The TC - can someone explain?

[Midnight Rob]

In recent weeks SI have all but given us 3 match engines. Lets call them:-

FM12 / 13.1.2 / 13.1.3

Now each ME has come out with a list of things it was fixing in the one that went before it. For the purposes of keeping this more simple let's surmise to the big things:-

FM12 did not have "collision detection". Apparently this gave it certain vulnerabilities to through balls and fast strikers.

13.1.2 addresses the above issues with FM12 but has its own problems, the biggest of which concern the defensive line and ineffective closing down.

13.1.3 comes along and fixes the above leaving us little that's wrong with game other than GK distribution.

Having set the scene, I now want to ask a question about the Tactic Creator. Whilst the above has been going on I don't think there have been many or any fundamental changes to the tactic creator. What I mean by that is that the slider settings in the background haven't been changing. E.g. If you set up a standard 442 with team settings to default then regardless of version things like the defensive line, width, tempo etc haven't altered. Incidentally in this example. they'd all be around the centre i.e. 10 clicks. Equally for individual players I don't think their settings have changed either e.g. the same amount of closing down, passing length etc.

Now then, putting the two things together, I finally get to my question.

Given that the three aforementioned versions have patently played differently with each new version fixing what many would call a major ME glitch in its predecessor. How has the TC managed (according to SI) to supposedly function correctly without users overriding the settings each new version?

The answer (to me and I'd galdly like someone to convince me otherwise) is that it can't have been right all along.

If FM12 was defeatable with through balls then then shouldn't the D-Line have been deeper so as not to allow room in behind?

If 13.1.2 had problems with closing down and defensive line settings then doesn't that tell you that the standard TC settings can't cope?

Each time the game changes we're told by SI to use the tactic creator intuitively and you will be alright. But to my eyes at least that can't be right if the game keeps changing and the TC remains the same with the settings it gives you. Something has to either have been wrong with it or is wrong with it. You can not have it both ways!

Furthermore I haven't seen anyone from SI admit this or explain that due to certain ME glitches you will need to press more/less (just as an example) for the TC to combat these issues.

Any answers out there?

[lam]

Look, not to be rude or anything but does it matter? As long as this version works, whats the problem?

I, like you I'm guessing, beleive that SI should NOT have released the middle version of the game as you put it. It was not ready, at least in my eyes. Was it playable - Yes, was it workroundable - Yes and because of that I guess it was released. But now it's largely fixed. Sure there are still some bugs in it, but it works very nicely now.

Suffice to say, the TC worked for me in all three versions and is working for me now. I have always tweak the TC, just because I can and just because I want certain results. As I watch most of my games in full, this ability is afforded to me because I know what to look for. I am certain similar results, would have been achieved without any tweaking at all.

You may very well be able to do this already and if that is the case then ignore this statement..... If you watch AND understand whats being played out infront of you, then you will be able to get the TC to work just fine in all cases.

Regards

LAM

[Jambo98]

The TC is a good thing for people in some ways, but in other ways i think its inherently flawed. It tries to shoehorn positions and roles, and there are just too many variations for this to be viable.

One example i noticed today. I have a fairly standard 3 man midfield - DMC, MRC, MLC. The MRC is an AP(a) and the MLC is a CM(s) - Now, i am looking and seeing the green duty on one and not the other, and assuming of course he will play higher up the pitch. Also he has "Advanced" in his role title, the other has "Central".

I was looking at positional analysis of a couple of my games and to my surprise the average positions for the 2 were almost exactly in line across all 3 games i reviewed. I checked PPMs - None. I though maybe my AMC had something like "comes deep to get ball" but no. I thought it must be my players, bad OTB attribute or something.

Then i thought well i need to compensate by changing sliders. What did i find? That an APM(a) has exactly the same mentality set by default as a CM (s) and the same run from deep instructions.

I am not saying that is wrong, that the TC in itself is set up wrong and that APM(a) must have higher mentality or run from deep, but its flawed in that the way it is designed would of course lead the average user to assume that a player in attack, versus one in support, in the same field location, would be well.........more attacking?

