FM 14: Sliders gone, thoughts?

[milnerpoint]

You obviously like the new system, which is great! I'm not dead set on this being the wrong way to go, so I was wondering if you have had any ideas about how you would develop the current system over the next few years? I don't know if you read my tactical assessment idea, but would you be for or against some kind of screen which gave the user some greater idea of how their tactic is likely to work BEFORE actually seeing it in a match? For me this would solve the problem of not really knowing what I have told my players to do.

There is no real way to predict exactly how your tactic will play out, because there are too many variables. You should have an idea of what your hoping to achieve by the way you have set your team up, from there you have to make real time decisions based on the outcome of the match. You could have what seems to be a perfect set up pre match, that turns to nothing come the game because of events within the game.

I dont have any issues with no knowing what im asking my players to do, its more simple than its ever been to know what im asking them. Im not asking my left back to sit at 7 for attacking, whilst having my left back sit at 6. That makes less sense than anything, because you cannot equate what 6 or 7 means in real terms, and you certainly had no further clue as to how your team would perform when it was like that, unless you had exact knowledge of what each number on the slider did, as far as im aware, no one ever had that.

[Fond Foat]

"You could pick a number of roles to shut down the DM and also drift" is not an answer, you have to say which roles do I have to use, how I can do that in the game.

This is what I was alluding to. It requires a shift of thinking. Your approach is decided by what you want to do, and how you use the roles and instructions to get the player and the team to play your way without thinking in terms of notches on a slider.

It is not what should I pick if I have scenario A. The reason you are not being told to choose this role and use this shout is because there are many different ways to achieve the same thing. It is new way to approach the game for those who are used to sliders.

I just want add, I don't think anyone has said that sliders are the tools of the devil, just that this new system is intuitive, exciting, and will allow for future development. As I said, it just seems people are being stubborn and nearly all points raised have been well responded to by people far wiser about the game than me.

[YKW]

There is no real way to predict exactly how your tactic will play out

I never said there was, and that wasn't my suggestion. You do understand the concept of 'chance' yes?

because there are too many variables. You should have an idea of what your hoping to achieve by the way you have set your team up, from there you have to make real time decisions based on the outcome of the match. You could have what seems to be a perfect set up pre match, that turns to nothing come the game because of events within the game.

I dont have any issues with no knowing what im asking my players to do, its more simple than its ever been to know what im asking them. Im not asking my left back to sit at 7 for attacking, whilst having my left back sit at 6. That makes less sense than anything, because you cannot equate what 6 or 7 means in real terms, and you certainly had no further clue as to how your team would perform when it was like that, unless you had exact knowledge of what each number on the slider did, as far as im aware, no one ever had that.

Any chance you could, for once, express your point without referencing sliders? You have done so in your last two posts to me despite the fact that I have said more than once I don't think they are realistic and that I'm not asking for them back.

So just to confirm (because you were hugely indirect with your answers) you would be against some kind of screen which gave the user a greater idea of how their tactic is likely to work before actually seeing it in a match? Is that because you think it is unnecessary? Or because you think it would be too much help?

Regardless of any other possible system (I mean sliders, so please don't talk in terms of them if you can avoid it), do you think the current system is realistic? Personally I think not, for the reason that in no situation is a manager less than 100% certain about the instructions he has given. The current system doesn't replicate this, and the recently confirmed fact that different players will interpret different roles in different ways further complicates matters. Do you disagree with this?

Finally, you don't have any ideas about how you would like the current system to develop? Not sure if you didn't see the question, just ignored it, or just didn't have any ideas.

[Da_Funk]

1) What is it exactly you want you player to do, apart from shut down the DMF and drift laterally? That is the information I'm asking from you, not the game. It's a pretty straight question. It's a basic question I ask when I set up any shape/style/role

And I've already answered.

So what is he supposed to do when he drifts? Exploit space with forward runs? Receive the ball and dribble aiming at the flank? Go for crosses? Make few touches and cutting back inside to shot? Something that maybe you can already do in FM or maybe not?

