If you register for free, you will be able to post threads, vote on polls and lots more. If you have problems with the registration or logging in, please contact the administrator.
In the spirit of experimentation, I took over the opposition to my Man city side (I'm not planning on keeping this game and saved just before to restart)
So after selecting a basic 4-4-2 with Tottenham and asking the assistant manager to pick the side I had set individual instructions to never close down my strikers or attacking midfield.
I also set the team up with Defoe as a central defender and a coupld of other strange positioning.
MY standard 4-4-2 with everyone in the correct position was 3-0 down at half time.
So I set Spurs up in the above formation and OK, I had a man sent off, but Tottenham still managed to score THREE times in the second half with this formation. I only managed to score my nine because I had the GK on that suicide run.
I'm going to keep this formation with Tottenham for a game (without the long 'gk run') and see what happens.
Have I stumbled across an uber-tactic, or is it proof that tactics in this game are entirely arbitary.
I disagree. If anything, tactics have too much effect on results in FM. Games of football are invariably decided by the ability of players. The influence of coaches is massively over-estimated by the media, fans, game designers, and possibly the managers themselves.
I have to agree with 'Sad Git', tactics do play too much of a role in fm.
BUT, without the tactics what would we the gamers have to do? We would have less effect on the game, we'd have hardly anything to do. Yes, we'd set the tactics, but the computer would already pre-determine the result. Because it would take into account the players skill more, and we'd end up with a game that was determined only on the players you had, meaning if you started with a team that was destined for relegation, you'd get relegated. You'd get no where.
But, generally i agree with sad git, but there is no way to put this into the game engine without screwing it up further. :cool:
Originally posted by Sad Git:
I disagree. If anything, tactics have too much effect on results in FM. Games of football are invariably decided by the ability of players. The influence of coaches is massively over-estimated by the media, fans, game designers, and possibly the managers themselves.
Which is why all the best clubs in the world have hired tramps they've found on the street to lead their teams...
NO, tactics are the biggest factor em wiinning a game however teamtalks+players+morale+physical condition (all together) have bigger influence then tactics imo.
Originally posted by Ackter:
<BLOCKQUOTE>Originally posted by Sad Git:
I disagree. If anything, tactics have too much effect on results in FM. Games of football are invariably decided by the ability of players. The influence of coaches is massively over-estimated by the media, fans, game designers, and possibly the managers themselves.
Which is why all the best clubs in the world have hired tramps they've found on the street to lead their teams... </BLOCKQUOTE>
If the 'real world' was FM, then Jose Mourinho could hire eleven tramps and beat Arsenal.
Originally posted by Cameron1911:
I have to agree with 'Sad Git', tactics do play too much of a role in fm.
BUT, without the tactics what would we the gamers have to do? We would have less effect on the game, we'd have hardly anything to do. Yes, we'd set the tactics, but the computer would already pre-determine the result. Because it would take into account the players skill more, and we'd end up with a game that was determined only on the players you had, meaning if you started with a team that was destined for relegation, you'd get relegated. You'd get no where.
But, generally i agree with sad git, but there is no way to put this into the game engine without screwing it up further. :cool:
How about having your players actually knowing how to play football instead of you having to tell them EVERYTHING.
"BUT, without the tactics what would we the gamers have to do? We would have less effect on the game, we'd have hardly anything to do. Yes, we'd set the tactics, but the computer would already pre-determine the result. Because it would take into account the players skill more, and we'd end up with a game that was determined only on the players you had, meaning if you started with a team that was destined for relegation, you'd get relegated. You'd get no where."
"Which is why all the best clubs in the world have hired tramps they've found on the street to lead their teams..."
Club managers do a LOT more than just pick tactics. They sign staff, develop players, man-manage players, etc etc. Ask any decent manager and they'll tell you that players win matches, not systems of play.
Tactics meaningless? 
Linear Mode
