Frustrated at players roles - my ideas for 'chalk board tactics'

[dave256]

I've grown so frustrated at the player roles and having pre-defined instructions that I have to stick to. The devs have said this is more realistic of football but who can imagine a manager like Ferguson saying I want you to play as a deep lying forward and the then leaving it at that? It's much more realistic that a professional manager would give instructions to players on where he wants them to be and how he wants them to act depending on where the ball is on the pitch.

My idea is simple. I'd like to see 2 chalkboards; 1) when in possession 2) when opposition in possession

All it would need is the option of placing a ball in 9 positions on the pitch - edge of your penalty box (central and on the wings), centre of the pitch (centre and on the wings), edge of oppositions box (centre and on the wings) and then you position where you want your players on each chalk board depending whether you or the opposition have posession.

This, to me, would much more realistically simulate how tactics would take place.

 

[WJ]

The devs have said this is more realistic of football but who can imagine a manager like Ferguson saying I want you to play as a deep lying forward and the then leaving it at that?

It's unbelievable how much this gets brought up. Of course a real manager doesn't say that. The game doesn't even say that, so where is this coming from?

There's an entire description of (your example) what a deep lying forward does, including a description of what he does with a certain duty allocated to him. There's also key attributes for the role that gives you a good idea of the key requirements of the role. Thirdly, you also have the default instructions (Player Instruction screen) where you can see in more detail what the role has been instructed to do.

That all has simply been given a name, in this case - deep lying forward. It could have been any name. It doesn't matter. It is just a label for a set of instructions.

The problem with your idea (which is just the wibble-wobble of old) is that it is massively open to exploits and the AI can't use it. It'll be unbelievably complex to teach it how to. Especially compared to roles and duties.

 

[dave256]

It's unbelievable how much this gets brought up. Of course a real manager doesn't say that. The game doesn't even say that, so where is this coming from?

There's an entire description of (your example) what a deep lying forward does, including a description of what he does with a certain duty allocated to him. There's also key attributes for the role that gives you a good idea of the key requirements of the role. Thirdly, you also have the default instructions (Player Instruction screen) where you can see in more detail what the role has been instructed to do.

That all has simply been given a name, in this case - deep lying forward. It could have been any name. It doesn't matter. It is just a label for a set of instructions.

The problem with your idea (which is just the wibble-wobble of old) is that it is massively open to exploits and the AI can't use it. It'll be unbelievably complex to teach it how to. Especially compared to roles and duties.

As part of the marketing, when the game was released, they said it was more realistic. My problem isn't to do with not knowing what the roles do, it's a problem with it taking the control out of a manager simulation game. Surely that's what 'simulation' means? There's no comparison to the player roles and how a team would be managed.

I understand you're reasoning that it opens the game to exploits but why water down the players (us) involvement to make it more balanced? Surely the point is trying to make you feel like you have impact on what happens on the pitch? All you've said is plenty have brought it up and surely then that's something fans of this game want? I don't see what you're saying with that comment

All fans are giving is their views on how they want to feel more involved with the game

 

[WJ]

As part of the marketing, when the game was released, they said it was more realistic. My problem isn't to do with not knowing what the roles do, it's a problem with it taking the control out of a manager simulation game. Surely that's what 'simulation' means? There's no comparison to the player roles and how a team would be managed.

I understand you're reasoning that it opens the game to exploits but why water down the players (us) involvement to make it more balanced? Surely the point is trying to make you feel like you have impact on what happens on the pitch? All you've said is plenty have brought it up and surely then that's something fans of this game want? I don't see what you're saying with that comment

All fans are giving is their views on how they want to feel more involved with the game

No, I said plenty of people use the short-sighted argument of "real life managers don't tell xxxx to be a Poacher and that's the end of it.".

You have a big impact over what happens on the pitch. You control the defensive shape and the attacking shape. It's less than real life, because IRL there are 4 phases and not 2, but most people struggle just with getting 2 right, so it should stay like that for now. I'd love for the game to have it, as it is more realistic, but I don't see it coming that soon. Unless it can be simplified/automated for less hardcore users.

You have a huge impact over what happens on the pitch. Take a look at the people struggling with tactics around the community, for instance. Others have huge successes. Just because you can't control which blade of grass a players stands on, doesn't mean you don't have control.

