Football Manager TV: Dynamics

[theballstopshere]

I would suggest this: fix the three biggest and most fundamental issues of this game:

- Tactics (the lack of it)

- AI

- 3D match engine 

Something along these three issues, and at the same time, add small, important features like player interaction, stadium/crowd realism, celebrations... the likes. 

The problem right now if this dynamic feature is that SI keeps adding more and more layers to the game, which often add new issues to the game. 

And then they have to fix this new issues next year, which then puts the other bigger issues in the backseat. 

I personally feel that the features they add now should be more thought through and well implemented, if not they will just be adding more fluff. 

[Bunkerossian]

1 minute ago, gunner86 said:

Yeah, you're right, that is the extreme end of the spectrum, but I'm sure there are people out there that would be happy with that, equally there are people that won't.

And as for tactics, we don't know what's been done yet as it hasn't been announced, that doesn't mean it's nothing. The feature tease already acknowledged additional roles, but we won't know more til they tell us more.

 

The number of roles should be reduced in certain areas, to simplify things. Picking the correct role is already hard to do, as the game seems to be very strict on the player if he picked a similar, but not ideal role. Eliminating the possible cause of a failing tactic is hard.

[theballstopshere]

4 minutes ago, gunner86 said:

Yeah, you're right, that is the extreme end of the spectrum, but I'm sure there are people out there that would be happy with that, equally there are people that won't.

And as for tactics, we don't know what's been done yet as it hasn't been announced, that doesn't mean it's nothing. The feature tease already acknowledged additional roles, but we won't know more til they tell us more.

 

Fair enough. I hope they announce the tactics improvement (if any) soon. 

If it is a big leap (as it should be) I was expecting it to be the first thing they introduce. 

But so far, from that overview video it seems nothing, yet. 

I do agree that there are casual players of the game and not all are keen observers of football. 

The tactics should still be updated to reflect the modern game, and let us choose what sort of tactic we prefer. It can be a simple 442, or a more modern Klopp style of football, for example.

This to me should be the basis of a good football management game. 

Edited October 9, 2017 by theballstopshere

[KUBI]

2 minutes ago, theballstopshere said:

 

- Tactics (the lack of it)

 

Could you explain, why you think there is a lack of tactics?

[HUNT3R]

Just now, theballstopshere said:

I would suggest this: fix the three biggest and most fundamental issues of this game:

- Tactics (the lack of it)

- AI

- 3D match engine 

Something along these three issues, and at the same time, add small, important features like player interaction, stadium/crowd realism, celebrations... the likes. 

The problem right now if this dynamic feature is that SI keeps adding more and more layers to the game, which often add new issues to the game. 

And then they have to fix this new issues next year, which then puts the other bigger issues in the backseat. 

I personally feel that the features they add now should be more thought through and well implemented, if not they will just be adding more fluff. 

Did you watch the initial video? Because there's a new graphics engine.

There was an overhaul of the AI, both on and off the pitch.

There are new roles etc too.

So what you mentioned was already covered. Maybe the tactics won't be as detailed as you wanted it; maybe it will.

[andu1]

i hope the next video is about the AI improvements. 

[theballstopshere]

Just now, HUNT3R said:

Did you watch the initial video? Because there's a new graphics engine.

There was an overhaul of the AI, both on and off the pitch.

There are new roles etc too.

So what you mentioned was already covered. Maybe the tactics won't be as detailed as you wanted it; maybe it will.

I might have missed that. I will await till everything is revealed before I comment. 

I would like to see the different sort of pressing being offered, mid press, full press, 7 secs rule...

Even tactics like passing lanes, how we defend set pieces, full man to man or mixed.

Individual tactics like who triggers the press, who covers which part of the pitch. 

I don't expect everything to be, it is nearly impossible but a marked improvement would be great. 

again, i will await for more to be revealed. 

[westy8chimp]

4 minutes ago, gunner86 said:

And as for tactics, we don't know what's been done yet as it hasn't been announced, that doesn't mean it's nothing

You'd like to think each feature they release will be better and better to build up the hype for release day. But considering this Dynamics seems to touch on a lot of areas (your relationship, security, player harmony/morale/hierarchy/tactical bonding, scout reports and more...) I get the impression this will be the biggest feature.

