenad.F]

i didnt know i can send u a PKM

can u please give me the mail to send u some PKM's.

[Millie]

The contact details are in the opening post.

[Nenad.F]

i sent u mail with my last game against Bari i won 3:2 with 2 crazy goals from them.

[higgins]

Q: Are you concerned at all by the speed at which so many "Diablo" tactics have emerged for FM10?

Diablo tactics?

I think I missed them.

[ZdlR]

I would like a discussion on the difference between zonal and man marking - with respect to FM, not reality.

They are mutually exclusive options per player and seem to be of key importance in defending. Because we are not directly informed as to their respective effects, it is pretty difficult to determine when to use which.

Using real-life sources, man marking is antiquated and hasn't been used since the days of the verou or catenaccio. However, that sort of 'player tracking' is - allegedly - implemented in FM using specific marking instructions. I say allegedly, because I have no concrete idea as to whether that is the case or not, it is merely informed heresay from here on the forums.

Perhaps a description - preferably based on authoritative fact rather than contentious theory - as to what affect each of the four marking combinations have on a player (zonal/man + tight/loose). Even with that information I could probably figure out when to use each option in a given situation in order to provide my defence with their best chance of succeeding. As it stands, there is almost no discernable difference in the match engine between any option, with quite good defenders apparently wanting to do whatever tickles their fancy on a whim.

If the tone of this post is a little annoyed, it's because my team has conceded 11 goals in 4 games, the majority of which are from individual errors. It gets tiresome sometimes trying to succeed tactically when you have very little clue as to what went wrong besides chalking it up to human error - ie: out of my control. I'd rather think that the game was more deterministic than that and I've never believed it implemented a 'luck' system.

[vasilli07]

Can you give some advice on how to use the teamtalks more effectively?

[Hammer1000]

1. I'd like to know why everyone but "your lot" realises there are massive defensive issues in the game?

2. If you are going to lump us with this new TC could you not have provided us with a few sets of tactics and a readme of how and when to use them so that we had a better chance of understanding how its all supposed to work?

3. Any chance of a TT&F d/load?

[The next Diaby]

I would like a discussion on the difference between zonal and man marking - with respect to FM, not reality.

That's a great idea. However, we have a huge article on marking systems in our tactical bible and it may become difficult to deal with all this in a show. But we could try that, even if missing out on several points.

[Millie]

Marking is big one, definitely, but we'll try not to shy away from it. We know there are concerns, so it's obviously something to address. I think an article or two is probably the best way to fully get to grips with it, but we can certainly try and cover the basics.

[The next Diaby]

Can you give some advice on how to use the teamtalks more effectively?

Squad and man management definitely will become a huge topic. Sorry for repeating myself, but again a wealth of information already is available as articles of Communication and Psychological Warfare and the Tactical Bible. However, if you are having more detailed questions after some reading, you are more than welcome!

[Lincoln Imp2]

Maybe that's an issue. Why do you expect ONE balanced tactic to dominate? Why do you not expect the right tactical instructions for the right situation to dominate? What dominates one side may not dominate another. The answers to those questions determine how good you are as a manager, surely?

I think we might run over our 35 minute target run time with this.

Millie - I think this issue is at the heart of a big dilemma for the future of FM. I've played the game since the very early CM versions, probably for nearly 15 years.

In that time I've acquired a demanding and responsible job, a wife, two children and two dogs. I'm now 42 and simply don't have the time I once did.

I think there's little doubt the tactics of the game have become more complex - and probably reflect real-life management much better. But as a long-time fan I simply don't have the time, the energy or the inclination to spend hours analysing the oppositions defence line or the effect of a tweak in the width of my tactic.

If I'm lucky I'll get a couple of hours on a Saturday morning and an hour or two during the week and I just want to sit down and play a few games, make a few singings and win something.

The micro-managing of tactics, which has increasingly become the case over the last two or three CM/FMs, is just becoming too much for me.

I suspect many other older gamers agree with me - while many younger gamers may find the patience and detail too much for them.

As a result FM is in serious danger of losing it's longer-term, older, busy, committed fans while not growing a new, younger fan base to replace them.

