retired_danig6484

My sympathies (as I stated above), but there's no need to pout. I simply disagree with you and therefore:
So, since I don't know what I'm talking about, please ignore the rest of this post. Its a reiteration of above anyways, in more detail.

In the real world? In FM? I think SI have done a good job of having fans muddle the two. 'If it works in the real world, it'll work in FM'. That is the highest compliment one can pay a simulation game.

But its also a strategy game. Its also not a 1:1 simulation of real life, obviously. In that its a strategy game, certain game strategies will work in the game world that won't in real life, and vice-versa. In that FM is a simulation, words like 'tempo' which could have 100 different meanings to 1000 different parts of a match, can't be translated 1:1 with the real world.

All these caveats aside, what is tempo, in FM2007? That is a more sizable question than asking what it is in real football. We all have a sense of what 'high tempo' means in the real world, and though our definitions will vary I feel certain that there is more agreement than disparity.

In FM2006/7 tempo is perhaps one or more of the following:

<UL TYPE=SQUARE> <LI>How fast a team moves from taking the ball to attempting a shot/endline cross/etc..
<LI>How quickly each player attempts to move the ball towards a position to do the above.
<LI>How fast the ball moves in MPH (yes I know, that's not it)
<LI>"how fast you move the ball around period." -Cleon
<LI>"how fast you distribute the ball." -Cleon
<LI>Tempo is how 'one touch' a team attempts to play. IE, how quickly each player tries to receive and pass, pass and move, etc.. == little time holding the ball up, searching for a pass, etc..
<LI>How much a player will try to force the ball forward, rather than backwards or crossfield.
<LI>etc...
</UL>

I know, some are wrong. Some are exactly what should be defined as 'direct' vs. 'indirect' styles of play (not styles of passing necessarily). The point is that tempo is a slider we control that affects the match simulation engine in some way, and few bother to define it, or discuss it in those terms, the GAME terms.

Again, we know what we think high tempo should mean, but discussing that is like arguing with a stone. The game code is set and won't negotiate with you no matter how right you are about what it should be doing.

Rather, discard with these notions and look at what the game engine actually does with our 1-dimensional tempo instructions. My perspective is that tempo is more about 'speed of buildup towards a shooting opportunity' if/than anything else. Others think its how fast the players pass the ball.

That SI's simple 'Slow tempo goes with short passing' is enough of an answer for some to advise as if this were the sum total of what a manager needs to know about tempo, is, IMHO, ludicrous. As the above list (albeit very incompletely) describes, the possible actual effects of tempo on how the match engine simulates a match seems quite a bit wider topic than that.

Not that the OP wanted the above, but I hope it helps relate that the info on tempo is NOT agreed upon, at least not by all of us.

Back to the pub with you SI!

retired_elpata

SI have said tempo is how fast you move the ball around though, so why disagree with what they say? Or do you know something they dont?

To achieve a one touch you'd have short passing 1 on the slider.

Nope, how a player passes the ball is linked to mentality. An attacking mentality sees more forward balls, a defensive one sees more back passes.

Slow Tempo = A slow build up play, meaning the players like to build an attacking opportunity and be patient rather than forcing one.

Fast Tempo = Fast frantic paced football, where you distribute the ball fast regardless and always look for an opportunity.

So I don't know why you are over complicating things, when the manual clearly states what tempo actually does.

On FM they both mean the same thing, if you pass the ball fast then you are not being pateint in the build up play. The game only interprets distribution in 1 way.

retired_handymanjohn

With short pasing plus fast tempo,u will nvr get forward wit the ball,because u oni passing wit each other at the back,and wit higher speed,mistake will comes out easily..So,short pass oni for patient play,and confuses opponent defender..

Direct pass wit fast speed,u will get the ball forward faster,wit lower mistake will come out,u are not passing the ball each other at the back..
so..the FM tooltip means its correct..

retired_janearific

I would go along the lines of Tempo being in relation to how fast you can get the ball from one end of the field to the other. The faster the tempo, the quicker you want to get the ball into the opposition box and create a chance on goal.

