Player Instruction Question - More Direct Passes vs. More Risky Passes

[Kharza_FM]

So how specifically does the match engine interrupt the Player Instructions More Direct Passes and More Risky Passes?  The descriptions both talk about risk so it doesn't help much.  I believe I've always heard Rashidi talk about More Risky Passes meaning that more through balls are played so does More Direct Passes mean we look to move the ball from back to front quicker?  So specifically I'm putting this instruction on a DLP-Defend in the DM slot in a stock 4-3-3 so would he look to spray the ball wider to the wings and striker more if I added more direct passes but those balls would be played to feet?  More Risky Passes might still spray the ball to those players but look into the space behind the defensive line maybe so they could run on to it?  Thanks in advance for any help!

[Cleon]

More direct passing is a passing length modifier. It just alters passing length it's that's simple. How quickly you move the ball is down to tempo.

More risky passes just = through ball, so means the ball is played into space and not really at people's feet. The ball will be played in front, behind or the side of a player for the player to run onto.

[Kharza_FM]

28 minutes ago, Cleon said:

More direct passing is a passing length modifier. It just alters passing length it's that's simple. How quickly you move the ball is down to tempo.

More risky passes just = through ball, so means the ball is played into space and not really at people's feet. The ball will be played in front, behind or the side of a player for the player to run onto.

Thanks Cleon.. so a combination would be longer passes into space then?  So to play into space beyond a high line I'd probably want both More Direct and More Risky to a DLP Defend in the DM slot?

[Cleon]

6 minutes ago, Kharza_FM said:

Thanks Cleon.. so a combination would be longer passes into space then?  So to play into space beyond a high line I'd probably want both More Direct and More Risky to a DLP Defend in the DM slot?

A throughball can be any length. If you want to utilise through balls beyond a high line then you need to focus on the roles and duties you use. You'd need players trying to go beyond it so the deeper players or the ones instructed to do more risky passes has people to aim for when doing through balls. 

[MBarbaric]

19 minutes ago, Kharza_FM said:

so a combination would be longer passes into space then?  So to play into space beyond a high line I'd probably want both More Direct and More Risky to a DLP Defend in the DM slot?

 

never understood why the TC is a puzzle game. The bolded question exemplifies this. A player knows what he wants to do (italic) but he doesn't know how to do it. He is forced to choose between a dozen of poorly explained ambiguous instructions without a clear correlation that are really understood only by a few people.

Maybe the TC should be constructed in a way that player chooses what he wants to do. i.e. "play into space beyond a high line targeting that CF that moves into channels". Or, "Pass the ball towards our creative player who moves between the lines". 

Then, the TC should do whatever it wants under the hood to achieve this. i.e. activating longer passes into space while setting the CF to move into channels...  

[Kharza_FM]

Well to be fair.. I know how to do it with team instructions.. what I'm trying to do is identify exactly how to do it with the DLP-D role with Player Instructions and never really understood the difference between the two instructions.  But in essence I agree with you and the TC is way to vague and it has taken me way to many Rashidi video's, trial and error, and reading this board to get a handle on tactics period.  And yes I understand I need the roles to get the attacking runs Cleon.. I have those.. RMD-A, CF-A, and a BBM with Get Further Forward.  What I'm trying to do is isolate the person playing those balls to my DLP and just have everyone else play it a little safer.  I'm playing the lower league challenge and signed a gem of a DLP that I'm trying to get full value out of.  I definitely have a vision for how I want my team to play and get frustrated trying to find the mix of roles, duties, and instructions to make that happen.  It's coming though...

[Scoham]

Have you tried a support duty? It'll mean they're more willing to take risks, which should result in more ambitious passes. You can add "hold position", "dribble less" etc to stop the player taking risks in other ways.

[AFCBeer]

Aside from tactical settings another way to get your DLP to play the passes you want is to train the appropriate PPM's. Obviously this will take a bit of time but can really add something to the way he plays. 

[Shi Xiansheng]

I actually had considered starting a thread on this topic, but I suppose I'll put the question here.

Just to be clear, the instructions More Direct Passes and More Risky Passes are using the word "more" to refer to quantity, not quality, right?  That is, they mean "MORE Direct Passes" and "MORE Risky Passes," not "MORE DIRECT Passes" and "MORE RISKY Passes."  I'm assuming this must be the case because obviously you can't telepathically move the intended recipient of a pass farther from yourself, meaning you can choose to select more distant targets and hence make a greater number of direct passes, but you can't make all your passes a little more direct.  Plus, if it were degree rather than quantity, it would be "Riskier Passes," I suppose.

