Muja
-
Posts
207 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Forums
Articles
FAQs
Online Manual
Support: Blocks
Support: Games
Bug Tracker
SIGames Manual (beta)
Profiles
Posts posted by Muja
-
-
- Popular Post
Do yourself a favor and start playing FM 2007.
Like you, I've recently felt the need to try out some of the past FMs that I own - and since I've been playing since the days of Championship Manager, I own a lot of them.You can find a review I wrote for all the old editions here.
But I'd like to update it by telling you this: FM 2007 is by far the game, among all those I've tried, that has given me the most fun - and I'm still playing it now.
Yes, of course, it's very old, and this means that the database isn't updated (but I've solved this by going on holiday until 2024 and starting from there) and that some features of modern games are missing - of which I personally don't feel the lack.
Because you see, the point is that the BASE of the game is simply perfect.What I love about this game is that it is DIFFICULT, but not artificially difficult. The AI opponents will give you a hard time.
Tactics are important, but the strongest team ultimately wins because player attributes are even more important.
And building a strong team is not easy at all, because the AI is very active in the transfer market: the big clubs are always scouting for new talents (which are plentiful thanks to a well-balanced influx of newgens) and every time you find an interesting player, you'll have to fight with many other clubs to get him.
This also means that the game world will always be balanced, even 200 years into the future - heck, the game could probably go on forever, and you'd still find perfectly built and strong AI squads to contend with.As for the match engine, there's no 3D, but what you see in 2D is highly enjoyable. There's not a single identical goal, and the most beautiful part is probably watching the dribbles of your most talented players - really, in comparison to other editions, your players dribble for real, not just when they're on the flanks and with plenty of space ahead.
And about tactics, yes, there are those much-hated sliders. But you have the MAXIMUM freedom to customize your tactic and individual instructions as you prefer, without any restriction such as the preset roles that exist now. Everything is possible, and every strategy is feasible.
Winning in this game is highly rewarding. And losing can also be frustrating, but always with the awareness that it depends on you, and that against stronger opponents all you can do is give your best.
I've been playing FM 2007 for a few months now, and I can't stop. I'm once again caught up in the "just one more game" fever. I had been missing it for so long.
8 -
It's something that has always left me a little perplexed.
"Trequartista" is a word borrowed from Italian, but as an Italian myself, I can assure you that the term is used here only to refer to anyone playing in the central attacking midfielder position, regardless of the tasks assigned to himI know it's a bit late now and we've gotten used to it, but if we really wanted to use an Italian term, "fantasista" would have been much better.
In Italy, it's used to indicate a very creative player who plays in any offensive position and is given absolute freedom to invent with very few defensive duties. It would have fit the FM role to a T.... And that's it, I was bored and thought of throwing this into the forum.
6 -
Il 28/2/2024 in 13:40 , Litmanen 10 ha scritto:
The worst one ever to be honest. And not even joking. When you talk about the most balanced version, FM 2017 should never even be mentioned.
Of support role strikers sum 80+ pass attempts and 5+ key passes per game, there is something really badly wrong with balance.
In FM24 you can reach those numbers with wingbacks, and with very poor attributes to boot as long as they’re fast “enough”.
2 -
I think these problems, especially B, were MUCH worse in 23.
So I definitely see an improvement compared to past editions0 -
9 ore fa, Dagenham_Dave ha scritto:
However, opening up the match engine to modders would be absolute insanity. And not in a good way.
I can't see a single reason why that'd be true.
All mods are optional by nature. Currently, someone could make a database when the stats of all players in the world equal to 1.
That'd be insanity? Maybe, but if someone has fun with such a mod, who cares?! How is that affecting you or me?21 ore fa, rp1966 ha scritto:I think the biggest reason that SI wouldn't allow modding of the match engine is nothing to do with code complexity - it's all about business. The ME is the area of difference that people most care about when comparing versions. Free up that to modding and SI have a greatly reduced ability to tweak the ME and market it as something 'new and improved' for a new edition of the game. Any ME changes would have to be beyond the scope of the modders to have any impact.
