Passing - Do You Understand It?

retired_liam · 11-23-2006, 11:24 AM

Quote:

How does reducing the number of passing options increase game play? Why does your idea work better than the current one?

Suppose I use your number 2 short passing option, but its too short for how I want to play. So I then use your 3rd option and its its too mixed now for my liking. How do I tell my players to pass short still but not as short as before? How can I work around this?

Imo reducing the passing to a much shorter scale would ruin the control you have and be a backwards step back towards the days of CM again.

Btw, why don't you propose a 10 or 20 position slider for forward runs or hold the ball?

Well, my ideea with more descriptive slider options could be applied this way - using two alternative tactical panels:

One for people who like giving team and player instruction using countless positions sliders (something like an advanced system, like the current sliders system)

The second one, for people who like using more like IRL instruction in their tactical system.
This one will have the current 3 position sliders (e.g. forward runs) left this way (i think it's best in this manner)

The mentality slider will have 9 positions (ultradef, ultradef-def, def, def-nor, nor, nor-att, att, att-ultraatt, ultraatt)

The passing slider - 7 positions as in my above post

The closing down slider - 5 positions (never, 1/2 in own half, own half, 1/2 opp half, always)

Time wasting - 5 positions (much, often, medium, seldom, less). Although 3 positions would be enough maybe (much, medium, less)

Defensive line - (deep, outside the box, 1/2 own half, push up)

Width - (narrow, narrow-normal, normal, normal-wide, wide)
And so on with tempo, etc

I think this kind of approach would eliminate posts like (set DL at 8, mentality at 15, tempo at 1672 etc).

It's time to use words when reffering to our tactics, like IRL, and not numbers!

retired_sexy_chili25 · 11-23-2006, 11:34 AM

Truble is, if you want to have a worded explanation for each section of the slider, HOW BIG would the screen have to be to get 20 worded positions on the screen

retired_elpata · 11-23-2006, 11:42 AM

Quote:

Btw, why don't you propose a 10 or 20 position slider for forward runs or hold the ball?

Bad example you used really it was

, how many different ways can you HUB? As far as I know only 1 and the game can actually handle just the opne option. Where as for the sliders it cannot....!!!!

Quote:

Btw, why don't you propose a 10 or 20 position slider for forward runs or hold the ball?

Well, my ideea with more descriptive slider options could be applied this way - using two alternative tactical panels:

One for people who like giving team and player instruction using countless positions sliders (something like an advanced system, like the current sliders system)

The second one, for people who like using more like IRL instruction in their tactical system.
This one will have the current 3 position sliders (e.g. forward runs) left this way (i think it's best in this manner)

The mentality slider will have 9 positions (ultradef, ultradef-def, def, def-nor, nor, nor-att, att, att-ultraatt, ultraatt)

The passing slider - 7 positions as in my above post

The closing down slider - 5 positions (never, 1/2 in own half, own half, 1/2 opp half, always)

Time wasting - 5 positions (much, often, medium, seldom, less). Although 3 positions would be enough maybe (much, medium, less)

Defensive line - (deep, outside the box, 1/2 own half, push up)

Width - (narrow, narrow-normal, normal, normal-wide, wide)
And so on with tempo, etc

I think this kind of approach would eliminate posts like (set DL at 8, mentality at 15, tempo at 1672 etc).

It's time to use words when reffering to our tactics, like IRL, and not numbers!

Okay then in future ill write 'one' instead of '1' then I have used words

The 2 panel idea, one panael would give more control though, so thats unfair in terms of game play no?

Quote:

I think this kind of approach would eliminate posts like (set DL at 8, mentality at 15, tempo at 1672 etc).

That it would, but it has a profound impact on the match engine and restricts what you can do. You seem to be forgetting this very important option. If it was viable and easier to do it your way, believe me it would have been created this way in the first place.

retired_elpata · 11-23-2006, 11:47 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by nonleague:
You could always use a drop down menu. Actually what the person above explained would give us many options and would make it easier for oter people to understand.

