Going out on a limb here because we don't know what FM08 will be like exactly, but trying to anticipate what the new 'match day' improvements will be like, here goes...
To summarize in brief what I'll argue for at some length: I suggest incorporating tactical changes a manager is likely to make into an event-based script system of some kind. Yeah, that's a mouthful. Basically I'm suggesting that a 'tactic-set' be replaced by a single tactic that is reactive to events on the field. Want your 4-4-2 long f-arrow attacking tactic to change to a 4-4-2 no f-arrow tactic if 2-0 up? Just script it in: "If leading by 2 goals, change to this tactic/formation". In short I am arguing
for a single tactic system, but one which incorporates the new depth added in FM07 by allowing the manager to pre-set his tactical changes and tie them to game events.
FM07 largely saw the demise of the 1-tactic-fits-all system of playing the game. There are plenty of exceptions of course, with not a few generalized tactics still emerging ("promotion winning tactic: no tweaking!" etc..). But overall, people seem to be moving to 'tactic sets' or 'home-away versions' of their tactical systems. They AI does it, and its in the player's best interest to do it as well. Well and good.
This is good and bad I think. Mostly good. It certainly adds realism to consider that teams will change their style of play depending on conditions, the opposition, and of course the scoreline (or pass completion ratio, etc..). Its also realistic that the manager call out these changes to the team on the field during play, or during a substitution / halftime. However, this new realism misses one thing and complicates another.
It misses the fact that most players will make their own adaptive changes to conditions, and usually in concert with management,
before the game begins. Kind of a large oversight of the current FM07 system, in my opinion. When a team concedes 3 goals in the first half, they will play differently no matter what the manager says. Each player's personality, history, morale and relationships will collude with his instructions from management and result in his on-field behavior, right? Its not like players just universally play to management's instructions no matter what happens on the pitch. They are human, and consequently can and do think for themselves in (hopefully) cooperation with their instructions.
Secondly, this new realism complicates the game-player's micromanagement unnecessarily (again, just an opinion and suggestion). Because we have no ability to script over the busy work we get consequently get quite a bit of desk work, every match. The very things that add to the game also detract from the game, and thats not really the idea I don't think. Opposition instructions, team talks, media. These add depth and tactical intricacy to the game (even the formulaic ones like media interactions). But they also add busy work because if we always want to respond to condition X with response Y we must still fill in the forms...
But nevermind the formulaic things that affect on-pitch performance. What about the tactics themselves? To hurdle these two difficulties (non-autonomous playing staff, increasing busywork) together I suggest adding a simple script system to the tactics front end of the match engine.
Script triggers:
Odds-On : What tactic to use or adjustment to make to tactics based on pre-game assessments of odds, and/or scout reports.
Scoreline : Changes to make to tactics based on score changes.
Game Stats : EG: "If yellow card, decrease tackling", or "If possession < 50%, and scoreline even, change these things (list)", or "If @80 minutes and ahead, switch to this tactic (shut up shop)".
Pitch conditions: "If wet pitch, adjust any tactic like this (change x,y, z)", or "If wet pitch, always use this tactic...".
Opposition Behavior: "If they hard tackle, hard tackle", or "If tight marked, take a free role".
......
Anticipatory defense (because a good offense is the best defense
) :
If this all sounds overly complicated to you, consider the time you spend doing these things on your own (and every match I might add) and imagine only doing them once to set them up, and only adjusting as you 'tweak' your tactic during the season. The oft-heard resistance to game changes on the SI boards is "That would be too complicated to implement". Give that a rest all ye non-programming types! Scripting is the easiest thing to program, and is all over the game already (how do you think the AI does the things it does?). Secondly, every time I hear fans say "That would be too complicated to implement" I also hear "I think SI are a bunch of simpletons". Personally I give them a lot more credit, and hope they keep their sights set high. Guess thats my management style...
Caveat finished.
The major beef with a scripted tactical system I think should be this: If we can set up our formulas and scripts such that we can play nearly hands-off, won't we either:
<UL TYPE=SQUARE> <LI>End up with the 'killer tactic' problem of FM05 + FM06?
<LI>Or end up with two formulas merely battling it out?
</UL>
I think those are major concerns, and concerns that have gotten us to where we are now: FM07, a very decent game. However I don't think that the current solution is adequate, although its a start.
The current solution, if I can paraphrase an entire game, is to require user participation at many stages of what is essentially exactly option B above: Two formulas battling it out with some chance and otherwise unpredictable elements helping out.
There is no escaping the fact that on some level there will almost always be a 'solution' to a tactical scenario. Its a game with scripts after all, not Deep Blue encountering some quantum supercomputer of the future. The delicate balancing act for FM is to keep the formula somewhat accessible to the player, but hidden enough that perfect solutions are non-trivial (unlike the media game) to work out. And that, furthermore, rational tactical approaches combined with experience will yield for the player a better approximation of such a 'perfect solution' without ever achieving it in an easy-to-virally-transmit way. IE, no killer tactics.
While the current implementation does prevent killer tactics from emerging, it also creates some problems as mentioned above. From what I can surmise about FM08, some of the busywork has been mitigated with new match day features and quicker tactical changes. I suggest for the long haul (FM09), that if in-match tactical adjustments are going to become even more pervasive that alternate solutions are considered (well, of course they are considered, I mean adopted!).
A mitigating feature could be: Quick buttons on the match interface to represent manager shouts to the team: "Push up!" or "Play more slowly!", etc.. These will help (I'm guessing something like this will be in '08) for sure.
In addition though, I do think a scripting system will address the underlying issue in a more comprehensive and satisfying way for the armchair manager. Lets start to represent the whole of tactics, which includes reactive tactics, if we are going to have the AI represent this (and demand it of the player in turn).
We all know that nobody needs to tell players to change a bit if getting repeatedly beaten. The changes they will make are part of the game plan. Likewise, after having worked out a time-wasting strategy in advance, the manager does not need to instruct each player individually on the particular team possession/time-wasting tactics...there is no time! There is no 'huddle'! I hope SI incorporate something like event-based scripting in the future. I think it would add tremendously to the game and would balance out the increasing complexity of the tactics system with real-world solutions, like, ah, a game plan!
-Smack
FM09 Suggestion: Scripted Tactical Changes 
Linear Mode