A slow tempo would be short passes - fair enough the good players may pass it at speed sometimes but it will still take the ball a lot longer to travel from one end of the pitch to the other being passed between 7 or 8 players than it would if it was hoofed forward in one or two passes (direct/long passing)

Thats how I have always interpreted Tempo anyway

retired_elpata

How fast you want to move into attacking positions is team mentality though

retired_autumn

If your players are being closed down aggressively by the opp, getting stripped while they dawdle with the ball, then the countermeasure is to increase tempo?

Or is it possible to alleviate the problem by changing passing style or mentality (or width) as well? I usually rely on tempo alone to fix the problem, but, assuming that's even right, maybe a change in other sliders can have the same effect (preventing the opp from closing down too aggressively)?

And Smac (smacksim, yes?), nice to see you back. :thup:

retired_danig6484

I have observed this in my own games: Players will pass the ball quickly with slow tempo. What they won't do is pass it forward at every opportunity as they will with high tempo.

That is what leads me to believe that tempo is about "speed-of-buildup-play" rather than how one-touch they play.

Backing this up is the oft-mentioned idea that slow tempo goes with short passing. If you're going to pass short, you need many options, not just attacking options. On the other hand, if you are attempting to create a shooting opportunity as fast as possible (what I observe with fast tempo), then its o.k. to have short, middle, and long passes available further down the pitch. The options in a fast-buildup are almost always forward, and obviously mid-distance or long balls have the best chance of getting to the goalmouth in the quickest manner.

As I've said in other threads, I think the slider duo of Tempo+Passing style is not well done or named. The idea that passing is either short or 'direct' is a false linearity. Its either short or long, no?

This is why the slider should, IMO, be short-----medium-----long, and be matched with another slider for direct--------indirect.

Further, mentality covers too much ground alone as well. Why not pair "pass forward at every opportunity ---------vs.---------- keep the ball no matter what" on one slider and have "make attacking runs only -------------vs.----------- make posession runs only" on yet another slider. Those could be further split for dribbling vs. passing as well, etc..

The point here regarding passing and tempo though is this: If tempo is like you say "SI have said tempo is how fast you move the ball around", then why should short passes be slower than long passes? If anything they are faster. Yet its clear that SI's advice "Short+Slow, Direct+Fast" is good advice in the game. Seeing as how this doesn't jive with "tempo is how fast you move the ball around" in the real world, or in FM, one of these notions is either incorrect or at least incomplete.

That is why tempo isn't just "how fast you move the ball around". If it were that, then the passing system is lying. But observing the game itself, its easy to see that slow tempo, especially vs defensive teams*, yields fast passing quite often. Thus, its safer to assume that the complexity here is in the tempo instruction, NOT the passing slider.

Just want to comment on this a sec:

Cleon, the list was an example set of possible hypothoses, not an opinion. However if you can somehow prove any of those are incorrect hypotheses, it would be informative for everyone. The match engine is a black box, and I don't care how official one opinion is or not. SI's comments are like hints as to what's going on in the black box. They are not answers. Fans like Wwfan are enamored of figuring out the puzzle box. I admire that attitude, but I feel that the ambiguity of the tactical system is problematic. Its fun for some to puzzle out, whilst others would rather not struggle with the interface.

And bflaff, HI! Had to get a new account as my email from last year is no more.

retired_thehpsleb

I always have tempo on slow now..as this makes my team build up an attack slowly. If I set it on fast they pass it forward to quickly - take to meny chances, which i dont like.

"SI have said tempo is how fast you move the ball around" - not what I have seen after 6-7 seasons sorry

You can set players passing on 1-2-3 then watch how fast they pass it around...

retired_sharonverm

I think that Smac has some very solid points. The ambiguity or badly named slider titles are the game's only weakness. If SI would rename the sliders I think it would clear a lot of things up. I have stated many times that I prefer not to delve into these threads too deeply since they have turned into a science experiment. It's unnecessary.

