FM19 new player roles?

[Southern Buddie]

The end is nigh

[FMunderachiever]

13 hours ago, Maviarab said:

why not actually disprove what he said?  or...are you not able to?

Well the game aint easy for lots of players as this forum shows. Might be for him but hes a minority.

 

And a greater level of input without hardcoded pi's would resemble real management.

 

Westychimp nailed it.

[JK Galgreefe]

Maybe simplifying the roles to the defaults, customised with player instructions (as westy8chimp has proposed) could make things easier for the AI too.

[RossJM12]

Defensive winger in AML and AMR would be nice.

Having less default player instructions on the Wing Back and Complete Wing Back roles would be great. For example I would like a Complete Wing Back on the attack duty, without the Cross More Often and Cross From Byline instructions, I want a wWing Back who bombs forward but doesn't cross every two seconds. 

I would like either a tweak to the Defensive Forward roll or a new role altogether for strikers that would make them go into the wide areas to defend when the team is defending. 

And finally I would like a more defensively minded AMC role. For example one that drops back to be part of the midfield or even the defensive midfield. Or one that is simply called  a bob to Box attacking midfielder.

[ajsr1982]

@RossJM12 - I agree with the first two points, but I think your third point is what an IF/A should do. There's an argument that they don't perform so very differently to wingers at times, so I think that's merely a case of role development.

I think you can achieve the fourth point with the right combination of player/role/duty already. Remember that your formation, as you see it on screen, is how your team looks in the defensive phase. If you want an attacking midfielder that drops into the midfield when defending, I'd argue you shouldn't be putting him in the AMC slot in the first place.

[westy8chimp]

1 hour ago, RossJM12 said:

And finally I would like a more defensively minded AMC role. For example one that drops back to be part of the midfield or even the defensive midfield. Or one that is simply called  a bob to Box attacking midfielder.

Segundo Volante ...will drop to DM when defending and make runs to AM/the box when attacking.

[westy8chimp]

2 hours ago, FMunderachiever said:

Well the game aint easy for lots of players as this forum shows. Might be for him but hes a minority.

 

And a greater level of input without hardcoded pi's would resemble real management.

 

Westychimp nailed it.

Thinking of Segundo Volante ... I can link back to my original point (and this post).

The Segundo Volante is just a gamey way of saying they have given us a new role... what they should have done in the first place is never lock down DM to D/S duties only.

In FM17 I was always annoyed that I couldn't have my DM on attack duty... I made do with 'get further forward' PI and team attacking mentality to create my own vision of the SV (Vieira in his pomp winning the ball deep in own half, making mazy runs and 1-2s to end up scoring from opponent box)

Similarly In FM17 I wanted a midfielder who moved from in->out (even created a thread about it and ended up having to use a bunch of trequaristas!) ... but now instead of having a a PI i can apply to a CM... i get 'Mez'

Every manager is an individual that wants to stamp his mark on the team... i shouldn't have to wait and be spoon fed a new role every few years... they aren't new roles in real life.

[herne79]

@FMunderachiever  You've had numerous advice from Mods about your posting style.  If you have something constructive to say then go for it.  On the other hand, if you want to carry on in the manner you seem to enjoy it's far easier to simply remove your posting privileges (again) rather than remove your posts.

[warlock]

4 hours ago, FMunderachiever said:

Well the game aint easy for lots of players as this forum shows.

What this forum shows is that many people struggle to create successful tactics, or struggle to recreate real-world tactics. But that isn't "the game". More to the point, it isn't even difficult to create a workable tactic that will, for example, safely secure Southampton against relegation. A straightforward 422, 433, 4231 or almost anything with sensible roles and duties will do that. But what most people seem to want is a tactic that massively over-achieves - getting Southampton into Europe first season, then winning everything in season 2. And whatever difficulties there are in creating tactics are largely the result of battling the Tactic Creator, and in translating real football into FM football.

But "the game" isn't difficult. You've posted about winning the German league with Dortmund in season 1. In the Plymouth thread, you took a team that were overwhelming favourites for relegation and were safely mid-table first season, and just missed the playoffs in the second. Those were great achievements, but how difficult - how realistic? - was it? There are dozens of players who have taken teams from the Vanarama to the Premiership and Champions League victories (five promotions!) in less than ten years. In what way is that realistic?