[Midnight Rob]

@Lam. I completely get that, good post. Does it matter? If the game is optimised to work around it, then no. if it isn't then yes. I think I raise the point because a stock answer from the mods on these boards is to stick with the Tactic Creator no matter what. I think the sheer weight of posts this past fortnight which include TC users suggests that its not the invincible template some people would have you believe. Having a more open and honest discussion around its strengths and weaknesses would do no harm to these boards.

@Jambo. I think you raise some really interesting points and something I hope this thread goes on to explore in more detail.

[thomit]

However, if you use a DLP(s) together with a CM(a) ...

But of course; there's nothing wrong with deviating from the settings/roles/duties that the TC comes up with as default. Sometimes it is bloody necessary. For example; I see that the TC often comes up with a Deep lying forward (support) role and duty for the lone striker, in say a 4231 or 451. But the DLF(s) has no roaming ... and roaming is better for the lone striker, even if the player in question does not have the necessary stats to roam "properly", in my opinion. By roaming, he does 2 things; the opposing defenders will not every time find him in his "usual" position. This can be good, or bad, depending of the strikers roaming skills - but in any case, it may open up spaces for deeper lying midfielders to run into. For managers playing a probing type of play, relying much of the time to score as a result of pin-point through-balls into space, this is crucial.

If the roaming DLF is good at roaming, he will open up many exploitable channels for himself - if he's not that good, he will not, so often. But at least he will contribute to creating spaces for attacking midfielders - by coincidence if he's not good at roaming, by purpose if he is good.

[Dr. Hook]

Well, I know from playing exclusively in the lower reaches of the football world that the TC is great for a starting point, and I never monkey with the slider settings any more (I never really knew what I was doing to begin with) but I change the roles often. The ones the TC suggests might work for a team with players that can do them, but I seldom have players that are really perfect for any role. Secondly, the weaknesses of the players have large knock on effects that I have to account for and this often means different roles throughout the team.

[Rashidi]

Tbh i started using the custom creator when i returned a few months ago. My last experience with it was when we were first putting it together for FMLive. Over the years the TC has changed to incorporate shouts, and it was based on some sound principles regardless of the engine. If we wanted a defender to operative in a ultradefensive setup we would have some basic fundamental settings for the sliders for example. Now within that ambit, we would need to make sure they all operated in a manner we would expect with the match engine.

Now if a player wasnt reading through balls between the lines and he was set up correctly and he had the right attributes and he had a screen of midfielders who were helping, then ceterus paribus he should be getting the through balls, cos he has the ability. If that didnt happen, some of us who had knowledge of the match engine would write these up as issues. If players didnt move correctly to anticipate the ball, because the fundamental logic was sound then we needed to look a the engine again. Now this all happens within a larger framework of match conditioning, player motivation, team motivation and pitch conditions.

For any incident to be classed as erroneous we would need to be methodical in listing out and a whole bunch of people would have to be able to replicate it for it to be deemed a match engine failure.

So the roles and duties within the tactical creator are sound, the strategy and philosophy are sound. Fundamentally they are. Naturally the match engine itself may have its quirks, for example we needed to bring the AMs down to the defensive strata because attacking was easier than defending, but logically if you set up a winger as support he should at least come down one strata to cover the midfield area. That wasnt happening; in as far as the tactical creator was concerned, the settings were right, the engine however needed to be tweaked.

There were some players, me included who were able to spot the gaps in the engine, so we were able to make exploitive tactics that would give us the edge, but these had to be done off the custom creator, however for those who couldnt balance their tactics properly, they in turn would face difficulty. There were quite a few times when i switched over to the tactical creator and used default settings and only adjusted roles and played via shouts, and, I found that it was considerably easier than using a custom set.

The tactical creator is sound, however, it does lack further more intricate and complex passing strategies that are currently not embedded. To do this, we would need to expend considerable time and effort and add further complexity to what already is a daunting challenge to most new to the system.