We need a lot of new roles. Think of players like Martial and Rashford - what's the difference? They both like to operate from the left... cut inside and be a goalscoring threat rather than an out and out winger? So both Inside forward right? Where maybe Rashford would then have a PPM likes to get in the box, and Martial has a PPM likes to curl the ball (or likes to shoot from range).

But... do they really play that similarly? Think about how Mourinho uses Rashford in the big games to virtually play as a left back during the defensive phase? Martial isn't capable and would never be employed in that kind of role. Our current solution (which gets nowhere near real life) would be to start Rashford as a FB or WB (to get his defensive positioning when the AI have the ball) with PIs to get further forward, dribble more, cut inside, roam etc

What if we had an attack tactic & a defensive tactic? They could have spent the whole year developing this and making sure it works with the ME and that the AI can use it too. Or give us attacking role and defensive role for each player?

 

[MBarbaric]

16 minutes ago, KUBI said:

Could you explain, why you think there is a lack of tactics?

err, the tactics screen being a defensive shape that allows stupid defensive shapes like 4-2-3-1? apart women college teams in the US I have never seen a professional team defending in that shape and I am not sure US college teams are professional at all. plus, does Guardiola's teams in FM really play anything like Guardiola's teams? Bielsa's? even FIFA got that right and it was a laughing stock here for decades.

anyway, i might be completely wrong and the tactics video will introduce (at least) defensive and offensive shapes.

Edited October 9, 2017 by MBarbaric

[KUBI]

1 minute ago, MBarbaric said:

err, the tactics screen being a defensive shape that allows stupid defensive shapes like 4-2-3-1? apart women college teams in the US I have never seen a professional team defending in that shape and I am not sure US college teams are professional at all. plus, does Guardiola's teams in FM really play anything like Guardiola's teams? Bielsa's? 

4-2-3-1 is the classic Jupp Heynckes tactic, I guess you will see that again in the next couple of weeks.

[Guest]

For those calling for focus on ME improvements there is only so much that SI can do with the physics of a match engine because those laws are established & in many cases already codes so they then needn’t to start looking at what influences match performance. What I like about the potential of this feature is that it could see a significant improvement in the behaviour of players on the pitch to a more realistic level & more importantly have a greater link between what happens on & off the pitch which atm is something I find to be lacking.

If the implementation is spot on then I can only see it being a huge bonus for the overall look & feel of a match played out in FM.

[westy8chimp]

8 minutes ago, theballstopshere said:

I would like to see the different sort of pressing being offered

Big time. IRL a manager will say where he wants his team to win the ball back, which players will commit to the press (depending on where the ball is).

At the moment I can tell the team (or individuals) how much to press. That is all. If I tell my RB to press much more... does this mean he is pressing the opposition RB when they are playing out of defence? No... simply that if the ball gets within an unspecified distance to my RB he will charge in like a headless chicken. This isn't pressing.

Pressing IRL is one of the biggest ways managers can stamp their mark on a team identity (on the pitch).

[MBarbaric]

11 minutes ago, KUBI said:

4-2-3-1 is the classic Jupp Heynckes tactic, I guess you will see that again in the next couple of weeks.

indeed, but when he is forced to defend he did it in 4-4-2 according to a match in 2012 against BVB.

the defensive shape is observed when the team is facing opposition positional attack. meaning the opposition has secured the possession and tries to penetrate the attacking third. 

[Cougar2010]

13 minutes ago, MBarbaric said:

indeed, but when he is forced to defend he did it in 4-4-2 according to a match in 2012 against BVB.

the defensive shape is observed when the team is facing opposition positional attack. meaning the opposition has secured the possession and tries to penetrate the attacking third. 

tbh that defensive shape looks like 451 which is essentially what a 4231 is.

Defensive shape will also depend on the opposition formation when teams don't line up man for man.

[westy8chimp]

1 minute ago, Cougar2010 said:

tbh that defensive shape looks like 451 which is essentially what a 4231 is.

Defensive shape will also depend on the opposition formation when teams don't line up man for man.

No. MBarbic is absolutely correct - in terms of the tactic screen being your defensive formation... any tactic with a striker is virtually redundant. Very few, if any, teams would leave a man as a striker if the opposition have the ball in your third of the pitch.

