Opinion: Football Manager needs to embrace being a "game" or focus on being a realistic management simulator

[RobertPage]

For me, the game is stale, and has been becoming more stale by the year (bought the game every year since FM10 and had 05, 06 and 08 before that). Every year there are a few little things added but rarely do they actually add a new depth to being a club manager and are more a filler for something else to do in the game. The match engine is as dull as ever but often it's pointed out that the statistics are pretty accurate when compared to real life. What  i want to see is this games full mode (not fm touch) go either for being a 100% realistic sim or embrace the fact its a game and offer more of an arcade kinda feeling.

If it was going to be more realistic then it could make for success actually being challenging. Take out all control of transfers and scouting and youth intakes (Pretty much everything a manager doesn't do, that we can do in this game), and replace it all with new communication features with key staff that you work with (Chairman, DOF, Head scouts). This would be massively important for new signings. Having to communicate with head scouts to find the types of player you need. Passing the information on to the DoF to attempt to sign these players and persuading the chairmen to make the money available.

The attributes and personality of these key staff would also hold importance. Being a Newcastle manager would be a tough task for Example. Getting money to improve that squad IRL is known to be a challenge where as with West Ham they're more willing to throw the money about. Also you look at Man United and Liverpool at the moment. Ed Woodward is getting a lot of stick at the moment for being unable to get complete deals for Mourinho's key signings (making his job harder, whereas Michael Edwards at Liverpool has done a superb job of getting most of Klopps key targets (Neither or DoF's i know, but they're the ones in charge of transfers as far as i know).

Also a rework of training and a tactical overhaul would be important. It's insane in this game that you don't have to do anything with training and can leave it to staff at no real disadvantage. Make training important. Make having a training schedule for both the team and players day by day. With tactics, there needs to be more freedom. If the game is going to be a management game, you need to be able to add your own style to the game. Along with this, player styles need to be more obvious and be important to how teams play.

Those are my ideas for a more realistic FM. i think way more could be done and the game could become a great realistic simulator where each job offers a new challenge,  that the game doesn't really offer right now.

If the game was going to be more of an arcade type game then there's even more that could be done. There's a few things especially i'd like to see (one of which gets shot down a lot on these forums). Firstly with the match engine, it could be a lot more free in terms of having to be as realistic as possible. Play styles could be exaggerated (for example, playing passing football you'd see most goals coming from slick, quick, interchanging football). Obviously balancing would still be important to make sure playing a certain way isn't over powered, but not having to worry about realistic statistics so much would allow for the matches to look a lot nicer to watch than they currently do.

Also, with being more relaxed about realism, bringing an owner/chairman mode in this game wouldn't be so much of an issue. 

 

I'm not the most creative person so am not full of ideas but i'm desperate for this game to take up some kind of direction and to move forward. For the first time i'm not going to be buying FM and it sucks. I honestly believe a clear commitment to the direction this game is taking in the future would improve it, rather than being a mix of a realistic manager game and just a manager game, that it currently is. Don't expect everyone to agree with this, but it's a forum and i'm using it to share my opinion. Peace out 

[decapitated]

I respect your opinion, but following your advice would ruin the game for casual fans (who outnumber the hardcore fans considerably) and kill off the franchise in under 5 years. The football manager series is a game first and foremost. It strives for realism but not the expense of being dull, tedious, and alienating non-hardcore fans. 

[forameuss]

While you've put more thought into it than most, I have to disagree.  While it's an incredibly difficult thing for SI to manage, they should always, always, always be balancing between both camps.  The day they pick one side is the beginning of the end for the product.

The rationale for this is the same as for any number of features that have been brought up in the past.  So you've got a product, and you have a fairly finite group of people who would potentially be interested in it.  A newer product has far more potential for growing this group than a more mature one, and FM is a very mature product in this sense.  There are still going to be people out there who could be interested in the product but haven't yet taken the plunge, and there will also be those who have been interested in the past, but lapsed.  That's where SI will likely be concentrating on.  Now, you bring in this new feature/philosophy.  In this case, it's sending the game hard down the road towards, as the OP put it, either a realistic management sim, or a more arcadey game.  Does that decision lead to a boost in people interested in buying the game?  It'll no doubt delight part of the fanbase (half, probably), but it also completely alienates the rest, and given it's such a fundamental change, it likely means they stop buying.  So, why would they do this?

Like I said before though, it's a difficult line to balance.  Personally I've found the game quite bland and tedious in the past couple of editions, much like the OP.  I've barely played 18 at all, and would probably - from a purely personal perspective - prefer it to move to a more fun, fast-paced, less po-faced version.  But I also know that'll never happen, and shouldn't happen, for the above reasons.  