Then there's also the fact that it would lift the curtain on how the ME works. Remember that after the Korean mods to the JSON file, SI chose to lock it down and remove the ability to edit it.
I'm afraid reason 1 is the main problem here.
But as I explained earlier, there is no need to "lift the curtain on how the ME works".
The way Paradox does it, most of the game's code remains inaccessible; all modders can change are the modifiers.
These are nothing more than simple variables included in the main code but accessible to the community.Translating it to FM, there could be modifiers like "maximum defensive line depth," "rate of physical condition deterioration during matches," or a value quantifying the effect of a "playmaker's ball magnet," among other examples, without revealing anything about how the ME works.
Outside of the ME itself, there could be modifiers like "AI aggressiveness in the transfer market" or a value indicating how much priority the AI gives to CA/PA or player reputation when deciding to purchase one.
The main part of the code should remain secret, as it is only fair.
0 -
6 ore fa, Dagenham_Dave ha scritto:
Genius. It's almost as if SI haven't been trying to work out a way to do this for about four editions now. But yeah, Joe Public will fix that in seconds.
This place, man.
Are you not aware of the existence of Daveincid's "megarealism pack"?
It's a meticulous modification of the initial database that, among other things, changes the finances and market preferences of all teams in dozens and dozens of nations, adds individual awards in dozens of leagues to rebalance the reputation system, and increases the number of injuries by modifying the physical integrity of all players in the game.It's been around since FM20, I believe, and many people, myself included, believe it makes the game SIGNIFICANTLY better in the long run, and some users won't even start a new game until they have this megapack.
Don't underestimate the dedication of the game's most hardcore fans. The hundreds of hours some spend testing to find the perfect tactic, or to create a more appealing skin...
There would be people who would work day and night to make the game better—or simply different in certain areas, to meet the needs of some players.
And the best part is, SI wouldn't even have to pay them!I repeat, it's a win-win situation.
1 -
4 minuti fa, Dagenham_Dave ha scritto:
It's incredibly naive to think that's how it would work.
It’s exactly what happened with FM20. People weren’t happy with the vanilla ME and they modified it and suddenly, placebo or not, they were enjoying the game more.
People moan because they don’t like some parts of the game? Allow them to change it as they see fit. It’s a no-brainer.
8 minuti fa, Dagenham_Dave ha scritto:Anyway, the FM match engine is a massively complex piece of code.
It’s not about making the whole code public - no company in their right mind would ever do that.
You put some *modifiers* in the code and make those, and only those, public. Numbers that can be decreased or increased, having an effect in the calculation.
13 minuti fa, Dagenham_Dave ha scritto:. Put that into the hands of the general public and all you're going to get is utter chaos.
Nonsense, what you’ll get is utter freedom and tons and tons of mods.
“You think gegenpress is OP? Use this mod that makes gegenpress unsusteainable for 90 minutes”
”Tired of the lack of central play? Use this mod which makes players take more risks in central areas”
”Catenaccio lover? Use this mod that makes defenders have an advantage over opponents”
And so on, and so on… Everyone’s happy.
20 minuti fa, Dagenham_Dave ha scritto:There's no downside to modding games like that, because there's nothing in real life to compare it to, so you have a completely blank canvas to do what you want. FM is a completely different ball game, pardon the pun.
Bollocks, everyone has his own idea of what real football is like.
Some people even care more about FUN than realism. Just look at the discussion in the general thread, some people are happier when they see less goals, others think it’s funnier when every match ends 5-4 or other results like that.
With mods, everyone gets what they want. Everyone is having fun.
How could anyone be opposed to that?
1 -
6 ore fa, Dagenham_Dave ha scritto:
THE single biggest placebo effect in all of FM's history.
Making the Match engine moddable is an horrendous idea. People already change so much of the game by putting in wildly unrealistic input then crying wildly when they get the obvious unrealistic output. This would be 100 times worse if the ME was ever opened up to be modded.
