Sliders in Action

[darthrodent]

I'm the type of FM player who likes to watch games in full. In fact, most of my enjoyment is experienced through the match engine; I want to understand it, to react against what I'm up against, and to revel in the glory of my masterful tactical decisions, ahem.

It is to my displeasure then that there are still several sliders whose effects, as far as I'm concerned, are either broken, non-effectual, or so subtle that they are hidden from my eyes. It is my intention with this thread to get the forum's opinion on those sliders and how they are interpreted and manifested via the match engine. If you have pictures to back your ideas up, even better, but the Queen's English should suffice. I'll only include the sliders I'm unsure of with a brief description.

1. Mentality

There is no question that mentality affects the way a player "behaves". It's quite clear that a player with a higher mentality will play more forward passes and behave in a more aggressive forward-thinking fashion. However, I was always under the impression that mentality affects positioning too, but I don't see it. I've experimented by having one full back on mentality ultra defensive, and another full back on mentality ultra attacking, but as far as positioning goes, they are positioned the same on both attack and defence.

2. Creative Freedom

This is the big one for me. For the life of me I can't tell the difference between the rigid and expressive settings. I understand that rigid creative freedom is to ensure players stick to their positions in a more disciplined fashion, however, even on high expressive settings they seem to behave the same way. Can anyone provide examples of a player behaving in an "expressive" way. To me this slider does nothing, which simply has to be wrong.

3. Marking (Tight Marking too)

Is this broken? I can get a man to man-mark only by individually having him mark another player. However, there seems to be no difference between the generic Man Mark and Zonal settings including the Tight Marking settings. I don't like guessing with my tactics; I like to have a reason to do anything and everything. When it comes to marking I am guessing.

As I mentioned, I don't like to guess when it comes to my tactical decisions, but with the uncertainty in the above-mentioned, that's what I am doing. If anyone could clear these concerns of mine up I would be most grateful.

[ModernLefty]

1. Mentality is not about attacking or defensive positioning at all. It's named abit misleadingly, but mentality controls how risky/cautious you want the average decision of the player to be. For instance, take Xavi and Pirlo two players with fairly similiar roles and skill sets. At Barcelona Xavi plays with a quite 'defensive' cautious mentality, in being tasked to patiently keeping the ball and moving it around. Whereas Pirlo at Juventus, plays with a more attacking mentality and tends to play riskier long passes and make more aggressive decisions to force play abit more.

P.S. Oh, you get that. That is what it does anyway.

2. Creative Freedom really does what it says on the tin, the higher the creative freedom of a player the more they are likely to express their flair and creativity and do things that are not strictly in the game plan. It's subtle but it is there. A way you might want to experiment to get a grasp of this is play a team with a rigid instruction to pass short, and have them all on very low creative freedom. Then switch one player, maybe the AM or CM midfielder to a high creativity freedom and watch how he utilises long passes and deviates from the instruction you set him and plays more on what he instinctively thinks to do with his skill set, as opposed to your instructions for him. They won't do any special 'expressive' move, (actually if you are limiting a player of high flair they might start utilising more of that high flair for stepovers etc...) but in general they will just be less forced to do what you want them to precisely do, and instead just be themselves (as defined by their attributes).

3. This one, from what I've read on here is that there are some grumblings about it not changing much, though I only really use Zonal, because no modern team doesn't, so you may want to ignore my views on this.

[RTHerringbone]

1. Mentality is not about attacking or defensive positioning at all. It's named abit misleadingly, but mentality controls how risky/cautious you want the average decision of the player to be. For instance, take Xavi and Pirlo two players with fairly similiar roles and skill sets. At Barcelona Xavi plays with a quite 'defensive' cautious mentality, in being tasked to patiently keeping the ball and moving it around. Whereas Pirlo at Juventus, plays with a more attacking mentality and tends to play riskier long passes and make more aggressive decisions to force play abit more.

P.S. Oh, you get that. That is what it does anyway.

This isn't correct, mentality does directly influence positioning.

[darthrodent]

Appreciate that a lot, mate, and I'll look more closely at Creative Freedom tonight. Maybe it's just a semantic thing with me. When I think of Creative Freedom I think of Ronaldo switching positions and the may Man Utd's midfield rotates. When I think of Rigid I think of Everton's mechanical, clockwork midfield. But from what you say, Creative Freedom is the likelihood that a player will deviate from your tactical instructions. In other words, if you're a micromanager and you want every player to stick specifically to your instructions, you'll have low Creative Freedom?