[craiigman]

I do agree that it would be better to pick either game or simulation, but the same can be said about all sports games. It’s about finding a balance.

[craiigman]

I do agree that it would be better to pick either game or simulation, but the same can be said about all sports games. It’s about finding a balance.

[wayne'o]

Iv been away from fm gaming for 5 years and will be getting back into it come  fm19..   reading a thew posts and opinions here and there it appears people are talking about the same problems that I remember going back 10 years..  looking at FM18 compared to FM13 which was my last experience,   It appears the game has changed and looks very different,  Iv seen a lot of buggy scenarios from defenders and goal keepers doing odd things..

When you’ve been playing a game such as Fm for 10 years it’s going to seem a little same o same etc because it’s the same game with tweaks and new implementation of things..

There isn’t another football manager game that comes close to Fm so if football manager games are your thing I still think the game looks great fun..

 

reading between the lines I get a feeling in FM19 training is Getting overhauled, I’m thinking the way we train players may effect how are teams tactics are on match day.,

[masno]

FM should do a "euro truck" approach in the future, having some config that could make the game more arcade (easy tactics,easy training, more unbalanced ME), or more simulated (Real tactics, having to deal with all the training drills, and a ME that try to ressemble real life). Right now, this balance between both is killing the experience for both sides. I've seen casuals finding impossible to get in the game because they find it too hard, and hardcores destroying season after season and finding it too easy, it definitively need some new ground for both sides. (sorry for the english)

[Gishi]

I'm an old football manager enthusiast. Every year, bar a few, I buy the game. Every year I want to play it. Every year I find playing it an intolerable chore. The New features added adds nothing to the experience, other than more work. I understand that some want a more "realistic" feel, but instead of focusing on the plastic "realistic" feel added by repetitive interviews (With quite moronic and lackluster alternatives to chose from when answering questions), they should Focus on adding depth and importance to training and tactics. And they need to get rid of the PA and CA bull**** that makes the game more stale than it should be and more deterministic than it should be. Loads of players that turns out to be great would never get anywhere Close to where they are in real life in the game.

 

I can't get myself to play it because of all the chores, but more importantly because of the lack of actual Control, and the fact that I do not trust the football simulation at all. It seems more like a game where you try to recreate whatever tactic is big in the meta prior to release of a Version (by use of those silly, narrow roles of players that you need to use, instead of the previous, much better, sliders). If you tried going 3 at the back before it was **** hot in RL, it was pretty much impossible to be successful.

 

They need to rework the basics, the football part, the youth Development part, instead of adding New layers of bullcrap interviews and stuff.

 

With regards to the "more realism" or "more Arcade" - why not both? They could use their License to produced two games. They could Catch a bigger audience that way, and keep their customers happier.

[wayne'o]

13 minutes ago, Gishi said:

I'm an old football manager enthusiast. Every year, bar a few, I buy the game. Every year I want to play it. Every year I find playing it an intolerable chore. The New features added adds nothing to the experience, other than more work. I understand that some want a more "realistic" feel, but instead of focusing on the plastic "realistic" feel added by repetitive interviews (With quite moronic and lackluster alternatives to chose from when answering questions), they should Focus on adding depth and importance to training and tactics. And they need to get rid of the PA and CA bull**** that makes the game more stale than it should be and more deterministic than it should be. Loads of players that turns out to be great would never get anywhere Close to where they are in real life in the game.

 

I can't get myself to play it because of all the chores, but more importantly because of the lack of actual Control, and the fact that I do not trust the football simulation at all. It seems more like a game where you try to recreate whatever tactic is big in the meta prior to release of a Version (by use of those silly, narrow roles of players that you need to use, instead of the previous, much better, sliders). If you tried going 3 at the back before it was **** hot in RL, it was pretty much impossible to be successful.

 

They need to rework the basics, the football part, the youth Development part, instead of adding New layers of bullcrap interviews and stuff.

 

With regards to the "more realism" or "more Arcade" - why not both? They could use their License to produced two games. They could Catch a bigger audience that way, and keep their customers happier.

In the past 3 weeks Iv watched very closely other managers play the game via YouTube, I’m not sure if I’m seeing different areas of the game due to watching from an entertaining point of view but how often do you see players make silly passes during different phases of the game attacking or defending?

