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.
So, this is an idea for match engine mechanics and I am going to need your input, too.
What I am talking about
In modern football, teams choose specific periods of time during a game when all the players give their 100%. During these periods, players close down more (and earlier), midfielders and wingbacks are more likely to make forward runs etc. I don't know what to call this phenomenon in english, so I choose to call it "effort management".
Obviously, this means that during the rest of the game players are supposed to pay more attention to maintaining an acceptable level of condition, so that they don't tire too much.
In FM
I am not sure how players handle their condition in FM at present, if they do at all. Sure, we are already able to manage players' condition by setting forward runs, closing down and running with ball to "rarely" or not. But if we want to "change gear" a lot of times during a match, this task is rather energy consuming (for us. the manager) and requires too much micromanagement right now.
New idea
I don't know how condition management works right now in the game, but here is my idea:
I would like to have a new slider in the tactics screen, giving me three options: [take it easy/normal/step it up! ]. This slider will allow me to "step up" or "slow down" the effort of my players.
In effect, "stepping up" would be like telling your players "do not worry about your condition level right now". The downside of course will be that players will tire quicker while doing this, and it will be impossible to keep this rhythm throughout a whole match.
"Take it easy" will mean that the players should be more careful with their condition level.
In effect, while "stepping up":
- midfielders and wingbacks will have a greater chance of making a forward run or run will ball in the open space.
- Forwards and the midfield will close down more and earlier.
- The style of play will be a slightly more attacking.
- The building of the team's attack will be faster paced, but not more prone to long balls. Passing is still going to be dictated by the passing slider. This is because the team knows that they may have to wait for some midfielder or wingback to make his forward run. So, domination football will still be possible.
- Because of all the above, players will tire quicker during such periods. So the manager, if he wishes to use this option, will have to be careful when choosing this period's length and frequency.
- This option will let the manager decide "when is the right time to give 100%". For example I may want my players to enter the match strong or I may wish they wait until I figure the opponent's tactics out. I may want them to give some extra effort just before halftime or maybe wait until second half. I may want them to take some more risks and attack now or choose to wait until 10 mins before the fat lady sings.
- "Take it easy" will be useful for matches we wish to "throw" the match ... er... OK, I never said that. "Take it easy" will be useful for when we want to save more energy for later or when we want to save energy for next fixture. Also, during "take it easy" times, the players will have a smaller chance of getting injured.
- OK, we need more ideas as to what else such a slider would mean.
Does anybody else think this would be cool or has ideas on it?
I can see where you're going with it, but honestly do we want all of those traits to be linked?
For example, if I'm up by one, I might want the increased closing down without the more attacking changes.
I guess I've been thinking of the game in that way - but I do it by having two saved-off versions of my tactic, one with the increased forward runs, closing down, etc.. .. and the other back with reduced forward runs, etc.
So if I want ten minutes of "all out effort" at the start of the game, I give them that tactic .. and then at the ninth minute I load up my other saved tactic, and apply it.
That gets me the condition-management effects that you're talking about, definitely, without the need for an additional slider.
OK, the "slightly more attacking style" thing is open to debate, I am wondering about it too. On the other hand, in real football I see this "stepping up" happening when teams wish to score, defense needs to be perfect at all times anyway.
You are mentioning the possibility of having two tactics (actually we would need three: easy/normal/strong), and yes, this is a way it can be handled at present. But then, whenever I change a player or make a substitution, there are two/three tactics I need to make changes on, right?
One of the reasons I propose the above idea, is to cut down on micromanagement of the boring kind.
I think Arsenal does this IRL, certain "spurts" of high energy passing, then revert back to working the ball around. Good idea, but I'm not sure I want it in FM.
One of the reasons I propose the above idea, is to cut down on micromanagement of the boring kind.
Yeah - I almost added a paragraph at the end of my post discussing the micromanagement that that approach forces me to do, and then removed it.
I think we need a solution to the "micromanagement on load-of-tactic" problem, period, with or without this solution; it probably warrants its own thread.
If we can solve that problem, then I don't think we would really need your proposed solution .. but I'll certainly grant that that's a big if.
As for the "step it up when I wish to score" .. I can see that in several stances:
- to open the game, pressure the opposition into a mistake, and score early
- to close the first half, to take advantage of the fact that the opposition are tired and score against them.
- to open the second half with an early goal, especially following a rousing half-time team talk
- as a component of all-out attack when trailing by a goal
- as the counter to "time wasting"
What other situations might we want "extra effort" in?
How about
- opening the second half with a lead, looking to disrupt the opposition and prevent them from getting a good early start
- as a component of all-out defense in the final ten minutes when leading by a goal
- as a way to instruct the lads that you expect them to run their tails off with ten men.