I realise you and other colleagues have contributed to the development of tactics and I respect the work you've done. But I do really miss the days of finding a good tactic (Diablo or any oher) and sitting down to thrash a few teams and going to bed with a big smile rather than struggling through hours of small adjustments in order to beat Wigan 1-0 and then go to bed only having played a couple of games.

If anything the tactical wizard (or the ME, or the AI or something!) seems to have made it even harder rather then simpler to just sit and enjoy. It seems the game has become an IQ test, a football exam requiring endless nights of homework or a slide-rule thesis instead of escapism and fun.

I fear the tactical theorists and in-depth detail protagonists have taken over FM and this may well be my last throw of the FM dice.

....and before anyone says it - it probably is my tactics!!

[Millie]

This is what needs to be combatted, I agree. Some seem to believe that responding to in-match situations... "tweaking" (a horrible cliche that has been done to death now) takes so much time and effort. It really doesn't have to - providing the game gives good enough feedback as to WHY there are problems.

The game needs to do better on that score. But in the absense of that, it's the job of the community to show that these changes are reasonably simple and don't take forever to do. Once you have the right tools at your disposal.

As for the diablo days - perhaps those are dead. But I'm not pretentious enough to say whether that makes things "better" or "worse". "Progress" is subjective, and for everything the game gains in a richer, more dynamic match engine, it loses in speed and, for some, enjoyment. SI need to work out how to keep the things that made the game great whilst adding more to the matchday experience. It's a difficult juggling act.

[Lincoln Imp2]

This is what needs to be combatted, I agree. Some seem to believe that responding to in-match situations... "tweaking" (a horrible cliche that has been done to death now) takes so much time and effort. It really doesn't have to - providing the game gives good enough feedback as to WHY there are problems.

The game needs to do better on that score. But in the absense of that, it's the job of the community to show that these changes are reasonably simple and don't take forever to do. Once you have the right tools at your disposal.

As for the diablo days - perhaps those are dead. But I'm not pretentious enough to say whether that makes things "better" or "worse". "Progress" is subjective, and for everything the game gains in a richer, more dynamic match engine, it loses in speed and, for some, enjoyment. SI need to work out how to keep the things that made the game great whilst adding more to the matchday experience. It's a difficult juggling act.

With respect I think the community is making it pretty clear they aren't that simple! and my experience suggests similar. I agree that SI have worked incredibly hard to get it right and essentially the game is a richer experience than it used to be but I fear the richer it gets the more indigestion I suffer (it's my age!)

I suppose there is a core debate here. My view of real football is that an expensively assembled quality team playing their own tactic (rather than one changed in response to their opponents) should win 9 our of 10 games. The history of the Premier League would suggest I'm right. I don't really believe that Man Utd and Chelsea see the need to change their tactics when they play Wigan.

Unfortunately my experience of FM10 doesn't reflect that truth.

I believe, essentially, the balance between quality of player and tactic has swung dramatically towards the latter and become so complex as to almost make the transfer window a disappointing and pointless exercise.

It's a shame but I accept things change and move on and sometimes people get left behind......I'll miss the fun but at least I now know why real managers have heart attacks...just didn't expect FM to quite reach the levels of stress reality it has!!

[Millie]

The history of the Premier League would suggest I'm right. I don't really believe that Man Utd and Chelsea see the need to change their tactics when they play Wigan.

Really? I agree that they can impose their gameplan more, but it's not the case that they make NO tactical changes if they start getting problems from these teams adapting. Wigan aren't a Sunday League team. They're a team of top class, well paid professionals.

Changing tactics doesn't mean complete rewrite - it means something simple like playing wider to try and get around a packed defence. That, surely, happens? No team will go through a season playing the same "tactic file" regardless of opposition. If that were the case, football coaches wouldn't get paid as much as they do, and no small team would ever outsmart a bigger one.

I agree that a general gameplan should work most of the time. But when the good teams come up against a team playing a different style, they will have to make at least some modification *if* it turns out that plan A isn't working. I would say the history of the Premier League has shown that teams without a plan B have fallen flat at the final hurdle (Arsenal, Liverpool).

This isn't about religiously changing tactics constantly all the time, always having a new tactic for every opposition. But it is about seeing obvious flaws and plugging the gaps.