Now take a training day on the pitch in terms of playing style.  Given lots of scenarios that could happen during a game I think being able to show players via a training pitch where you think they should be playing the ball  or making runs into space, I’m sure every human manager may have different ideas of where and what players should be doing during a game?  Come match day this would have a huge effect on the style of play and also show a teams identity  of how a manager wants his team to play.

usung video analysis taken from a previous game we could hilight certain times during the game and then instruct the player what you would want him to do in that situation beit a pass threw the middle or pass out wide to a fullback making a forward run.

training in real life is more than just improving fitness, skills or attributes etc it’s about teaching a team how you want them to play, there’s more than 1  out come from training..

Many years ago in one game version we had with and with out ball screens where we could tell our players where we wanted them to be during the different phases of play, I’m not suggesting this be brought back but similar replication to training could teach players what kind of passes and runs they make at different stages ultimately effecting how our team plays on match day..

Its very frustrating when in your head you know how you want your team to play but can’t create it using the tactical template and instructions.  

 

If you want a winger to play as a winger this could be implemented threw training, one persons idea of how he wants his winger to play may be completely different to another person, it could be how wide he stays, how far he’s expected to track back or what areas of the pitch is he expected to close down the opposing player.

To play football manager we are expected to find ways to beat a simulation coded by how the Ai reacts which may detract from how you actually want your team to play, ie, if I play long balls it will beat the Ai’s tactics and will result in me winning the league,  why should we be forced to play a certain way to beat a coded programme?  

I think I’d like my team to have a style of play and identity how I’d want a team to play in real life, rather than be forced to play in a way I have to play to beat the Ai. 

Is this something you refer to and woukd like to see also?

[Svenc]

Arguably FM already tries to be far too much to far too many different people (or tastes, if so you wish). The term "design by committee" doesn't quite spring to mind, but you may get the drift. The dichotomy at work can already be seen in simple things such as difficulty levels. The credo has always been "we do a simulation so a difficulty would be silly". Yet there's demand for any of that on anyone front. Then again, the game's succeeding, so why do it differently (from a commercial perspective).

[enigmatic]

The thing is, you can already be entirely at the mercy of your director of football if you want with the existing game, without ruining it for the people that want to sign their own players.

But as you've probably noticed, they don't have particularly good judgement and it's pretty clear from other game modules that more simulated conversations (and dodgy promises) is not a way of improving things...

CM4 had training "schedules" back in the day. You set them once and forgot about it. And setting new training regimes on a day by day basis would be incredibly dull since it's literally just ticking boxes. It's not that there aren't tweaks that can be made to improve the training module like better ways to manage individual players' fitness etc, but at the end of the day you're not going to be able to replicate the real life experience of organising stuff on a training pitch

[turnip]

Football teams have so many different ways of running themselves, that if SI focussed on just one, it'd fail miserably at being "realistic" and there's no possible way they could cover all of them in any real depth. And nor should they, since how could it possibly be fun to play the game as the 'manager' of a club where the Chairman signs players, picks the team and even gives some of the teamtalks. Which actually happens at clubs (albeit never for all that long).

Just accept that Football Manager is an abstraction of the concept of being the manager/head coach of a football team. And if you don't like the game as it is any more, you should absolutely try other games. 

[Adopj]

Registered and step only to say the game is already very arcade more than ever.. the amount of attention you have to pay to action is pure arcade.

Strategy or simulation are about planification,mid long term, focusing on the big picture not in small details and ongoing action. Fm nowadays is very arcade, you must play the matches almost if it was PES, making constant changes in tactics and players beyond what any manager does in real life.

Have your defensive line one notch higher than what it should and you are destroyed. I have never seen a real manager moving defensive line 10 cm higher or deeper and that's what fm is about

Add to this the own dynamics of the game less similar than ever to real foitball. What on earth is shape?

How can you call this a simulatiion if has nothing to do with what it is trying to simulate?

[Snorks]

Most of the things the OP mentions can be set up in the game already - through staff responsibilities and the like.

I like the way the game allows you to set up and play how you are comfortable with it.

From a commercial point of view, it suits pretty much the spread of gamers and various levels of immersion. From FM Touch to fully immersed hands-on like me.

You DoF can do a lot for you, as can your Chief Scout, your HoYD deals with the youngsters so if you have them working hard for you, all you need do is manage the team and the tactics -if that's how you want to play.

Real world simulation and yes, you tell the DoF or Chief Scout the type of players you are after, you convince the board it's worth paying XXX amount for a player, they negotiate the deal and sign or not sign.

 

[sporadicsmiles]

I admit to not understanding what you actually want. The game makes a pretty good choice between being for casual and hardcore fans already. If you want to pick up the game and play as a casual fan, you can do that easily already. The preset formations will give you good results, and there are a load of user made tactics to download if you want success based on what other people do. If you want to play "hardcore", you can build your own tactic. Make your philosophy, play to it and have success. The game makes an excellent balance between these two fronts already. Just look at the tactical forum (both tactics for download and threads of people trying things) to see that.