Mourinho goes to such extremes that his back 4 becomes a back 6 (wide strikers i.e. Rashford and Mata) become left back and right back... with the back 4 squeezing centrally. To emulate this you would have to go for a flat back 6 (not even possible) with 3 dms and a CM in a 63100 formation. It's ludicrous and no new FM'er is going to understand this. Not least when players favoured roles are exactly how you see them depicted in Sky Sports style lineups i.e. 4231. No team defends with 4 players in the opposition half when the opposition has the ball in the final third.

 

[herne79]

1 minute ago, westy8chimp said:

No team defends with 4 players in the opposition half when the opposition has the ball in the final third.

Neither does the 4231 and this imo is part of the issue on the Tactics screen - the formation is shown over the entire pitch.  Just change it to show the formation covering your own half of the pitch and that's nearer how your formation will defend.

But yeh, if you want to defend as a 451 use the 451 formation and set up roles & duties to attack like a 4231 if that's what people are after.

[MBarbaric]

2 minutes ago, Cougar2010 said:

bh that defensive shape looks like 451 which is essentially what a 4231 is.

the one you think is the 5 in 4-5-1 is Mario Mandzukic, a hard-working striker who moves ball side to cover the flank. player actually defending the flank is number "7" - Ribery. In offensive phase, mandzukic plays as a lone forward ahead of Toni Kross in the defensive phase, these two form the first line of defence in 4-4-2 shape.

 

10 minutes ago, Cougar2010 said:

Defensive shape will also depend on the opposition formation when teams don't line up man for man.

Teams don't line up man for man for last 40 years at least. the defensive phase might depend on opposition formation, however, that is to deal with specifics of opposition and doesn't really happen that often. it is rare because offensive shape is so fluid and unpredictable that it is largely unproductive to try and counter it man for man. instead, teams try to cover the most dangerous zones. this is not set in stone but it is a general principle that all teams employ. then, they add stuff against specific threats but FM lacks this general principle in the first place. 

[westy8chimp]

2 minutes ago, herne79 said:

Neither does the 4231 and this imo is part of the issue on the Tactics screen - the formation is shown over the entire pitch.  Just change it to show the formation covering your own half of the pitch and that's nearer how your formation will defend.

But yeh, if you want to defend as a 451 use the 451 formation and set up roles & duties to attack like a 4231 if that's what people are after.

In isolation that's fine... I can put Rashford as a ML WM with instructions to get further forward and cut inside etc ... and as far as the ME goes ... yeah he is kind of playing as an inside forward when I attack.

Unfortunately SI have tied in preferred positions to promises and happiness... as well as aesthetically with the role suitability on the screen. It's poor.

Rashford is an Inside forward ... who under Mourinho will be demanded to work his socks off defensively. So he becomes  a LB when the opposition attack.

It doesn't make sense, whatever spin you put on it, to play him as a FB or WB and use instructions to get the desired inside forward effect. He would get poor ratings and be unhappy in no time.

[Cougar2010]

Just now, westy8chimp said:

No. MBarbic is absolutely correct - in terms of the tactic screen being your defensive formation... any tactic with a striker is virtually redundant. Very few, if any, teams would leave a man as a striker if the opposition have the ball in your third of the pitch.

I was talking about the RL picture not the tactics screen!

If you want to talk about strikers defending then it depends on the role/duty/where the ball is on the pitch/what the opposition players are doing etc etc.

I don't expect my strikers to track back to the 18 yard box and mark midfielders IRL and therefore I don't expect them to in FM.

Going back to the pic that MBarbaric posted what is the striker doing? Which of the yellow team is he marking/pressing/closing down?  Of course the answer is none as you would expect when the ball is on the edge of his 18 yard box.  He is moving to a generic central position in the general area of the yellow DCs waiting for the ball to be passed/cleared up field.

 

Just now, westy8chimp said:

Mourinho goes to such extremes that his back 4 becomes a back 6 (wide strikers i.e. Rashford and Mata) become left back and right back... with the back 4 squeezing centrally. To emulate this you would have to go for a flat back 6 (not even possible) with 3 dms and a CM in a 63100 formation. It's ludicrous and no new FM'er is going to understand this. Not least when players favoured roles are exactly how you see them depicted in Sky Sports style lineups i.e. 4231. No team defends with 4 players in the opposition half when the opposition has the ball in the final third.

