Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community

shaunwwfc

Members
  • Content Count

    891
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About shaunwwfc

  • Rank
    Amateur

Currently Managing

  • Currently Managing
    to struggle

Recent Profile Visitors

3,754 profile views
  1. So that is more of a game issue than system its ran on? Thanks for the post on save on laptops Would it be a fair assumption to make that if I run nothing in 3D on FM then a dedicated graphics card would not be needed? What is the main difference (FM wise) between a "U" processor and a "H" or "HQ" processor ? Would a "H" in an 4th or 5th gen in i3 be better than a i7 7 gen "u"? Hope that makes sense!
  2. Thanks for your reply mate. Could you elaborate on the bit in bold? I dont see any reason why I could not get away with medium database actually. Also, it is not actually an i7, it is an i5. It is the HP 250 G6 laptop. Due to a work discount I can get it at around £350. Would this suit me for FM? Link below; https://store.hp.com/UKStore/Merch/Product.aspx?id=1WY59EA&opt=ABU&sel=DEF
  3. How would this run; Intel Core i7 7500U 2.7GHz 8GB DDR4 RAM and 256GB SSD Storage 15.6 inch Full HD Screen WiFi and Bluetooth Windows 10 Home I use no aspects of 3D at all. Every match I watch is in 2D. I plan to run say around 5/6 nations on large database.
  4. They are both a concern but I am sure they are being addressed. Remember this is still beta and the data lock has not been placed yet (least I think) Neves and Ruddy's new contract have also not been added. Vinagre wage is also too high. I am also very uncomfortable with the wages of Patricio and Moutinho. I understand they were both big "marquee" signings and Wolves owners are loaded, but it leaves a huge gap between those salaries and the rest of the side. Without sounding cheesy, that is not what "the pack" at Wolves are about. I have not started a save with Wolves yet, but that combined with the finance issue means in-game it could develop into a very difficult management issue with huge implications in house. Total contrast to RL imo.
  5. I feel devastated but it just doesn't do it for me this year. There are just too many issues, many of which @bababooey touched on. The game has got lost in itself for me. The simplistic thing about FM was how beautifully simplistic it was. It feels like FM has been taken over by someone, that is how difficult and irritating the UI is.
  6. Personally I am not sure if it is possible in FM. Definatly wasnt in 17.
  7. I really enjoy your stories smp20. What I enjoy the most is your tactical approach. Very simplistic and very stubborn, but in a good way. By and large your shape and philosophy remains exactly the same and I really admire that, if anything it is encouraging and wipes away the "AI crack your system" myth. What I would like to ask though, from a tactical POV, do you tend to make many tweaks? Or do you remain quite loyal to it? Generally it always seems to be 4-4-2/4-4-1-1 (two DMs) with a very fluid team shape and Attacking mentality. Do you ever differ from that??
  8. I saw those tweets, fairplay for posting it. Intrigued to look at the tactic actually. Insane results.
  9. I think the modern day 3-4-3 only really works when the "3" up top are played with AMC roles.
  10. I once noticed this with Rowett well before he left Blues. I thought SI knew something we didnt when he did indeed leave! Does seem to be an odd random one.
  11. Put a CM on hold position and you basically have a deep lying playmaker. You could even add more risky passes. He will essentially behave like one, with the added benefit of the rest of the side not always looking to get him to be the main creator. The main creators you want are your wide players.
  12. I do not think you should play with any Playmakers/Target Men unless they are genuinely your only good players. They attract too much attention. Your side will always look for your playmaker to create, and the Target Man will always be your one main outlet. No wonder you are so direct, it is too one dimensional. I would go Flexible/Standard with for now just exploit each flank and see how that goes. Simplify it as much as possible. In that structure/strategy, I think two Box to Box midfielders with Wingers either side are ideal. They are not too conservative, nor too offensive, I actually think it is a good balance. Obviously if you put it up to Attacking then it would be overkill. If personnel or the oppositions approach is leaving you too exposed, go with a CM duo of defend/support. Upfront, I would go with DLF (S) with an Advanced Forward. I would experiment with other combinations but for now try that. But honestly, you are looking to play arguably one of the most simplistic ways, yet putting in player roles that are just harming it and turning it into something else. Let me know how you get on.
  13. On Flexible/Standard, I think two Box to Box midfielders is not actually a bad combo.
×
×
  • Create New...