So if this is the case, it must be that a certain type of pass is labeled "Risky," rather than all passes being relatively more or less risky.  How do we know which are risky?  I mean, yes, I understand that through balls into space are risky while short balls into the feet of an unmarked teammate are not, but what kind of percentages are we talking about here?  Is it the case that some small subset of attempted passes are "Risky" (kind of like how a small subset of completed passes are "Key"), or is the game defining a much greater part of passing as "Risky," including balls not into space but to a marked player for instance?  Are aimless long balls "Risky"?  Does More Risky Passes by necessity increase passing distance too, despite the possibility of short through balls?

Forgive me if this sounds pedantic, but I'm curious how More Risky Passes especially works exactly, and accordingly what exactly its effect would be on top of More Direct Passes (as well as modifiers to passing length and risk from Mentality, Shape and TIs).

[Egecann]

9 hours ago, Shi Xiansheng said:

I actually had considered starting a thread on this topic, but I suppose I'll put the question here.

Just to be clear, the instructions More Direct Passes and More Risky Passes are using the word "more" to refer to quantity, not quality, right?  That is, they mean "MORE Direct Passes" and "MORE Risky Passes," not "MORE DIRECT Passes" and "MORE RISKY Passes."  I'm assuming this must be the case because obviously you can't telepathically move the intended recipient of a pass farther from yourself, meaning you can choose to select more distant targets and hence make a greater number of direct passes, but you can't make all your passes a little more direct.  Plus, if it were degree rather than quantity, it would be "Riskier Passes," I suppose.

So if this is the case, it must be that a certain type of pass is labeled "Risky," rather than all passes being relatively more or less risky.  How do we know which are risky?  I mean, yes, I understand that through balls into space are risky while short balls into the feet of an unmarked teammate are not, but what kind of percentages are we talking about here?  Is it the case that some small subset of attempted passes are "Risky" (kind of like how a small subset of completed passes are "Key"), or is the game defining a much greater part of passing as "Risky," including balls not into space but to a marked player for instance?  Are aimless long balls "Risky"?  Does More Risky Passes by necessity increase passing distance too, despite the possibility of short through balls?

Forgive me if this sounds pedantic, but I'm curious how More Risky Passes especially works exactly, and accordingly what exactly its effect would be on top of More Direct Passes (as well as modifiers to passing length and risk from Mentality, Shape and TIs).

We agreed on "More Risky Passes" means Try more through balls , More Direct Passes means Try more vertical passes.For example let's take AP in Cm strata. With short passing and more risky passing he should try to send through balls to wingers, fullbacks who is overlapping or his midfield partner but with direct and risky passes he should send balls behind the defence in theory.  Are we overcomplicating TC? We know what we want to do but we don't know how to do it generally.

[herne79]

4 minutes ago, Egecann said:

If i understand it correctly "More Risky Passes" means Try more through balls , More Direct Passes means Try more vertical passes.

 

On ‎20‎/‎09‎/‎2017 at 12:56, Cleon said:

More direct passing is a passing length modifier. It just alters passing length it's that's simple. How quickly you move the ball is down to tempo.

More risky passes just = through ball, so means the ball is played into space and not really at people's feet. The ball will be played in front, behind or the side of a player for the player to run onto.

[Egecann]

1 minute ago, herne79 said:

 

Isn't through ball means sending balls to a player who is making a run? With that definiton that should make it a more direct pass automatically. Can you send a through ball to your CB? More you think of it, more it gets complicated

[HUNT3R]

6 minutes ago, Egecann said:

Isn't through ball means sending balls to a player who is making a run? With that definiton that should make it a more direct pass automatically. Can you send a through ball to your CB? More you think of it, more it gets complicated

A pass into space is just a pass into space. It can be any length. Length/Directness is where the passing instructions come in.

[kandersson]

I think an in-game graphic/animated explanation would help a lot with PI's and TI's. I know I should be able to know after almost 20 years of CM/FM but sometimes I doubt I have ever understood some of the basics of this game... For example in this goal (scored by Belotti, assisted by Ljajic) what is Ljajic doing?

A) a more direct pass

B) a through ball

C) both

out of interest, Belotti is:

A) moving into channels

B) trying to beat offside trap

C) both?

 

[Cleon]

1 minute ago, kandersson said:

I think an in-game graphic/animated explanation would help a lot with PI's and TI's. I know I should be able to know after almost 20 years of CM/FM but sometimes I doubt I have ever understood some of the basics of this game... For example in this goal (scored by Belotti, assisted by Ljajic) what is Ljajic doing?