[noikeee]

One example i noticed today. I have a fairly standard 3 man midfield - DMC, MRC, MLC. The MRC is an AP(a) and the MLC is a CM(s) - Now, i am looking and seeing the green duty on one and not the other, and assuming of course he will play higher up the pitch. Also he has "Advanced" in his role title, the other has "Central".

I was looking at positional analysis of a couple of my games and to my surprise the average positions for the 2 were almost exactly in line across all 3 games i reviewed. I checked PPMs - None. I though maybe my AMC had something like "comes deep to get ball" but no. I thought it must be my players, bad OTB attribute or something.

Then i thought well i need to compensate by changing sliders. What did i find? That an APM(a) has exactly the same mentality set by default as a CM (s) and the same run from deep instructions.

I am not saying that is wrong, that the TC in itself is set up wrong and that APM(a) must have higher mentality or run from deep, but its flawed in that the way it is designed would of course lead the average user to assume that a player in attack, versus one in support, in the same field location, would be well.........more attacking?

I tried the exact same setting and was misled the exact same way. I figured APM(a) would attack space. Apparently not so I had to tweak him around.

[jcb1980]

I think what people need to realise is that the TC in my opinion is just a starting point... a template if you will.

I personally tend to use it to get a basic structure in my formation and how i want to play, I then go on to micro manage the sliders to best suit the players i have in those positions. Sure you may think well why cant it do it for me.... But surely thats the skill set, being able to recognise the strengths and weaknesses of players and either exploit them or protect them as best you can...

As i say just my opinion.... Oh and yes i too the the ME in 2013 is has some rather unique quirks....

J

[Jambo98]

Tbh i started using the custom creator when i returned a few months ago. My last experience with it was when we were first putting it together for FMLive. Over the years the TC has changed to incorporate shouts, and it was based on some sound principles regardless of the engine. If we wanted a defender to operative in a ultradefensive setup we would have some basic fundamental settings for the sliders for example. Now within that ambit, we would need to make sure they all operated in a manner we would expect with the match engine.

Now if a player wasnt reading through balls between the lines and he was set up correctly and he had the right attributes and he had a screen of midfielders who were helping, then ceterus paribus he should be getting the through balls, cos he has the ability. If that didnt happen, some of us who had knowledge of the match engine would write these up as issues. If players didnt move correctly to anticipate the ball, because the fundamental logic was sound then we needed to look a the engine again. Now this all happens within a larger framework of match conditioning, player motivation, team motivation and pitch conditions.

For any incident to be classed as erroneous we would need to be methodical in listing out and a whole bunch of people would have to be able to replicate it for it to be deemed a match engine failure.

So the roles and duties within the tactical creator are sound, the strategy and philosophy are sound. Fundamentally they are. Naturally the match engine itself may have its quirks, for example we needed to bring the AMs down to the defensive strata because attacking was easier than defending, but logically if you set up a winger as support he should at least come down one strata to cover the midfield area. That wasnt happening; in as far as the tactical creator was concerned, the settings were right, the engine however needed to be tweaked.

There were some players, me included who were able to spot the gaps in the engine, so we were able to make exploitive tactics that would give us the edge, but these had to be done off the custom creator, however for those who couldnt balance their tactics properly, they in turn would face difficulty. There were quite a few times when i switched over to the tactical creator and used default settings and only adjusted roles and played via shouts, and, I found that it was considerably easier than using a custom set.

The tactical creator is sound, however, it does lack further more intricate and complex passing strategies that are currently not embedded. To do this, we would need to expend considerable time and effort and add further complexity to what already is a daunting challenge to most new to the system.

rashidi, you seem to me like you have a very deep understanding of the TC, and by the sounds of it you were involved in its construction. Given your view around it being sound, and the issues being ME related (which i understand, to an extent), what would your thoughts be on the isssue posted around how different roles and duties in central midfield are not different in terms of their impact?