2) Have you actually used at high energy player in a treq role? the role does not have no defensive duties, but significantly less. But a high energy player interprets it differently, like I said you can actually get someone (I did it with Rooney) playing the treq role and putting a good defensive shift in. It's just not an optimum thing to do

How in the hell do you end suggesting me the "least defensive" role of the list, the one with probably "less pressing than everyone else"? Do you realize it the paradox?

You're suggesting Trequartista just because it's the only one that maybe can move laterally, and even you don't even know how if that's 100% correct. In fact

Actually, you are wrong on this, that is an answer, because your current brief on what you want him to do is very broad ( drift and shut down the DM = close down/mark the DMC + move into channels, perhaps some roaming, and of course have a look at the player im using).

Actually, I'm not wrong on this as move into channels and "some roaming" is not an answer and my description is not broad.

My description is not broad because I stated that I want the player to focus on the middle-left side while attacking. The simpliest thing a manager can ask to his AMF. I didn't add complicate things like waiting for fb overlap, or playing short looking for one-two, or looking for his option the striker with killer through balls...none of this.

Any "roaming" or "move into channels" don't do this. It simply gives a general roaming option that is different from what I asked and probably roam from position decreases his defensive awareness. If you activate it you have no idea of what the player range is.

[davidbowie]

Yet another list in the dumbing down of this game to make it casual friendly.

FM is dead.

Long live Casual Football Manager 2014.

[milnerpoint]

I never said there was, and that wasn't my suggestion. You do understand the concept of 'chance' yes?

Any chance you could, for once, express your point without referencing sliders? You have done so in your last two posts to me despite the fact that I have said more than once I don't think they are realistic and that I'm not asking for them back.

So just to confirm (because you were hugely indirect with your answers) you would be against some kind of screen which gave the user a greater idea of how their tactic is likely to work before actually seeing it in a match? Is that because you think it is unnecessary? Or because you think it would be too much help?

Regardless of any other possible system (I mean sliders, so please don't talk in terms of them if you can avoid it), do you think the current system is realistic? Personally I think not, for the reason that in no situation is a manager less than 100% certain about the instructions he has given. The current system doesn't replicate this, and the recently confirmed fact that different players will interpret different roles in different ways further complicates matters. Do you disagree with this?

Finally, you don't have any ideas about how you would like the current system to develop? Not sure if you didn't see the question, just ignored it, or just didn't have any ideas.

Yes i understand the concept of chance, which is what we have now, you have the chance that your team will play exactly as you want, or there is a chance they wont. The better players you have, the better chance they will follows your instructions closely, the worse the opposition, the better chance you will have of winning.

I dont see any reason for a screen to outline what your tactic is suppose to be doing, because the info is already there. I can tell from the tactics screen what kind of passing i want my team to employ, how much pressing they will do ect, what do you think is missing from this screen that you would like to see added?

I am certain what instructions i have given my players through the roles i have set and the player instructions i have set. For example i know i have set Ozil to play as an advanced playmaker, with the added instructions of roaming from his position and playing short passes when possible. I therefor know, he will be the main focal point of my attacking play, he will drift around looking for spaces, he will try and play short passes to team mates if suitable, he will also drive at defenses because of his dribbling ability, and i know he will get himself into scoring positions on a regular basis because of where he plays, and how i have asked him to play. What more would i need to know? Again, what do you feel is missing? Different players have always reacted differently based on their attributes, its up to you as a manager to figure out exactly how to get the best out of a player at all times, i dont think the game needs to do much more to help you get this.

Id like to see us be able to swap more players with each other, id like my 3 attacking mids to be interchangeable with each other when appropriate, so thats defintely something id like to see improved, id also like a more obvious way of playing specific passes for a striker, although it can be achieved now, it def could be expanded on. But the single most important improvement to me would be how the AI handles things, i want a challenge, i want the AI countering what im doing more often, i want the AI to come up with a way of beating my system so i have to adapt more, which hopefully can happen now with this change.

