Looking at some of FM's new features...

[macca72]

The ME must be calculating failure and success, and this is apparent of course when you look at matches. Now, due to this aspect, it could be influenced by strategies so if a Gamer is (more or less) correct with settings/instructions (strategies) then the calculations will be more in your favor than being uncorrect. Just because you are uncorrect with the strategy it won't mean you will necessarily loose for sure, but will have a more 'random' effect on the degree of success compared to being correct.

If the ME does indeed calculate you're likelyhood of success, and thus what strategy you have the best chance of suceeding with (at least pre-game) then i'd like to understand a bit more about the things that are taken into account, and how / if this is fairly represented anywhere to the human manager

From what I understand (and i could be totally wrong) the pre-match odds are calculated primarily on form & reputation. The issue I have come across is this can mislead you into employing a totally inappropriate approach to the game, which can lead to frustration / "tactic cracking" issues.

How important do we believe this aspect is ? Does the AI take into account the quality of your players ? Should this be ignored entirely?

If the AI bases it's tactical approach to you based on the same parameters, then users will often find that results go the wrong way at the wrong time. You often see people saying that losses have come against "weaker" teams and are probably as a result of going too gung ho, too early.

It would also be good to understand just how important each "major" area of the game is translated into the game. Historically some people have always focussed very heavilyon tactics, maybe now other areas of the game are equally as important (teamtalks / player interaction), but it would be good to get a definative answer on this. Too many times people become very frustrated and automatically default to "it's your tactics" and good tactical thought may get discarded.

If the TC is genuinely the way forward, and the AI & human managers both work within these set boundaries and they are consistently and correctly implemented visually in the ME, then surely you don't need the classic settings at all?.

Sorry, I realise i've cut across a few points all at once there, just throwing down ideas in a good discussion.

[sjm]

According to SI (several years ago) the match is entire calculated for every 1/8th of a second. So there's no "this strategy should win" calculation at the start. Instead, the settings you and the AI have made influence how the game pans out and which calculations take place. Of course, if your strategy is ill-suited to the match, you'll have more things go against you.

The pre-match odds are the game's way of telling you how people in the game world view the upcoming match. It indicates what the media, your players, fans etc. are expecting from the up-coming match, and, most importantly, how the opposing AI manager views their chances. So it will to a certain extent dictate how the AI will approach the game, at least at the start of the match. The odds definitely take into account how your team is doing in the league and at the moment, as well as home and away etc.

As for the importance: tactics have become much less important and have been significantly dumbed down, I think in response to the people who just wanted to plug in a tactic (any tactic) and do OK. Morale seems to be far too important, i.e. you can use the same team and tactics and do terribly if you choose the wrong team talk option and brilliantly if you choose the right team talk option. In fact, you can often tell within about 2-3 minutes of half time whether you are going to take a pounding (they now play like Accrington Stanley) or bounce back (they suddenly play like Brazil). The easiest fix is then to just sub players if you got the talk wrong and give the new players a different team talk when you bring them on. The new players can then change the game for you again if you get the team talk right. I can't help thinking this really really needs to be toned down, as it makes a mockery of the game in the more extreme cases (it's almost "team talk manager 2011"), and relegates tactics to at best a secondary role.

That said, assuming your team talk was OK (as in say 70% of the cases), then you can get that extra bit more out of the team by reacting tactically to the opposition and making the right changes. And obviously the ability of your players is also important, but again much less so than team talks/morale. Get the team talk right, and you'll win more often than not against somewhat better teams (say a league higher than you), although once the players are far superior, there's not much you can do but hope (e.g. BSN vs CH).

Here's hoping that SI get round to improving the tactical side of the game for those who enjoy this bit the most, and give us back the means to get our players to do what we want with less effort. I understand the TC is great for people who just want a tactic that'll do OK, but if you actually want to spend some time developing your own tactics, the interface is as tedious as it always was, and the tactical options at your disposal just get less and less (even if there are more options per se!), e.g. the control you have over player positioning has gone from too much (wibble/wobble) -> about right (attacking/defensive positioning using arrows) -> your players decide where to run with practically no control on your part, and a choice of a single positional slot on the pitch that will make them do sort of what you want. The last case isn't really much progress from the first football manager (i.e. the original from '82)...