Change in tactics creator / roles and duties

[thizaum]

This has basically started with a opinion that the game now has too many roles. And by that, I mean too many strata-side-role-duty combinations, which I've counted around 100.

And, even with being a player since CM and reading a lot, I'm still not clear on some role differences. When I do have an idea of it, I still get the impression that the difference is so small that it shouldn't require a new role.

In example:

DM(d) x A(d)

AM(a) x SS(a)

Eng(a) x AP(a)

Treq(a) x F9 (s)

WM x IW

 

So, first of all, I would say that the way the game explains the roles could be improved. I'm not talking about being spoon fed, but at least allowing the players to have a better notion of what they are doing. If we compare with real life, I would say that the challenge is if the way you want the team to play is successful or not. In FM, and you see this everyday in the Tactics and Training forum, the challenge is to get the team to play the way you want.

And apart from that, Mezzala, Carrilero and Trequartista are not ordinary terms in many languages. They can even cause confusion, as "carrilero" in Spain is the wingback in a 3-5-2. I, as a brazilian, was surprised with the introduction of the Segundo Volante, as he's just a DM(s). Or why not have a DM(a)?

And now, to the suggestion itself, which I break in 5 parts:

 

1) Instead of the 6 strata (if you count the SW one) structure, have a 3 strata structure (defence, midfield, and attack). And then, inside each strata, the role would position the player on "substratas". In this case, you wouldn't have 2 trequartista roles or 2 advanced playmaker roles, for example. Only one of each. And probably remove the CM role (leaving only DM and AM). DLP would be deeper than AP, and so forth. This would already reduce the number of strata-role combinations.

2) Remove the roles that are somewhat similar.

3) Show (preferably in a elegant and graphical way) the hidden obligatory characteristics of the specialist roles (i.e. HB, Mez, Car, etc). What am I supposed to expect of this "specialist" roles?

4) Allow the player to "create roles" using the same tools ( vertical or horizontal or diagonal movement, creative freedom, playmaking, pressing, etc) and allow the AI to use these roles (to counter the possibility of the human managers outsmarting the AI). I think it's easier to know what to expect from a role when you create it. Again, if you compare with real life, nobody told Müller to be a Raumdeuter. The role was created with him.

5) When roles, duties and PIs are activated, show the relative positioning and use arrows in the formation. In conclusion, instead of making the player draw arrows, show them the effects of each role and/or PI.

 

As an example: the 4-2-3-1 (which would be a 4-5-1).

A fun test would be if someone could guess the roles with the different positioning and the arrows. I think it's probable. The idea is to be intuitive to anybody who knows football (which I'd think is more than 99% of the player base).

And I think it would be easy to know what to expect from this team. I don't see a worry about the midfield being to far from defence (4-2CM-3-1) or the trequartista being far from the DMs (4-2DM-3-1) or being top or bottom heavy (because in the 4-2-3-1, this need to come from the mentality, not the formation, as the lines should be equally spaced).

From the top of my head, I think you can use this to make all the most used formations in the game. Even narrow 4-1-2-1-2 and narrow 4-2-2-2 could be feasable (they would be 4-4-2s).

 

In conclusion, I don't think much would be lost, while making the game more intuitive, straightforward and elegant.

 

 

 

[Neil Brock]

Reviewed so locked.