This is a relatively simple process most of the time. The problem is that this isn't communicated well through the assistant advice in the game, and the documentation provided. I think the fact that so many people have so many problems isn't necessarily a problem with the game at a base level, but it certainly indicates a lack of good information and feedback within the game.

[cagiva]

Before everybody claims that FM is not like real-life football,is buggy,and etc.

Now,when the game became more and more like real-life football, somebody claim that FM become too hard and not posses enough "game" joy.

Personally, I dreamed for the moment when FM will become more real,with "football" speaking terms and etc. Now I'm just dreaming the time,when FM's AI will become more and more like human brain.

If you don't like FM - switch to other game. Simple.

If you want "just" to play FM - switch to other game. Simple.

But ,please,don't claim that the more detailed football realism of FM will ruin it's fanbase and joy of the game.

[DirtyACE]

cagiva, I apologize if what I'm about to say may sound rude or insulting, but what you've written is a pretty narrow-minded opinion. I've read many of your posts on FM-Britain and find you insights into football and FM pretty interesting, but your post above is a bit hard to believe. I would have thought that someone who has contributed to TT&F, and has a very good knowledge of football and FM would be able to appreciate other points of view. I might as well say to you, "if you find FM to be so unrealistic in the way that the AI doesn't behave like a real life human brain, then switch to real life, and become a real life coach/manager". Simple.

[cagiva]

"if you find FM to be so unrealistic in the way that the AI doesn't behave like a real life human brain, then switch to real life, and become a real life coach/manager".

Nope. What I'll do is to try my best to help the current AI become more and more realistic in his approach and thinkering.

May be my last opinion was little bit rude,but I become mad everytime when somebody tells something like this " FM is crap,just because is more detailed now,is more real ,and possess great tactics detail now. I just want to have a "cheat"/"Diablo" tactic and win all the matches just with few clicks with the mouse" .

[Lincoln Imp2]

Nope. What I'll do is to try my best to help the current AI become more and more realistic in his approach and thinkering.

May be my last opinion was little bit rude,but I become mad everytime when somebody tells something like this " FM is crap,just because is more detailed now,is more real ,and possess great tactics detail now. I just want to have a "cheat"/"Diablo" tactic and win all the matches just with few clicks with the mouse" .

Cagiva - well I didn't say FM is crap did I! I actually said I appreciated that it was a far more detailed and rich game than it ever was. I simply said that as a married man with two kids and a busy life In was finding it very difficult to devote the time to the game that it so obviously needed.

I'm not really sure why that would make you mad! I'm guessing you haven't got kids, two dogs and a job that demands you work 11 hours a day - or perhaps you have and still find time.

Either way I'm simply expressing an opinion that an element of fun has been lost in the drive for realism. I don't think I'm alone.

Frankly your drive to "help the current AI become more and more realistic in his approach and tinkering" can only mean one thing - more and more tinkering needed by the game player. Doesn't that just emphasise my point that the tactical "geeks" are taking over the game and us "normal" players are getting left behind??

I mean no disrespect by this but I think, Cagiva, that you are wrong in suggesting there are not other players like me who get their fun from takingTrivial Wanderers to the Champions League final inside a fortnight by finding one good tactic and signing hidden gems rather than by an in-depth analysis of how an extra click on the closing down slider and three clicks on the width slider - when analysed by watching 12 full games - has allowed me to overcome Scunthorpe Utd 1-0 and taken a week to do it.

Don't get me wrong I can see how many people will derive great pleasure from the latter. But don't dismiss as uninformed, unintelligent or unworthy those who don't agree with you.

Clearly SI agree with me to some extent or why introduce the "tactical wizard" to supposedly make tactics easier? The problem is a brief glance around the tactical forum will tell you that it hasn't made it easier.

[wwfan]

I think you are misinterpreting the reason for the 'tactical creator'. It was never intended to dumb things down or make things easier, rather make things closer to real football instructions and further removed from sliderology. Theoretically, if you understand how real football works, you can use the creator, whereas that wasn't the case with the sliders. The creator might be somewhat limited right now, but its development relates to making FM more football-term friendly rather than easier.

[Lincoln Imp2]

Really? I agree that they can impose their gameplan more, but it's not the case that they make NO tactical changes if they start getting problems from these teams adapting. Wigan aren't a Sunday League team. They're a team of top class, well paid professionals.