While we're on the subject then, what would happen if you put one CB on expressive Creative Freedom (all the way to the right) and your other CB on ultra rigid (all the way to the left)? What would one expect to see? And also, I forgot to mention this earlier, but how is Roam from Position tied into all of this?

Thanks again, man.

[darthrodent]

This isn't correct, mentality does directly influence positioning.

Care to explain, friend? Would you please elaborate?

[kevin3]

Mentality

• How aggressive a player plays positionally through combination with the Run-from-deep slider (higher mentality means earlier forward runs)

• How aggressive and ambitious a player passes the ball

Creative Freedom

• Likelihood a player may act on their own authority

• Likelihood a player may attempt to play with flair and trickery

• Tendency a player may attempt the more difficult and ambitious

• How unpredictable a player may play

• A player may occasionally ignore your tactical instructions

[RTHerringbone]

Care to explain, friend? Would you please elaborate?

What Kevin3 said. Mentality combined with runs affects positions. This is why sliders are dangerous, people look at things in isolation rather than within the context of a role and duty within a Strategy, hence the launch of the Tactics Creator.

[darthrodent]

So Kevin and Herringbone, a silly little thought experiment. Let's say the three of us were at my computer screen and I told you nothing about my tactic. If we watched the match on full, do you think you would be able to single out those players with high creative freedom? What I am really asking is, is it so subtle that it's difficult to miss?

Sorry, and the corollary to that question then is:

Does Roam From Position actually do what it says on the tin?

And thirdly…

Are certain positions forbidden when it comes to certain sliders?

In other words, let's say you put one of your centre backs on Roam From Position? Would he actually do what you ask?

[RTHerringbone]

So Kevin and Herringbone, a silly little thought experiment. Let's say the three of us were at my computer screen and I told you nothing about my tactic. If we watched the match on full, do you think you would be able to single out those players with high creative freedom? What I am really asking is, is it so subtle that it's difficult to miss?

Sorry, and the corollary to that question then is:

Does Roam From Position actually do what it says on the tin?

And thirdly…

Are certain positions forbidden when it comes to certain sliders?

In other words, let's say you put one of your centre backs on Roam From Position? Would he actually do what you ask?

If you had two players with the same Role and Duty default settings and where default CF is low, and then manually overrode the CF for one of them to the extreme top, then it should be noticeable. The difference within the context of a normal, unedited scenario would be subtle. The simplest way to do this is to look at one players' sliders with Strategy on Balanced. Change to Overload and see what happens. All the TC does is progressively increase or decrease slider settings based on things like Strategy and Duty. Critically it does so within a limited range to ensure a tactic is coherent.

CF controls a players' propensity to do something creative, mentality determines how often/actively they are likely to express that CF. Roam from position would be most apparent with a higher mentality and CF player, so it would be far less obvious with a LD than a Treq.

[Svenc]

Are certain positions forbidden when it comes to certain sliders?

In other words, let's say you put one of your centre backs on Roam From Position? Would he actually do what you ask?

Yes, there are. :-) For instance, you cannot make any of your CB's to "run from deep". Hence I never understood why researchers even bother giving Lucio the "gets forward whenever possible" PPM. Whilst getting forward many many a time was/is certainly one of Lucio's strengths, back at Bayern it frequently still caused frustration with Hitzfeld. Sadly this isn't simulated by FM, perhaps a CB getting forward would cause problems in the ME.

As for marking it's difficult. The reason you see no difference between man and zonal is that both are zonal. I don't really see a major difference either, but then even the tactics UI gurus appear to struggle coming with a valid explanation for this. It is often implied that on "man" the marker would be more prone to sticking to his man until the attack is over, but watching a match, it isn't that hard to see why that is only implied, but never explained proper in detail.

[ModernLefty]

What Kevin3 said. Mentality combined with runs affects positions. This is why sliders are dangerous, people look at things in isolation rather than within the context of a role and duty within a Strategy, hence the launch of the Tactics Creator.

Fair enough, RTH, so if you had an attacking mentality player and a defensive mentality CM players both with identical setups with RFD, and RWB on rarely, apart from the passing aggression would the attacking mentality player have visibly different positioning?

I know this is looking at it in isolation, but I felt I needed to clarify

[dooro23]

I'd rather call it indirectly than directly, though. When play is static, it shouldn't affect the tactical shape/positioning.

[RTHerringbone]

Fair enough, RTH, so if you had an attacking mentality player and a defensive mentality CM players both with identical setups with RFD, and RWB on rarely, apart from the passing aggression would the attacking meltality player have visibly different positioning?