I have no problem with new roles, simplified roles, open-ended roles, or anything else. But they add complexity to a match engine that the AI already appears to struggle with - as others have pointed out, the annual exploits like the three-striker tactic aren't evidence of a broken ME, they're evidence of a struggling AI. And any new features must be exploitable by the AI if the game is not to become even more unbalanced.

Here endeth today's piffle .

[tiago_wakabayashi]

I would say I would like of a "offensive defender" but the "ball playing defender -----> playmaker defender" idea sounds better, and I say more: I know there is a PPM to make the defender run with the ball forward but after I played Motorsport Manager, player traits should be only a playing addict, a thing can be adquired by alone, learning with other player or from staff. What I mean I don't wanna use PPM training always to I be able to use a specific role in the way I want to. It takes time and the "playmaker/ball playing defender" example shows it, should be a role where any defender, not depending of his quality, could do that, run with the ball, organizing the play from defense with I have to train at player a PPM for that. 

Adding/continue a comment about PPM's, annoys me to see a normal thing like "volley/bicycle kicks" you need PPM to do that. ANY player should be able to do that, what would make the difference would be the player quality to do that move with perfection. It could be kept like a player trait, a specific mark of a player, indicating "this player likes to do aerial moves", then he would try to do that move often while other players without that trait would do it depending the game situation, how the ball is going to him, and not a playing style. The same thing I apply to the finishing traits like "curly balls", "dribble/lob GKs", any player could do that, the difference would be the trait would become any of those kind of finishing a playing style. Example: Romario and his "fingertip shots" and "lobs". Any player can do that, but not as an addict, a style. It's how I see the player traits.

And I never liked that PI hardcoded thing. It kills the creativity of any coach. I see FM role like "action areas" for the players with traits, but traits they aren't obligated to follow. A example I saw the people talking about: F9. Why in F9's the long shots are hardcoded? I would like to say to Messi in FM and say "I wanna you be my F9 but don't shoot unnecessary". Or to my wingbacks in attacking task to cross early or simply run with ball till the line and don't cross but back the play with a simple pass to teammate. 

I would like to see more PI options in all roles, kinda for a Defensive Forward a "run forward" option when the team is with ball and with the team are without it he would back in a defensive way closing down the defenders or volante depending his task. Or even the possibility you be able to give one or two tasks for a same player, one task when the team are with the ball and a different task when aren't with the ball. For example wingbacks without the ball could be in "supporting" or "defending" task and with the ball in "supporting" or "attacking" one.

On 31/03/2018 at 09:16, Cleon said:

Ball Playing defender should be renamed or reworked to actually be a centreback who plays the ball out from the back and build up play via him linking with the midfield. At the minute all the role is, is a centreback who tries to hit long through balls.

Sweeper/Libero should be able to be selected from the DC positions.

I could go on and name a lot more.

I loved you, mainly the Libero idea from DC posiitons, but this is basic! Ahaha. But I am thinking... and if the "covering" task mechanic were improved, no needing a new role fro DC's? Or what are u thinking with Libero in DC positions? Tell me, I'm curious. 

On 31/03/2018 at 09:27, zeus77 said:

Libero!

From DC positions like the buddy said above?

On 31/03/2018 at 12:16, yonko said:

Ball Playing Defender should be Playmaking Defender. In addition to that, I think that Play Out Of Defense instruction should have an effect on the behavior of the GK, Defenders and Defensive Midfielders in terms of spreading out their shape and picking out their passes from the back.

 

I love you², I really loved the name idea and I agree about the POOD thing. 

On 31/03/2018 at 16:12, TheJanitor said:

I do agree that a Libero role from CD would be amazing. How do you see the Sweeper role performing differently from CD cover though?

Oh, and Automatic duties should have been removed like 6 years ago.

1- I just can imagine a sweeper DC could go forward/back the d-line while the cover task just would do the covering d-line work.

2- Why?

On 31/03/2018 at 19:49, ajsr1982 said:

I'd like the Defensive Winger to be available in the AM R/L positions again. 