10 hours ago, RobertPage said:

If it was going to be more realistic then it could make for success actually being challenging. Take out all control of transfers and scouting and youth intakes (Pretty much everything a manager doesn't do, that we can do in this game), and replace it all with new communication features with key staff that you work with (Chairman, DOF, Head scouts). This would be massively important for new signings. Having to communicate with head scouts to find the types of player you need. Passing the information on to the DoF to attempt to sign these players and persuading the chairmen to make the money available.

 

You either are talking without knowledge or speaking of things already in the game. Managers absolutely have control over transfers in the vast majority of cases. Watford being an obvious counter example right now. I am also fairly certain managers have some input into scouting, because that is an area of transfers. There is currently very little you can do to influence youth intakes. Sure, you decide what players you sign, but you have zero control on the quality of players that you get. If you choose, you can already set your chairman or DOF to make offers for first team players for you. This is clearly not a default option to make sure it appeals to as many people as possible. If you wanted to play as Newcastle, with no control over transfers, you can. If you choose. Which is exactly what it should be like. 

 

10 hours ago, RobertPage said:

 The attributes and personality of these key staff would also hold importance. Being a Newcastle manager would be a tough task for Example. Getting money to improve that squad IRL is known to be a challenge where as with West Ham they're more willing to throw the money about. Also you look at Man United and Liverpool at the moment. Ed Woodward is getting a lot of stick at the moment for being unable to get complete deals for Mourinho's key signings (making his job harder, whereas Michael Edwards at Liverpool has done a superb job of getting most of Klopps key targets (Neither or DoF's i know, but they're the ones in charge of transfers as far as i know).

 

Ditto this. If you want to leave transfers to Edward Woodward, you can. It is really simple to set the game to behave thus. You set him in charge of making offers, and you add players to the "wanted" list so he makes offers. Or you can take control yourself. Which is a good thing. As many ways to play as possible is a good thing, we want the game to appeal to all fans, not just a select few.

10 hours ago, RobertPage said:

 Also a rework of training and a tactical overhaul would be important. It's insane in this game that you don't have to do anything with training and can leave it to staff at no real disadvantage. Make training important. Make having a training schedule for both the team and players day by day. With tactics, there needs to be more freedom. If the game is going to be a management game, you need to be able to add your own style to the game. Along with this, player styles need to be more obvious and be important to how teams play.

 

Training is already important. If you do not see that, you do not understand how to properly use training. Tactics ditto. There is immense freedom in the current tactical setup in the game. You can make almost any type of system you want (pressing is the one thing that really needs some work, however). Again, if you do not see how to impose your own style onto your team, it really is your failing rather than a game. I have seen enough people make a style they want to know most things are possible. Player styles are clearly already in the game, in PPMs. If you thing these do nothing, again, you simply do not understand the game.

Currently, every club does pose a different challenge. There are just some sensible things you do at every club. Looking at players to decide their training, deciding which players should be sold, deciding tactics, etc. This is generic to every club. Of course it is. Every club has a chairman who expects different things (if you have never had a chairman who expects absolutely insane results, lucky you). The simulation side of things is nicely balanced with the arcade side of things. In particular, if you do sensible things you get sensible results. Stupid things get stupid results. That is proper simulation. I played a lot of games on full match mode lately, and the football that is played is not dissimilar to real life.

10 hours ago, RobertPage said:

Also, with being more relaxed about realism, bringing an owner/chairman mode in this game wouldn't be so much of an issue. 

 

Why? It is football manager. Not chairman manager. If you want these modes, play football chairman, or some such mobile game. If you really want to do this, just get a skin with an instant result button and leave most things to you assistant. 

Criticism is always welcome, because it improves the game, I just do not see how you want to improve anything here.

[warlock]

5 hours ago, Adopj said:

Have your defensive line one notch higher than what it should and you are destroyed. I have never seen a real manager moving defensive line 10 cm higher or deeper and that's what fm is about

Sorry, but this is just nonsense. I've played about 30 saves this year, won all kinds of trophies with clubs from Darlington in the Vanarama South, to multiple titles and Champions Leagues with Man Utd, and I'd bet I've never changed the defensive line more than once or twice a season (and only then to drop one notch deeper against teams that were threatening to tear us apart). And some of us - including me - have been banging on about the importance of squad management and squad development being more important than tactics for years.