Thankfully I reckon SI will see the sense in this and never allow this to happen.
Sorry, but this is a nonsensical argument.
It's quite the opposite, someone who is unhappy with the vanilla ME would surely have plenty of mods to try until they're satisfied, instead of coming here in the forums to complain.
There are ZERO contraindications to let players modify a game however they like.
Think of Europa Universalis: the vanilla game is very good on its own, but all the mods out there can bring it to another level and allow everyone to make the game as fun as they want it to be.
It's a win-win situation.
3 -
2 ore fa, Rookie FM ha scritto:
I know lots of work to do the testing Match Engine from FM 05 TO FM 24 to see which one is most balance Match Engine as only way to do that is get up to 10 Games on each FM Series such as Attacking or Defending Mentality then we all can compare it as it would interesting to see it .
Everyone know that FM 13 is most balance Match Engine there is due proof of picture above on someone post it
The conversation had derailed a bit earlier... Anyway, I provided the most comprehensive answer I could to the original question in this post here.
0 -
9 ore fa, Rookie FM ha scritto:
FM 08(I still got cd
and one of my fav.)
I didn't mention 08 because I haven't played it recently, but I've heard it's considered the best one of the 2D era.
1 -
18 minuti fa, Rodrigogc ha scritto:
I haven't played this FM20 version and was unaware of this Korean thing. Can you elaborate more on that ?
In practice, these guys had found a JSON file in the game directory that managed some of the ME's physics values.
The file was editable, and by changing these values, it was possible to alter the way the ME itself operated - not in detail, because players' decisions were still governed by their attributes and other parts of the code that were inaccessible, but enough to create visible differences.18 minuti fa, Rodrigogc ha scritto:I'm asking it because I've always found that FM should be moddable in almost every aspect
I've always been a big supporter of video games that allow for modding.
Football Manager does that, to a certain extent. Just think about the numerous graphic packs, real names fix, fantasy databases, and last but not least, Daveincid's realism megapack.
But if other aspects of the game - like the ME or the AI's behavior in the transfer market - were to become moddable... Oh, I can only see ENORMOUS benefits from that.
0 -
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
In recent times (years, actually), I've taken a nostalgic dive by trying out some of the older FMs, so I've refreshed my memory and can give a more or less objective opinion.
I haven't played them all, and not all for the same amount of time, but I've formed an idea that I'd like to share with you guys.
In chronological order:FM 07 - very streamlined, similar to what FM mobile is today. The thing that stood out to me in this version is the behavior of AI in transfers: AI buys players mainly (or perhaps solely) based on their Ca/Pa, not based on their reputation. This means that even 20 years into the future, the strongest teams always have the strongest players, they are the first to go after the best wonderkids, and it's really HARD to compete with them in the market (even using external tools like FM Genie Scout) and therefore also on the pitch.
Honestly, I loved this aspect. It makes saves interesting and challenging even in the long term.
Of course, this version lacks many quality-of-life improvements that we are all used to by now.
As for the ME, there's a certain preference for forwards with high jumping reach. A forward with high values in strength and jumping reach is simply UNSTOPPABLE.FM 10 and FM 12 - I pair these two versions because in my opinion, they are quite similar.
Their strength lies in the ME, which is simply very entertaining to watch - and that's why FM12 in particular is still often considered one of the best.
Technical and creative players reign supreme, but it's especially the pacey forwards who excel, perhaps excessively.
Pairing these two types of players means witnessing penetrating passes that split the defense in half fairly regularly, with the fast forward eagerly breaking through the defense.
Serious flaw: AI squad management. After just 10 years into the future, the quality of the rosters of the strongest teams drops drastically, and it becomes increasingly easier for the player to dominate the league and cups.
FM 13 - this one is the FM in which the true first introduction of the tactic creator occurs.
In reality, the system is still mixed (the sliders are still there), but you begin to see what will become the future of the series.
Additionally, there is an improvement in physics - players now have "solid" bodies, whereas in the past they could run "through" their opponents as if they were ghosts.