[Rashidi]

rashidi, you seem to me like you have a very deep understanding of the TC, and by the sounds of it you were involved in its construction. Given your view around it being sound, and the issues being ME related (which i understand, to an extent), what would your thoughts be on the isssue posted around how different roles and duties in central midfield are not different in terms of their impact?

.'Shoehornin' comes to mind when you ask that question. Yes the TC attempts to simplify the creation if tactics by offering people a choice to define tactics via roles. In fact as some of you probably the attempt tondo this via the slider was so wrapped up in mystique that quite a few solved this by downloading tactics. That does make it hard for a lot of people..

.

In 2008 I started making sets, and then started offering players presets for players. There would be broad strategies based on a particular managerial style and within that you would find different player roles. I wasn't alone in doing this but I was one of the first to do an entire default set. That and the tactical creator aren't too dissimilar, at least the principles. The tactical creator gives players broader options as well as specific ones. In fact it made the whole process even easier..

.

Personally I think the tactical creator hasn't reached its full potential. There are some passing styles and player roles that may not be inside it, and the next challenge is probably defining them. I have managed to modify individual settings to set a fullback on defensive all the way, and create a different passing system as well. To incorporate these now into the tactical creator will probably not be wise, since so many people are already finding it challenging enuf as it is..There is nothing stopping the advanced player from using the TC as a base to make these work, the match engine has some minor quirks but I don't believe thar these prevent us from such customization. In fact I would be keen to hear whether people have managed to create their own 'Busquets'.

[slipknot67]

In recent weeks SI have all but given us 3 match engines. Lets call them:-

FM12 / 13.1.2 / 13.1.3

Now each ME has come out with a list of things it was fixing in the one that went before it. For the purposes of keeping this more simple let's surmise to the big things:-

FM12 did not have "collision detection". Apparently this gave it certain vulnerabilities to through balls and fast strikers.

13.1.2 addresses the above issues with FM12 but has its own problems, the biggest of which concern the defensive line and ineffective closing down.

13.1.3 comes along and fixes the above leaving us little that's wrong with game other than GK distribution.

Having set the scene, I now want to ask a question about the Tactic Creator. Whilst the above has been going on I don't think there have been many or any fundamental changes to the tactic creator. What I mean by that is that the slider settings in the background haven't been changing. E.g. If you set up a standard 442 with team settings to default then regardless of version things like the defensive line, width, tempo etc haven't altered. Incidentally in this example. they'd all be around the centre i.e. 10 clicks. Equally for individual players I don't think their settings have changed either e.g. the same amount of closing down, passing length etc.

Now then, putting the two things together, I finally get to my question.

Given that the three aforementioned versions have patently played differently with each new version fixing what many would call a major ME glitch in its predecessor. How has the TC managed (according to SI) to supposedly function correctly without users overriding the settings each new version?

The answer (to me and I'd galdly like someone to convince me otherwise) is that it can't have been right all along.

If FM12 was defeatable with through balls then then shouldn't the D-Line have been deeper so as not to allow room in behind?

If 13.1.2 had problems with closing down and defensive line settings then doesn't that tell you that the standard TC settings can't cope?

Each time the game changes we're told by SI to use the tactic creator intuitively and you will be alright. But to my eyes at least that can't be right if the game keeps changing and the TC remains the same with the settings it gives you. Something has to either have been wrong with it or is wrong with it. You can not have it both ways!

Furthermore I haven't seen anyone from SI admit this or explain that due to certain ME glitches you will need to press more/less (just as an example) for the TC to combat these issues.

Any answers out there?

Fm12's ME being exploitable by through balls to a fast striker had nothing to do with the TC d line settings. It was as a result of that ME not having the ability to utilize collision detection, so regardless of D line settings a striker could literally run through defenders.

[Rashidi]

I have 3 midfielders as well one is an advanced playmaker and another is a b2b mc what I discovered when I analyzed them was that my APM was in all the areas of the pitch I expected him to be, when I looked at my DLF he covered the whole pitch

[Jambo98]

.'Shoehornin' comes to mind when you ask that question. Yes the TC attempts to simplify the creation if tactics by offering people a choice to define tactics via roles. In fact as some of you probably the attempt tondo this via the slider was so wrapped up in mystique that quite a few solved this by downloading tactics. That does make it hard for a lot of people..