Edit to add: The game absolutely lets you focus on squad management over tactics if you're aware of the importance.

[Snorks]

4 hours ago, sporadicsmiles said:

 

Why? It is football manager. Not chairman manager. If you want these modes, play football chairman, or some such mobile game. If you really want to do this, just get a skin with an instant result button and leave most things to you assistant. 

Criticism is always welcome, because it improves the game, I just do not see how you want to improve anything here.

4

Sorry to cut your post down so drastically, but you have brilliantly communicated the exact points  I wanted to, but didn't have time.

[Adopj]

hace 6 horas, warlock dijo:

Sorry, but this is just nonsense. I've played about 30 saves this year, won all kinds of trophies with clubs from Darlington in the Vanarama South, to multiple titles and Champions Leagues with Man Utd, and I'd bet I've never changed the defensive line more than once or twice a season (and only then to drop one notch deeper against teams that were threatening to tear us apart). And some of us - including me - have been banging on about the importance of squad management and squad development being more important than tactics for years.

Edit to add: The game absolutely lets you focus on squad management over tactics if you're aware of the importance.

Are you joking?

Seriously, you may not change your defensive line but you change something else for sure. Otherwise, its impossible.

Teams destroy me if I have my defensive line too high (or too low) or whatever other small detail. 

The game is very arcade in.my experience

 

 

[forameuss]

FM has never been particularly "arcade-y".  Ever.  You don't even need to look particularly far, or even out of the genre, to find games that lean far, far more towards that.

Had to laugh at the assertion that changing one small thing causes big changes means it's an arcade game - that screams of a simulation far too concerned with minutiae to me.  Go play FIFA for a few hours, then come back and try and argue with a straight face that FM is an arcade game.

[dryfountain123]

I don't know if arcade or simulator but I'd like the game to be more accesible to people like me who are not talented for videogaming. I find the game very very hard, i can't play if I don't cheat (replaying games, using downloaded tactics, etc...).

I understand people like challenges but the ones who are no talented like me are set apart from the game and, after all, this is game and all I want is to have fun. Being frustrated with the game is the norm for me and that's a bid sad.

[XaW]

9 hours ago, Adopj said:

Are you joking?

Seriously, you may not change your defensive line but you change something else for sure. Otherwise, its impossible.

Teams destroy me if I have my defensive line too high (or too low) or whatever other small detail. 

The game is very arcade in.my experience

I’ve played the exact same formation and tactics for 10 seasons. Going up several tiers without a single change. Sure, my tactic of choice is weak against some other tactics, but my team still wins most games. Why? Because I focus much more on squad building and squad management so as long as the tactics are within decent standards we win most of the time.

I don’t think I’ve been «destroyed» at any time, only narrow losses. Even against higher ranked teams. 

If you are getting mauled for small changes like that I think you need to rethink your tactical approach on a broader scale.

[craiigman]

21 hours ago, Svenc said:

Arguably FM already tries to be far too much to far too many different people (or tastes, if so you wish). The term "design by committee" doesn't quite spring to mind, but you may get the drift. The dichotomy at work can already be seen in simple things such as difficulty levels. The credo has always been "we do a simulation so a difficulty would be silly". Yet there's demand for any of that on anyone front. Then again, the game's succeeding, so why do it differently (from a commercial perspective).

Would argue it’s only successful being the only competent game on the market. 

They’ve tried with FM Touch, but honestly that has it’s own problems being on the same ME and having micro transactions. FM Touch should really be the one to have difficulty options and in game editor. But currently it’s severely being held back by either bad decisions or greed (micro transactions).

[isignedupfornorealreason]

7 minutes ago, craiigman said:

FM Touch should really be the one to have difficulty options

I think both could do with them. There shouldn't be a major issue in offering the options. The difficulty should come in how to implement those options. In lieu of that, I really would like to see them use the coaching badges as part of an (optional) interactive tutorial on tactics, tactical set ups and foundations. Simple things, like how most sensible teams will have a defensive minded midfielder, things that casual fans will tend to overlook. Anything that would shift casual fans away from downloadable tactics and whatnot - which, although we don't see the likes of Diablo and co anymore, I feel they still dominate the playerbase and they still look utterly bizarre, plastered with 952 instructions.

 

That tutorial could come via you studying for the badges in-game, or via you choosing to read/study them at manager creation. I don't advocate for videos unless they're well subtitled for accessibility though.

[phd_angel]

As frustrating as FM can be, it is still awesome.

Most of the features criticized for being too un/realistic and too complicated/simple can be CUSTOMIZED to fit the gamer's preferences.