There is no need to turn this into an argument between us, we're having a good discussion, lets keep it this way.

[Da_Funk]

This is what I was alluding to. It requires a shift of thinking. Your approach is decided by what you want to do, and how you use the roles and instructions to get the player and the team to play your way without thinking in terms of notches on a slider.

It is not what should I pick if I have scenario A. The reason you are not being told to choose this role and use this shout is because there are many different ways to achieve the same thing. It is new way to approach the game for those who are used to sliders.

It's not a matter of shift thinking. If you can say "You could pick a number of roles to shut down the DM and also drift", you can also name every role (plural) that satisfy my request. You actually can't make one. Because if you say that in order to mark a DM and drift you're giving me one (and only one!) role (which is by the way just a setting, and only one) and this role is the less defensive oriented, can you admit that maybe, maybe, the system is a little too rigid in how is implemented and even the "football concept idea to use in TC" is not as clear and useful as it seems? It's not me needing to change thinking or unable to adapt. You're telling me to use the least defensive role in the list in order to mark a player.

[milnerpoint]

Well how many teams man mark a deep lying midfielder? Secondly, how many players playing in an attacking mid position are suited to man marking a player? Thirdly, you could set one of your midfielders to man mark if set up properly, or you can position someone with defensive attributes in an attacking mid role if you really wanted too. Like madsheep says, it can be done with a trequista if its set up to work that way, why cant you understand this?

Tell me tho, how did you achieve this with the old system? How did you get an attacking minded player to succesfully man mark a deep lying mid?

[themadsheep2001]

And I've already answered.

How in the hell do you end suggesting me the "least defensive" role of the list, the one with probably "less pressing than everyone else"? Do you realize it the paradox?

You're suggesting Trequartista just because it's the only one that maybe can move laterally, and even you don't even know how if that's 100% correct. In fact

Actually, I'm not wrong on this as move into channels and "some roaming" is not an answer and my description is not broad.

My description is not broad because I stated that I want the player to focus on the middle-left side while attacking. The simpliest thing a manager can ask to his AMF. I didn't add complicate things like waiting for fb overlap, or playing short looking for one-two, or looking for his option the striker with killer through balls...none of this.

Any "roaming" or "move into channels" don't do this. It simply gives a general roaming option that is different from what I asked and probably roam from position decreases his defensive awareness. If you activate it you have no idea of what the player range is.

So what is he supposed to do when he drifts? Exploit space with forward runs? Receive the ball and dribble aiming at the flank? Go for crosses? Make few touches and cutting back inside to shot? Something that maybe you can already do in FM or maybe not?

Again what do you want him do to? be a more of a creator, or drive at goal? instruct him in that manner using the roles. I personally used him to drift, link and drive at goal, while having my left player cut inside, so my central amc often ends up out of the left.

How in the hell do you end suggesting me the "least defensive" role of the list, the one with probably "less pressing than everyone else"? Do you realize it the paradox?

You're suggesting Trequartista just because it's the only one that maybe can move laterally, and even you don't even know how if that's 100% correct. In fact

I didn't suggest anything, I just asked if you has ever used one. I gave you an example of a player who interprets a role different to what you would expect. Its the least defensive, yet I could get Rooney doing a defensive shift. It's an example of what Cleon and I have been about how a player can interpret something differently.

Shutting down the DMC is only one facet.

Actually, I'm not wrong on this as move into channels and "some roaming" is not an answer and my description is not broad.

My description is not broad because I stated that I want the player to focus on the middle-left side while attacking. The simpliest thing a manager can ask to his AMF. I didn't add complicate things like waiting for fb overlap, or playing short looking for one-two, or looking for his option the striker with killer through balls...none of this.

