Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

12 "You're a bum, Rock"

About kevin3

  • Rank

Favourite Team

  • Favourite Team
    Minnesota Timberwolves

Recent Profile Visitors

2,075 profile views
  1. I don't agree that setting too short a passing style will lead to hoofball if it's outside the player's passing range. From running simple tests on FM12, I found that players still play long passes even on very short passing. The difference was most notable when you change a striker's passing style - a shorter passing style actually led to longer, backward passes. Here's an example from FM12: Van Persie (medium mentality, medium CF, passing style 1) receives the ball with his back to goal and has space to turn. Can you guess which pass he plays next? Instead of playing the "short" pass infield to Ramsey, he plays a long sweeping ball backwards to the LB, Andre Santos. The most "direct" pass available to Van Persie in this situation was actually the pass to Ramsey, whilst the long pass backwards to the LB is the one of "shortest" available. My interpretation of the passing slider is that it affects the urgency to advance possession forward into attacking areas/situations vs retain possession (mentality can also have an effect on this).
  2. Does Balance (combined with other attributes) affect the tendency a player will attempt or be caught diving within the ME?
  3. Exactly this. Restricting a user from logical tactical choices is not a solution for poorly-implemented AI. It's just papering over the cracks. Real managers are not restricted by pre-defined roles. I'm not looking for granular control over mentality or creative freedom (although an individual "Be More Expressive/Be More Disciplined" instruction would be nice ). I just would like roles that are generic, or roles that are based on off-ball movement, to be a lot more customisable in terms of on-ball instructions such RWB, TTB, crossing and shooting. The beauty of roles in FM should be for allowing quick tactical shortcuts or for implementing unique behaviour that's not possible with the generic roles, such as Half Back or Wide Playmaker. However, roles shouldn't come at the expense of user creativity or flexibility in designing roles that suit the strengths of each player.
  4. A 2 point difference in player mentalities is exactly how team shape/team compactness worked in previous FMs so it's understandable that users would look at player mentalities to understand different team shapes. From FM12, here are the differences in mentalities between Very Rigid and Very Fluid. Remember mentality directly altered team shape. Very Rigid Very Fluid Do different player mentalities still affect team shape or is it now something else?
  5. I agree. Also, there's no indication from the UI on the variance of creative freedom between each player depending on position, role and duty. In the feature request forum, I made a suggestion for this to be included.
  6. In previous FMs, player mentalities altered space and team shape. How does this work in FM16 if not by changes in player mentalities?
  7. I didn't fully explain it as I didn't want to derail the thread too much, but closing down/d-ine would change based on the pressing style selected (as would mentality/tempo based on build-up style selected). So if a high pressing style was selected, then closing down/d-line would automatically be increased in a similar fashion to how mentalities currently work. But I guess you could include a few extra closing down options if you want, but the main point of the post was to demonstrate how to remove confusion around mentality labels.
  8. This could be rectified if mentality were removed and instead split into two phases - offensive and defensive. A "build-up style" for the offensive strategy and a "pressing style" for the defensive strategy. Like this: Offensive Strategy Build-up Style: Very Short / Short / Mixed / Direct / Very Direct Mentality: Much Safer / Safer / Default / Riskier / Much Riskier Tempo: Much Slower / Slower / Default / Quicker / Much Quicker Creative Freedom, Width, Timewasting, Chance Creation etc Defensive Strategy Pressing Style: Very Low / Low / Medium / High / Very High Defensive Line: Deeper / Default / Higher Closing Down: Less / Default / More Offside Trap, Tacking etc If I want to play a counter-attacking style, I can choose a "low pressing Style" and a "mixed build-up style". If I want to play a possession-based game, I can choose a "very short passing style" and a "high pressing style".
  9. At the moment, there is no feedback from the tactical interface to inform a user on how much creative freedom has been currently assigned to each individual player. On top of this, it would be nice if we could pinpoint a specific player and edit their setting individually. If, for example, I choose the team shape "flexible", there's no way of telling from the interface the extent of the creative freedom difference between my CB and CM or my CM and my ST etc. If I were to then choose a different team shape, a different role or the shout "Be More Expressive/Be more Disciplined", then I only have a really vague idea how much difference this has. So to summarise my request, show on the PI screen how much creative freedom is currently assigned to each player, and then allow us to choose between "Much More Disciplined/More Disciplined/Team Default/More Expressive/Much More Expressive" to alter each player's creative freedom individually.
  10. From observing the ME (I still play on FM12), I've noticed that players with the PPM "Dictates Tempo" like to get attracted to the ball and offer passing options by straying a little outside of their position compared to a player without the PPM. I think the Teamwork attribute may affect this also. For example, I've noticed Mat Hummels step out of a back three to offer passing options for the midfielders, whereas players without the PPM wouldn't do so.
  11. I think roles that edit on-ball instructions (such as RWB and TTB) can actually mean less AI player individuality by shoehorning too many responsibilities. When combined with PPMs, these roles can make players attempt to do too much when in possession. Personally, I would keep the roles that focus mainly on off-ball movement and then allow PPMs to dictate the rest so that AI managers aren't over-burdening their players with instructions. These are the roles I would keep: ST Deep-lying forward Advanced forward Target Man AMC Attacking Midfielder Central Winger AMR/AML Wide Forward Wide Target Man MR/ML Wide Midfielder Winger Inside Midfielder CM Central Midfielder Box-to-Box Midfielder Ball Winning Midfielder Central Winger DM Defensive Midfielder Half Back FB/WB Full Back Wing Back Inverted Wing Back CB Central Defender GK Goalkeeper Sweeper Keeper
  12. Yes player roles have oversimplified tactic-creating to a certain extent. I'm glad we don't have direct control over the 1-20 sliders anymore, but there are a lot of roles that have too many unavailable/hard-coded options for dribbling, passing, shooting, movement etc where I'm forced into accepting SI's interpretation. I think it's too restrictive, and that there should be a role for every position that allows for completely neutral on-ball instructions.
  13. @Cleon Fair enough and perhaps I didn't word my example the best. There is definitely a multitude of factors that determines whether a player will attempt a long-range effort as well as other tactical options. What I'm trying to say is that with higher CF, there is a chance a player might operate with more flair (depending on their flair attribute). With that extra flair, the player might attempt different, more exciting options, some of those options might exist outside of his tactical setup. Does CF have any influence on flair anymore? The FM16 online manual seems to suggest that it can still increase/decrease a player's flair attribute.
  14. So high CF allows a player to ignore their tactical instructions? If so, what's the point giving a player detailed instructions if they are just going to ignore them? The only way that makes sense to me is if a player ignores their instructions so they can attempt a flair-based move, because high CF would allow a player to play with extra flair. For example, a CM with high flair is told not to shoot from range; With high CF, there's an increased chance the player will strike a 30 yard first-time volley at goal because it's a flair-based move. With low CF, there's less chance the player will shoot from range because their flair has been reduced, so they will stick to their instructions more.
  • Create New...