Customization is the keyword SI should pursue, as it alleviates some of the pressure from having to take sides.

[CFuller]

I think the day that full-fat Football Manager adds arbitrary difficulty settings is the day that it can no longer legitimately claim to be a simulation. Does anyone really want an 'easy mode' where they could, for example, trounce everyone in the Bundesliga as Dusseldorf in the first season with little effort? What about a 'hard mode', where being 'FMed' could be taken to ridiculous extremes? I might be exaggerating a little, but you get the idea.

Besides, there are already three unofficial difficulty settings in the game - namely your manager's experience, badges and starting club. If you put a former Sunday League player in charge of Real Madrid, for example, you'll probably struggle at first.

I do agree, though, that a tutorial would be of great assistance to many new or struggling FMers (something similar to what Loki Doki suggested a few months ago). A tactics tutorial in particular could be massively helpful for the uninitiated.

[..Valhalla..]

23 hours ago, Gishi said:

They need to rework the basics, the football part, the youth Development part, instead of adding New layers of bullcrap interviews and stuff.

So much this.

The communication side of the game is genuinely dreadful, and most of it is completely unnecessary as well, and largely embarrassing. Winning an early Champions League qualifier with a lowly team and being asked if you can "go all the way and win it" is always a highlight. Most pre- and post-match interviews now are just answered by quickly looking at the answers (you already know what the question is and it really needs nothing more than clicking through them). And I've never once changed my tone of voice from calm, why would I? Why does the game make a point of recording how I answer? "Is often calm but has been known to be assertive on occasion" what is the point in this, exactly? That alone is probably the most mind-numbingly unnecessary part of the entire game. 

The game even mocks itself by allowing you to ridicule the question about how you dress. But WHY is it there to begin with? Who writes this nonsense?

And see that infuriating news item after winning the League/a trophy, where the board say something about keeping a lid on celebrations to focus on future challenges - what kind of thanks is that to get for your efforts? Some seasons take me several days of real time to get through, I land a pretty unlikely title, and basically get a slap in the face from the board; they might as well say "yeah yeah, congrats, it's hardly a big deal is it? Now carry on working..."

When a young kid ends a conversation with me (discipline 20) by saying "I'll get going then, I'm sure you'll want me for something else soon..." I want nothing more than to release him there and then on a free. 

And why are we hamstrung by a lack of communication options that would actually help us? We should be able to tell players that the guy you just sold WANTED TO LEAVE and left us with no choice. Sadly, all we can do is mollycoddle the player grilling us, or make daft promises, or tell him we are the boss and he needs to shut up. A simple "I tried everything in my power to make him stay" would save so much stress.

Assistant Manager's in-game advice is complete drivel. He tells me every single match we are "being completely overrun in midfield", no matter what the match stats are. He also says "we should encourage our players to:

• Play more long balls forward
• Try to adopt a more direct passing play
• Try to adopt a shorter passing play

…etc etc" Every single match, at random points, for no reason whatsoever.

 

I could go on but I'd be here all day. There really is no need for a vast majority of the daft interactions and communications in FM. 

[Svenc]

1 hour ago, CFuller said:

I think the day that full-fat Football Manager adds arbitrary difficulty settings is the day that it can no longer legitimately claim to be a simulation. Does anyone really want an 'easy mode' where they could, for example, trounce everyone in the Bundesliga as Dusseldorf in the first season with little effort? What about a 'hard mode', where being 'FMed' could be taken to ridiculous extremes? I might be exaggerating a little, but you get the idea.

As a side note, I've watched a load of FM matches during the years, and whilst that is some subjective, most cases of a user claiming to be "FM'd" is him being the victim of lacking feedback and goddamn awful (or at least, sensationalist) punditry and commentary (which the game mimics also in its text commentary). The rest is the game being a code of Maths, and inevitably limited player motion capturing animations and also finite possible sequences of play.

That aside, if there would be a decent "difficulty" one day it can ideally only come by different levels of AI. The insight you eventually gain from playing trumps the AI itself eventually, whilst when you start out, you may even struggle with simple concepts. Be it in man management, squad management, scouting, training, tactics. Suffice it to say the supposedly "elite" managers usually aren't that well represented in the game, imo, and it oft doesn't take overly much to outperform them (highlight still Guardiola FM 2016ish, losing up to 8 Bundesliga matches on the occasion in a league that is no contest with that squad). Must be hard to balance though and will likely never happen.