Wide strikers don't "become" fullbacks, they are wide strikers who track back when the opposition have the ball in their half.  I can show you plenty of screenshots where my players do similar and end up in the fullback area in FM.

Its also not SIs fault that FMs tactical setup is based from a defensive POV while the media focus on the offensive shape.  Working from a defensive POV makes far more sense.

[Sheriff7]

Good changes and it will add more realism in game but i would like to see more depth in tactics,training and international management...

[HemHat]

3 minutes ago, Cougar2010 said:

Its also not SIs fault that FMs tactical setup is based from a defensive POV while the media focus on the offensive shape.  Working from a defensive POV makes far more sense.

Why do some teams line up in a 4-3-3- then? No team defends like that. 

 

4 minutes ago, Cougar2010 said:

If you want to talk about strikers defending then it depends on the role/duty/where the ball is on the pitch/what the opposition players are doing etc etc.

I don't expect my strikers to track back to the 18 yard box and mark midfielders IRL and therefore I don't expect them to in FM.

I wouldn't expect them to mark a midfielder necessarily, but if there were 2 on the pitch at least 1 would drop to make a compact, deep, 4-4-2/4-5-1/5-4-1 shape when defending. Especially if the other team are attacking for any period of time.

[westy8chimp]

1 minute ago, Cougar2010 said:

Its also not SIs fault that FMs tactical setup is based from a defensive POV while the media focus on the offensive shape.  Working from a defensive POV makes far more sense.

If you start a save as Arsenal. Pick the 11 IRL from the start of the 16/17 campaign, in their best positions in the game. You will have 4231. Exactly how Sky portray them. Sancehz is IF, Ozil AM, Walcott AMR, Giroud SC, Xhaka and Ramsey CM, Bellerin RB, Monreal LB, Koza & Mustafi CB.

Also below....

1 minute ago, westy8chimp said:

Unfortunately SI have tied in preferred positions to promises and happiness... as well as aesthetically with the role suitability on the screen. It's poor

So yes... it is SIs fault. If they want to invest in this idea that you build your formation from defensive shape, then players preferred role and role suitability should match a sensible defensive setup. And there would need to be more roles to enable you to create a good attacking shape off of the defensive setup. A DM with 'get further forward' does not equate to all the possible attacking midfield and striking roles you might want.

[theballstopshere]

I stand corrected on the tactics till i see the full launch of the 2018 game. 

but from the video it seems as though the tactical improvement is a minor part of 2018.

let's see, i am happy to be proven otherwise.

westy and mbarbaric brought up very good points. and a few other posters on here too. 

tactics are really inadequate and should really be the first thing that has to be improved upon, especially so for a football management game. 

years ago i used to be able to play FM without looking much at the tactics, just set a formation, put some instructions and play.

but football has moved on in terms of tactics. it is a lot more in depth now.

and through the internet I am learning more and more about it. 

the more I learn, the more i realise how woefully inadequate SI is in this aspect. 

and honestly, i have stopped playing the game ever since. 

in fact, I think it is hard for those with a decent level of knowledge in football, for example semi-pro coaches and above to even want to pick up the game and play. not saying that i have good knowledge. 

to have new features is good, and important but to me, nothing beats having a really up-to-date tactics implementation. 

just out of curiosity, does SI work with a team of football experts? or are they mostly developers? 

 

[Cougar2010]

2 minutes ago, HemHat said:

Why do some teams line up in a 4-3-3- then? No team defends like that. 

I'm not aware of any team that does that currently, that doesn't mean it hasn't been done in the past though and might be done again in the future as trends in football change over time.

The general trend IRL at the moment is for a solid set defence to restrict space which is why we see compact 442s and a lot of 451 type tactics that leave a lone forward up the field.

 

[themadsheep2001]

I've talked about FM needing to show all 4 phases of football so often, that I'm bored of it. 

That said, the idea that The Tactics Creator is so basic that you can't approximate many of the basic aspects of football, is somewhat absurd. It's certainly got areas to improve in, and whether it should be as complicated to achieve some things is up for debate. But things like varying levels of pressing, funnelled play via pressing exist

Also some of the interpretations that are apparently missing in FM don't really occur in football. There's a serious misinterpretation of shape doesn't just happen in FM but outside it as well 

[MBarbaric]

3 minutes ago, Cougar2010 said:

The general trend IRL at the moment is for a solid set defence to restrict space which is why we see compact 442s and a lot of 451 type tactics that leave a lone forward up the field.

