retired_elpata

Too many people think FM should mimic real life to every single detail. Remember its a game and with the right set up anything is achievable. You don't need to be a number cruncher or anything, just a little patients, common sense and adaptability tbh

retired_vernicebell

If only it did mimic real life, then it would be playable and enjoyable. As it is, it's a nightmarish swathe of overly complicated statistics demanding a massive commitment of time and effort.

In their attempt to prevent "super tactics" becoming employable, an intent I completely sympathise with, SI have gone much too far and made this version, in my opinion, completely unplayable for the casual gamer. Football Manager is a game. You should be able to pick your best 11, whack them into a straight 4-4-2, watch the game and finish the season with a points tally reflecting the strength of the squad relative to your rival teams. You could do that in the old versions of FM. That's what made it a classic. Now you can't. Not without tedious and endless tweaking.

I await with interest the next release.

retired_elpata

Ermm, I know plenty of people who do that. And you want to know how and why they do? They keep it all simple and don't try anything elaborate. They stick to what they know about RL football and implement that to the game. Then they give it time for the players to get used to the new tactic. And volla 9/10 success.

retired_larson_luck

As many, many posts have said before this, how is whacking your team into a straight 442 without any extra tactical input anywhere near real-life? If that was the case, then real life teams wouldn't need a manager. Does Mourinho just pick his team then sit quietly watching the game? No. He is shouting out orders from the touchline if things aren't going his way.

The previous versions of the game where one tactic will work season after season were boring, because it didn't need the manager to do anything except buy the players.

I think there is also a myth about endless tweaking. I have read alot of wwfan's theories and all I do is set up various different tactics before the season starts, then you just pick a different one depending on the situation you are faced with.

retired_vernicebell

[/QUOTE]

Ermm, I know plenty of people who do that. And you want to know how and why they do? They keep it all simple and don't try anything elaborate. They stick to what they know about RL football and implement that to the game. Then they give it time for the players to get used to the new tactic. And volla 9/10 success.[/QUOTE]

Indeed. I want to keep it simple and not try anything elaborate. That's my point. What I know about real life football is that the winning side usually has the better players. Chelsea and Man U finished in the top two positions in the league this year because of how good their players are, not because of brilliantly engineered and incredibly complex tactical involvement from their managers.

Watford went down because their players weren't good enough. The "capabilities" of the manager were irrelevant. I would be willing to bet a lot of money that none of the likes of Mourinho, Capello, Benitez or Ferguson would have kept Watford up, assuming they had the same squad.

retired_elpata

Ermm, I know plenty of people who do that. And you want to know how and why they do? They keep it all simple and don't try anything elaborate. They stick to what they know about RL football and implement that to the game. Then they give it time for the players to get used to the new tactic. And volla 9/10 success.[/QUOTE]

Indeed. I want to keep it simple and not try anything elaborate. That's my point. What I know about real life football is that the winning side usually has the better players. Chelsea and Man U finished in the top two positions in the league this year because of how good their players are, not because of brilliantly engineered and incredibly complex tactical involvement from their managers.

Watford went down because their players weren't good enough. The "capabilities" of the manager were irrelevant. I would be willing to bet a lot of money that none of the likes of Mourinho, Capello, Benitez or Ferguson would have kept Watford up, assuming they had the same squad.[/QUOTE]

Its not just all about players though, if Arsene Wenger was tactically minded then Arsenal would win the league imo. But he is imcompetent and looks lost with the tactic side of things. He never changes the way Arsenal play, while Fergie and Mourinho etc all change many times during a game.

I wish people would stop saying but IRL, the game is not a real life just a sheer simulation of football. Some aspects are realistic other not due to game functions and mechanics.

retired_vernicebell

Its not just all about players though, if Arsene Wenger was tactically minded then Arsenal would win the league imo. But he is imcompetent and looks lost with the tactic side of things. He never changes the way Arsenal play, while Fergie and Mourinho etc all change many times during a game.

I wish people would stop saying but IRL, the game is not a real life just a sheer simulation of football. Some aspects are realistic other not due to game functions and mechanics.[/QUOTE]

Ferguson - always attacking, flair, creative freedom to creative players.

Mourinho - very safe, posession based football.
Or hoof the ball to Drogba.

Both never vary from what, two basic formations? Neither of which are based upon whether they're playing home or away. Nor are they based on the odds with the local bookies.

FM is a simulation of football and not real life. Of course that is so. Only it simulates it in a less realistic way than did previous versions imho.