Changing tactics doesn't mean complete rewrite - it means something simple like playing wider to try and get around a packed defence. That, surely, happens? No team will go through a season playing the same "tactic file" regardless of opposition. If that were the case, football coaches wouldn't get paid as much as they do, and no small team would ever outsmart a bigger one.

I agree that a general gameplan should work most of the time. But when the good teams come up against a team playing a different style, they will have to make at least some modification *if* it turns out that plan A isn't working. I would say the history of the Premier League has shown that teams without a plan B have fallen flat at the final hurdle (Arsenal, Liverpool).

This isn't about religiously changing tactics constantly all the time, always having a new tactic for every opposition. But it is about seeing obvious flaws and plugging the gaps.

This is a relatively simple process most of the time. The problem is that this isn't communicated well through the assistant advice in the game, and the documentation provided. I think the fact that so many people have so many problems isn't necessarily a problem with the game at a base level, but it certainly indicates a lack of good information and feedback within the game.

I see that there is something in what you say but it's about balance. I still think that a Chelsea playing with the wrong tactic will overcome Portsmouth playing very intelligently "most of the time". I don't think that's reflected in the game currently.

Let me try and explain myself in more detail.

look at the approach to game day. You get feedback telling you the way the opposition normally lines up and advice on how you should respond to this - normal tempo, high def line etc - ie change the way you might normally play (albeit within the same framework).

Yet if the AI is using the same criteria as the human player (and tactical genuises insist it's a level playing field) then it's adjusting its tactics to the way you play anyway.

Thus the advice pre-match is pointless, the changes you make pre-match questionable and you have to watch the game in detail to see how you need to tweak again. It's possibly very reaslistic but it is time consuming and requires a fair amount of ME, tactical and football understanding.

I'm not really sure to what extent Chelsea make these changes during a game-by-game basis but in my view even if they don't they tend to win most games regardless - hence the classic football cliche of teams playing badly and winning. They win because their players are better - even when they don't get the tactics right.

I don't think that's what happens in FM - but of course I maybe wrong.

If I play Sims on the PC I don't need a degree in parenting or social science. There's a learning curve. The complexities of the game might emerge over time but while you play. FM has lost the ability to get people emersed quickly. Your tactic bible is both briliiant and essential reading - but therein lies the problem. It's become ESSENTIAL reading for anybody wanting to get even a half-decent performnace from the team and it shouldn't have to be. It's a game, bought and played for enjoyment not an FA coaching badge simulation.

This is all just an opinion. I understand those who feel differently. But I do feel that for all those who genuinely love the challenge of tactics there are just as many who are bored, put off or confused by the level of detail and just want to play the game.

[wwfan]

If you look through the threads, people do do well with the Chelseas, Arsenals, Liverpools and Man Utds of this world. However, they might not win the league and they lose a few games they feel they should have won, i.e. they have turned a great team into merely a good one, which is surely possible through bad or average management. They then rant and rave about the odd poor result or late comeback.

People failing to finish top 6 with a big team are few and far between. That would suggest that nothing too much is wrong, would it not?

[Lincoln Imp2]

If you look through the threads, people do do well with the Chelseas, Arsenals, Liverpools and Man Utds of this world. However, they might not win the league and they lose a few games they feel they should have won, i.e. they have turned a great team into merely a good one, which is surely possible through bad or average management. They then rant and rave about the odd poor result or late comeback.

People failing to finish top 6 with a big team are few and far between. That would suggest that nothing too much is wrong, would it not?

Depends upon your interpretation of "bad management" I suppose. With the tactical wizard I'm not sure how you can be a "bad manager".

The wizard sets your sliders for you.

If by being a "bad manager" you mean I don't individually adjust the sliders for each players and for each game then I'm not sure that's being a bad manager.

I suppose since none of us are Premier managers we don't know the extent to which they do make small adjustments to each players role in each game but it looks to me like Chelsea play as near as dammit the same tactic every week - but then I don't claim to be an expert on football.

I think the real question is if Chelsea had a bad manager where would they finish? Top six, top four or top two? Frankly I think even an average or bad manager would struggle to drop Chelsea out of the top three at the moment because they have the strongest squad.