Also making its debut, for the first time, is the Director of Football (DoF).
The ME is very balanced: in practice, any type of tactic (catenaccio, counter-attack, possession) can work with the right players and instructions. Nevertheless, it is with this game that the tactical intelligence of the AI takes a leap forward and it becomes necessary for the player to adjust their tactics during gameplay. A sudden increase in difficulty that was traumatic for many players.
I remember very well that it was traumatic for me, and it's also more or less the time when many of my friends, long-time FM enthusiasts, began to abandon the game.
Unfortunately I can't speak more about other aspects of the game - quality of long-term saves or other bugs - because this is the version I've played less.
FM 17 - This is another game that is remembered very fondly by a large majority of enthusiasts.
The reason, in my opinion, is that it's the last FM with faster progression and doesn't require all that micromanagement that will become the norm from FM18 onwards.
Another reason is that the graphics of the ME are EXCEPTIONAL, every stadium looks different, the grass wears out during the match, there is meticulous attention to detail.
Additionally, the players really seem to follow tactical instructions to the letter, and player traits are clearly visible during the match; each player seems truly unique. And while this is true for many older FMs, FM17 is perhaps the last to prominently feature this aspect (in later FMs, all players seem to more or less follow specific tracks, and gameplay actions appear more mechanical).
It's also the last FM where the most technical and creative AMC players are still useful for creating goal-scoring opportunities. From FM18 onwards, central play in the final third will undergo a regression, becoming increasingly rare (and this is a problem that still exists today).
Serious flaws of the ME: there's a bug, which has been improved with subsequent patches but never fully resolved, where players on the flank don't help defend in the middle of the field, making tactics with many central midfielders a bit OP. But what's really OP is playing with three forwards: the way defenders handle the defensive phase makes it impossible to manage a trio with three central attackers; this is somewhat balanced by the fact that the AI itself resorts to three-in-the-front formations when it needs to come back from a result, but overall, it really feels like a cheat code.
FM 18-23 - I group all these versions together not because they are identical to each other (I haven't played them all anyway), but because for me, they mark the beginning of an era that I would call the "age of gegenpress."
While each new version brings improvements to everything that happens off the pitch, all the MEs, more or less, are characterized by the overwhelming dominance of gegenpressing and wing play; as I mentioned before, classic number 10s becomes less and less useful, and in various forums and on Reddit, questions like "my tactic works, but my AMC is always the worst performer, how do I get him to perform better?" becomes increasingly common.
Honorable mention to FM20, for a very particular reason: at some point, the Korean community found a way to modify the ME physics and released "patches" online.
These modifications visibly altered the functioning of the ME itself, but I don't want to get into whether they made it better or worse.
However, it was undeniable that these patches breathed new life into the game, and this anecdote has always made me think that FM could benefit ENORMOUSLY from making the ME moddable.
Finally, we come to FM24.
The progress made over all this time is undeniable. In terms of graphics and animations, this ME is the best ever seen.
The tools available to the player in managing a football team are the most numerous ever, and the level of realism achieved is unparalleled compared to any previous edition.
Even this version has its flaws, particularly some recurring bugs, but there is always hope in the March patch.
Unfortunately, even in this version gegenpress is dominant and, above all, the central attacking midfielder remains rather ineffective in providing assists, with the best scoring opportunities predominantly created on the wings or from set pieces - and I fear that not even the latest patch can solve this issue.
A minor problem, of course, especially considering that classic number 10s are becoming increasingly rare in reality as well - but for those like me who are fixated on that specific role, it's something that prevents me from fully enjoying this latest version of the game.
Final verdict:
Every version of FM has its strengths and weaknesses. I don't think there's anything wrong with preferring to play an older version for one reason or another; the problem often lies in remembering what the real differences are between all the versions of a game that has been around for over 20 years now.
I hope, with this lengthy post of mine, to have been of help in that regard. Surely, someone else might be able to contribute even better.15 -
3 minuti fa, Litmanen 10 ha scritto:
Are you really telling us that FM 2017 had a good match engine?