Any "roaming" or "move into channels" don't do this. It simply gives a general roaming option that is different from what I asked and probably roam from position decreases his defensive awareness. If you activate it you have no idea of what the player range is

If you want him to drift left more, give him the instructions to drift/roam, and leave more space for him to drift into the space. Having a specific instruction would be nice (something for the future?) But that's neither here nor there in the slider debate.

[themadsheep2001]

It's not a matter of shift thinking. If you can say "You could pick a number of roles to shut down the DM and also drift", you can also name every role (plural) that satisfy my request. You actually can't make one. Because if you say that in order to mark a DM and drift you're giving me one (and only one!) role (which is by the way just a setting, and only one) and this role is the less defensive oriented, can you admit that maybe, maybe, the system is a little too rigid in how is implemented and even the "football concept idea to use in TC" is not as clear and useful as it seems? It's not me needing to change thinking or unable to adapt. You're telling me to use the least defensive role in the list in order to mark a player.

You do realise I never once told you to use a treq, right? I also explicitly said you could use a number of roles, since a number of these could be instructed to do it, while also doing another different job as well. I could do it with a playmaker or a shadow striker. what would make my final decision would be what else I wanted that role to do.

Shutting down the DMC is only one facet.

By the way, the treq isn't the only role that can move laterally. When you instruct a player to move into channels, you are asking him to try and drift laterally

[HaydarAli]

I've posted 2 threads in which I address the issue of a lack of the default instructions in FM14. For those who are interested to read them you can do it by clicking here.

I really think that the improvement of the Match Engine should be the main priority of SI Developers.

That beeing said, I'd like to ask a few questions for the SI Developers:

1. What was the real reason for removing the sliders?
   
2. Considering the fact that the ME of FM14 is not a complete new version, but an improved version of FM13's ME, and therefore can we conclude that sliders are still availlable in the background?
   
3. Default instructions are untweakable in FM14: is there a correlation between the fact that default instructions are untweakable and the addition of 8 new roles?
   
4. Are the default instructions untweakable to avoid the emergence of bugs that could not be fixed?
   Or, in other words because the AI couldn't defend against or adapt to those minor tweaks, resulting in the emergence of the so-called super-tactics?
   
5. Why don't we have a little bit more explanations - in football terminology - of the default instructions for a better interpretation?

Thank you in advance.

[YKW]

There is no need to turn this into an argument between us, we're having a good discussion, lets keep it this way.

Of course.

Yes i understand the concept of chance, which is what we have now, you have the chance that your team will play exactly as you want, or there is a chance they wont. The better players you have, the better chance they will follows your instructions closely, the worse the opposition, the better chance you will have of winning.

Ok great (apart from your second example which is wrong, but forget that). So to relate that back to my idea, can you see now how it isn't about "predicting exactly how the tactic will play out," but about using the concept of chance to asses a tactic? Take 2 identical formations and tactics and then for one set the AMR as a defensive winger D and the other as a winger A. Isn't it fair to say, assuming the same player was to play in both formations, that there is more chance of the defensive winger getting a yellow card? Anything COULD happen, but the chance has changed. To use a more extreme example, who has more CHANCE of getting an assist, a goalkeeper or an AM?

I'm not sure a system based on highly subjective terminology can work without one of a) detailed descriptions of the roles and their relationship to one another; or b) something like the idea above. a) isn't really more fun at all, so I would plump for b).

I dont see any reason for a screen to outline what your tactic is suppose to be doing, because the info is already there. I can tell from the tactics screen what kind of passing i want my team to employ, how much pressing they will do ect, what do you think is missing from this screen that you would like to see added?

Yes you can see these things, and players as in-tune with the system as you are may very well be able to conceptualise their tactic in action at the creation stage. However, for some of us many of the subtleties of the system are either learned and told (use one defensive role in midfield) or just arise out of "aha" moments (for me, the link between pressing and height of the d-line for example.) I have actually made many mistakes like that which when considered in terms of real football seemed ridiculous errors to make.