Does FM reflect this or is it too focused on the tactical "mistakes" or set-up rather than on the players abilities or stats?

I know we'll disagree but I feel FM punishes small tactical issues far too much - but then you're clearly more adept at tactics than I am.

[Millie]

Again, I think the point is missed though. Nobody is saying you need to "individually adjust the sliders for each player and for each game". What we are saying is that making adaptations (strategically: I want to hold onto a lead; I want to go for a goal; I want to stop the opposition hitting me down the right hand side) by using the tools provided is what is needed. This isn't as time-consuming as people make out, providing you get good enough feedback from the ME and the game (something that needs to be worked on).

You're still equating a tactic file with "good management". This is the mentality which needs to change if the whole point of tactics in FM10 is to be understood. Being able to set sliders DOES NOT EQUAL good management. It equals good coding ability. Sensing problems and reacting to find their solutions - THAT is management.

[Lincoln Imp2]

Again, I think the point is missed though. Nobody is saying you need to "individually adjust the sliders for each player and for each game". What we are saying is that making adaptations (strategically: I want to hold onto a lead; I want to go for a goal; I want to stop the opposition hitting me down the right hand side) by using the tools provided is what is needed. This isn't as time-consuming as people make out, providing you get good enough feedback from the ME and the game (something that needs to be worked on).

You're still equating a tactic file with "good management". This is the mentality which needs to change if the whole point of tactics in FM10 is to be understood. Being able to set sliders DOES NOT EQUAL good management. It equals good coding ability. Sensing problems and reacting to find their solutions - THAT is management.

Millie - I realise your are not saying you have to individually adjust slider for each game. I'm saying it!. I'm saying because, in my experience, that is what you need to do to put together a decent run of results in FM10.

That's my whole point! I'm saying you shouldn't have to but it seems like you do. I don't think I'm alone in that opinion either.

If the business of tactics wasn't more complex, with actions and consequences ad infinitum, why is the tactical bible so goddam huge. It's truly exceptionaly work btw but how many teenagers can be bothered? Isn't the game losing touch with some of its audience?

Like I've said elsewhere I wouldn't mind spending some time to truly adjust my tactics/approach for half a dozen big games a year but it seems like if I don't take account of how wide Wigan play I get punished by the ME.

The ME must take account of tactics/approach/formation/player stats and much more in order to calculate who wins a game. I think the balance or importance given to the tactics and approach as against the players is too much.

[cagiva]

Like I said before - FM is a simulation of football game,required football skills.

If I play any basketball simulation I will fall in the second,just becouse I don't understand basketball game.

To to have any decent succes in FM you must be football/tactical knowledgable.

[googoo56]

Millie - I realise your are not saying you have to individually adjust slider for each game. I'm saying it!. I'm saying because, in my experience, that is what you need to do to put together a decent run of results in FM10.

That's my whole point! I'm saying you shouldn't have to but it seems like you do. I don't think I'm alone in that opinion either.

If the business of tactics wasn't more complex, with actions and consequences ad infinitum, why is the tactical bible so goddam huge. It's truly exceptionaly work btw but how many teenagers can be bothered? Isn't the game losing touch with some of its audience?

Like I've said elsewhere I wouldn't mind spending some time to truly adjust my tactics/approach for half a dozen big games a year but it seems like if I don't take account of how wide Wigan play I get punished by the ME.

The ME must take account of tactics/approach/formation/player stats and much more in order to calculate who wins a game. I think the balance or importance given to the tactics and approach as against the players is too much.

That's a really good post there.

There's this United v. Wigan example going around in this and the other thread, and I think it's an interesting one.

Lincoln says that United wouldn't need to make changes to their normal gameplan to play against Wigan, Millie says they would, even if only minor changes.

I'm with Lincoln on this one. I understand that Wigan are decent PL outfit and a professional team, but this is where the players' ability AND intelligence should be taken into account.

They see themselves what's happening around them, they'll try to adapt, they don't need their manager to tell them: "they're packing the defence, so play wider to get 'round them".

In my opinion (though you may not agree Millie) it is such basics that the players will figure it out on their own.

[Lincoln Imp2]

Like I said before - FM is a simulation of football game,required football skills.

If I play any basketball simulation I will fall in the second,just becouse I don't understand basketball game.