No, I was referring to the central final third problem.
Since FM17 that zone of the pitch has become more and more problematic.1 -
Il 18/2/2024 in 12:46 , dannyfc ha scritto:
I'm sure it's got a lot worse since FM 19 but may be remembering the older versions through rose tinted glasses.
Can confirm it's been getting worse since FM 2017.
FM19 and FM20 were the worst, FM23 was a bit better but then this year's edition is very very bad again.
It's a real pity because overall FM24 is the best ME in recent years, if it wasn't for this problem it'd be the very best ever.2 -
1 ora fa, NineCloudNine ha scritto:
"Right lads, we're going for the win here so I want us to attack from the off. Bob, that means you getting forward right up against the opposition full back; Johnno I want you running in behind every chance you get; press them high and don't give that fancy lightweight winger of theirs a moment's peace."
Right.
In FM this would become:
- Bob goes from W-Su to W-Att
- Johnno goes from Amc-Su to Amc-Att
- trigger press goes from "often" to "very often"
- OI man-mark on fancy opponent winger
It's four clicks, sure.
In theory, adjusting the mentality would be just one click. And you'd mostly get the same thing, so it WOULD be better.
But then you get much more than that: the team goes wider, tempo goes higher, offensive passes gets more direct, everyone will shoot more and be more offensive so you need to decrease the duty of somebody else to keep the balance, and add more TI to counterbalance the mentality, and then 1 click becomes more.
At the moment I prefer to keep the balanced mentality and do those 4 clicks instead, I feel more in control.
2 -
19 ore fa, Mitja ha scritto:
If mentality is ditched all other instructions become transparent and perfectly clear.
[...]
some vague and hardly understandable mentality which interferes with other instructions, a dinosaur from CM days when there were only like seven or eight team instructions.I couldn't agree more.
Not many years ago (or perhaps many years ago and I'm older than I'd like to think), mentalities had different names than they do now:
defensive, counter, standard, control, attack.
Those names already then gave a wrong impression of what mentality really did.2 ore fa, jcafcwbb ha scritto:I have re-read the mentalities and they are slightly different from what I thought.
It doesn't help either that the descriptions within the game, like much of the current documentation, are old, imprecise, and sometimes even misleading.
They create misconceptions like this:3 ore fa, jcafcwbb ha scritto:cautious asks you players to get behind the ball which is inviting pressure for the counter attack. Positive is to keep possession but to encourage forward runs when it is safe to do so.
That's not exactly how it works.
You can still be attacking on a defensive mentality and you can still be fairly defensive on an attacking mentality.
The main aspect affected by mentalities is the concept of 'risk'.
That's why mentalities were renamed, and "Counter" became "Cautious", "Control" became "Positive", "Standard" became "Balanced" and so on.
This concept of risk affects many different things: width, tempo, passes directness, passing risk-taking, how high is the defense line on the pitch, even pressing!
Compared to "balanced", a positive mentality means that the team will be a bit wider, defenders' passes will be a bit shorter and offensive players will make more direct passes, tempo will be a bit faster, defense will be slightly higher, all player will press a bit more, all of them will take more risks in general.
So, you see, if you want to have a tactic based on possession, maybe positive mentality isn't the best choice because offensive players will take more risk when maybe you want to keep the ball and play it safe.
Conversely, a cautious mentality means they will take LESS risks, but if you want to play counter-attacking football, when your team gets the ball back you want them to rapidly attack and be more urgent when bringing the ball up, which is the contrary of being cautious.Taking all this into consideration, changing the mentality can also profoundly change the way a tactic works on the pitch, because it affects LOTS of things that can even counter some TIs and the team strategy as a whole.
This is the main reason why these days I almost exclusively use the balanced mentality and seldom change it.And in my opinion, this is also why the concept of "mentality" is now redundant and something that the tactic creator could (and even should) do without in the future.
