isuckatfm

.......or does it?

I was reading 'what the managers said' on Yahoo sport

http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/100220...gers-said.html

and when I read what Harry Redknapp had to say the various complaints (my own included) about how having to change tactics so much (for Human and AI managers) in an FM match was completely unrealistic immediately sprang to mind. Here's the quote from good ol' 'Arry:-

"I think we battered them - how did they get away with 1-0? I changed the way we played 14 times in the game because we couldn't get any balance and they were a handful. It was like the Bolton of old, very difficult to play against."

I know it's only one manager and Harry Redknapp may well have been exaggerating for effect, but it has definitely made me reconsider my opinion of how realistic the need for in match tweaking in the FM world is. It also made me consider how there might be numerous subtle changes occuring in any given match that aren't noticeable just from watching as a fan, whether in the stands or on TV.

For the people who, like myself, have moaned (on the forum or otherwise) about the ridiculousness of the AI constantly changing tactics and the need for the human manager to react in what sometimes feels like a convoluted game of rock, paper, scissors; do Harry Redknapp's words make you reconsider your position given that he is an actual football manager?

Any Pompey/Bolton fans reading this that saw the whole 90 minutes notice these 14 changes Redknapp mentions?
Maybe the problem with the AI changing in match tactics in FM is the lack of subtlety with respect to changing tactics, particularly formation, rather than the actual amount of AI tactical tweaking going on?

Of course it could just be Harry Redknapp's love of a good media soundbite and the 14 changes he mentions might only have been 4. In which case any discussion is irrelevant .

backpackant

Good post, isuckatfm.

And I have said for a while that to be successful at this game and get around the shots-on-target "bug" you need to tweak tactics little and often throughout the game.

Rather ironically, I was playing against Bolton last night (as Leeds in 2012) and was having one of those games. I play in split screen so I can watch the match stats build and fall as well as the highlights. I was up to 25 shots, 15 on target, they were on 3 shots, 0 on target, and the game sat at 0-0 on 75 mins. I'd changed from fast normal passing to normal direct passing, which had increased my possession but kept shots-on-goal ratios climbing. I went to fast, direct to no avail, finally resorting to slow and short, and made my wingers LESS attacking (ensuring a more patient buildup) went 1-0 up on 86 mins, then resorted to my "shut-up-shop" 4-1-4-1 tactic and won the game 1-0.

I know a lot of gamers don't like this requirement, but I find that it gets me more involved in the game, makes me think about the different aspects of how I'm playing and what the players are capable of. Stancu might be rated 8 on 80mins, but I need to score. Is it my wingers, or my AMC, or is it simply not happening for Stancu? He's getting 10-20 chances but not putting them away. I look at the match stats, and if we're getting tons of crosses in, maybe I need a better header of the ball? Sub Stancu - in this example - for Rosenberg and we score. Or I could start playing through the middle with a second, faster striker beside him. Or push the wingers into stiker positions with the arrows.

Like I said, good post. All SI need to do is work out how to reduce the statistic of shots-on-goal and people might be happier. Folk don't mind losing but when the number go against them they get rather upset.

Powermonger

Whether or not Redknapp's comments are accurate for his situation, constantly having to make tweaks in FM is tedious and at most frustrating. It's hard enough setting up a stable tactic let alone then having to worry about constantly making changes.

Not that I'm advocating being able to have one tactic and sticking to it, more that if the expectation from now on is to constantly wrestle with the AI each match and a preference for watching full matches, then we need better analysis tools and statistics. Whether this is in ProZone-ish like form, more player concentric statistics and/or tactical assistance/comments from your coaching staff, something needs to be given to us to help balance out this.

At the end of the day this is a game and for it to remain enjoyable then FM needs to provide some features which provides better information to help tackle the expected complexity.

Powermonger

Which I think alot of people would agree with. It's not about winning or losing, it's the frustration of not knowing why you lost when all basic statistics say otherwise.

zeuS0r

just use standard 442 or 442 diamond without ANY player instructions. it'll work!

gonzo7

When I found my team doing uselessly I was constantly tweaking this and that was a hit or miss in terms of success. A few more defeats down the line, something clicked in my mind. Maybe, I thought my old 4-4-2 formation is not broken, but that the players are not playing in it consistently. In the previous season I had e won the league and in doing so played pretty much the same team throughout the season due to not having a massive squad. But, due to being in the Champions League I went a bit crazy in the transfer market. I did go on to qualify for the second round of the champions league, but found myself in 15th in the league.

From, this point I decided to freeze my squad selection, bar injuries and fitness, to see if my theory of consistent squad selection would work. I had nothing to lose really because I was already in bottom half of the league and expected to get into the UEFA cup. Anyway, to my surprise overall things improved considerably with 5 consecutive wins in the league. Despite this though I still got destroyed by Man Utd 4-1 and lost to Juventus 4-3 at Fratton Park. Yet overall I moved up the table from 15th to 6th.

So when things go pear shaped perhaps trying to change formation and the starting eleven is not in the best interest of your club.

mitja

:thdn:

if that's true then the game is totaly flawed...

VonBlade

1) You don't actually have to adjust your tactics at all. I never have, barring a mid-game injury crisis at one position.

2) And this is the crux of the matter, if we could change tactics in the way that real life managers can, with the extremely specific player instructions and, more importantly, a set of instructions of things not to do, then changing it 14 times wouldn't be a bother.

The problem is that

: I can't tell a player to play long balls from the back, but short balls when in the midfield.

: I can't tell him to stand in a certain place from set pieces or corners (yes I can say "on the post" etc, but I want to say, "on the opposite side of the box in case the ball goes past everyone").

: I can't tell players to go forward wibble, or stay back wobble.

: I can't talk to my substitutes at all before putting them on.

: If I do give players the best specific instructions I can (not very) then a sudden change in the course of the game means I have to go through each an every players instructions to change what I'm asking them to do. I can't just yell at the captain "Oi. Tell everyone to do this, that, the other".


Sooooo. Tactics in FM are to real-life what steam is to nuclear power.
VB

VonBlade

I use a plain 442 Normal. The only instructions I give are to change my wingers to "wingers" and my CDs to "CDs".

I win everything everywhere with anyone and never touch them.

mitja

tactics is tweaked a lot, during every match IRE. it doesn't have to be whole new tactic. mostly it's only closing down, width and D-line due to leading/loosing. and so it's in FM. when AI decides to close the match, there's not much what you can do, but to put some pressure on them. how do you do it? by closing them down...

also player instructions need to be changed when things don't work like they should. sometimes it enough to just lower forward runs, sometimes you need to change allmost everything. there's no magic formula, just like there isn't IRE.

that's why one tactic suits them all, doesn't exists anymore in FM. and that's something that made this game better in my opinoum. and defenetly more realistic.