A) a more direct pass

B) a through ball

C) both

out of interest, Belotti is:

A) moving into channels

B) trying to beat offside trap

C) both?

 

It's just a normal pass. 

[Cleon]

This is an example of a through ball, ignore the length of the pass and focus on where the ball is going and what Henry is doing.

 

[MBarbaric]

so a pass into space for a forward moving into space. however, it is a counter attack so a lot of space to move into.

[Cleon]

4 minutes ago, MBarbaric said:

so a pass into space for a forward moving into space. however, it is a counter attack so a lot of space to move into.

Counter attack isn't a passing move though its a style. It doesn't matter if there is lots or space or not, I'm highlighting what a through ball is so people can easily see what one is. How or why its created is irrelevant. Although its not a counter attack, there are only 2 players involved in going forward and are outnumbered 2v5. But that's a different thing altogether. Without the through ball it would have likely been a direct pass forward though, unless Xavi played it safe and passed backwards as it would have been a direct attack, not a counter attacking one.

[Atarin]

If the developers were aiming to demystify the basic tools of the game then they couldn't go wrong with, as well as the basic descriptions that accompany all the options, having pop up gifs/graphics that illustrate the concept. Despite their best efforts the descriptions, like the ones accompanying Roles, Mentality and Shape for example, still trip people up.

[Cleon]

Just now, Atarin said:

If the developers were aiming to demystify the basic tools of the game then they couldn't go wrong with, as well as the basic descriptions that accompany all the options, having pop up gifs/graphics that illustrate the concept. Despite their best efforts the descriptions, like the ones accompanying Roles, Mentality and Shape for example, still trip people up.

Quite some time ago I did a feature request that asked if we could see all the instructions on a training pitch and it show you a little example of what the options actually do. Just a quick basic visual. I guess its a lot to implement though and something that would take quite some years to implement. 

[MBarbaric]

2 minutes ago, Cleon said:

Counter attack isn't a passing move though its a style. It doesn't matter if there is lots or space or not, I'm highlighting what a through ball is so people can easily see what one is. How or why its created is irrelevant. Although its not a counter attack, there are only 2 players involved in going forward and are outnumbered 2v5. But that's a different thing altogether.

well, if counter attack has to have numerical advantage then you're right. personally, i don't think it matters. i consider it counter attack if the defensive unit isn't in position, and obviously they aren't as they just lost the ball. anyway, i was mentioning it just to highlight it is easier to play a through ball when you have space. much more difficult to find that space for a through ball when you face an organized defensive unit that sits firmly behind the ball.

considering that people are struggling with breaking down poor teams that defend deep I thought it might be relevant. especially as in these situations a lot of players try to put a ton of TI's. "more through balls" seems no brainer in these situations. except, if there is no space, there is little point of playing a through ball. well, at least i see it that way. might be well off

[Cleon]

1 minute ago, MBarbaric said:

well, if counter attack has to have numerical advantage then you're right. personally, i don't think it matters. i consider it counter attack if the defensive unit isn't in position, and obviously they aren't as they just lost the ball. anyway, i was mentioning it just to highlight it is easier to play a through ball when you have space. much more difficult to find that space for a through ball when you face an organized defensive unit that sits firmly behind the ball.

considering that people are struggling with breaking down poor teams that defend deep I thought it might be relevant. especially as in these situations a lot of players try to put a ton of TI's. "more through balls" seems no brainer in these situations. except, if there is no space, there is little point of playing a through ball. well, at least i see it that way. might be well off

By pure definition a counter attack in football is a numerical advantage. Without the numbers advantage its just a direct attack.

I did a post about breaking weaker sides down, shame not many people read it

[Atarin]

2 hours ago, kandersson said:

I think an in-game graphic/animated explanation would help a lot with PI's and TI's. I know I should be able to know after almost 20 years of CM/FM but sometimes I doubt I have ever understood some of the basics of this game... For example in this goal (scored by Belotti, assisted by Ljajic) what is Ljajic doing?

A) a more direct pass

B) a through ball

C) both

out of interest, Belotti is:

A) moving into channels

B) trying to beat offside trap

C) both?

 

Some footballing terms are a bit like pornography, you can't always describe it to the satisfaction of everyone, but we all know it when we see it.

In my mind a short pass is played between two team mates who are close enough that a clear passing channel exists, i.e - an unobstructed gap. These tend to be technically easier and lower risk.

A direct pass is a pass that covers distance in order to bypass opposition players who stand between the passer and the recipient. This kind of pass can be along the grass, in the form of a through ball,  in the air in the form or a ping, punt or a cross. If it bypasses multiple players then it can probably be assumed to be a direct pass, if not then its probably a short pass.