I'd also like six position slots across the pitch, rather than five, to enable this kind of thing: https://spielverlagerung.com/2015/12/06/the-3-6-1-a-logical-step/

 

1- This is basic, too. I am tired to see wingers marking wingbacks or helping own wingbacks at marking. In FM there is no a good marking from wingers, you can "fix" it with individual marking and/or changing their tasks but still that way is not THAT perfection. 

2- I always wanted it. I think in previous version you could do a six-men-line or FM always was up to 5-line?

On 01/04/2018 at 08:00, kingjericho said:

I'd like to see the Defensive Winger back in the AMR/L slot. The logic of it can be the same as a Defensive Forward, as it used to be in previous years. I don't know why it has been removed because it fitted lots of players back in the day, e.g. Kuyt, Camoranesi, Mandzukic.

I am remembering now, was there that role in FM now, yeah? Poor this was removed.

[Jrddrkly]

I'd like a withdrawn target man who plays in the AMC but I think that's only because I have a player I think could do a job doing that, not that it would add anything to the game

[Carlos92]

14 hours ago, Jrddrkly said:

I'd like a withdrawn target man who plays in the AMC but I think that's only because I have a player I think could do a job doing that, not that it would add anything to the game

I miss the ability to designate anybody as your target man, just like I miss being able to choose how that target man is fed.

[Jrddrkly]

3 hours ago, Carlos92 said:

I miss the ability to designate anybody as your target man, just like I miss being able to choose how that target man is fed.

Target man run onto ball vs high opposition defensive line?

[Carlos92]

4 minutes ago, Jrddrkly said:

Target man run onto ball vs high opposition defensive line?

?

I was thinking more about being able to feed him with high balls, regardless off passing style. I'd like the ability to designate an attacking midfielder as your target man. It should be possible to have a short passing style and still be able to hit your target man with high balls

[Bigmonkey79]

On 31 March, 2018 at 18:32, wkdsoul said:

Peps sitting inside fullbacks was my first though.  sitting narrow wing backs just doesn't really do it justice.  

IWB d do a good job if dm strata left clear. Just need possession long enough for them to move from fab to the revised attacking position

[Bigmonkey79]

What's Bobbys position at Liverpool? Deep lying-defensive false 9 shadow striker combo?

 

id love to have more options for closing down for the forward positions. A DF just doesn't have enough mobility to replicate Vardy-esque play in lateral or horizontal

defensive wingers back in the am strata. Pretty please!! 

The quarterback? Less mobile than regista / DLP . a pinger of long high risk passes.

The matador. A high flair am l or r player who takes ball to the corner flag with intention of retaining possession without providing a goal threat or releasing ball to teammate., to either get thumped by a defender, humiliate them or win corner to support time wasting strategy.

the "ratter" a mobile, high energy BWM(ish) in the press but does not tackle harder/ go to ground as often would be effective in showing onto weaker(chosen) foot but technically gifted opposition would still be able to pass around to beat the press

 

an option to start the he press once a certain player is in possesion or opposition reach certain place in pitch.

 

ive often felt the wide cb of a back 3 should have own defined best attributes/ stats as a role. I think really old champ man games had drc  dlc for some players instead of DC/DR or DC/DL.   That implied they were best on the end of a 3. 

 

[FMunderachiever]

3 hours ago, Bigmonkey79 said:

What's Bobbys position at Liverpool? Deep lying-defensive false 9 shadow striker combo?

 

id love to have more options for closing down for the forward positions. A DF just doesn't have enough mobility to replicate Vardy-esque play in lateral or horizontal

defensive wingers back in the am strata. Pretty please!! 

The quarterback? Less mobile than regista / DLP . a pinger of long high risk passes.

The matador. A high flair am l or r player who takes ball to the corner flag with intention of retaining possession without providing a goal threat or releasing ball to teammate., to either get thumped by a defender, humiliate them or win corner to support time wasting strategy.

the "ratter" a mobile, high energy BWM(ish) in the press but does not tackle harder/ go to ground as often would be effective in showing onto weaker(chosen) foot but technically gifted opposition would still be able to pass around to beat the press

 

an option to start the he press once a certain player is in possesion or opposition reach certain place in pitch.

 

ive often felt the wide cb of a back 3 should have own defined best attributes/ stats as a role. I think really old champ man games had drc  dlc for some players instead of DC/DR or DC/DL.   That implied they were best on the end of a 3. 