On the subject of tempo—if tempo is so synomonous with passing then why have tempo at all? If short passing and quick tempo does not work (and vice-versa), and SI are telling us this then surely the tempo slider is obsolete? Anything other than following these simple instructions is going to weaken your side (according to Cleon and SI). Why not just have varying levels of passing? For example:

patient possession game
short one touch passing
mixed passing
long ball to strikers

Obviously I have not put much thought into the examples but you get the idea.

Now, what about for those who use a mixed variety of passing throughout the team. What do I do? I always play with a midfield anchor man as playmaker. I have my back 4 on extremely short passing so they pick him out, and the rest of my midfield on direct passing in an attempt to get it to my target man striker. My striker is on extremely short passing too. What then, I ask, should my tempo be? Would it be paractical then to have an individual setting for each player? For example:

Get ball to playmaker quickly
Play 1-2's
Play ball down the line
Always pass short

Surely this SPECIFIC method of instruction is far more common sense than the rather AMBIGUOUS settings that we currently have to deal with.

retired_elpata

I have observed this in my own games: Players will pass the ball quickly with slow tempo. What they won't do is pass it forward at every opportunity as they will with high tempo.

That is what leads me to believe that tempo is about "speed-of-buildup-play" rather than how one-touch they play.

Backing this up is the oft-mentioned idea that slow tempo goes with short passing. If you're going to pass short, you need many options, not just attacking options. On the other hand, if you are attempting to create a shooting opportunity as fast as possible (what I observe with fast tempo), then its o.k. to have short, middle, and long passes available further down the pitch. The options in a fast-buildup are almost always forward, and obviously mid-distance or long balls have the best chance of getting to the goalmouth in the quickest manner.

As I've said in other threads, I think the slider duo of Tempo+Passing style is not well done or named. The idea that passing is either short or 'direct' is a false linearity. Its either short or long, no?

This is why the slider should, IMO, be short-----medium-----long, and be matched with another slider for direct--------indirect.

Further, mentality covers too much ground alone as well. Why not pair "pass forward at every opportunity ---------vs.---------- keep the ball no matter what" on one slider and have "make attacking runs only -------------vs.----------- make posession runs only" on yet another slider. Those could be further split for dribbling vs. passing as well, etc..

The point here regarding passing and tempo though is this: If tempo is like you say "SI have said tempo is how fast you move the ball around", then why should short passes be slower than long passes? If anything they are faster. Yet its clear that SI's advice "Short+Slow, Direct+Fast" is good advice in the game. Seeing as how this doesn't jive with "tempo is how fast you move the ball around" in the real world, or in FM, one of these notions is either incorrect or at least incomplete.

That is why tempo isn't just "how fast you move the ball around". If it were that, then the passing system is lying. But observing the game itself, its easy to see that slow tempo, especially vs defensive teams*, yields fast passing quite often. Thus, its safer to assume that the complexity here is in the tempo instruction, NOT the passing slider.

Just want to comment on this a sec:

Cleon, the list was an example set of possible hypothoses, not an opinion. However if you can somehow prove any of those are incorrect hypotheses, it would be informative for everyone. The match engine is a black box, and I don't care how official one opinion is or not. SI's comments are like hints as to what's going on in the black box. They are not answers. Fans like Wwfan are enamored of figuring out the puzzle box. I admire that attitude, but I feel that the ambiguity of the tactical system is problematic. Its fun for some to puzzle out, whilst others would rather not struggle with the interface.

And bflaff, HI! Had to get a new account as my email from last year is no more. </BLOCKQUOTE>

I just think you over complicate things and look for things that do not exists. If I say the grass is green you'd argue it was black. I shall say no more on the subject now. I have things worked out and it works for me, I shall let the rest of you struggle and make your own minds up.