Jump to content

Spart

Members+
  • Content Count

    726
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

12 "You're a bum, Rock"

About Spart

  • Rank
    Amateur

Biography

  • Biography
    Writer.

About Me

  • About Me
    Manchester/London

Interests

  • Interests
    Football, writing, music, gaming

Favourite Team

  • Favourite Team
    MUFC, Dulwich Hamlet

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. @herne79I don't think SI are making them up at all but unless the Brazilian Portuguese version of the game is going to include 'No Nonsense Full-back' without translation then it doesn't make much sense to use an untranslated label for a position. @AmaranteIt's not about dumbing down though. If anything, I'd like it to be more complex with a greater array of customisable options for generic roles. Please don't misrepresent what I'm saying in order to grandstand about a strawman argument you've cooked up.
  2. @AFCBeer For sure! I'm very interesting to see all these little sub-systems will work together now it has been made easier to get at options such as 'defensive width'. What happens when a side set up for Gegenpressing goes on the defensive in the last 10 mins without changing style? Lots of things I'm going to be interested to see in action.
  3. @MBarbaric Great post. Interesting point too on how some managers do view the game through Player Roles, and SI have come upon the idea of player roles from speaking to professionals in the game, so perhaps player roles should exist, just as these tactical styles will now exist starting from FM19, but with more options for the generic roles for those who want to see the game the other way? Wait... that sounds even more complex. Ignore me. Ahem.
  4. @HUNT3R Right but I haven't denied there is information in the game on them, or that there's anything deeper than not liking how the roles are presented. I'm not sure you are getting the point of what I'm saying, which is probably my fault for dropping a bit of a stream consciousness in here between work rather than taking time to go over it properly. No problems with the game or SI at all. This is just a direction I'd like to see development go in, eventually. If that's no possible or popular, fair enough. There are far better ideas and bigger 'problems' that have been raised by others.
  5. @HUNT3R Of course, but I still think they can be a barrier to understanding or immersion, and would prefer a more streamlined array of roles with more customisation options where I tell a central midfielder to make for the half space rather than select a Mezzala. It's not life or death by any means but it'd be a quality of life addition for me - which I get isn't enough as the game isn't made to my spec or interests, thankfully!
  6. @AFCBeer I think where my uncertainty stems/stemmed from is how it affects the centre-backs, not so much the full-backs. I'd hope to be able to use individual instructions to tell my wider players what I expect them to do in one-on-one situations, whereas a wide defensive shape (this was my first impression) would also force your central defenders to split to cover the full-backs, therefore leaving the middle exposed, and I can't think of any situation where you'd want that as the defending team.
  7. @HUNT3R For sure, I just think it would be better if you opened up your tactical tool box, so to speak, and the options available made more sense on first glance. You could stick someone in front of it with all the tactical insight you'd want and they would have to jump through a few loops first if they weren't au fait with the labels borrowed from other football traditions that don't always actually mean what FM has made them to mean.
  8. That proves my point on Segundo Volante though, no? It's not a term or a label that was in common use. The top result on Google in English is about an FM role because it wasn't a term widely used to describe anything in football in English prior to its inclusion in the game. Not true of False Nine. If we were to go down the generic roles, more customisation options route I'm talking about then a Regista (in my weird little world) would be a DLP with added instructions; instructions that might only be unlocked if you drop the player into the DM band. That seems reasonable on the face of it
  9. Yeah, I get this, and what I'm wondering about/hoping for might be an absolutely terrible idea in terms of how it actually works (or doesn't) in the game, in which case fair enough!
  10. No problem at all with 'False Nine'. It does what it says on the tin and for those who don't understand what it does it's easy to Google. Not sure that's true of Carrillo, Mezzala, Segundo Volante Take Trequartista for example... Couldn't that be covered with a dribbly attacking playmaker with a free role and other instructions? It has become a more specific term because of its use in FM whereas previously in the wider world (I may be wrong on this) it is a catch all term in Italy for a playmaker as I understand it. Not keen on Raumdeuter either for the reason DP states above. Isn't
  11. That makes sense. Thanks Rashidi and HansJoachimM!
  12. Hi all, I really like the sound of the new tactical styles, mentalities and how SI seem to be trying to make sure when jargon is used it's in keeping with common terms in football, rather than stuff that only really makes sense to them/FM. On that note, I wonder if it's time to look again at player roles and how they're labelled and used? I understand that the Mezzala (for example) was created as a specialist, hard-coded role that moves central midfielders into the half-space but why not just make that an instruction we can trigger? There's many other examples of this. Trequarti
  13. That's not quite the same thing though. You can have coverage of pass lanes and all that but if your two centre-backs are spread apart there will still be too much of a gap through the middle which will need a body (or two) to fill. I think it was against Young Boys earlier this season taht Fellaini and Matic dropped back to cover that space?
  14. That sort of makes sense - I was thinking you'd deal with that with individual instructions but it could go hand in hand. I guess if you instruct a back four to have a lot of defensive width, which will pull the centre-backs apart, you'd have to prepare for that by having a midfielder available with the right role to drop back and pull the gap?
  15. Hi everyone. Long time no posting but the new tactical options has spurred me to log back on with a question. We'll be able to set defensive width in the new tactics module but while being narrow and compact without the ball makes perfect sense why would you ever want a wide defence increasing the gaps between your defenders? What am I missing? Thanks!
×
×
  • Create New...