1 -
57 minuti fa, jcafcwbb ha scritto:
Cautious asks you players to get behind the ball which is inviting pressure for the counter attack. Positive is to keep possession but to encourage forward runs when it is safe to do so. They are less extreme versions of attacking and defensive.
Mentalities do MUCH more than that, though.
I'll elaborate more later.
0 -
13 ore fa, wazzaflow10 ha scritto:
So lets just start with a simple testable hypothesis shall we? What is it you're trying to prove so badly?
It seems that a bunch of messages have been deleted after last night.
I don't understand why, just when the conversation was becoming more civil...!
My answer to this, and even your reply after that, which I managed to read yesterday. It was a quite detailed response, but now it's gone
0 -
2 minuti fa, wazzaflow10 ha scritto:
And you're so willing to share because you know those test will hold up to a light breeze.
I'll wait for the sun to burn out for you to produce valid test results. Like i said before
You really are a lost cause.
QuoteIf you really need it, I can even redo the test in question and document it with save files and all, to provide you with more concrete evidence. It would only take a couple of days.
100 matches on neutral ground between two identical teams with maximum morale, fitness, happiness, and tactical knowledge. One of them uses a parking the bus preset, the other uses a very simple offensive tactic.
And another 100 matches where one team uses a gegenpress preset and the other team still uses the same very simple offensive tactic.
Documented with 200 save files.
It'll take me a few days - 'cause, you know, I have a real job too.Do I really have to go to such lengths?
If I did it and the results proved me right, would that be enough for you to admit you're wrong? Or would you come up with some other excuse?0 -
3 ore fa, herne79 ha scritto:
I’m done playing your games.
Way to dodge a question.
3 ore fa, wazzaflow10 ha scritto:You're telling me things that you haven't tested.
Won't be the first time that you're wrong in this conversation.
I conducted numerous tests, in the hundreds, using the editor to create specific competitions with specific teams, isolating external variables as much as possible such as morale, happiness, fitness, and tactical knowledge with FMRTE.
They are not documented, except for a single Excel file full of numbers, because these tests were done for me only.
But if you want to see it, I'll upload the file from my other computer as soon as I get home.
Anyway, to make a long story short, my conclusion is:3 ore fa, Muja ha scritto:UNDER ALL OTHER CONDITIONS BEING EQUAL, the parking the bus preset tactic is the WORST AT DEFENDING compared to all other preset tactics
If you really need it, I can even redo the test in question and document it with save files and all, to provide you with more concrete evidence. It would only take a couple of days.
But I simply don't believe that anything I can do will ever make you admit a reality that you keep denying even though it's already evident in itself.
Because, honestly...1 ora fa, whatsupdoc ha scritto:God we really didn't need a page of back and forth to debate whether sitting back concedes less than pushing up and pressing in fm24.
Trying it for even 15 minutes would be enough.
What he said.
3 -
3 minuti fa, wazzaflow10 ha scritto:
Lol, man, you have a serious problem with text comprehension.
20 minuti fa, Muja ha scritto:You're telling me that no one ever thought to consider comparing, under the same conditions, the defensive effectiveness of a preset tactic whose main purpose is to defend, with that of other preset tactics?
If I were to tell you that, UNDER ALL OTHER CONDITIONS BEING EQUAL, the parking the bus preset tactic is the WORST AT DEFENDING compared to all other preset tactics, what would you say?
0 -
41 minuti fa, herne79 ha scritto:
Why before? Odd.
I'll get to it.
52 minuti fa, herne79 ha scritto:It’s much much more than just pick a tactic and holiday for 10 years
God, who would ever test things like that? That'd be moronic.
That's not what FM Arena does, either, you know.