I know this is looking at it in isolation, but I felt I needed to clarify

Yes, and the visibility of that different positioning would be greater the wider the gap between slider settings.

However, in a real life football sense, can you think of two players in the same side who play with that sort of difference?

I can't, hence the generic concept of Role, and the ability to influence its individual mentality within the wider team mentality via Duty.

This whole topic is interesting but will probably be rendered obsolete eventually, as I believe that TC will ultimately entirely depose sliders, we are currently in a transitional period.

[RTHerringbone]

I'd rather call it indirectly than directly, though. When play is static, it shouldn't affect the tactical shape/positioning.

I agree, realised that shortly after I posted it.

[ModernLefty]

However, in a real life football sense, can you think of two players in the same side who play with that sort of difference? This whole topic is interesting but will probably be rendered obsolete eventually, as I believe that TC will ultimately entirely depose sliders, we are currently in a transitional period.

I suppose Puyol/Pique next to Alves in his pomp, when he was more a right winger playing rightback had a pretty big mentality gap. I desperately tried to find a non-Barcelona example. My head just went blank. Though I suppose the runs from deep are pretty different for one between the other.

This whole topic is interesting but will probably be rendered obsolete eventually, as I believe that TC will ultimately entirely depose sliders, we are currently in a transitional period.

I think that is probably the case, it is abit sad because some players need a few tweaks to specify their role abit more, to minimise a particular flaw they may have. Or if you want to set very non-specific generalist instructions and let your players just play, that element might be lost. Or if you want to try out a particular tactical idea, that is abit quirky it might limit that possibility.

[RTHerringbone]

I think that is probably the case, it is abit sad because some players need a few tweaks to specify their role abit more, to minimise a particular flaw they may have. Or if you want to set very non-specific generalist instructions and let your players just play, that element might be lost. Or if you want to try out a particular tactical idea, that is abit quirky it might limit that possibility.

I'm sure I've seen wwfan say that he's not entirely happy with all the roles, and I suspect more will be added.

If sliders do disappear (it's a big if), there will be some upheaval, but it should represent a change which results in progress, which can only be good.

The game will become more tactical in my eyes; more about how you react in game, rather than how much effort goes into setting up before kick off.

[ModernLefty]

If sliders do disappear (it's a big if), there will be some upheaval, but it should represent a change which results in progress, which can only be good.

The game will become more tactical in my eyes; more about how you react in game, rather than how much effort goes into setting up before kick off.

Surely it needs to be about both, I've read about plenty of managers consider that the most of their important preparation comes before the match in identifying the weaknesses of their opponent tactics and training and tactically studying how to exploit them, and looking over their weaknesses and working out how to minimise them. And then setting up the team and tactics and gameplan in a certain way.

I completely agree, however that the game will be improved by making it more tactical though, and more about how you react, but the issue is that this is the weakest part of the AI. Is adapting and forcing you to tactically battle them. When you react having realised how you should break down the system of the AI, if you make those changes, the AI rarely changes much. I would love it if the AI fought back, but they can't analyse quite in the way a human can.

[goat101010]

never understood why si never used the player instructions from ehm or at least gave us the option to.

for anyone thats not played it everything is so much clearer and theres no cack trying to work out the difference between cf set at 11 or 12

from what i remember the options were for example safe, normal, adventurous and risky for individual passing. that way you know exactly what youve picked

[darthrodent]

All good stuff, lads, many thanks.

Herring, you touched on this idea briefly of a coherent system, meaning that when one changes their team's Style or Strategy, the sliders are affected within a limited range. Does this imply that one (1) notch on a slider either way (left or right to state the obvious) is a fairly significant increase or decrease along that slider, or would you say that it's far more subtle and gradual than that?

I will reiterate that when implementing any tactic or system, there has to be a good reason in my mind to justify that alteration. If for example I ask myself, "Why are you playing Short Passing?" and I don't know the answer, then there is a problem (this is a cut and dry example, but bear with me). My point—actually it's a question—is (and let's assume a 4-4-2 system for ease of argument) what would be the ramifications of having my more defensive central midfielder set to Creative Freedom 10 (let's assume there are 20 notches on the Creative Freedom slider) and my more attacking central midfielder set to Creative Freedom 12? In fact, using two players may be a bad example due to PPMs, etc., so I'll rephrase it: what would be the noticeable difference between setting a central midfielder's Creative Freedom set to 10, versus that same midfielder having a Creative Freedom setting of 13? It's not a complaint, but there seems to be a lot of ambiguity when faced with this question, and it seems to me that I am guessing at Creative Freedom's effects. Are you guys still with me?! Does it not make logical sense that, if you wanted a player to adhere solely to your tactical instruction, then you would set his Creative Freedom to zero or one (all the way to the left) and, conversely that if you wanted a player to be expressive, then you would set his Creative Freedom to 19 or 20 (all the way to the right)? What does a Creative Freedom of 10 actually mean? That he adheres to your tactical instruction 50% of the time?

