(sic)

No. It's not a skin at all, it's just a concept design.

It's a shame Mitro, Vlahovic and Kostic weren't fully fit. The game could've gone very differently. We just had nothing going forward. Didn't even put in any good crosses. Brazil are just stacked, they could change their entire front 5, and they would still beat most of the teams in this WC.

Visual hierarchy might be the term you're looking for. Certain important things should stand out more, and be larger/bolder. Though in this case, I'm not sure how you can do it, as all of these items carry the same importance. Maybe you could do it by ordering them in a different way, so it's not just 2 straight rows of 7 boxes. Imo the game does it well by distributing attributes in 3 areas, though I'm also a fan of dividing it even more. I'd actually like it if SI changed it up a bit, and instead grouped certain things like @_Ben_ has done, but showed icons and descriptions, instead of the raw attribute values. Kind of like what coach/scout reports do with pros/cons, but better.

Fred on. We might still have a chance!

Tbf we're used to it at this point. Last time vs Switzerland it was a complete mess. Blatant foul on Mitrovic, we don't get a pen, instead he shows a yellow to Mitro. We proceed to lose the game in the end.

VLAHOVIC ON here we go

SMS rarely ever shows up for the NT, so I wouldn't really count on it. I really want to see Kostic and Vlahovic, we need someone to actually put in crosses for our forwards.

It's not a problem, it's personal preference. I use dark mode on any app, website, etc. that allows it, including these forums. I can't stand looking at a white screen for a longer period of time.

https://www.behance.net/gallery/156580343/Football-Manager-Improved-UIUX-Design Seen this linked in another thread. I think it looks really good, it's simple, modern, and clean looking. I really wish SI would actually work more on this end, and make some larger changes to the UI/UX. A lot of areas have been pretty much unchanged for 10-15 years, and this is an example of what a modern UI looks like. I'm gonna try to make some of it work in-game, but I don't think a lot of this stuff can be changed.

Yeah you can set the pitch horizontally. I wanted to do something like having tactics screen with the pitch on top of the page, with squad selection on the bottom. But I couldn't be bothered to figure out how that whole panel works, as it makes 0 sense to me. For example, I can't even figure out how to resize the width of those 2 sections (pitch and squad selection). I can resize the pitch separately, but not the whole panel underneath it.

I'm in love. This is absolutely what a modern UI should look like, not the mess we have right now.

Hardly creative mate, I struggle with that as well Most of my "creativity" comes from seeing someone else's work, then trying to "improve on it" or do something similar, but in a "better" or different way (when I say improve and make it better, I mean making it suit my taste more). I have a hard time coming up with stuff myself (one of the reasons I stopped pursuing a career in web design and UI/UX design). Most of the stuff you see on that panel comes from taking inspiration from Tato, FME, TCS and OPZ skins for example (stuff like the general layout of panels, using tabbed containers, using different selector panels, using tables, etc.).

Thanks, it took me a while to find these icons and put them together so they make sense (as I just used the already available icons that come with the game). It would've been easier to just download some off the internet

Here's another example, seen it quite a few times now. GK hesitates a few times, when he could've cleared the ball. 1st goal Burton.pkm

Can confirm, this often happens when the opposition isn't pressing. Players often just stand in one place and do nothing, instead of moving into the space with the ball. Don't have any .pkms right now though, will try to remember to get some when I notice it happening.

Best ME ever made imo. I'm not seeing any issues, therefore it must be your tactics. /s Goes for it, then changes his mind, then goes for it again, then changes his mind again. Just lets the striker score. Amazing stuff, even that through ball might be offside.

Added some selector panels, changed up the stadium panel, the top panel with the logos and stuff, as well as added some icons to other stuff (club details and facilities). Overall, I'm looking to add more icons to other areas as well, player profile, home page, etc. I really like how they make the skin feel less empty and less boring,

Hmmm, makes sense if it's true. I never believed that text description. For example when you go on player instructions, it would say Trigger press "Less Often" but the green bar would be full. So over the years I just learned to ignore it

See, I didn't come to that conclusion about the PIs, but I do understand how some people did. I agree that UI is a mess in FM, in general, not just in this instance. You already set up your defensive line, why would you need to set it up again with Step Up/Drop Off? To me it was clear from the start that it would be situational, and that it would instruct the players how to deal with the opposition who is coming at them. Step Up to compress the space ahead, so the opposition have less opportunities to play in front of defence. Drop Off to protect against balls over the top, but it could leave space in front of defence. Overall, this game should be a lot more clear in telling players what something does and how it does it. When it comes to roles, duties, mentality, PIs, TIs, everything. They attempted to do something with adding animations to role descriptions, but they just left it at that. They didn't even adjust those animations for different duties (Defend, Support, Attack). Imo they should work on it more, and expand on it. Right now it just feels like they abandoned this completely.