To to have any decent succes in FM you must be football/tactical knowledgable.

You're right cagiva - its a football simulation. Not real life.

And there is a big difference between having some football and tactical knowledge and understanding the delicate balance of sliders.

I think you are being a bit of "football snob" here. Thousands of fans go to watch football because they love it it without having to understand how closing down three yards further up the pitch or playing with slightly shorter passing range would make a crucial difference.

Doesn't mean they are any less worthy of the game.

...and finally I'd love to see your comments used by FM in their future marketing campaign. "To enjoy this game you must be tactically knowledgable or you won't enjoy it and you shouldn't buy it."

Perhaps they should take the same approach with other games. "Laura Croft - don't buy it unless you can actually shoot pistols while cart-wheeling - otherwise it's rubbish"......."Dungeons and Dragons - a waste of time unless you've studied magic for 20 years and understand the combat behaviour of an orc".

[Millie]

Millie - I realise your are not saying you have to individually adjust slider for each game. I'm saying it!. I'm saying because, in my experience, that is what you need to do to put together a decent run of results in FM10.

It may seem like you have to do this - but I'm telling you that you don't. This is what I'm driving at. You don't need to make these changes all the time even if it seems sometimes like you do. My whole point is that there needs to be more clarity in the game to show people this.

That's my whole point! I'm saying you shouldn't have to but it seems like you do. I don't think I'm alone in that opinion either.

I completely agree. A lot of people are under this misconception.

If the business of tactics wasn't more complex, with actions and consequences ad infinitum, why is the tactical bible so goddam huge. It's truly exceptionaly work btw but how many teenagers can be bothered? Isn't the game losing touch with some of its audience?

There are a lot of things that have a lot of variables, but this doesn't necessarily therefore mean that basic concepts aren't pretty easy to pick up with practice. The problem here is that football is subjective. There are general things you can do, which are not overly complex, to identify and attempt to fix a problem. The higher levels of complexity come when you attempt to solve all minute problems in all possible situations at all possible times.

If you think more generally - i.e. what is the basic problem here? I'm getting hammered down the middle. OK, I'll play narrower.

Now a full explanation of everything which is possible to do would take hours. But that doesn't make the game totally complex and unmanageable. The thing is, that with a good team you will only have to make simple adjustments like this, perhaps only once or twice a game (perhaps never if everything works well). But, for a smaller team, you will have to do more micromanagement.

This is as true in FM as it is in real life. But, because this is all subjective there is no "right" answer. Everything that is in Tactical Theorems '10 is designed for people that have very little background in FM and/or in real football. Length does not equal complexity.

Like I've said elsewhere I wouldn't mind spending some time to truly adjust my tactics/approach for half a dozen big games a year but it seems like if I don't take account of how wide Wigan play I get punished by the ME.

The ME must take account of tactics/approach/formation/player stats and much more in order to calculate who wins a game. I think the balance or importance given to the tactics and approach as against the players is too much.

But again - what I'm saying is that as Manchester United if you have a decent plan you SHOULD only have to radically change something once every couple of game months. But that is not the same as taking the decision to sit on a lead, go for another goal or wind down the clock. All of these decisions are made by football managers. They're not (necessarily) complex, made by studying hours of footage, but pretty basic things like "Wigan are attacking now, we're two-nil up, perhaps we should tighten up a bit". In FM, that's "we're being attacked, switch to a different strategy". Not complex, and not time consuming.

Should players use more common sense? I definitely think they should. But I wonder sometimes how much "common sense" a collective of 11 players can have. Not because they lack inteligence, but they lack the ability to co-ordinate as a collective with no designated leader watching from without the game. Otherwise, Fergie would just sit down quietly on his bench and watch the wins unfold.

The failing in the game right now is that it is very poor at giving proper feedback to people, or at the very least is poor at giving that information directly to people and showing them how to interpret the data in front of them. But, yet again, that does not necessarily mean that this has to be time consuming or complex.

[Lincoln Imp2]

It may seem like you have to do this - but I'm telling you that you don't. This is what I'm driving at. You don't need to make these changes all the time even if it seems sometimes like you do. My whole point is that there needs to be more clarity in the game to show people this.