To my point about having to know unequivocally in my mind why I'm implementing a given tactical alteration, one can see why Creative Freedom gives me such pause…

[RTHerringbone]

Herring, you touched on this idea briefly of a coherent system, meaning that when one changes their team's Style or Strategy, the sliders are affected within a limited range. Does this imply that one (1) notch on a slider either way (left or right to state the obvious) is a fairly significant increase or decrease along that slider, or would you say that it's far more subtle and gradual than that?

I just meant that the TC is a framework which progressively changes slider settings based on things like Strategy.

Irrespective of the roles and duties you allocate in a tactic, the Strategy will increase or decrease things such as mentality, depending on which way on the Strategy scale you head.

By doing this within the bounds of the TC ensures that those incremental slider changes are logically apportioned across your players; what it won't offset is any weird role duty combinations you have.

Your dilemna about the impact of CF is precisely why I hate sliders. Ignore them and embrace the TC!

[darthrodent]

I know, it's all me me me, and take take take

However another question springs to mind, which again is addressed to RTHerringbone.

When changing universal slider settings, individual settings are obviously altered too. I was thinking again this idea of a coherent system, so I set my team's Philosophy to 'Style: Fluid' and 'Creative Freedom: More Expressive' for playing style. This changes the Creative Freedom of my two centre backs (CBs) to alarmingly high levels, especially when playing with a Ball Playing Defender. As a consequence I have a question or two:

1. What are the implications of having your CB's Creative Freedom so high?

2. Does a creative, fluid system equate to a less coherent system?

[RTHerringbone]

I know, it's all me me me, and take take take

However another question springs to mind, which again is addressed to RTHerringbone.

When changing universal slider settings, individual settings are obviously altered too. I was thinking again this idea of a coherent system, so I set my team's Philosophy to 'Style: Fluid' and 'Creative Freedom: More Expressive' for playing style. This changes the Creative Freedom of my two centre backs (CBs) to alarmingly high levels, especially when playing with a Ball Playing Defender. As a consequence I have a question or two:

1. What are the implications of having your CB's Creative Freedom so high?

2. Does a creative, fluid system equate to a less coherent system?

1. Creative freedom needn't be an issue when players are capable. Competent BPDs have composure, technique, concentration, passing, creativity etc. Increasing their CF increases the frequency of expression of those attributes, so it is only an issue f you are playing someone inappropriate in that sort of role

2. Style remains coherent where you have the correct balance of specialist and non-specialist roles. wwfan's view on what is what is:

"I consider the following to be specialist:

Target Man

Poacher

Trequartista

Advanced Playmaker

Box to Box Midfielder

Deep Lying Playmaker

Ball Winning Midfielder

Anchor Man

Libero

These four roles can fit in either camp, depending on your interpretation.

Complete Forward

Defensive Forward

Defensive Winger

Ball Playing Defender

Generic roles:

Advanced Forward

Deep Lying Forward

Attacking Midfielder

Central Midfielder

Defensive Midfielder

Inside Forward

Winger

Wide Midfielder

Wing Back

Full Back

Central Defender

Sweeper

I don't include keepers."

[ModernLefty]

1. They will act more in accordance to how they think they should act, and less in line with your instructions. It puts more of an emphasis on their decisions, so a BPD will try things that aren't actually tactically prescribed by you. If you ask the team to play a short passing game, and he sees the opportunity to play a defense splitting long pass, he will try it.

2.Rigid to fluid, comes down to a dichotomy so that the more generalised and all around your players are the more fluid you can afford to be, as you expect them all to chip in and do abit of everything.

For instance, lets take an example of a team of Yaya Toure's a player who could arguably play almost any position due to his pretty rounded skill set. If you had a team of Yaya's it would be worthwile to play fluidly because while he is not brilliant at one particular facet of the game, bar his physical attributes, his all around game makes him a brilliant all around player.

It also is partially managerial philosophy, if you want a players to make up their own minds and be given freedom to 'play' then you are looking for a more fluid philosophy. Whereas, if you want players to 'just do their job' then you are looking for a more rigid approach.

P.S. Sorry RTH, only saw that after I posted.