 

[dave256]

Also, I'm not talking about micro-managing every action to one click of a slider. Having 9 ball positions on a pitch doesnt seem too much of an advantage to me but does seem to be more about management. You could say you want your winger to be behind the ball when the opp have it edge of your box on the wing but he wont magically appear there if he's the other end of the pitch. It just means he'll try get there (depending on team work etc) more consistently than it works now. Using that as an example, I don't like having to set him to mark a winger/fb as it mucks up other aspects of the game...and with the roles it doesnt work as well. You should be able to say where you want them positioned and then depending on the players stats that depends how effective. It's not huge changes

You can kind of do this with the automatic setting but unless you mark a specific player he rarely does things effectively. It's just positioning

It makes more sense to me

 

[dave256]

I'd try explain how I'd see it looking in game. So you'd have your chalk boards with those 9 positions you can put the ball. You'd then have 'slots' in rows of 5 where you can position players. I'd see these slots running alongside the ball positions and then in between....something like


penalty area
ball slot ball slot ball
slot slot slot slot slot
ball slot ball slot ball (centre of pitch)
slot slot slot slot slot
ball slot ball slot ball
penalty area

You can place players in any of those slots (ball would also be slot)

We just differ on things but I don't see this being an unfair advantage over the AI. We already have a more advanced way of training players anyway and so surely should be able to implement more of our OWN choices on the pitch? The AI can't train players like we can

 

[WJ]

I'd try explain how I'd see it looking in game. So you'd have your chalk boards with those 9 positions you can put the ball. You'd then have 'slots' in rows of 5 where you can position players. I'd see these slots running alongside the ball positions and then in between....something like


penalty area
ball slot ball slot ball
slot slot slot slot slot
ball slot ball slot ball (centre of pitch)
slot slot slot slot slot
ball slot ball slot ball
penalty area

You can place players in any of those slots (ball would also be slot)

We just differ on things but I don't see this being an unfair advantage over the AI. We already have a more advanced way of training players anyway and so surely should be able to implement more of our OWN choices on the pitch? The AI can't train players like we can

I know what you're proposing. The point is that at the moment, it's a level playing field. The AI can use the same tools that we can. Your way will see us come up with a million exploits that the AI just can't. It isn't that advanced yet. It's still struggling to set up tactics as it is now!

You'd have to code very specific restrictions to make the AI able to use it and still have us on a level playing field so that there won't be a return of diablo tactics again.

How on earth is it not an advantage over the AI?!?!

 

[WJ]

Also, I'm not talking about micro-managing every action to one click of a slider. Having 9 ball positions on a pitch doesnt seem too much of an advantage to me but does seem to be more about management. You could say you want your winger to be behind the ball when the opp have it edge of your box on the wing but he wont magically appear there if he's the other end of the pitch. It just means he'll try get there (depending on team work etc) more consistently than it works now. Using that as an example, I don't like having to set him to mark a winger/fb as it mucks up other aspects of the game...and with the roles it doesnt work as well. You should be able to say where you want them positioned and then depending on the players stats that depends how effective. It's not huge changes

You can kind of do this with the automatic setting but unless you mark a specific player he rarely does things effectively. It's just positioning

It makes more sense to me

Just a question. How will forward runs work? They now have 9 rigid positions, so will forward runs be scrapped?

 

[wkdsoul]

A similar idea was brought up (and shot down as to why its a terrrible idea) on SI Discussion the other day, i suggest reading that argument/debate as well.

http://community.sigames.com/showth...-of-player-roles-simplified-the-game-too-much

 

[dave256]

Just a question. How will forward runs work? They now have 9 rigid positions, so will forward runs be scrapped?

It's not rigid positions. The roles currently play out a more rigid approach and that's what I find frustrating. It allows more choice and would be a more organic approach to players movement depending on where the ball is.

I am thinking the 9 positions would be very hard to code into a game and the simpler way implementing my idea would be player behaviour determined by opposition having the ball in their half and your half and player behaviour on your team having the ball in your half and their half. So you select a striker and then choose for which mentality you want him to be on in all 4 phases of play. If the opposition was in your half and you had him in attack mode he would stay up in attack. If you had him in defend mode in the same phase then he would run back to help the midfield at the edge of the box. You could still have a very attacking striker but he will still help in defence. So have him on defend to help the defence when opp in your half and on attack when you have the ball in their half and he will look to play much higher up the pitch. You could still choose forward runs, run in channels etc. but you can choose mentality changes in the 4 phases of play.