 

Shinji Okazaki is the perfect number 10 ratter

Jonjo Shelvey quarterback

[yau]

I would love to see a 'static' role for slow finisher, who would just stay in the box all the time waiting for finish.

[tiago_wakabayashi]

9 hours ago, Bigmonkey79 said:

The matador. A high flair am l or r player who takes ball to the corner flag with intention of retaining possession without providing a goal threat or releasing ball to teammate., to either get thumped by a defender, humiliate them or win corner to support time wasting strategy.

This could be a common thing in ME for certain kind of situations 

 

[Tom8983]

19 hours ago, Bigmonkey79 said:

What's Bobbys position at Liverpool? Deep lying-defensive false 9 shadow striker combo?

 

Complete Forward, Support. But with more emphasis on the withdrawn aspects of the role than there currently seems to be in the ME.

That does remind me though, rather than a list of new roles, I'd like players familiarity with roles to be correct. Bobby is the perfect example. In game, he isn't natural or even fully suitable to any striker roles, but is a natural in the AP role in the AM strata. Salah isn't at all competent up front either, though that one is much more forgivable as it's only a recent discovery how good he is up top! VVD is much more than a DCB, yet the game doesn't recognise that. TAA, Emre Can, Henderson, none of these seem to have the correct familiarity with the roles they play IRL. Yes, I know that the little green/orange/red dots aren't the be all and end all, but it's still something that should accurately reflect real life. If only to help the majority of players who play the game and don't look on forums to find up out something they assume is accurate is a load of rubbish! The same goes for role descriptions. They're a mess and often don't actually reflect how a role will play out.

Reading these forums, it's easy to forget that for the average player, most of the little nuances of roles and tactics don't actually matter. Most people don't spend hours upon hours doing research, fiddling with the tiniest detail etc, they just want to read what the roles do, pick a shape and roles for that shape, and play. I think it's therefore reasonable that they should expect accurate descriptions and interpretations of roles and role suitability at least. And that goes for mentality and structure too. Maybe even a bit of in game generic advice for setting up tactics in the help section. 

Having said that, I would very much support an overhaul of the BPD. I don't think the name needs changing but the PIs certainly do. And give them a support duty which makes them step into midfield rather than/as well as the cover/def/stopper options. As it is, unless I'm not remembering correctly, the BPD is just the same as a DCB with more risky passing. It's ridiculous. A few people have also mentioned not hard coding the crossing options for fullback roles too, which I agree with.

I think I'd also like to see many more AML/R players being able to play ML/R. Especially as we're always told the positions you see when setting your tactics are the defensive positions. Obviously there's some wide players who don't/won't track back, but most do and take up that position, so it only seems natural that they'd be able to play there.

[moolochicken]

I (probably only me) desperately want these roles:

1. DM that would drift wide in attacking phase

2. AM that would participate more in defense phase

3. Target man in AM

Can I have these for my christmas present this year?

[goqs06]

On 4/20/2018 at 14:04, moolochicken said:

I (probably only me) desperately want these roles:

1. DM that would drift wide in attacking phase

2. AM that would participate more in defense phase

3. Target man in AM

Can I have these for my christmas present this year?

Point 3:

@moolochicken why not call it the deep-lying target man? A real life example would be "Lord" Fellaini.

[Cleon]

On 20/04/2018 at 07:04, moolochicken said:

I (probably only me) desperately want these roles:

1. DM that would drift wide in attacking phase

2. AM that would participate more in defense phase

3. Target man in AM

Can I have these for my christmas present this year?

1. 

32 minutes ago, goqs06 said:

Point 3:

@moolochicken why not call it the deep-lying target man? A real life example would be "Lord" Fellaini.

Everyone uses Fellaini as the example for a targetman in the AM role. Yet he was just a normal AM but his physical presence brought targetman like traits to the role. You can do this now in FM. It wasn't a new role Fellaini invented, it was just his skillset playing the role different to what we was used to seeing.

[Tajerio]

37 minutes ago, Cleon said:

1. 

Everyone uses Fellaini as the example for a targetman in the AM role. Yet he was just a normal AM but his physical presence brought targetman like traits to the role. You can do this now in FM. It wasn't a new role Fellaini invented, it was just his skillset playing the role different to what we was used to seeing.