Thanks Millie for yet another considered response. I respect your opinion because you undoubtedly understand this game and its mechanics more than I. That said you can tell me I don't need to tweak for every game and it only seems like it but if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck....!!

If I don't tweak often I lose often - that's the basic truth. If I tweak more often I lose less often.

Bottom line is it's probably my tactics that are rubbish - but thankfully no-one has descended into pointing that out to me and for that I'm thankful.

I think at the route of my struggle with this version is that I'm slowly beginning to realise that I'm falling out of love with a game that has been part of my life for longer than most marriages - and it's upsetting me.

Is it my fault, is it her fault or has time just changed us both..either way I realise there's nothing going to replace her in my affections and I'll end up sad and lonely in a bedsit eating cold beans and watching re-runs of The Sweeney...oh how I miss those days when she was an uncomplicated and fun CM without demands, stress and arguments...cue the violins...!!

[cagiva]

Lincoln, could you ,please, answer to me how can you enjoy FM if you don't possess even a bit of football tactic/knowlegde ?

Or in other words - how can I enjoy a tennis/basketball simulation if I don't even know what is tennis/basketball ?

FM become more complex and with great detailed just because real-life football is pretty much that. Football is not simple game. Football required many skills and knowledge ,if you wan't to be sucessfull manager.

And definetely SI's approach is the right one - if some one 13-years old teenager doesn't know even the basic aspect of the football,he shouldn't have any succes within FM. And that is the right approach. If somebody who lacks completely any football knowledge have even small succes in FM then the game is pretty much crap.

For my personall hapiness this is not the case.

[Lincoln Imp2]

Lincoln, could you ,please, answer to me how can you enjoy FM if you don't possess even a bit of football tactic/knowlegde ?

Or in other words - how can I enjoy a tennis/basketball simulation if I don't even know what is tennis/basketball ?

FM become more complex and with great detailed just because real-life football is pretty much that. Football is not simple game. Football required many skills and knowledge ,if you wan't to be sucessfull manager.

And definetely SI's approach is the right one - if some one 13-years old teenager doesn't know even the basic aspect of the football,he shouldn't have any succes within FM. And that is the right approach. If somebody who lacks completely any football knowledge have even small succes in FM then the game is pretty much crap.

For my personall hapiness this is not the case.

Oh dear.....well let's not let people learn to enjoy a football manager game unless they are already experts then. In fact why not say you have to show your FA coaches badges in order to purchase a copy!

You don't seem to understand my point - I'm NOT saying you shouldn't need a BIT of football knowledge - it's the LEVEL of knowledge required that we are debating. If you are not interested in football "a bit" you won't buy it anyway.

Apply your reasoning and we should simply stop letting anyone try anything unless they are already good at it. I suppose you were a tactical genius at 12 and were self-taught in maths, english, history, PE and grammar!

What other computer games do you play may I ask?

[cagiva]

What other computer games do you play may I ask?

Nothing,just FM.

May be it's time that I must silence,and step aside.

[ZdlR]

The new tactics creator – is this the death of downloaded tactics?

When I loaded up the tactics forum this morning, the top five non-sticky threads were all created tactics available for download. So, no, downloaded tactics are very much alive!

[Millie]

When I loaded up the tactics forum this morning, the top five non-sticky threads were all created tactics available for download. So, no, downloaded tactics are very much alive!

I know.

[higgins]

When I loaded up the tactics forum this morning, the top five non-sticky threads were all created tactics available for download. So, no, downloaded tactics are very much alive!

Yep, but with very poor results, cause it seems a bit strange to me that someone needs to download a tactic just to win something with Liverpool, Chelsea or Manchester United.

A very basic, balanced 4-4-2 could do the job for you.

The funny thing is that people downloading tactics are always the same, they do that in a compulsive manner (a new day? there must be a new tactic to download!), without wondering about why a tactic works in some scenarios and not in other situations.

I think that if you're not interested in tactic building, maybe FM is not the right game for you, if you don't have some time to waste, again this is not the game for you.

This might sound a bit harsh but it's true.

Every strategy game is time consuming, I was used to be an avid computer war games player, and they were very time consuming.

I've been playing this game since 15 years, more or less, of course when I was younger I had more time, but you don't have to restart from scratch for every new version of the game, just add some new knowledge, nothing so impressive.