So maybe we're thinking of two subtly different things. I'm almost thinking of "effort management" as a way to provide input into my players' "Work Rate", a way to instruct a hard-working player to let his foot off the gas and conserve "Condition" for Tuesday's game, or a way to encourage hard work out of my average player.
If I take it as combining exactly the things you're asking for - which I should have done to begin with, my apologies - then I might not call it "effort management", but I can certainly see the benefits and times I would want to use it.
...
Ironically, this is the sort of input I'd expected from *team talks* before the implementation we wound up with. Pre-match talk:
"I know they're intimidating, and they may be 'better' than we are, but we're a team. We work harder, and by the eightieth minute you're going to have run their tails off!! YEAH!!"
Half-time, individual talk: "Bobby, I'm going to sub you during the second half, so I want you to get out there, run your heart out, and make your mark on the game. Jimmy, start warming up to replace him - with your speed, once Bobby's tired him out, you should be able to roast that guy."
Crazyrap,
that's exactly what I am talking about. In real football, it's impossible for a big club to not do something like that, because then each player will take it easy at a different moment, and the team will never be coherent.
Ideally, this option will be optional and gamers should be allowed to ignore it, playing the whole game at "normal".
Amaroq,
I understand what you are saying. But there are two reasons why I would like this option to just be (mainly) an offensive weapon (and not defensive):
1) If it makes a huge difference on defense too, then it will be impossible for people to ignore this option. And I wouldn't like that, I would prefer it to be optional, so that people get used to it gradually. Yes, this is a gameplay reason.
Having said that, of course it will have some impact on defense, because the team is going to be closing down higher.
2) If it made a big difference in defense too, then it would be kind of imbalancing, because of this: the minute one manager chooses to "step it up", the oppenent would have no choice but to step it up himself (otherwise his defense would be in ruins).
So, personally, I 'd rather have it affect the offensive play, mainly.
I might be getting the wrong end of the stick but is all of this not possible with the current tactical set up? Closing down, D line, mentality etc.
Quote:
But then, whenever I change a player or make a substitution, there are two/three tactics I need to make changes on, right?
Do you mean individual player instructions? This is something I agree on and would like to see implemented in the code. At the moment you can modify one of the xml files to create player specific 'set to' instructions but I would like to see it in the game itself.
Quote:
One of the reasons I propose the above idea, is to cut down on micromanagement of the boring kind.
This is just my opinion and you probably disagree but I feel that micromanagement is the essence of the tactical side of the game. I want complete control to get my players to perform how I want and to try and impose a style of play (theoretically of course given that when their mental attributes are crap they tend to just do whatever they want ).
As for how top class teams play in spurts I think this is one reason a game will never be able to replicate real life. As much as it might be a manager shouting from the side lines to "step it up!", I believe it has more to do with the quality of players, their natural instincts and abilities. A top class player in any given situation will make a decision to pass quick or hold up the ball depending on the options available, so they will of their own free will decide to play at a 'quick' or a 'slow' tempo depending on their split second analysis of a situation. In the game this just isn't possible to replicate because we have a single team slider that governs this and because player intelligence hasn't advanced to that level just yet.
It might go counter to your desire to reduce micromanagement but from watching matches in the game I feel that tempo is the key to this. For that reason I would love to see tempo separated into areas of the pitch or individual players rather than an overall team selection.
As an example if I am favourites and the opposition are sitting back what I want to see is patient build up from the back towards the opposition's box, but in the final third I want more urgency, I want to see quick, fluid exchanges and one twos to slice the opposition open (the relative success of this would depend on the skill of the players). At the moment I can only set tempo, if I set this to quick then my defenders who have space and time will inevitably get rid of the ball quickly because the overall team tempo is set to 'quick'. This makes it harder to draw the opposition out and create space that didn't exist previously. Basically what I see is tempo having a positive impact at one end of the pitch and a negative impact at the other.
It relates also to goalkeeper distribution. If my tempo isn't quick enough he tends to take his time in distributing the ball, but if I change my tempo to get him to distribute quicker I then get the negative effect with the defenders I mentioned above.
I think separating the tempo like this would lead to the desired effect you are looking for, but it would unfortunately increase the boring micromanagement you refer to. It would also make it an attacking effect only as from watching matches in the game I am fairly convinced that tempo has no impact on how players behave defensively (I could be wrong though).
Also time wasting has a part to play in this as well. But I have yet to discover the perfect balance between mentality, tempo and time wasting to create the desired effect (and I doubt I ever will).
Having written all that I am still not sure if I have interpreted your idea incorrectly so if that's the case feel free to disregard what I posted.
idea: Effort Management 
Linear Mode