Isn't the challenge more about how to get a player as a priority target for the ball in the AMC position while not having that player also play risky passes?  You can see in some games IRL that Mourinho has told his players to aim for Fellaini's head, but he's not told Fellaini to look to play through balls, and I don't think there's a role in FM that allows for that combination at AMC.

[moolochicken]

48 minutes ago, Cleon said:

1. 

Everyone uses Fellaini as the example for a targetman in the AM role. Yet he was just a normal AM but his physical presence brought targetman like traits to the role. You can do this now in FM. It wasn't a new role Fellaini invented, it was just his skillset playing the role different to what we was used to seeing.

The clear difference is, target man has an inherent "hoof the ball mechanism".

For FM18, I have not find a way for the ball to go into the air and land in the AM area. Early Cross or Cross From Byline will land in the box, Pump Ball Into Box will land the ball near the opponent central defenders, Clear Ball To Flanks will land the ball into wide areas. The closest thing is is More Direct Passing, but it is so uncontrollable since 1) the AM will not be the only target, and 2) the ball might go on the ground instead of in the air. 

So playing A player with aerial presence in AM  in FM18 does not pay off as it could potentially be.

[Cleon]

41 minutes ago, moolochicken said:

The clear difference is, target man has an inherent "hoof the ball mechanism".

For FM18, I have not find a way for the ball to go into the air and land in the AM area. Early Cross or Cross From Byline will land in the box, Pump Ball Into Box will land the ball near the opponent central defenders, Clear Ball To Flanks will land the ball into wide areas. The closest thing is is More Direct Passing, but it is so uncontrollable since 1) the AM will not be the only target, and 2) the ball might go on the ground instead of in the air. 

So playing A player with aerial presence in AM  in FM18 does not pay off as it could potentially be.

A targetman doesn't have hoof the ball mechanism either, you're taking what actually happens out of context. The ball isn't hoofed to him but players in some scenarios (some not all) will maybe look at him to be an outlet. But you can do all of this manually anyway, with how you set up the roles around him and more importantly the team instructions he is given. A targetman is also no more likely to get balls in the air that the other roles that attract the ball like playmakers and so on. It's quite easy to set up a physical AM who is good in the air. You're just looking at it all wrong and looking at team instructions that bypass the AM, which is just silly, why would you do that? You don't have to use TI's to achieve the style of play you are asking for. Players can do stuff naturally, it doesn't always have to be forced. All TI's do is force that action more regular than normal. So it's important you really understand what the TI's do and why you'd use them. If not, in the scenario you mention in the quote every single one of them goes against what you was wanting.

Your AM can get into the box and get on the end of crosses. He can be a target for the players around him. Players can give him the ball in central areas and so on.

 

51 minutes ago, Tajerio said:

Isn't the challenge more about how to get a player as a priority target for the ball in the AMC position while not having that player also play risky passes?  You can see in some games IRL that Mourinho has told his players to aim for Fellaini's head, but he's not told Fellaini to look to play through balls, and I don't think there's a role in FM that allows for that combination at AMC.

This isn't entirely true though is it? The players look for Fellaini to hold up the ball or knock on headers and play balls through to the other attackers. So he is doing through balls of some kind, or the whole role he is playing is pointless. Watch what he does when he gets the ball when this is happening. All risky passes are in FM are through balls. I don't have FM on atm but I'm sure not all the AM roles have risky passes being hardcoded.

Also if people are going to use Fellaini as the example then refer to his time at Everton where this was his main role. At United he's just the hit and hope option when the team lacks attacking threat. Both roles are totally different. 

You can have a AM involved in everything and naturally get the ball constant in a variety of ways, early crosses, passes, dropping into midfield, staying high and holding the ball and so on. I'm pretty sure I wrote something about the AM not that long ago where I wanted a natural playmaker so used a creative player in the role. The reason was I didn't want the ball forced to him but rather he got the ball because he was the best option without sacrificing play elsewhere in the side and forcing the issue. The Fellaini stuff is the same.

I'm not saying there shouldn't be a new role added either. But roles should only be added is they're unique and add something vastly different to what's currently available. They shouldn't be added because a specific player played a specific way once, that's far too niche. For the game to be more tactically astute, we need roles that offer the user new things that he can't currently get so the user can be more expansive in his approach. This is just my opinion though and I'm not saying people have to agree with this.