In terms of what is missing, some kind of indicator of the chances that your tactics are likely to create? For example if you are deploying a lone striker as a deep lying forward support, then he is more likely to be playing through balls in on goal rather than receiving them in that same area. If he is playing in wingers then perhaps it will be a lot of crosses converted. Another example would be playing with a rigid defensive 4-5-1 with wingers that held up the ball. You could do this to win a lot of corners (and throw ins if you have the throwers) so subsequently this would be a good source of goals for you.

Could it be represented by highlighting pitch areas in terms of attacking and defensive danger? Or imposing arrows onto it to show likely passing direction? Highlighting players in terms of where the burden of goalscoring of assisting is likely to lie?

Other benefits of this system would be that you could build teams around certain players more easily and clearly. Have a player with good long shots? Modify your tactic so that his position has a high chance (otbe) of getting the chance to shoot from distance. I may achieve this by moving him deeper, or changing his role etc, but the end result (which is the important thing to me as manager) would be clear, and I would have feedback on whether or not I was doing my part to achieve it. (It may later occur that the player I envisioned for the role cannot do it, or that the opposition close him down too soon etc, but at least I am clear that at least in theory my base tactic is set up correctly to achieve my goal.)

I am certain what instructions i have given my players through the roles i have set and the player instructions i have set. For example i know i have set Ozil to play as an advanced playmaker, with the added instructions of roaming from his position and playing short passes when possible. I therefor know, he will be the main focal point of my attacking play, he will drift around looking for spaces, he will try and play short passes to team mates if suitable, he will also drive at defenses because of his dribbling ability, and i know he will get himself into scoring positions on a regular basis because of where he plays, and how i have asked him to play. What more would i need to know? Again, what do you feel is missing? Different players have always reacted differently based on their attributes, its up to you as a manager to figure out exactly how to get the best out of a player at all times, i dont think the game needs to do much more to help you get this.

Firstly, yes you are certain about what role and duty you have given him, but NOT about what the role or duty actually does. It is possible to have a feel for this, for example through watching the matches and reading the description, so I am in no way in suggesting this is a game killer, but to say that you are certain what instructions you have given your players is wrong, because you are only making (logical) inferences, NOT knowing. I don't think it is about what you NEED to know, but about what you want to know, or want to instruct. Do you not agree that a RL manager knows to a much greater extent his player instructions? For example specifically where to try and receive the ball, or specifically which players to try and find? Even in as much detail as "when player x receives the ball in this area I want you to go here." Or do you think a manager tells a player to be a limited full back and just assumes that was the instruction he wanted?

Id like to see us be able to swap more players with each other, id like my 3 attacking mids to be interchangeable with each other when appropriate, so thats defintely something id like to see improved, id also like a more obvious way of playing specific passes for a striker, although it can be achieved now, it def could be expanded on. But the single most important improvement to me would be how the AI handles things, i want a challenge, i want the AI countering what im doing more often, i want the AI to come up with a way of beating my system so i have to adapt more, which hopefully can happen now with this change.

Yes, I definitely agree that a level playing field for AI teams is a major benefit of the changes.

In summary, I have no problem with whatever the inputs are for me to use as the manager, but if they are going to vague (which is not realistic) then there needs to be some way of measuring the output beyond seeing it in a match where all the other factors already discussed are blurring your view.

[YKW]

Well how many teams man mark a deep lying midfielder? Secondly, how many players playing in an attacking mid position are suited to man marking a player? Thirdly, you could set one of your midfielders to man mark if set up properly, or you can position someone with defensive attributes in an attacking mid role if you really wanted too. Like madsheep says, it can be done with a trequista if its set up to work that way, why cant you understand this?

Tell me tho, how did you achieve this with the old system? How did you get an attacking minded player to succesfully man mark a deep lying mid?