 

 

indeed, for last 30 years...

Edited October 9, 2017 by MBarbaric

[Cougar2010]

10 minutes ago, westy8chimp said:

If you start a save as Arsenal. Pick the 11 IRL from the start of the 16/17 campaign, in their best positions in the game. You will have 4231. Exactly how Sky portray them. Sancehz is IF, Ozil AM, Walcott AMR, Giroud SC, Xhaka and Ramsey CM, Bellerin RB, Monreal LB, Koza & Mustafi CB.

and?

I'm not really getting your point tbh, you stick them in a 4231 in FM and it becomes a 451 when defending.  Put Sanchez & Walcott at ML/MR rather than AML/AMR and they'll track back more, put more defensive players at AML/AMR and they'll also track back more.  Its always a trade off between defensive work and attacking work.  If you want a player to be more attacking you have to give up some of the defensive side and equally if you want more defence you need to accept its going to limit your attacks more.  Its about finding a balance that you are comfortable with as a manager because players aren't supermen.

 

10 minutes ago, westy8chimp said:

Also below....

So yes... it is SIs fault. If they want to invest in this idea that you build your formation from defensive shape, then players preferred role and role suitability should match a sensible defensive setup. And there would need to be more roles to enable you to create a good attacking shape off of the defensive setup. A DM with 'get further forward' does not equate to all the possible attacking midfield and striking roles you might want.

Why would you promise something you have no intention of delivering??

This issue clearly shows a failure on the squad management side which goes to explain why you don't like the look of the dynamics feature.

[KUBI]

And as Hitzfeld ones said: some players are slow on the uptake, they need some clear instructions and not a tactic book.

[Smurf]

This has really piqued my interest... I would have to give this a go in the demo and subsequent fixes - lets face it, it will probably need some tweaking like any new feature...

 

[westy8chimp]

The point is...

The formation screen in FM should be your defensive shape.

No team in real life defends with 4 players in opposition half when the opposition are attacking the final third

So therefore, to create a sensible defensive shape, you should probably play flat back 4... with maybe 4 dms and 2 cms.

SI have created player preferred roles, role suitability and contract promises off of players attacking positions.

You will upset your players if you play them in your defensive structure.

AI managers always choose attacking formations; 442, 451, 343, 4231... this is not how any team defends IRL

FM is supposed to be a simulation game trying to emulate real life

[HemHat]

3 minutes ago, westy8chimp said:

AI managers always choose attacking formations; 442, 451, 343, 4231... this is not how any team defends IRL

 

Currently none do - they might have in the past or might do in the future

 

[westy8chimp]

6 minutes ago, Cougar2010 said:

Put Sanchez & Walcott at ML/MR rather than AML/AMR and they'll track back more

Sanchez preferred role and highest role suitability - as presented by SI is AML IF. Why would I play him at ML? How would someone picking up FM for the first time know to play him as ML when all the graphical representation, assistant advice, and AI management would have him at AML?

Yes AML does track back a little bit... but you are describing the attacking formation transitioning to defence. When you and others advise that the formation is our defensive shape... and the instructions are there to facilitate our transition to attack.

[GOODNAME]

Its nice but i can not really see how this effect the players on the ME,the biggest issue for me that FM dosent have team chemistry like FIFA.

* Looking to see the new graphic engine,very hoping to see unic movments to the best players in the world

[Cougar2010]

3 minutes ago, westy8chimp said:

The point is...

The formation screen in FM should be your defensive shape.

No team in real life defends with 4 players in opposition half when the opposition are attacking the final third

Just because they are shown in the opposition half on the tactics screen doesn't mean thats where they are on the pitch when the opposition are in the final third ffs, how dumb would you have to be to think that?

 

[westy8chimp]

1 minute ago, Cougar2010 said:

Just because they are shown in the opposition half on the tactics screen doesn't mean thats where they are on the pitch when the opposition are in the final third ffs, how dumb would you have to be to think that?

 

 

1 minute ago, Cougar2010 said:

because they are shown in the opposition half on the tactics screen

LOL?

Should naturally assume the game is lying to me... going to show him as an inside forward playing in AML... but I should know he is going to play LB when the opposition have the ball (which he doesn't ... he may track back a tiny bit but never as far as in real life).