 

[JK Galgreefe]

I'm still waiting for Rashidi to tell us which roles he considers exploits

[goqs06]

Just wanted to ask everyone, what is the role of Messi? Is he more of an Enganche or trequartista?

[Cleon]

3 hours ago, goqs06 said:

Just wanted to ask everyone, what is the role of Messi? Is he more of an Enganche or trequartista?

Or does he take up different roles depending on the phase/scenario of play............

[Fosse]

Could there a case to be made that the Complete Forward role shouldn't have any PIs hardcoded? All instructions would be available but starting as a complete blank slate is more complete in my eyes.

[herne79]

2 minutes ago, Fosse said:

Could there a case to be made that the Complete Forward role shouldn't have any PIs hardcoded? All intersections would be available but starting as a complete blank slate is more complete in my eyes.

A blank slate is complete?  Surely a misnomer.  Wouldn't having no PIs make him an Incomplete Forward ?

Seriously though, I understand what you're saying.  I think with Complete Forwards they're designed to be the jack-of-all-trades striker, so you get things like Hold up Ball, Roam More, Dribble More, whatever hardcoded for that purpose.

I'd like to see a striker role without any predefined PIs however .

[Fosse]

1 minute ago, herne79 said:

A blank slate is complete?  Surely a misnomer.  Wouldn't having no PIs make him an Incomplete Forward ?

Stickler 

I think people get a bit hung up on the idea that because a player isn't asked to dribble more they won't dribble at all. Say a striker without any PI's will try to dribble a neutral 50% of the time (completely made up figure for anyone reading), the dribble more PI might adjust that to 75% which I don't think is necessarily more complete.

I agree a new role is probably the best way to go but I think the PIs for a so called 'complete' player are actually quite limiting, which is sort of the point I suppose but more flexibility would suit 'complete' forwards. As always though with FM it's easy to get bogged down in the semantics haha.

 

 

[tiago_wakabayashi]

3 hours ago, herne79 said:

'd like to see a striker role without any predefined PIs however

I don't matter with pre PI set, since it doesn't be hardcoded, and for any role, not only strikers. 

[westy8chimp]

I stand by what I said earlier in the thread that more instructions/or player individuality (through traits and attributes) are preferable to more roles.

One thing I would like improved - either through roles, PI or TI (or all) is the ability to really play out from the back. It's obviously something FM have tried with BPD, SWK, HB roles and the PI 'play out from back' but I think all of those roles need some improvement to create the correct behaviour.

A new GK role 'BPK' could be introduced, and they should take more risks and be much more involved in passing triangles at the back - especially if you use 'play out from back' in tandem with the role.

The BPD (or new role) should be more about playing it out from the back in triangles, advancing with the ball... trying through balls to DM/CM ... it's a bit too direct currently. Trying to find CBs with the new preferred move of bringing the ball out is too much of a ball ache and not very good if you want that player to be less risky in a different tactic

Use of a HB still needs tweaking to create the proper split of CBS going wide and HB slotting in.

[tiago_wakabayashi]

34 minutes ago, westy8chimp said:

A new GK role 'BPK' could be introduced, and they should take more risks and be much more involved in passing triangles at the back - especially if you use 'play out from back' in tandem with the role.

This should be a Sweeper GK improvement, IMO, maybe in attacking mode. And yes, must haver an improvement for POFB, mainly when you see wrong passes to GK or teammaters (including the GK) that don't close around you like a pass option, making you alone to be pressured, with risk you make a wrong pass under pressure or lose the ball. 

[westy8chimp]

15 minutes ago, tiago_wakabayashi said:

This should be a Sweeper GK improvement

kind of, certainly in FM terms. They seem to have added passing behaviour to the role, which could be improved.

If you asked me in real life what a sweeper keeper means... it is purely that his initial positioning is more advanced, and his aim is to rush out and clear and direct balls behind the defence, allowing your team to play a higher line.

I would completely decouple sweeping and passing. i.e. Ederson at City is involved in a lot of build ups ... but he isn't a sweeper keeper who rushes out a lot, or stand outside his penalty area. Lloris under Villas Boas however, had a very high starting position and often rushed out to make clearances, but isn't really renowned for his passing ability or involvement playing out from the back.