Actually lots, it's a frequent tactic and I would wager you will probably see it over this weekend of football. I will personally keep an eye out for it to reference. For a lot of teams, the deepest CM is cruical in retaining possession. Often they don't have any tekkers, and just keep play ticking over, always making themselves available. They also usually play the ball from side to side, to widen the pitch for the better players. You can ruin the tempo of the team by shutting this man down, if that's how they play.

The second question I have a good example for. Marking this DM is an entirely different style of marking to the sort that a CB is likely to employ, it is less about tackling and being stronger and more about blocking this player as a passing option. I believe the match I am thinking of is Spurs away at Chelsea, 0-0 when Mourinho first made his "parking the bus" comment. If my memory serves me right, Aaron Lennon played centrally that day and man marked Essien out of the game. Perhaps its a different match, but Jol played Lennon in the center on 2 or 3 occasions, and his role was usually to shut down the DM, just as described.

[Da_Funk]

Well how many teams man mark a deep lying midfielder?

Only mine. And only against you.

Secondly, how many players playing in an attacking mid position are suited to man marking a player?

It's not impossible, but at any level you can find someone to suit that role. And not necessary excellent on both defending AND attacking.

It's not that I want to transform a player named Bale from WB to ST. It's a proper tactical implementation for a position.

Like madsheep says, it can be done with a trequista if its set up to work that way, why cant you understand this?

Because it's not that in order to do this I need Rooney, which can basically play well in every role because he has everything >15

And because in terms of football terms/concept, the Trequartista as described can't do that. You're telling me with descriptions and similar.

A user while on the Tactic Screen reads the various role and the last thing he can think of as the correct answer is to set Trequartista. The last thing. If he want to put pressure while off the ball that's the last role to use. And he doesn't know much of the difference about the others available. I don't know the different kind of closing down of the various roles, for example. How many different midfielders role are there? How different is their closing down? How can I decide at first which one is more suiting?

Shall we make a game like "list now the midfielder roles sorted by pressing" and see how different they are?

Tell me tho, how did you achieve this with the old system? How did you get an attacking minded player to succesfully man mark a deep lying mid?

Low mentality and high pressing with man marking.

You do realise I never once told you to use a treq, right?

I'm referring to everyone participating and giving these kind of suggestions, sorry if I mess up with quote. It's a general you to who likes to give a contribute.

If you want him to drift left more, give him the instructions to drift/roam, and leave more space for him to drift into the space. Having a specific instruction would be nice (something for the future?) But that's neither here nor there in the slider debate.

What kind of slider debate do you want? It's not that you're waiting someone who makes you decide to bring back sliders because they were simply the best with all his arguments. SI's already made his decision and you'll shut it down immediately. It's all about what you could/couldn't do and what you can/can't do actually.

Now you've seen that maybe, maybe, there's a lack in what instructions you can give to a player, like where to roam or in which area/side he should focus at first (spoiler alert: this is a mine field where arrows from the last century are hidden) and it's not micromanagement. Knowing which between two roles have more closing down and are more defensive aware is not wanting to know the exact slider value. If I put "press more" to my Trequartista does he press like/more/less than a default Advanced Playmaker or other roles?

In a 4-3-2-1 I could instruct my 2 AMF to focus on the right and on the left, or one on moving up to the center while the striker moves laterally (maybe only on one side).

It's natural to me to think in these terms when building a team, I can't understand why this is not so obvious to you.

By the way, the treq isn't the only role that can move laterally. When you instruct a player to move into channels, you are asking him to try and drift laterally

So I can make an Enganche or Advanced Playmaker move laterally with move into channels? What's the difference between them if I use these role from a defensive point of view?

[themadsheep2001]

So I can make an Enganche or Advanced Playmaker move laterally with move into channels? What's the difference between them if I use these role from a defensive point of view?

Not at home, so forgive me if I'm wrong. The Advanced PM will generally close down more (relative to the mentality and fluidity). That's why I said it was broad, because you could say, do it with an AM or a SS. It was the other stuff you might want the role to do that, that would shape which of these roles you use as a base.