I already have that, but when I installed a new logo pack it changed to display logo instead of the national flag. Weird, as it still displays the flag on the club/nation pages. The issue comes when I try to place that same code for the national flag on player profile, it just displays nothing at all. Gave up on trying to fix it.

I agree, a perfect new role for this would be a Inverted-Fullback. So when you have him on support, rather than roaming around and what not, you'd just have him sit in the midfield, and if on defend, he'd hold the back 3 shape.

I definitely agree with this, except the WB-S. Now, I haven't watched Arsenal that much, but when I have, White was usually either forming a back 3, by staying deep, or pushing into the midfield and forming a midfield 3, but still playing narrow, IWB-D makes the most sense, though maybe you could make him overlap sometimes, or even play him as FB-S with sit narrower, hold position, etc. IWB-S definitely is a role that Zinchenko plays, especially because it has Roam from position PI, and I don't think White really plays that role, hence why I think he should have a more conservative role. Again, I'm not 100% sure on it, maybe he did play as a WB-S in other games. But I do agree with the rest of the tactics, and it is spot on, just like how I would set it up (Maybe I'd put Jesus on CF-S).

Nobody's discrediting the effort itself, just the conclusions and the way he reaches those conclusions. Again, some of his findings might be correct, but from what I've seen, most of them simply aren't. When he tells people that there isn't any significant difference between BPDs and WCBs, and then shows how he came to that conclusion, a lot of people would tend to believe it, even though it simply isn't true at all. Like he said in the video "After every match, I went into the match report and recorded the statistics that I THINK are relevant in assessing the performance of the WCB" So it's all based on what he thinks is relevant, meaning there's a lot of room for mistakes (especially if he doesn't select the right things to look out for). Especially because you would need to simulate a few hundred matches for each tactic, and not just a few dozen in total. Also, just by looking at the numbers like blocks/interceptions, etc. you can't get a full picture of how the role plays. There are so many variables not accounted for, like the tactic and the roles around the WCB (including midfield roles, wingback roles), team and player instructions, mentality, duties. Then we also have opposition formations, opposition roles, duties and instructions. All of that is missing, and all of those are variables that will make the WCB (or any other role) play slightly different. Though you don't even have to do all of that, you can just load up the match and watch it. WCBs, especially on Support and Attack will make attacking runs, they will overlap and underlap, just like the description says, while the BPDs won't really do that (not unless you have the right attributes, traits, tactics, etc. set up, but even then, they wouldn't do it as often as WCB). Similarly, with the Carrilero analysis, he came to the conclusion that CM-S and Carrilero aren't really different... by testing the role in a 4-3-3, 4-2-3-1, and 4-4-2 formations. What about the formations in which the role should actually be used, like 5-3-2, 4-4-2 diamond, and other formations without wingers? You know, the formations for which the Carrilero role is primarily designed for. It's the same thing with this now, he just looks at the wrong things and doesn't understand what the instructions are for, and comes to wrong conclusions at the end.

This does make sense, but where did you get that info from?

+1. While they do hold the width better this year, especially if you train "hugs the line" trait, they're just missing something. They often get in the way of the Mezzala, especially if they're both on support duty. So I do prefer Wingers to IWs in that sense. Wingers with with their stronger foot on the opposite side of where they're playing on, and with cuts inside trait work much better imo. They hold their width, they do cut in sometimes (honestly I found them cutting in with the ball more than the IWs do, which is definitely weird, maybe the actual trait works better than the PI), but they also do run to the byline and cross (not from the wide areas, but instead on the edge of the box), instead of just turning around and looking for options (though it helps to have a player who's comfortable with both feet). Though it all depends on what you want from the player/role. If I want the wide player to actually operate in half-spaces, and be a more creative type, I'd often pick IW-S and tell him to sit narrow, Roam from position, etc. CM-A does often seem to play as a second striker, especially in the buildup, so you get something like a 4-2-4, if you play a 4-3-3 formation. Support duties can be too conservative, and too deep. I'd just mess around with mentality settings. AP-A would also work, as he doesn't really play like a CM-A. He will go forward often, but he'll also drop back when needed in the buildup. I used a formation with no attacking duties and an Attacking mentality. So the midfielders who were on support were more willing to go forward, but they would also sometimes help in the buildup. Also I found that the more attacking mentalities are better in the buildup, as they don't look to kick it long as often, for no reason. Player traits like "Tries to play way out of trouble" are great for this as well. and if you train this trait to your back 5 (back 4 + DM), it works wonderfully. Though you obviously need players with good attributes to do this (Anticipation, Composure, Concentration, Decisions, Vision, Agility, Balance, First Touch, Passing, Technique, Dribbling, Acceleration) - are all important to have imo).