Please note I have the utmost respect for yourself and the likes of wwfan. Your patience and intelligence is undoubtedly substantial. I'm just upset that I can't play FM any more. Well I could, but I'd have to quit my job so I had enough time to devote to it.

retired_janellewood86

Ferguson - always attacking, flair, creative freedom to creative players.

Mourinho - very safe, posession based football.
Or hoof the ball to Drogba.

Both never vary from what, two basic formations? Neither of which are based upon whether they're playing home or away. Nor are they based on the odds with the local bookies.

FM is a simulation of football and not real life. Of course that is so. Only it simulates it in a less realistic way than did previous versions imho.

Please note I have the utmost respect for yourself and the likes of wwfan. Your patience and intelligence is undoubtedly substantial. I'm just upset that I can't play FM any more. Well I could, but I'd have to quit my job so I had enough time to devote to it. </BLOCKQUOTE>
That's missing out quite a lot about tactics, though. Sir Alex still winds the game down in the last few minutes, he plays more conservatively away. Yes, he tends to go for goals, yes he allows quite a bit of creative freedom, but it isn't exactly the same for 90 minutes.

At its simplest, Evra and Neville are usually told to bomb forward at home. Away, or when defending a lead, I very rarely see this. That's just observations on what I've seen on the tv.

The game doesn't take endless tweaking, hours of stat analysis or anything of the sort. I think wwfan has clearly shown that with a set of tactics for certain situations, you can acheive quite a bit, and you don't have to minutely analyse every single kick. A quick look at certain key match stats and common sense tells you when to change.

The game takes too much time to play if you try and play it like you did the old versions - i.e., you try to use on basic set up. You need a little bit more depth to the tactics now. If you don't know how to do this yourself, wwfan's sets are a perfect example of how to do it. Or, you can even use them.

Once again, this idea that United and Chelse play the same tactic all the time is nonsense and ignores a lot of factors. I'm not saying that tactics have to be vastly different, but they change nonetheless.

psychodad13th

I've found success using a slightly tweaked 442 which I rarely change at all, unless I get several key players injured. I do change mentality depending on who I play and where, and I also change the individual player's settings depending on their relative strenghts. This is all common sense though and you'd be a fool to play for example Carragher at RB and have him play very offensively with the settings run with ball and forward runs at often. If I had R Carlos in his prime at RB this might be a much better idea.

If I'm holding on to a lead or chasing a game I might make some changes too but I rarely bother to counter when the AI changes tactics mid-game.

Just think it's real football and give the players instructions accordingly. This is what I do and what gives me the most pleasure. Just remember the players are idiots and have to be told everything, which to be fair ain't very unrealistic either.

retired_rayrhi

HOME
http://community.sigames.com/eve/for...7/m/7252065123

AWAY
http://community.sigames.com/eve/for...7/m/6772081323

Give the above a read and try it out. It took me about 7 months to finally realise that simple is better, and you don't have to tweak in match whatsover. I have two tactics that I switch between, it's that simple: An attacking (home) formation, and a cautious (away or keep the lead) formation. In my last three games I finished second with Everton, won the Championship with Palace, and won the Championship with Derby.

As for your opinion that the game is flawed, I tend to disagree. The game itself is not flawed since it's designed the way it's supposed to work. The manual is flawed, the feedback system is flawed, but the game itself is not. After 7 months of playing I have found my magical formula. As happy as I am, and as renewed as my spirit is for the game, it's a little frustrating that I got here through trial and error. A lot of mouse abuse and sulking could have been avoided if only I had the information and feedback I now have 'discovered'. A lot of people find this part of the game most enjoyable—the trial & error approach is a journey of challenge and happiness for a lot of people, although not for me.

Our level of expectation for this game now is so sky-high that we lose a sense of its brilliance. No game comes within 1,000 miles of FM's level of intricacy, detail, realism, and scope. I would encourage you all to stick with it and keep it simple. This is how I get my teams to perform to the highest potential. This way you are merely providing a solid base, not over-complicating things, and from this base you can rely on your players' ability to win you those trophies.

I urge you all to remember what this game was, to ponder over what it is, and to salivate over what it is to become. Every game thus far has been a stepping stone closer to perfection. But with each step forward, perfection will always be one step ahead. This is exactly what we want, otherwise there could be no improvement. The potential of this game is profound, so let us not dilute these forums with complaints, or distort the beauty of it with our infinte rants. Remember: the day that this game is perfect is the day that Football Manager dies.