[enigmatic]

2 hours ago, westy8chimp said:

kind of, certainly in FM terms. They seem to have added passing behaviour to the role, which could be improved.

If you asked me in real life what a sweeper keeper means... it is purely that his initial positioning is more advanced, and his aim is to rush out and clear and direct balls behind the defence, allowing your team to play a higher line.

I would completely decouple sweeping and passing. i.e. Ederson at City is involved in a lot of build ups ... but he isn't a sweeper keeper who rushes out a lot, or stand outside his penalty area. Lloris under Villas Boas however, had a very high starting position and often rushed out to make clearances, but isn't really renowned for his passing ability or involvement playing out from the back.

Ederson's the quickest keeper to rush out I've ever seen, but I agree with the wider point that he's used in buildup play, whereas Lloris isn't and just positions himself very aggressively.

What I'd ideally like to see is a "use in buildup play" option, for goalkeepers and central defenders (and possibly FB(D)s and anchor men; I'd assume i would be on by default for everyone else including ball playing defenders). Basically I'd like (e.g) Matic to consider passing to Lindelof a very good option, passing to Smalling a last resort, and not have any particular presumption about passing to Rojo. And I might be very happy to encourage my time wasting side to play lots of passes to De Gea even though he's definitely not a sweeper keeper.

This is an instruction it should be possible to get the AI to use sensibly and infrequently too.

[goqs06]

Would a RPM on attack duty work?

(e.g. Paul Pogba)

[felley]

10 hours ago, goqs06 said:

Would a RPM on attack duty work?

(e.g. Paul Pogba)

Then the role just becomes an Advanced Playmaker. The point of the RPM is to provide a playmaking role from the centre of the park that neither exclusively sits deep nor exclusively plays in the hole - ergo the role has to have a support duty to make sense.

[enigmatic]

Wider observation: for the most part I'd like to see fewer roles. Follows naturally from there being an "is FM elitist" thread

Fullbacks have already been mentioned, because the existing set of roles is absurd. Roles which are called wing back but pure wingbacks aren't actual natural at playing? Ridiculous. And does anybody actually know whether a fullback WB(S) supposed to be less attacking or more attacking than a FB(A)? Keep it to  Defensive Limited Full Back, Fullback(D/S/A) and Inverted Fullback, maybe a "Complete Fullback" if you need something more aggressive than a FB(A)

The DM playmaker roles DLP (doesn't have an attacking setting) and Regista (doesn't have a defensive setting) are both screaming to be merged into DLP(D/S/A) too

Raumdeuter is not a real position name, and whilst I can just about see the point of having a Wide Poacher, how about we call it what it is, and not a jokey comment Muller once made about his personal style of play? Better still, how about we have the Muller style of play something you can get from a generic wide AM role if you customise it to sit narrower, get further forward, move into channels and play with high creative freedom but no dribbling or shooting from distance (and sign Muller to play in it). The AI won't use it, but it's not actually a common role...

The ridiculously long list of striker positions can be culled too. Isn't a Trequartista by definition behind the strikers, not another type of striker? Either way, there doesn't seem to be an obvious need for two types of DLF, a False Nine, a Complete Forward (S) and a Trequartista all as separate options for dropping deep to link the play. tbh I think False Nine should really be a strikerless-only AMC role, but that might not be making things simpler...

 

 

[westy8chimp]

In terms of tactic ... a striker is a striker... if I play Andy Carroll as my striker he will naturally be different than if I play Javier Hernandez. You should have to pick the right players (attributes and traits) and sensible PI/TI

If you say to me 'DM' I just see the position on the pitch tactically -> between my defence and central midfield. A DLP is just a DM that likes to pass the ball...so if you want DLP behaviour sign someone with good passing, technique, vision and PPM 'likes to dictate play' or 'likes to play out'...If you want a DM who just wins the ball and lays it off then go for a player with ppm 'plays simple passes'

Using the RB again as it fits the narrative perfectly... how can you have a WB role in a flat line with the defence. That is a full back!

Trequarista doesn't work at all imo... if you look at heat map they roam vertically as much as anything. They are supposed to maraud the third quarter. Again just an AM with 'free role' or a PI with a split for vertical movement or horizontal (would cover off the Carilerro issue too).