That seems easier to implement for both player and AI and gives more control for a player instead of having it all pre-determined.

 

[dave256]

A similar idea was brought up (and shot down as to why its a terrrible idea) on SI Discussion the other day, i suggest reading that argument/debate as well.

Anyone else think the introduction of player roles simplified the game too much?

Yeah, I had a little read of that and I think I'm coming at a slightly different angle. I wouldn't say the roles are simplified but more limiting really. My first thought though of the '9 ball positions' would be a little hectic but I think the game could implement something around player mentality determined on 4 phases of play - opposition having ball in their half and your half and your team having the ball in your half and their half. I feel this would be a little easier to implement into the game and is more involving for the player than how I find the current role thing

I've detailed my idea in the post above

 

[WJ]

It's not rigid positions. The roles currently play out a more rigid approach and that's what I find frustrating. It allows more choice and would be a more organic approach to players movement depending on where the ball is.

I am thinking the 9 positions would be very hard to code into a game and the simpler way implementing my idea would be player behaviour determined by opposition having the ball in their half and your half and player behaviour on your team having the ball in your half and their half. So you select a striker and then choose for which mentality you want him to be on in all 4 phases of play. If the opposition was in your half and you had him in attack mode he would stay up in attack. If you had him in defend mode in the same phase then he would run back to help the midfield at the edge of the box. You could still have a very attacking striker but he will still help in defence. So have him on defend to help the defence when opp in your half and on attack when you have the ball in their half and he will look to play much higher up the pitch. You could still choose forward runs, run in channels etc. but you can choose mentality changes in the 4 phases of play.

That seems easier to implement for both player and AI and gives more control for a player instead of having it all pre-determined.

That's not football. That's gaming now. You want to be able to create diablo tactics. A very attacking striker that helps out in defence?!?!

That isn't realism. Your 4 phases of play will just confuse everything and take us further away from reality. The roles are a good start and the tactical system expands or is refined every year, so I'll stick with that.

 

[dave256]

That's not football. That's gaming now. You want to be able to create diablo tactics. A very attacking striker that helps out in defence?!?!

That isn't realism. Your 4 phases of play will just confuse everything and take us further away from reality. The roles are a good start and the tactical system expands or is refined every year, so I'll stick with that.

Huh? How is that not realism? It's more true to life that a manager would instruct players on what he wants them to do in phase of play rather than flat instructions for all of it. It's more real to life that a manager would want his player to do something and then the player go's on the pitch and carries it out to the best of his ability. I'm not saying that the player would be able to contribute to all phases of play regardless of ability but you should be able to instruct that and then buy the players to suit that. I'd use Adebayor as an example for Spurs. Spurs played a very pressing, control style of play but Adebayor didn't contribute to that. That is down to Adebayor's personality but Spurs' mentality was very much focused around team pressing. If Adebayor was in the Barcelona team he wouldn't adapt to it in the same way as others but Barcelona has that mentality in every position. With the roles as they are you can't even instruct that. You can have defensive forward but then he stands around in the attacking phase or a more attacking player who then doesn't track back. The point is that you should have the option as a manager to do whatever you want but then you need to find the players who will carry it out effectively.

You get plenty of strikers who will be pressing the opposition in the midfield when defending and then effectively contribute as the focus of the attack. You're saying you've never seen that and that sounds like game fantasy? I've certainly never seen a striker who tracks back, defends and then stops dead when the ball reaches a certain point when attacking. That happens constantly with the roles right now

 

[WJ]

Huh? How is that not realism? It's more true to life that a manager would instruct players on what he wants them to do in phase of play rather than flat instructions for all of it. It's more real to life that a manager would want his player to do something and then the player go's on the pitch and carries it out to the best of his ability.

I suggest you make time to understand the current system. You're asking for things that already happen.

I'm not saying that the player would be able to contribute to all phases of play regardless of ability but you should be able to instruct that and then buy the players to suit that. I'd use Adebayor as an example for Spurs. Spurs played a very pressing, control style of play but Adebayor didn't contribute to that. That is down to Adebayor's personality but Spurs' mentality was very much focused around team pressing. If Adebayor was in the Barcelona team he wouldn't adapt to it in the same way as others but Barcelona has that mentality in every position. With the roles as they are you can't even instruct that.