.

In 2008 I started making sets, and then started offering players presets for players. There would be broad strategies based on a particular managerial style and within that you would find different player roles. I wasn't alone in doing this but I was one of the first to do an entire default set. That and the tactical creator aren't too dissimilar, at least the principles. The tactical creator gives players broader options as well as specific ones. In fact it made the whole process even easier..

.

Personally I think the tactical creator hasn't reached its full potential. There are some passing styles and player roles that may not be inside it, and the next challenge is probably defining them. I have managed to modify individual settings to set a fullback on defensive all the way, and create a different passing system as well. To incorporate these now into the tactical creator will probably not be wise, since so many people are already finding it challenging enuf as it is..There is nothing stopping the advanced player from using the TC as a base to make these work, the match engine has some minor quirks but I don't believe thar these prevent us from such customization. In fact I would be keen to hear whether people have managed to create their own 'Busquets'.

Hmm all of that makes sense, and very knowledgable and points well made.

However what i am asking, i guess, is does the TC have some fundemental errors in it? Either that or is it perhaps that some guidance on it is lacking? I am a reasonably experienced player, have a decent understanding of both "the game", in terms of FM, and football itself. I cannot fathom why 2 players in the same positions, with completely different roles and duty, end up effectively functioning the same if i use the TC.

That kind of anomoly is what leads to a lot of less experienced players being frustrated at the game and at the ME - "how come i have my team set up as i want, but they wont function as i want" is a common question (paraphrased).

It would be really interesting to great a matrix of TC roles and duties mapped against 3 or 4 key sliders (i am thinking mentality, RFD, TTB, plus maybe some others). I think it would open some eyes. Another example is an AMC(s) in the AMRC slot has the same mentalitly as an IF(a) in the AMR slot.......again i dont believe people would expect that when they are trying to build TC tactics.

I think the TC concept is excelllent and a huge amount of work and thought clearly went into it. However the fact that it hasnt changed at all in 2 years, suggests there could be a risk of complacency? Should it not be constantly developing and evoling, like the game of football itself?

[Rashidi]

Jambo I have an answer to that but I am on an island paradise half hammered now. My Gf wants me to stop typing so I will get back to this soon

[Jambo98]

Jambo I have an answer to that but I am on an island paradise half hammered now. My Gf wants me to stop typing so I will get back to this soon

Best post ever:lol: Enjoy mate! Best to what the GF says in my experience.............

[PeeKay]

It would be really interesting to great a matrix of TC roles and duties mapped against 3 or 4 key sliders (i am thinking mentality, RFD, TTB, plus maybe some others). I think it would open some eyes. Another example is an AMC(s) in the AMRC slot has the same mentalitly as an IF(a) in the AMR slot.......again i dont believe people would expect that when they are trying to build TC tactics.

I tried to do this but after a couple of days I realised that roles for one player impacts another players in the team with specifc role (eg mentalities for using AP's with Wingers). It would have been far to complicated to document and be reasonable confident that it was completely right. It needs someone confident that they know what they are doing and can work out a way of presenting the information.

[avex]

I view it just as a tool for newcomers. I've been playing since CM 01/02 and don't like it at all. It's extremely limited. It's nearly impossible to do something a bit complex or subtle, and I don't think it will ever be. Even lots of basic things can't be done.

It can be used to make tactics to win matches and leagues*, but nothing else.

*I get that's perfectly good, but after 10 years playing this games, I couldn't care less about just winning. I want to enjoy the full matches, and I want my teams to play beautiful.

[slipknot67]

I view it just as a tool for newcomers. I've been playing since CM 01/02 and don't like it at all. It's extremely limited. It's nearly impossible to do something a bit complex or subtle, and I don't think it will ever be. Even lots of basic things can't be done.