 

[Taipan]

On 08/05/2018 at 08:06, herne79 said:

I'd like to see a striker role without any predefined PIs however .

Bit late to the party, but I'd love to see this role. I was only thinking about this the other day when I had taken over a new club and was trying to make a reliable two man striker combo with the players I had.  Midfield has the option, so why not the forwards and the backs? I don't care this role is called. Good old "Striker" sounds as a good as a name as any. I love just have more tactical options in setting up positions and instructing players to play how I want them to play right across the park and not be forced to use the cookie cutter system we have now. 

To expand on this I play mostly LL, where I take the average pass mark on any stat to be 9. The majority of forwards at this level are below (or very below) this mark in tackling and/or passing which leaves me with the Poacher & AF positions as the really only forward position that isn't hard coded with at least one of those stats. AF can be also hit and miss also with the more dribbling being hard coded.  I do find most LL Forwards with "hold up the ball" gets tackled off said ball well before his low decisions making has set off the light bulb in his head to pass the ball using his low passing skill to another player. Having the instruction "more Risky Passing" just doesn't cut the mustard with a large majority of LL players, forwards especially. DLF , TM, CF, DF, TQ & F9 all fall into this category where you have HUB, Tackling and or Passing hard-coded. So a lot of times I  am left with the two attacking (only) viable positional options in the forward line (P/AF), which then kinda forces me to have a AMC as the "link" to the midfield or play the old boot up the field bypass midfield and hope game where I have played many a time successfully with two Poachers feeding off the incoming bombs. Of course there are tactical work-arounds, and I'm not complaining about my lot in life. I chose to play LL with all it's challenges of no money, shallow and poor player depth, and a host of other restrictions, but an option for a STC without any pre-defined roles would be a welcome addition to FM.

 

 

 

[goqs06]

Some viable suggestions would be to:

1.  reintroduce the Defensive Winger in the AML/AMR role
2.  half space defenders (HSD) based on Mourinho's 4-2-2-2 approach against Chelsea

[Wavelberry]

The Bastard: DM strata role. A BWM with tackling turned up to 11. Also tries risky passes. Also arrives late into the box to win pelanties. Where is this legend?

[goqs06]

1 minute ago, Wavelberry said:

The Bastard: DM strata role. A BWM with tackling turned up to 11. Also tries risky passes. Also arrives late into the box to win pelanties. Where is this legend?

Keane and Vieira, perhaps? 🤔

[tiago_wakabayashi]

On 19/05/2018 at 01:25, goqs06 said:

 reintroduce the Defensive Winger in the AML/AMR role

+100 please!

 

[Snorks]

How about leaving all the roles and duties as they are, but making the'hard-coded' PIs changeable. For those who like to keep the game simple theey can select the role and duty and leave the default settings. Those tactical players can go in and adjust the defaults to suit their tastes.

Am seeing so many posts about what players should or would do in a role it seems to me that a 'soft default' rather than 'hard coded' player instructions would work.

That way you can have a DLF that doesn't hold up the ball, or a BPD that plays short or long depending on your setting.

[elefank]

I think we dont need more player roles, but rework some of them.I think ball playing defender, raumdeuter, inverted wingback, inside forward should be reworked.  Ball playing defender should act like a playmaker defender who helps to build up the play from the back.Raumdeuter should run much more into spaces. I feel like they are involved too much in build up phase. Inverted wingbacks works strangely when there are no other wide players. Inside forward rarely do plays with cut inside in front of the 18 yard box. I think defense should be reworked too because the defensive players rarely do tactical fouls. Defenders escort the strikers a lot of times or they just making a really crazy tackle where they get red card. Another thing that poacher role not works how it is described.  It described as it sits in the last defenders shoulder but he isn't. I'm always using AF if I want this. The game went through a radical change so  I think SI should consolidate the game. I think they should focus on the players AI and the AI managers too.

[tiago_wakabayashi]

On 25/05/2018 at 05:16, elefank said:

I think defense should be reworked too because the defensive players rarely do tactical fouls. Defenders escort the strikers a lot of times or they just making a really crazy tackle where they get red card.

Really +1

[enigmatic]

tbf, if they do tactical fouls well, you probably don't see it in the highlights...