Now you've seen that maybe, maybe, there's a lack in what instructions you can give to a player, like where to roam or in which area/side he should focus at first (spoiler alert: this is a mine field where arrows from the last century are hidden) and it's not micromanagement.

This is a different focus entirely, something that needed to be focused on regardless of sliders/no sliders (this thread was about no sliders, hence my point before about it not being here or there). Worthy of its own thread tbh. I would love to be able to tell a player to drift left/right. Right now I can encourage it by opening up space, but its something to be looked at.

[Da_Funk]

Not at home, so forgive me if I'm wrong. The Advanced PM will generally close down more (relative to the mentality and fluidity).

No need to be forgiven, don't worry.

This is the advantage of a system where the you can tweak the different aspect of a role/position/player manually (or maybe to build yourself a role). You don't have to remember all the descriptions of every role by memory if you're not at home (joking ) and you're less tied between some sort of paradoxes a macro system/layer can lead to. The system lets you set the different instructions you're giving, just like when you talk to a player, you give different instructions on different topics and the on the pitch you have the role you gave him. I'm not against all this new system, after all it is some sort of fresh air, but when I choose a role and duty I'm suppose to know the differences in passing/pressing/moving/others of another role with some degree.

Ok, assume you're right and Advanced PM might have the components (close down and similar) I need. Why does my player need to be a playmaker? Does the player needs to be necessary a playmaker (with all the consequence that feature brings) if I don't want to? This is the "limitation" sometimes someone argue to. Is it just an attacking midfielder?

This is a different focus entirely, something that needed to be focused on regardless of sliders/no sliders (this thread was about no sliders, hence my point before about it not being here or there). Worthy of its own thread tbh.

Yes. In a 4-4-2 or 4-2-2-2 the central midfielders can play in a lot of different ways, in terms of movement and pitch zones you assign to them. You can understand that a Deep Lying plays a deeper and an Advanced Something plays ahead, you can understand that a Box to Box is actively in both offensive and defensive phase, but how much and where in relationships of other roles? I don't have so much informations and I can't make a comparison with other roles if I take the Central Midfielder. I can't understand the true difference between an Anchor Man and a Defensive Midfielder on Defense duty, which of these press more or plays deeper? At the same time how can I be sure that a Target Man set in some way is like a Poacher with Target man activated (which is what I want but I need to go through the Target Man role to activate that specific function).

[chelseaboyz]

@RocheBag...Spot on. Sliders for that reason are unrealistic. Now you have to do it really thinking like a manager, creating your own formation and footballing philosophy for your team, creating a style of play based on the players you have but having to set them up with more thought into their player instructions to be merged with the team instructions you can choose.

[dking]

Joined the party a bit late, but after having a quick scan through the thread, am I to believe that sliders are finished and it's now just shouts to control the game? No more classic tactics screen?

If this is the case then it really is the end of an era for me.

[Da_Funk]

Look at the title of the thread. Sliders gone.

[miguelalves]

Sorry, I will just keep insisting that the fact sliders are gone are not a problem. It would all be better if we could just visualize the default player instructions and how they change when applying the team instructions.

[themadsheep2001]

Ok, assume you're right and Advanced PM might have the components (close down and similar) I need. Why does my player need to be a playmaker? Does the player needs to be necessary a playmaker (with all the consequence that feature brings) if I don't want to? This is the "limitation" sometimes someone argue to. Is it just an attacking midfielder?

You can still adjust the aspects of each role.

I'm not sure you are actually reading my posts. It doesn't have to be a playmaker, i simply said you could use one. About 3 times I'v e asked you, what else outside being able to drift (instruct him to move into channels) and close down the DMF (mark and/or instruct him to close the DMF, did you want the AM to do? You then go with whatever would suit what you are wanting them to do.

I use a SS because I use a second striker as alternative point of attack. There is nothing in the new system that limits you from doing this.