So I come on the forum for assistance, and everyone tells me "it's your defensive shape... play him as Wide midfielder with instruction to get forward and cut inside and dribble more" so I do... and he becomes unhappy at being played out of position.

Again you are describing the tactic screen as my attacking formation (or just a formation) and implying there is defensive transition.

[Cougar2010]

6 minutes ago, HemHat said:

Currently none do - they might have in the past or might do in the future

 

I really don't get whats so difficult to understand

The formation screen shows the general defensive shape, where the players are on the pitch depends on where the ball & opposition players are at that moment in time.  Any football fan should be able to understand that ffs.

 

5 minutes ago, westy8chimp said:

Sanchez preferred role and highest role suitability - as presented by SI is AML IF. Why would I play him at ML? How would someone picking up FM for the first time know to play him as ML when all the graphical representation, assistant advice, and AI management would have him at AML?

Yes AML does track back a little bit... but you are describing the attacking formation transitioning to defence. When you and others advise that the formation is our defensive shape... and the instructions are there to facilitate our transition to attack.

Personally I wouldn't play Sanchez at ML because he isn't that type of player.  He is an AML/ST type of player and as such I wouldn't expect him tracking back as much as a ML type of player.

[Cougar2010]

4 minutes ago, westy8chimp said:

LOL?

I give up Westy because you approaching Superman levels of ignorance here

You are being difficult for the sake of being difficult which doesn't help anyone.

[Smurf]

8 minutes ago, westy8chimp said:

 

LOL?

Should naturally assume the game is lying to me... going to show him as an inside forward playing in AML... but I should know he is going to play LB when the opposition have the ball (which he doesn't ... he may track back a tiny bit but never as far as in real life).

So I come on the forum for assistance, and everyone tells me "it's your defensive shape... play him as Wide midfielder with instruction to get forward and cut inside and dribble more" so I do... and he becomes unhappy at being played out of position.

Again you are describing the tactic screen as my attacking formation (or just a formation) and implying there is defensive transition.

Play him as AML but put him a Defensive Winger. 

 

[westy8chimp]

Won't post anymore on this as we are going deeply into criticism of the tactic creator and off of the dynamic feature.

I eagerly anticipate further updates of features and can only hope there is significant improvements to tactics.

Cougar don't start calling us idiots etc ... you are the one contradicting yourself and making a pigs ear of defending the lack of cohesion the tactic module has with other areas of the game... and the lack of possibilities within the TC. I'm fairly convinced you are a BOT sent here by Miles to defend everything. If he could get his guys to code the dynamics and social media half as well as he'd coded you, then I'd probably enjoy those features more.

 

 

[Guest El Payaso]

1 hour ago, westy8chimp said:

Big time. IRL a manager will say where he wants his team to win the ball back, which players will commit to the press (depending on where the ball is).

At the moment I can tell the team (or individuals) how much to press. That is all. If I tell my RB to press much more... does this mean he is pressing the opposition RB when they are playing out of defence? No... simply that if the ball gets within an unspecified distance to my RB he will charge in like a headless chicken. This isn't pressing.

Pressing IRL is one of the biggest ways managers can stamp their mark on a team identity (on the pitch).

Lack of pressing and awful zonal marking are also the main reason why so many things are badly wrong in the ME. Not that this discussion belongs into this thread. 

Some people might romantisicize about 'gegen pressing' etc. actually being in the game but honestly pressing has never existed on FM. Though I guess it is hard to introduce well as it has not been present for so long time. But yeah, I would much rather see myself making a tactical error by setting my team to chase the ball against Real/Barcelona or tiring out against any other team  than seeing one man chasing the ball headlessly and all teams being able to play their way out of the so called pressure and by that every team in the game being able to play short passing style of play successfully as no team in the game universe can put any pressure to them. 

Instructions like 'play out of defense' and giving the goalkeeper the short distribution from goal kicks are really overpowering instructions at the moment as every team is able to execute them. Also because of these errors in the ME every team basically are scoring the goals in the same way, no matter what the tactical setups are or what type of players and how much quality you have. 

[XaW]

2 hours ago, theballstopshere said:

I don't disagree with you totally. I have nothing against SI having new features. This is something that I welcome, and I alluded to that in another post. 

In fact I don't think people are against them having new features.

