Time for skill levels

retired_LUXANGEL · 04-13-2007, 12:23 AM

I disagree with difficukty levels, the editors in the past have offered a degree of ensuring people have an easier way of playing in need, didnt agrre with editors ever but that is just my preference.

I would suggest the overhaul needs to be in the tactics as has been said on a few occasions a lot of big teams dont play different tactics or have to change them when they go from heros to zeros as in SI because the game decides it now knows your tactic, that is quite pathetic and unrealsitic.

So vo difficulty levels, but please ensure more relaistic and ensure the focus on game by game tactics ie more in depth scouts to to react to and better minor tactical changes like over lapping wide players, better man marking on specific players etc etc

retired_Fiteach · 04-13-2007, 12:25 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Chand:
But I'm not moaning, really. My posts are not complaints. I like the game because it's the only one of its kind (the only one worth a damn, at least). That doesn't mean it doesn't frustrate the hell out of me and other players.

The reason for my frustration is not that it's 'too hard', or that I can't get Albacete to win every European competition for ten years straight without changing my tactic. I like it when games throw bricks at me and force me to rethink my approaches, try different things, etc. The reason for my frustration is that this game doesn't give me good tools to do it and keeps me in the dark as a player most of the time.

Like the example given above. Something conceptually simple like having someone above the back four spraying balls. Suppose that, for right or for wrong, I determine that the problem with my tactic is that I don't have something like that, and I wish to try implementing it. As it is now I have to put up with a mess of sliders and badly-described options (counter-attack, anyone?), and try different settings and eight million combinations of the precise instructions until 'it happens'. Not until 'I get it done', but until 'it happens'.

The game gives me no tools to implement solutions. Simple solutions or complicated ones, it doesn't matter. Players may be dumb, but they're not stupid. They may know what to do, but have no way of knowing how to do it with the current system. Instead of telling my FB's "Don't come out so much", I have to fiddle with at least two or three sliders so granular that whatever change I make is not even reflected visually sometimes. Instead of telling my AMC "Play in the hole and distribute from there", I have to again fiddle with his mentality, type of passing (why on earth should I be telling an AMC type of player in the hole how to pass, for crying out loud?), etc.

Players may know, sometimes, what to do and they might want to try simple solutions. But most of the time either they don't know how to, because of all the sliders that affect/don't affect anything, or simply because whatever changes they make are not enough/too much/not reflected in-game.

That's what needs to improve. And if you guys think a system that leaves player in the dark is 'challenging' well, no. I disagree. That's an annoying system, not a challenging one. A challenging system forces players to think and get better. An annoying system keeps players in the dark until they strike lucky with the options by the grace of god.

Totally Agree with you Chand, refreshing to see all our frustation explain in proper manner.

I do think people in here that (complain or moan) dont do that just for the sake of it, they do it for the luck of understanding the complex tattical difficulty.

We just want a CLEAR understanding of what the slider do at 11 and what they do 225, that what I think is the problem very few understand this sliders and how they work.

Unfortunally not all of us got the luxuary to spend 2 hours just trying to figure out what 1 slider do never mind all the rest will take some of us ages.

So please simplicity that all we ask, not easy or not unrealy just make easy to understand and implement your direction to the players on the pitch.

At the moment is frustrating and no fun :thdn:

retired_mizzneka1287 · 04-13-2007, 05:34 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by FuSS:
So in conclusion -

=This game is realistic, teams that arn't already top 2 material won't suddenly win the league just because you're the manager....and neither should they.

Ok this is quoted on the first page and it's only part of FuSS's post but I have to say I dis-agree. What do you mean teams that aren't top two material can't suddenly win the league? Look at cleon with Sheffield Utd. Look at wwfan. Even your tactic can make teams that are no more than bottom half material win the league!

Now onto the difficulty level, I think that it's not a bad idea. For example, it really is the only way to include casual and serious gaming. (NOT improved Ass. Man!). The reason I don't like an improved Ass. man is because firstly I agree that is becomes repetitive and also wouldn't that make it the Ass. Man win the games for you as he tells you what you should change and you just do it...
I'm sure I had more but it just doesn't come into my mind at the moment so that's it for now.

retired_mgavlick · 04-13-2007, 07:12 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Arthur Li:
<BLOCKQUOTE>Originally posted by FuSS:
So in conclusion -

=This game is realistic, teams that arn't already top 2 material won't suddenly win the league just because you're the manager....and neither should they.

Ok this is quoted on the first page and it's only part of FuSS's post but I have to say I dis-agree. What do you mean teams that aren't top two material can't suddenly win the league? Look at cleon with Sheffield Utd. Look at wwfan. Even your tactic can make teams that are no more than bottom half material win the league!

Now onto the difficulty level, I think that it's not a bad idea. For example, it really is the only way to include casual and serious gaming. (NOT improved Ass. Man!). The reason I don't like an improved Ass. man is because firstly I agree that is becomes repetitive and also wouldn't that make it the Ass. Man win the games for you as he tells you what you should change and you just do it...
I'm sure I had more but it just doesn't come into my mind at the moment so that's it for now. </BLOCKQUOTE>

I wouldn't say my tactical musings would allow a bottom of the table team win the league. I'd be happy with top six. In my current game I considered finishing 12th in the Premiership, when given pre-season odds of 2,000-1 a major achievement. I think I give the extra edge to some players who can turn a bottom six team into a top six team through applying some of my ideas. But, to win the league with a side that realistically has no chance; I'm glad I can't do that and would be disappointed if anyone did.

retired_mizzneka1287 · 04-13-2007, 07:27 AM

Well i didn't exactly mean bottom of the table. I can't think of how to put this so lets just give an example. Tottenham won't be winning the league irl. Not this season, not the next or the one after that. But in FM they could do it easily. Or to give a more extreme one Cleon has done it with Sheffield Utd. and they're a 'bottom of the table team'.

retired_tbobbitt · 04-13-2007, 09:14 AM

Glad to see this thread come back to life. I think i agree with the perspective of empowering players. Like I said in my last post, you can't have this much control over a player in game IRL. At best, you can give him specific instructions in game which he will interpret in his own way and execute depending on his abilities to follow orders, his tactical skills and his technical skills. Most of his play will be dictated by his position on the field and the set-up of the team. I am in favour of having more options for the set-up of the team style of play because that does not detract from realism. But having this amount of individual instructions certainly does.

Some will say that this is making the game too simple. I say it makes it more realistic. Simulating reality through complexity is never a good idea. In this case, it takes away from the experience of the game.

Time for skill levels

It's no use having a squad full of star players without a decent way for them to play their football.

Time for skill levels