Regarding the problem of managing a top team and still being obliged to tweak your tactic for every match, I could say that if you're able to build a balanced tactic, you won't be obliged to do such a thing, only very unbalanced tactic (or if you play with a weak side) needs to be heavily tweaked from match to match.

[shakeable]

Any news on when the next episode will be released?

[Millie]

Any news on when the next episode will be released?

Today, in couple of hours.

[Millie]

GetSacked! is back the Football Manager tactics podcast from FM-Britain. We answer your questions about everything FM related, including:

• Has the new tactics creator made the game harder? – now it’s much easier to create tactics, is reading the match engine now more important than ever?
  
• Defending – how do you go about plugging those leaks in your defence?
  
• And that pesky AI – how can you tell whether it’s attacking or defending?
  

Plus, we discuss real life football and how it relates to the game, answer more of your questions in the quick-hits section, and general footballing goodness. All on GetSacked! The Football Manager Tactics Podcast.

Listen to the show right now!

Send your questions to us via:

• Twitter @FMBritain
  
• Our Facebook page
  
• Our e-mail inbox – thinktank@fm-britain.co.uk

And we also keep track of the goings on in the various scene forums!

With thanks, as ever, to those who submitted the questions for this week: SFraser, @tomedeira, @Bonus_Mosher, James Gary Wibberley, J’Vaughn Jacobs Esq., Andrew Oppong, ZdlR, vasilli07, Beardeye, @ObtuseMusings

[Beardeye]

Thanks Millie and The Next Diaby for the second podcast, and for answering my question. I like the format and think it is a good way for you to express your views and give advice. It compliments the forums well.

As a future suggestion, I would welcome your earlier idea of a videocast which illustrated your points in an actual FM game (or even screenshots).

for example, you mentioned that if you see a team playing deep you would push up your defensive line to pressure the midfield and attack but not push up so high that there was a big gap behind your own defence.

could you use a video or screenshots to point out the key indicators on this: i.e

1- how to spot that that the AI is playing deep- and where they are creating space

2- what level you would then push up to- and illustrate the effects on the oppositions space/time on the ball.

3- how to tell if you have pushed up too far, leaving too big a gap behind, and how you would fix this.

Similarly- you could provide examples of how to combat the AI strikers or wingers which are causing you problems (again mentioned in second podcast) by:

1- an example of how a winger/striker got behind your defence

2- the action you took to counter this- i.e how to cut off his supply, or the specific OI you used on the opposition player to reduce the threat.

Now i know this sounds like spoonfeeding (and it is), but I, for one, would find it extremely helpful. And anyway a few videos and screenshots of how to read the match engine is not going to provide a "win button"- there are still so many other factors needed for success.

Thanks again for the podcast- there was good advice on it which I will certainly take on board.

[SFraser]

Great podcast, and thank you for answering my question. It is always good to hear the opinions of the highly respected members from FM-Britain.

If that doesn't butter you up to answer my next question then I don't know what will

The next question I have is something I have been wondering a lot about recently. Football Manager is a game that is released every season and relies upon it's reputation for accuracy and simulation.

My question is:

Q. How well do you think Football Manager has done and is doing to replicate or simulate or otherwise engage it's users in the tactical trends we have seen in top level football like the Champions League, La Liga and the Premier League over the past few seasons, particularly when considering the performances and positions of players like Messi and Ronaldo, Ibrahimovic and Tevez, Eto'o and Rooney? Do you think FM is capable of simulating the hugely fascinating tactical battle between False 9's, Winger Strikers, Defensive Wingers and Holding Midfielders?

And one other question that would most certainly fascinate me if you could deal with it:

Q: Ancelotti had a supremely excellent team in the European Cup with Milan 3-4 years ago, with a brilliant formation utilising the peerless Kaka. He seems to have reverted to type at Chelsea with the diamond midfield while Ferguson looks like taking his Barcelona lesson and developing a modern day WM around Giggs, Rooney, Owen/Berbatov and Evra and Valencia. What do you think of their tactics in light of recent trends? And how would you evaluate European Football given that Ronaldo, Benzema, Alonso and Kaka now play for Real Madrid while Ancelotti has made his way to Chelsea?

There may have been a couple more questions sneaked in there than I let on, but I hope you don't mind.