It is the lack of effort shown towards tactics that is giving people grief. 

My issue is on how the main thrust of the game, the tactics, has not been improved upon for the longest time. 

This to me should be the most important thing they do: overhauling the tactics. 

If the tactics are still stuck in the 90s then nothing else they do will really give the game a quantum leap. 

Let's face it, whether you like it or not, this new "dynamics" is not really that big a leap. 

Yes it is a good feature to have, not a must though. 

If there is a ranking of what should be changed, improved or added upon I am sure most, if not everyone will say that the tactics will be top of the pile.  

 

I agree with you on the tactics part. I've been feeling like I'm missing some options when creating a tactic. However, this does not mean that the "dynamics" are an issue? So many people have for so long asked for a clearer way of knowing why things are not working. One of the aspects that most players face is overconfidence and complacency. It's not hard to create a working tactic in FM should you have a slight understanding of how football works. However, many people struggle to deal with the morale and team spirit. Dynamics will hopefully help players to understand it better. As you said it's not a revolutionary change, but as stated before, what fundamentally different is possible? And I don't want Chairman Simulator or stadium creator or something like that.

Regarding tactics I also feel there is something missing. A better way to declare different aspects of play is something I'm missing. Like the way Barcelona play extremely slow, but when they find space they play with a huge swing in tempo that most teams struggle with. This is something I don't think is possible in FM17. I've tried to implement a tactical approach like Klopp in Liverpool, that is also not quite possible to me. The gegenpress is not something that I have been able to get to work. Like press with an extreme tempo for a short while, and if unsuccessful then drop back to the own half of the pitch. Things like that is what I feel is missing.

[Scrench]

IRL teams usually don't have the same shape during pressing and deeper defending. Pressing is usually done in a 4-3-1-2, 4-3-2-1, 4-2-3-1, 4-2-2-2, 3-4-2-1 etc. shapes, while deeper defending is usually 4-4-2(-0), 4-1-4-1(-0), 5-4-1, 5-3-2 etc. there are exceptions of course. Currently formations in FM are very static and there are pretty much no defensive instructions to operate with, especially regarding pressing.

I think the most basic thing regarding pressing is to implement man-oriented and ball-oriented pressing at least, which also means that the physical interactions between the players inside the ME must be improved.

In many cases pressing shapes also change depending on where the ball is, a good example is espanyol's pressing against barcelona:

https://www.esdfanalysis.com/match-analysis/barcelona-vs-espanyol/

Dynamic pressing shapes are very tiny details, and probably would just destroy the ME and i don't think that we will ever need this sort of depth in the game, however the current state of the TC is definitely in need of a huge overhaul, as currently it reflects a time in football which is long gone.

[herne79]

1 hour ago, westy8chimp said:

No team in real life defends with 4 players in opposition half when the opposition are attacking the final third

westy that's twice you've said this.  That's not how FM defends when in a top heavy formation such as the 4231.  I agree it's a confusing picture on the Tactics screen, however as said above in reply to your first post:

1 hour ago, herne79 said:

Neither does the 4231 and this imo is part of the issue on the Tactics screen - the formation is shown over the entire pitch.  Just change it to show the formation covering your own half of the pitch and that's nearer how your formation will defend.

It's a UI issue, not an ME issue.

So yeh, no team irl defends with 4 players in the opposition half when the opposition are attacking the final third - but neither does FM.  You're normally pretty good on the tactics front, kinda surprised you're saying this tbh.

[westy8chimp]

1 minute ago, herne79 said:

You're normally pretty good on the tactics front, kinda surprised you're saying this tbh.

I'm arguing it from the UI perspective to be honest. Also objectively through the eyes of a first timer

On this forum we are told the formation is akin to our defensive shape and that the instructions can be used to determine our transition to attack. But everything in the game (UI) tells us differently. It's more like we are presented with an attacking formation, and then through observation we realise there is some natural tracking back (as opposed to starting position) into a defensive shape.

Beyond that ... I really feel I have no control over how my team defends. The instructions are nonsense... honestly what does 'press sometimes' mean? Imagine being told that in the dressing room.

Defensive width is automatic - though some of the great exponents like Cleon have linked it to team mentality (he plays control vs Arsenal because on control the default width is a bit wider to handle Arsenals wide threat)... in game and other advice is to play control when you are favourite to win.