[DJ Sir Matthew]

On 10/08/2018 at 03:04, warlock said:

Sorry, but this is just nonsense. I've played about 30 saves this year, won all kinds of trophies with clubs from Darlington in the Vanarama South, to multiple titles and Champions Leagues with Man Utd, and I'd bet I've never changed the defensive line more than once or twice a season (and only then to drop one notch deeper against teams that were threatening to tear us apart). And some of us - including me - have been banging on about the importance of squad management and squad development being more important than tactics for years.

Edit to add: The game absolutely lets you focus on squad management over tactics if you're aware of the importance.

 

On 10/08/2018 at 18:29, XaW said:

I’ve played the exact same formation and tactics for 10 seasons. Going up several tiers without a single change. Sure, my tactic of choice is weak against some other tactics, but my team still wins most games. Why? Because I focus much more on squad building and squad management so as long as the tactics are within decent standards we win most of the time.

I don’t think I’ve been «destroyed» a, more fluentt any time, only narrow losses. Even against higher ranked teams. 

If you are getting mauled for small changes like that I think you need to rethink your tactical approach on a broader scale.

 

Wondering what tactics you are playing? Standard formations delivered in the base game? Downloaded tactics from someone else? Or did you make your own tactic?

I for one have been playing FM since the first version beginning of the nineties. My most fond memories are 01-02 and 07. I agree that the game only added more chores and more work to it. For those who feel that way, they tried to resolve it with a tuned down Touch version and the ability to have staff do most of the work. The personal beef I have is f.e. that I love to focus on squad management and player development but that Touch doesn't allow tutoring (at least not the version I last played). And the full fat FM just goes way too slow for me, needing to press continue way too many times (even with the setting for less breaks). Given my life situation has changed since the nineties (can I get those teenage years back please?  ), it's clear I want something that goes faster or more fluent and gives me more immersion.

The complexity of tactics has exploded in recent years. The number of attributes increased and where before you had no roles and limited number of positions, the combinations are limitless these days. I almost feel I need to have an UEFA "A" License myself to make my own tactic within the game. Sure, I could try to pick the best 11 players and put them on the field according their preferred position and best role, but something tells me I would end up with a very unbalanced monster. If I could have confidence that the default tactics that come with the game are good enough to become Champions League contenders with any team (given correct team management and player development and a lot of seasons), that would make me like the game probably better. That would probably, given the current state of the numerous roles etc, mean they would have to provide 100-some default tactics (f.e. several 4-4-2 with different roles). 

Cause to be honest, I'm just too dumb for the tactical side of the game. I don't know what works and what doesn't. I don't know what to look for during a match and how to counter certain situations. Maybe a comprehensive  tactics manual (creating and adjusting during matches to tackle weaknesses) with checklists and what not, might help people like me.

[XaW]

2 hours ago, DJ Sir Matthew said:

Wondering what tactics you are playing? Standard formations delivered in the base game? Downloaded tactics from someone else? Or did you make your own tactic?

I made my own, in FM17, and I’m using an almost exact identical one now in FM18.

This tactic is of course inspired by the one Klopp used around the time I created the topic. I did make one change to it, and that was to make the Complete Forward into a Deep Lying Forward, because I felt the poorer quality players of lower leagues didn’t suit the role good enough.

Now, I’m not a tactical genious, but I wanted something that worked and that I could make due with without that much tinkering. I did have a rough plan of what I wanted the players to do though. And that is were a lot of FM’ers struggle, I think. They want to play, but have no thought as to how they want the play to flow.

With my tactics each role have one or more task to do and I designed it after Liverpool at the time. Left winger as a playmaker allowing the left back space to cross, attacking right winger who keeps a bit wider and are eligeble to cross as well. Striker, left winger and the attacking central midfielder are occupying the central attacking areas while the other central midfielder provide defensive support. Hald back/regista (depending on opponent) are the pivot if the play breaks down while the right back also sometimes makes a cross should we recycle the ball. The central defenders are there to defend mainly while the rest are concentrating on the attack.

So I have a plan and set up the team to fullfil it. Of course we are a bit vounerable to counterattacking teams with quick strikers, but it doesn’t happen that often.

My advise to anyone struggling with tactics is to rethink your game plan. What are you trying to do, where are your goals coming from? What should your players do if the attack breaks down? How do they recycle possession? Who attacks and who support them to avoid being caught of guard should they lose the ball?

After you know these things then you need to find out how to do it in action. There’s a reason most managers try out new tactics in friendlies. Do the same and watch more highlights. Every shot and lost ball should be looked at to understand why. No chances for a cross or pass? No way of passing back to recycle possession? Does this happens often? Then you might need to change something. I did this for a pre-season and then took a review after about half way into the season. The I asked for advise in the thread and got some. Now it’s working like a charm. It’s really not as time consuming as it might seen and a lot less irritating than feeling nothing works.