41 minuti fa, herne79 ha scritto:Anyway, I was part of a team that conducted literally 000’s of hours of pre-release tests under all manner of scenarios across lots of different clubs. You mention Parking the Bus so ok - again many varied scenarios such as (but not limited to): the closing stages of cup matches where players may feel more pressured than usual; regular league matches across all kinds of scenarios such as end of season relegation fights, top of the table clashes and mid table matches where results would have no impact on league position; using the basic tactic for full 90 mins, last 10 and lots inbetween; making tweaks to the tactic to suit different player availability. These tests are not done to merely pick a club and see what happens. The type of match is also important as is the type of player, their personalities, interaction and standing with the manager, morale, reaction to team talks, and other factors which all contribute to ME calculations and thus need testing.
So you're telling me that you've conducted all these tests to conclude that the parking the bus preset can defend the result... sometimes, every now and then, depending on many other factors?
You're telling me that no one ever thought to consider comparing, under the same conditions, the defensive effectiveness of a preset tactic whose main purpose is to defend, with that of other preset tactics?If I were to tell you that, UNDER ALL OTHER CONDITIONS BEING EQUAL, the parking the bus preset tactic is the WORST AT DEFENDING compared to all other preset tactics, what would you say?
Would you be surprised?
Would you say it's irrelevant?
Or would you go as far as to say that it's normal?
(please don't say that it's normal)2 -
25 minuti fa, herne79 ha scritto:
As said, the objective reality of my own (and other’s) testing shows they do perform as intended. That intention being to provide a basic framework as a starting point which can work more or less depending on the situation.
That sentence is so vague, it can mean anything and nothing.
Okay then, before I tell you which tests I've done, explain to me specifically which tests you have done.Let's take the parking the bus preset.
What tests have you conducted? What was the purpose of the test, and what acceptable conclusion did you reach?
Was it about whether that preset can help defend a lead in the last 10 minutes of a match? In how many cases, at what percentage?0 -
9 ore fa, herne79 ha scritto:
Well there we are. Circles, more circles
We keep going in circles because fundamentally we don't agree on the main point of the issue:
9 ore fa, herne79 ha scritto:presets can still be usable
Nope, they can't.
You yourself just a page ago said that presets don't work as they are because they are not "finished articles", whatever that means.
If you use the preset counter-attack tactic with a team battling for relegation... You'll get relegated, even if you micro-manage everything, and probably get sacked before you can finish the season.So this discussion will keep going on in circles until you admit the objective reality that presets don't work as they should, because in theory all the instructions make sense and SHOULD work, but an unbalanced ME doesn't allow them to.
Presets should be FUNCTIONING EXAMPLES of a style to help new players understand how to set up a basic tactic.
Like the tactic I posted before, which certainly isn't the best possible, but it WORKS well enough to fulfill that role.
If the presets don't serve this purpose, they're useless.9 ore fa, herne79 ha scritto:Personally I think presets should never have been included in the game
Or they could remove them altogether and make even more inaccessible a game that already has a fairly elitist aura as it is
2 ore fa, Mitja ha scritto:I think SI would do themselves a favour if they simplified tactics creator.
55 minuti fa, Costav ha scritto:I am sorry, but tactics in FM are almost elementary. IRL there are plenty of cases when in phase of possession you change your disposition on the filed, and then you change it back when out of possession of the ball....
I kinda agree with both of you.
If it were up to me, now that there's an opportunity to rewrite it from scratch, I would simplify the ME entirely and eliminate unnecessary and/or redundant concepts, such as mentality, which are cumbersome and ancient relics from the early prototypes.
And I would focus the tactic creator on the positions and movements of players in possession and out of possession (distinguishing between the start of a play and when reaching the final third) in a way that's clear and concise, as I think that is one of, if not THE most important aspect of any tactic in modern football.0
FM Retro-Gaming... which old is the best?
in Football Manager General Discussion
Posted
I see!
I liked 08's ME more than 07, to be honest.
But 08 had some that I consider major flaws:
- newgens were very bad: low starting CA, low phisical attributes all around, weird distribution of CA (best penalty and free-kick takers in the future are mostly central defenders);
- AI transfer activity was very flat, no more than 1 or 2 good buys per year, most players would spend 10 years in the same team;
As my favourite part of FM are long term saves, these flaws unfortunately prevent me from having fun with 08