It can be used to make tactics to win matches and leagues*, but nothing else.

*I get that's perfectly good, but after 10 years playing this games, I couldn't care less about just winning. I want to enjoy the full matches, and I want my teams to play beautiful.

I don't think there's ever been a statement made on these forums I disagree more with than this tbh. I've used the TC since it was first introduced to create a plethora of massively different tactical styles and systems and you couldn't pay me enough to go back to 'classic tactics'.

The notion that seems to pervade these forums that if something simple and effective is introduced to a game as inherently complex as FM is, it's automatically labelled as 'dumbing down' or only for beginners strikes me as quite condescending to experienced users who use these features and enjoy playing this game with them.

[RTHerringbone]

^+1

Criticism of TC generally seems to be a bit of over zealous willy waving.

[wwfan]

I don't think there's ever been a statement made on these forums I disagree more with than this tbh. I've used the TC since it was first introduced to create a plethora of massively different tactical styles and systems and you couldn't pay me enough to go back to 'classic tactics'.

The notion that seems to pervade these forums that if something simple and effective is introduced to a game as inherently complex as FM is, it's automatically labelled as 'dumbing down' or only for beginners strikes me as quite condescending to experienced users who use these features and enjoy playing this game with them.

This. And then this again.

And once more for luck.

[displaced_seagull]

Experienced player, from CM93 to now. This game has been a part of my life, probably too big a part of my life, for nigh on 20 years.

Started using the TC when it first came out. Didn't have a lot of success. This time around though, I decided to avoid the Download forum, avoid settings that I've always used or copying things out of books such as Inverting the Pyramid, and give it a real go.

Since then, I've probably learnt more about the game than I ever have done before. It's a terrific tool, and I wouldn't be without it now.

[leovii]

advanced playmakers even on attack wont attack space which is realistic they still sit back trying to influence the play if u look at iniesta for example for barcelona he will not make loads of advanced runs like an attacking midefielder but more likely to pass and move in a short passing style but will be an option for support when your team is in and around the opponents area. I only find advanced playmakers tend to work in short , fluid passing teams with lots of roaming. Take man utd for example they play a more direct attacking style where more attacking mids, wingers and central mid attacks would be used as an advanced playmaker would not be as productive in that system.

The preset player roles on fm are very clever and if used correctly in the right systems on the ME can set u apart from average managers. For Example playing a target man on a short slow build up style philosophy would be silly cos your be telling your players on the one hand to get it forward cos u set him as target man but on the other you set your team to play slow tempo possesion football so they be caught in 2 minds and less fluid. It is more finding the right roles for your system rather than trying to work out why your advanced playmaker isnt bombing forwrd from midfield cos u would set a central mid attack or an attacking midfielder to do that in a more direct style of football when an advanced playmaker would be used in a more possesion style slower game who u want picking out the killer pass when u worked the ball up to your oppositions area.

[avex]

I don't think there's ever been a statement made on these forums I disagree more with than this tbh. I've used the TC since it was first introduced to create a plethora of massively different tactical styles and systems and you couldn't pay me enough to go back to 'classic tactics'.

The notion that seems to pervade these forums that if something simple and effective is introduced to a game as inherently complex as FM is, it's automatically labelled as 'dumbing down' or only for beginners strikes me as quite condescending to experienced users who use these features and enjoy playing this game with them.

Is not about dumbing down or anything like that, but about the tactics it makes. I would love it to be helpful for me! But sadly I have never been able to make a tactic which does what I want without extremely heavy tweaking (and in this case classic tactics are easier to work with). Always too vertical (with any mentality+control+ball to feet+keep possession), always defending too deep (it's a personal taste, but I don't like to defend in my side of the field, I like to do it in the opposite), always too many long balls, too many crosses, etc... I always end up having to tweak everything to make the team play as I want them to play.

It only works when I try to do pretty straightforward things, but that's not the kind of football I enjoy watching, and I can't stand a whole season of full matches if I don't enjoy what's happening on the pitch.