It probably would be easier to udnerstand yes, however the representation on the match engine would be very different and limited. Thats why there is the whole sliders in place now. While the naming and options might be more realistic, the game wouldn't be and would loose a lot of control, what many epopel have been screaming for for the last 5 years or so.

retired_liam · 11-23-2006, 11:50 AM

Quote:

Okay then in future ill write 'one' instead of '1' then I have used words

Good one :p

Quote:

That it would, but it has a profound impact on the match engine and restricts what you can do. You seem to be forgetting this very important option. If it was viable and easier to do it your way, believe me it would have been created this way in the first place.

I'm not so much against 20 positions sliders, as long as they have a written description underneath and they just don't let the manager guess what is all about :thup:
And maybe, by trying to write down an explanation for every slider position, SI will reduce the number of options, but that's another story

retired_elpata · 11-23-2006, 11:54 AM

Quote:

I'm not so much against 20 positions sliders, as long as they have a written description underneath and they just don't let the manager guess what is all about

I agree it could be clearer yes. Maybe if you hovered over the slider or placed it in a different position you got a little pop up that told you.

Although im guessing it would be something like 3 mentality less defensive than 2 mentality

But people already know this don't they? Doesn't the manual say something about each notch is a progression to the next stage? Then its down to us to view games to see the effects it has.

retired_janay731 · 11-23-2006, 12:01 PM

Take a look on my approach

retired_hanabell0421 · 11-23-2006, 01:54 PM

This is something I spotted Ackter saying in the bugs forum:

Quote:

The simplest way of thinking about technical attributes is like this:

Crossing, Finishing, Passing etc is his accuracy doing those things, and Technique is how good he does them.

So passing would be his ability to pick out his man, and technique would dictate the quality of the pass.

If this is correct (which I'm not saying), it would IMHO mean that player's technique should be given more emphasis than currently is given. At least I have always thought that if a player has a good passing skill, then he is a good passer. But according to Ackter, this isn't the case.

retired_elpata · 11-23-2006, 04:10 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by nonleague:
<BLOCKQUOTE>Posted 23 November 2006 10:50

The prvious poster has a valid point and here is the question...

If having the sliders allows us to gain more control of the game then how about a short description of what each position of the slider does in the manual.

I have an idea how about whoever knows fully what each position of the slider does create a thread detailing the sliders with a short description of them. :thup:

It would surely make an interesting read.

</BLOCKQUOTE>

It would take something away from the forums maybe? You have to remember a big part in FM is the community and the forums. Plus the manual can only be so long. If everything is explained in the manual it would be rathe rlong and the forums would be obsulte imo.

Quote:

If this is correct (which I'm not saying), it would IMHO mean that player's technique should be given more emphasis than currently is given. At least I have always thought that if a player has a good passing skill, then he is a good passer. But according to Ackter, this isn't the case.

Its always been about more than just 1 stat, everything you do on FM always relies on a numbe rof stats and not just 1 out and right stat.

retired_hanabell0421 · 11-23-2006, 04:19 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Cleon:
<BLOCKQUOTE> If this is correct (which I'm not saying), it would IMHO mean that player's technique should be given more emphasis than currently is given. At least I have always thought that if a player has a good passing skill, then he is a good passer. But according to Ackter, this isn't the case.

Its always been about more than just 1 stat, everything you do on FM always relies on a numbe rof stats and not just 1 out and right stat. </BLOCKQUOTE>

Yeah but atleast I didn't know Techinque is kinda rule-them-all -skill. How many tutorials out there recommend your DM or ST to have good technique? DM requires it so that he can pass the ball, ST requires it so that he can finish. Wingers need it for crosses, central defenders need technique for good headers. If Ackter's statement is correct, that is.

Passing - Do You Understand It?

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

Passing - Do You Understand It?