If you want to know the difference in your game just observe the distance between the players, the presence of a gap for the ball to travel cleanly and then risk/difficulty involved.

The channels can be best understood by seeing the pitch as being broken down into horizontal and vertical rows and strata. The gaps are between the fullback and the flank (1), between the fullback and the centre back (2), between the two centre backs (3), the other centre back and the other fullback (4) and the fullback and the flank (5). Historically, 1 & 5 were the "outside" or "flank". 3 was "the middle" or "the hole" and 2 & 4 were the channels. Its not incorrect to call them all channels though. It basically means any movement between defenders, rather than up against them.

Beating the offside trap is the same as "breaking the back line" or "running in behind". It basically means exploiting the space behind the defence without being offside. If there is space behind a defence, then they will invariably be trying to mitigate that by moving up when the ball is played to capture the attacker in an offside position. A clever striker delays and bends his run in order to time it just right so he isn't offside and then he can enjoy all of that space.

I would say the video shows the advanced striker exploiting the "2" and the deeper striker playing a threaded short pass. Nothing complex.

[Rashidi]

2 hours ago, kandersson said:

I think an in-game graphic/animated explanation would help a lot with PI's and TI's. I know I should be able to know after almost 20 years of CM/FM but sometimes I doubt I have ever understood some of the basics of this game... For example in this goal (scored by Belotti, assisted by Ljajic) what is Ljajic doing?

A) a more direct pass

B) a through ball

C) both

out of interest, Belotti is:

A) moving into channels

B) trying to beat offside trap

C) both?

 

Belotti ran through the channel between the FB and the CD and was found with a simple pass to feet. A throughball can be played in many ways but that wasn't one of them.

[Egecann]

3 hours ago, Cleon said:

Quite some time ago I did a feature request that asked if we could see all the instructions on a training pitch and it show you a little example of what the options actually do. Just a quick basic visual. I guess its a lot to implement though and something that would take quite some years to implement. 

In Championship Manager 2010 we could see the training drills and created set pieces live in 3d. Similiar thing can be done in FM. Maybe SI is afraid of this additon makes the game more arcadey but it could make the game more realistic. We can choose players based on training performances not just by attributes. 

[Atarin]

7 minutes ago, Egecann said:

In Championship Manager 2010 we could see the training drills and created set pieces live in 3d. Similiar thing can be done in FM. Maybe SI is afraid of this additon makes the game more arcadey but it could make the game more realistic. We can choose players based on training performances not just by attributes. 

Even if they didn't want to go down that route, they could still make training seem more..."real time". Its a huge part of a football manager's job (if they work six days a week, they usually spend five of them on the training ground) and yet in the game its so easily done on auto-pilot. Just select a Role and let them get on with it. It is definitely time saving but it isn't very "sim", isn't very immersive and definitely isn't particularly interesting.

Going back to the issue of graphical representations, I just think it would remove some ambiguity that currently exists, not all obviously. The game should be hard because you're up against a devious AI opponent and because your squad of players are characters who react to different approaches, not because the tactical controls are cryptic.

[Egecann]

2 minutes ago, Atarin said:

Even if they didn't want to go down that route, they could still make training seem more..."real time". Its a huge part of a football manager's job (if they work six days a week, they usually spend five of them on the training ground) and yet in the game its so easily done on auto-pilot. Just select a Role and let them get on with it. It is definitely time saving but it isn't very "sim", isn't very immersive and definitely isn't particularly interesting.

Going back to the issue of graphical representations, I just think it would remove some ambiguity that currently exists, not all obviously. The game should be hard because you're up against a devious AI opponent and because your squad of players are characters who react to different approaches, not because the tactical controls are cryptic.

Yes game should be hard but think like that you are a manager and you want to play through balls behind the high line of opponent. In real life you just say send through balls to our forward. But in FM you don't know how to say it. I'm giving example from through balls since this is the topic.

[Atarin]

Just now, Egecann said:

Yes game should be hard but think like that you are a manager and you want to play through balls behind the high line of opponent. In real life you just say send through balls to our forward. But in FM you don't know how to say it. I'm giving example from through balls since this is the topic.

I respect the developers, I really do and I love the game but at times it does seem needlessly confusing. I've heard plenty of tactical team talks and never come across some of the concepts in the tactical creator. In  my experience, and I don't know how much this chimes with other peoples, the tactical stuff tends to be quite simple to understand. Footballers aren't known for their powers of concentration. Usually it involves a simple shape when defending, an instruction of of who to try and get the ball too and how quickly and who should be support and covering as the attack develops. Set pieces are generally fairly simple as well. Big lads on big lads, little lads on runners and someone to apply pressure and someone to offer an out ball.