I’m writing this from my phone, so sorry for any wierd autocorrects. Hopefully this will help! 😊

[warlock]

4 hours ago, DJ Sir Matthew said:

Wondering what tactics you are playing? Standard formations delivered in the base game? Downloaded tactics from someone else? Or did you make your own tactic?

I have used downloaded tactics, but only where the author can explain precisely how the tactic works, why and when it might not work, and why it was setup the way it is (ie, not 99% of the tactics in the tactics sharing sub-forum!). And they're always modified to suit my own preferences - I don't like high-pressing, a lot of closing down, hate 'get stuck in', and refuse to use more direct passing. I rarely use more than 3 or 4 TIs. I'm not good enough to read the subtleties of the game and figure out what to tweak - I use much broader tools like, are we winning or losing, who's got most possession, who on my team isn't playing well. Complicated tactics, with loads of TIs, make it harder to figure out what's going on.

For the last couple of months I've been playing a pretty simple 442, standard/structured, and it took Ipswich to the Championship title in the first season, and is now promising to do the same for Darlington in the VNN.

[RodentofDoom]

When I think of arcade style football sims, FIFA comes immediately to mind.

TBH that's not somewhere that CA want to be suddenly competitive in for market share.

 

Could backroom staff and interactions with them do with more work, yes, yes they could.

Will CA get around to it eventually, yes, I think they will at some point in the future.

I can wait a bit.

[westy8chimp]

On 09/08/2018 at 20:29, enigmatic said:

The thing is, you can already be entirely at the mercy of your director of football if you want with the existing game, without ruining it for the people that want to sign their own players.

But as you've probably noticed, they don't have particularly good judgement and it's pretty clear from other game modules that more simulated conversations (and dodgy promises) is not a way of improving things...

CM4 had training "schedules" back in the day. You set them once and forgot about it. And setting new training regimes on a day by day basis would be incredibly dull since it's literally just ticking boxes. It's not that there aren't tweaks that can be made to improve the training module like better ways to manage individual players' fitness etc, but at the end of the day you're not going to be able to replicate the real life experience of organising stuff on a training pitch

Yeh... i play fm to build my squad, create a tactic and look after matchday... I leave the fluffy stuff to my assistant manager. 

It sounds like training is going to be more complex, to the joy of many, but as a working dad with a toddler, the game is plenty time consuming enough... So i hope whatever intricacies they add... It's still a choice to delegate to asst. Manager and them be able to make at least sensible choices. 

[warlock]

2 hours ago, westy8chimp said:

Yeh... i play fm to build my squad, create a tactic and look after matchday... I leave the fluffy stuff to my assistant manager. 

Or someone else! The game already gives you the option to run training for everyone from the first team to the U18s (including position, role, additional focus and PPMs), sign everyone, renew contracts for everyone, direct scouting, handle the media and teamtalks... or pass on those responsibilities to another member of staff. I don't know how much more flexibility we could want.

And for everyone of the minority who wants to control training drills on the pitch during the week, I'd wager there's a majority who would find that rather boring and just skip it. SI need to make tough decisions about where they allocate resources, and I'd guess that more detailed training regimes is a losing proposition.

And, with regard to the OP, I'd go further: in terms of a 'game' there are - and have been - several alternatives (FIFA, PES to name just the first that come to mind); in terms of a football 'simulator', there's never been anything that came close to CM/FM, and they're further away than ever.

[enigmatic]

16 hours ago, westy8chimp said:

Yeh... i play fm to build my squad, create a tactic and look after matchday... I leave the fluffy stuff to my assistant manager. 

It sounds like training is going to be more complex, to the joy of many, but as a working dad with a toddler, the game is plenty time consuming enough... So i hope whatever intricacies they add... It's still a choice to delegate to asst. Manager and them be able to make at least sensible choices. 

Weirdly I think the balance is largely right with the training module. Can be completely left alone, you can follow the (mostly fairly sensible) suggestions of the assman and leave the rest, but if you want to develop your youngsters in a particular way you have some ability to do so but not an implausible level of control (so you can "fix" their finishing to an extent but not their concentration) and you can play with match preparation settings if you want to.

 

The main change I'd make is making the "star ratings" for coaches' key areas visible on their profile and searchable. If you're going to have non-obvious combinations of already visible attributes have a direct and apparently purely deterministic effect on their training effectiveness in each area, you might as well skip the need to use a calculator to figure out whether Possible New Staff Member is better at Attack Coaching than Existing Attack Coach