This already happens. A player with low Work Rate will not work as much or track back as much as high Work Rate players.

You can have defensive forward but then he stands around in the attacking phase or a more attacking player who then doesn't track back. The point is that you should have the option as a manager to do whatever you want but then you need to find the players who will carry it out effectively.

A defensive forward isn't supposed to spearhead attacks. The descriptions and duties make this clear. You want something that the role isn't supposed to do.

"An attacking player" is vague. If you mean a forward, that's because... he is a forward and for him to be a forward, he needs to behave like a forward and stay forward. If you mean an AM strata player on Attack duty then, again, that is what the role is supposed to do - to be a constant goal threat. This works especially for counter attacks. M strata players do track back quite a bit, so that's more what you want.

You get plenty of strikers who will be pressing the opposition in the midfield when defending and then effectively contribute as the focus of the attack.

Why can that not be a SS/A? The formation is the defensive shape. If you need players to defend deeper, drop them down a strata. You're getting FM's formation confused with the formations commonly put on TV which represent the attacking shape or even average positions more.

You're saying you've never seen that and that sounds like game fantasy? I've certainly never seen a striker who tracks back, defends and then stops dead when the ball reaches a certain point when attacking. That happens constantly with the roles right now

No. What happens now is that strikers are expected to behave like strikers. If you want a player to defend in midfield, he's a midfielder. It's simple.

 

[dave256]

"No. What happens now is that strikers are expected to behave like strikers. If you want a player to defend in midfield, he's a midfielder. It's simple."

What you say right there is what people used to say about the common FB. Now the modern wingback/fb is arguably one of the most effective players in modern day football. I'm not going to argue anymore as it seems pointless. I play Chadli as an IF (s) and he doesn't track back effectively despite me ticking tight marking and he has good teamwork and stats that should allow him to. He only tracks back if I specifically tell him to man mark and that negatively affects other areas of the game.

My point would be, as far as tracking back is concerned, each player I've put in that IF (s) positioned has behaved exactly the same. I have Eriksen, Son and Chadli and they all go back a certain point and then stop. They act variably when you tell them to mark a specific player but that comes down to marking, concentration etc. I would suggest that this is more determined by the player role than the stats such as teamwork and work rate

So many strikers contribute to more defensive areas of play while still being effective in attack. I don't feel this game replicates the transitional phases of play and my suggestion of instructions in phases of play is merely my view in how it could more effectively do that.

 

[WJ]

They stop at a certain point because they're in the AM strata. They are supposed to be high up. If you need them to defend deeper, they need to be in the M strata.

High Work Rate players do track back more. They will however stop at a certain point because they've been given an AML/AMR role and they've already done a lot to drop this deep.

How well a player Specific Man Marks a player, depends on attributes such as Work Rate, Team Work and (of course) Marking.

 

[zigaliro555]

I would like something like that. Even PES which is not focused on tactical realism have something similar to this. I wish they would implement this like in PES.

 

[potato head]

Dave256, you made a good suggestion, I’d also like to see more “customization” in FM!

 

[Blarry]

I've grown so frustrated at the player roles and having pre-defined instructions that I have to stick to. The devs have said this is more realistic of football but who can imagine a manager like Ferguson saying I want you to play as a deep lying forward and the then leaving it at that? It's much more realistic that a professional manager would give instructions to players on where he wants them to be and how he wants them to act depending on where the ball is on the pitch.

My idea is simple. I'd like to see 2 chalkboards; 1) when in possession 2) when opposition in possession

All it would need is the option of placing a ball in 9 positions on the pitch - edge of your penalty box (central and on the wings), centre of the pitch (centre and on the wings), edge of oppositions box (centre and on the wings) and then you position where you want your players on each chalk board depending whether you or the opposition have posession.

This, to me, would much more realistically simulate how tactics would take place.

Nah, that would actually simulate more realistically how teams are set up and how football is played in real life. We can't have that, you crazy?

 

[miitchh]

I would say, on top of what we already have, just add a 'for example' for the striker position a simple 'forward'. No instructions and then you just choose everything.