None of it is really cohesive to paint a picture of what your average player should be doing to get by.

[herne79]

20 minutes ago, westy8chimp said:

I'm arguing it from the UI perspective to be honest. Also objectively through the eyes of a first timer

I totally agree there's a UI issue and have even raised such in the suggestions forum .

[Guest El Payaso]

1 hour ago, westy8chimp said:

The point is...

The formation screen in FM should be your defensive shape.

No team in real life defends with 4 players in opposition half when the opposition are attacking the final third

So therefore, to create a sensible defensive shape, you should probably play flat back 4... with maybe 4 dms and 2 cms.

SI have created player preferred roles, role suitability and contract promises off of players attacking positions.

You will upset your players if you play them in your defensive structure.

AI managers always choose attacking formations; 442, 451, 343, 4231... this is not how any team defends IRL

FM is supposed to be a simulation game trying to emulate real life

I wonder when this is actually changed as we had a really good discussion about this issue already in the spring. I guess it is a big feature and understandably not included in FM 2018 (sadly though). But if and hopefully when this is in the game: formation not being the defensive shape and/or being able to set both defensive shape and attacking shape, I will be peeing honey. 

And also something to think about for those who say: "well just set him to be ML instead of AML": there aren't same roles available on those positions and because transitioning is quite slow on FM I'm quite certain that it would chop quite a bit of goals away from players/teams if instead of AMR the AI would play Messi as a MR. They do struggle to make them perform even currently and I believe that this would upset this balance even more. Even more teams would have a profilic scorer up front while the other positions would be trailing behind. Barcelona having 60 goals a season Suarez and maybe 15-20 goals scoring Messi, sounds brilliant... 

[rdbayly]

31 minutes ago, westy8chimp said:

32 minutes ago, westy8chimp said:

honestly what does 'press sometimes' mean? Imagine being told that in the dressing room.

Well said. Of course the line between the terms 'pressing' and 'closing down' have become blurred in the ME. For me, pressing is a series of behaviors to win the ball back triggered after a turnover of possession. Problem is, I've found that trying to simulate this using the 'close down more' instruction does not see the team do it in a synchronized fashion starting from the front. It actually sees individual players (bound by their role and duty) chase towards someone, do nothing when they get there, other than jog slowly alongside them - until the opposition slice my defence open with a through ball.

I've experimented using BWMs, but they end up missing the run-in because they get 30 yellow cards a season.

 

[PhilT]

22 hours ago, ChelseaSince86 said:

That is my only concern with it,  after  a few months are we going to see a stack of  'unh' icons next to the majority of squad members in the teams in our league.  And the reason being 9 times out of 10, "Wants to leave as unhappy with treatment of team mate"  and see about a dozen players all listed by request, including major stars.  

Yep, gotta say whilst it's a great introduction, I really hope it's a realistic introduction & not one that's going to overshadow the actual game

[herne79]

4 minutes ago, El Payaso said:

I wonder when this is actually changed as we had a really good discussion about this issue already in the spring. I guess it is a big feature and understandably not included in FM 2018 (sadly though). But if and hopefully when this is in the game: formation not being the defensive shape and/or being able to set both defensive shape and attacking shape, I will be peeing honey. 

And also something to think about for those who say: "well just set him to be ML instead of AML": there aren't same roles available on those positions and because transitioning is quite slow on FM I'm quite certain that it would chop quite a bit of goals away from players/teams if instead of AMR the AI would play Messi as a MR. They do struggle to make them perform even currently and I believe that this would upset this balance even more. Even more teams would have a profilic scorer up front while the other positions would be trailing behind. Barcelona having 60 goals a season Suarez and maybe 15-20 goals scoring Messi, sounds brilliant... 

If you want a wide player to be primarily goal focussed, such as your Messi example, then you'd obviously play him at AMR/L not MR/L  with an appropriate role and duty.  The point of using MR/L instead is to aid your defensive ambitions which you probably wouldn't do with a player such as Messi.

Honestly I feel this is where people get confused - and is where the UI falls short.  If you want somebody to actively help out in defence, then use the ML/R positions.  If you prefer them to stay further forward then use AML/R.

But even then, given relevant tactical settings and/or player attributes, players can still track back effectively and consistently from AML/R.

[rdbayly]

This thread has ended up being miles better than talk of dynamics.