I realise that if this was all there was then the control freaks and micro-managers would be unhappy but the tactics creator (both UI and engine) should be more geared to towards the former, imho. By this I mean plenty of room for customisation but under that a really simple and clear toolbox for those of us that think half time is for a cup of tea and a sit down not a physics lesson.

[ferrarinseb]

SI should first and foremost give the Functionality understanding of tactical options / instructions on what does what with a detailed info. I think very few people have that knowledge and may be even fewer who can use it to implement. 

About Some of Instructions :

More risky passes = Through ball to space 

More Direct passes = Long ball i think players tend to use long balls with that on. Its not just distance in my view. May be it differs with TI and PI. 

In a test i made I had Mixed Passing in TI and i gave my CB's and DLP the more direct passes they are passing it quite long and quick. 

[jc577]

If we've agreed that 'More Risky Passes' = Through balls, and 'More Direct Passes' = More vertical (i.e. longer) passes, then could we say that BPD's asked to play more risky passes is a combination of both? Obviously depends on a variety of things, but I'd be tempted to suggest they look to play more direct passes as opposed to more risky passes.

[Atarin]

1 minute ago, jc577 said:

If we've agreed that 'More Risky Passes' = Through balls, and 'More Direct Passes' = More vertical (i.e. longer) passes, then could we say that BPD's asked to play more risky passes is a combination of both? Obviously depends on a variety of things, but I'd be tempted to suggest they look to play more direct passes as opposed to more risky passes.

In general, yes. The main difference between a BPD, DCB and a CD is in their style of distribution. A CD keeps it simple, possession being key. a BPD pushes forward and looks for passes into the offensive third, offering penetration. DCB's take a safety first approach and lump it out or forward.

[MBarbaric]

15 hours ago, Atarin said:

I've heard plenty of tactical team talks and never come across some of the concepts in the tactical creator.

essentially, this!

"team shape" is a good example. in FM it represents something that has nothing to do with real tactics terminology, at least not in a way it is in FM. Then the risk modifier aka mentality. i understand it is an attempt to translate risk from football towards the computer code. however, it doesn't really represent how football works.

it might seem counterintuitive, but in real, you aren't playing attacking football just by making players more keen to get forward earlier or pass the ball forward rather than sideways or back. How attacking you are, depends on how many players you move up the pitch when you have the ball. How keen you are to press high up the pitch, and above all, what kind of movement you do to open space.

In real tactics player roles certainly exist, however, they are divided between phases of the game (attack, defence, defensive transition, attacking transition..). Each player on the field has his role within the team during each phase of the game. And they can be very different. In FM they are all lumped together into one overall, uber role. it doesn't work like that.

I.E., defensive forward: in FM you have a description he will close down the dm (on support) or the back line (defence). That might be fine, but that is essentially what almost every striker does when the team closes the opposition high up the pitch. When the team has possession, that same player might play as F9. but what does he do when you are in possession in FM? 

While TC is one part of the problem, the ME is another. The defensive phase of the game is very much neglected and some basic principles of cover/pressure don't exist but that is another topic I guess. 

[Egecann]

1 hour ago, MBarbaric said:

essentially, this!

"team shape" is a good example. in FM it represents something that has nothing to do with real tactics terminology, at least not in a way it is in FM. Then the risk modifier aka mentality. i understand it is an attempt to translate risk from football towards the computer code. however, it doesn't really represent how football works.

it might seem counterintuitive, but in real, you aren't playing attacking football just by making players more keen to get forward earlier or pass the ball forward rather than sideways or back. How attacking you are, depends on how many players you move up the pitch when you have the ball. How keen you are to press high up the pitch, and above all, what kind of movement you do to open space.

In real tactics player roles certainly exist, however, they are divided between phases of the game (attack, defence, defensive transition, attacking transition..). Each player on the field has his role within the team during each phase of the game. And they can be very different. In FM they are all lumped together into one overall, uber role. it doesn't work like that.

I.E., defensive forward: in FM you have a description he will close down the dm (on support) or the back line (defence). That might be fine, but that is essentially what almost every striker does when the team closes the opposition high up the pitch. When the team has possession, that same player might play as F9. but what does he do when you are in possession in FM? 

While TC is one part of the problem, the ME is another. The defensive phase of the game is very much neglected and some basic principles of cover/pressure don't exist but that is another topic I guess. 

Make FM great again