(FM14) Setting Playmaker?

[GC28]

With the tactics change where or how do you now set one player i.e AMC to be your teams playmaker?

[Herbie2100]

by giving him the role "advanced playmaker", the old way was wrong in so many ways.

[kandersson]

by giving him the role "advanced playmaker", the old way was wrong in so many ways.

no more playmaker and/or target-man instruction? only roles?

[Herbie2100]

no more playmaker and/or target-man instruction? only roles?

correct, which is the way it should be

[GC28]

I guessed that might be it, thanks for the quick replies!

[kandersson]

correct, which is the way it should be

yeah I agree, less confusion this way

[gerardpique]

Don't really agree with this tbh, what if your AML is your best player and you want to get him on the ball as much as possible but also play an amc as an advanced playmaker etc? Or if you have two centre mids where you want the better of the two to be your playmaker getting on the ball. IRL you can tell your players get the ball to player x, absolutely no reason for this to be got rid of just because sliders were going.

[Lucas]

If you've got multiple playmakers/target men, these get equal attention/weighting in terms of how they are used.

[kandersson]

Don't really agree with this tbh, what if your AML is your best player and you want to get him on the ball as much as possible but also play an amc as an advanced playmaker etc? Or if you have two centre mids where you want the better of the two to be your playmaker getting on the ball. IRL you can tell your players get the ball to player x, absolutely no reason for this to be got rid of just because sliders were going.

I'd say you could use 'exploit left flank' shout/instruction or something like that? or setting the creative CM as a dlp? I think getting the ball to player x is slightly different from that player being your team's playmaker, more of a tactical instruction which should still be available in theory - but I have not the beta so cannot confirm this

[gerardpique]

If you've got multiple playmakers/target men, these get equal attention/weighting in terms of how they are used.

Well that quite frankly, is a load of my left you know what. So basically in the haste to get rid of sliders and get everything and everyone onto player roles and that alone, on the tactics screen absolutely no thought was put into the fact that having each player weighted equally now for individual and team tactical instructions no matter if they were Lionel Messi or Ronaldo compared to Carlton Palmer or Bebe in the same team wouldn't have a detrimental effect to the users tactics as a whole? A player role is exactly that, a role you wish a player to play on the pitch, not the teams overall tactical plan.

I'd say you could use 'exploit left flank' shout/instruction or something like that? or setting the creative CM as a dlp? I think getting the ball to player x is slightly different from that player being your team's playmaker, more of a tactical instruction which should still be available in theory - but I have not the beta so cannot confirm this

Indeed you could do that but to the detriment of literally everything about the style of play and tactics you want your team to play.

[soccer.joel]

I noticed a different icon next to my enganche and false 9 do these signify playmakers / target men

[Lucas]

I noticed a different icon next to my enganche and false 9 do these signify playmakers / target men

To the left, is an icon that will display a player head to signify whether they have player instructions, or a club shirt, to show that they will follow team instructions. The ones to the right will show A/S/D/Auto, which is for the duty.

[WOW77]

I really like the older version for setting playmakers and a target man it always worked for me ; ) I hope they change it back in the newer version

[guspjmh]

So there is no longer an opportunity to set players to cross to specific players either?

[Lucas]

So there is no longer an opportunity to set players to cross to specific players either?

See Player Instructions - you can set where the Crosses are aimed.

[YokiFC]

Don't really agree with this tbh, what if your AML is your best player and you want to get him on the ball as much as possible but also play an amc as an advanced playmaker etc? Or if you have two centre mids where you want the better of the two to be your playmaker getting on the ball. IRL you can tell your players get the ball to player x, absolutely no reason for this to be got rid of just because sliders were going.

I'm with you on this. I used the roles a lot.

I used to play 4-3-2-1. My most central midfielder is my advanced playmaker, but my target man is one of my two 2 wide men in front of my midfield. My target man is then my striker.

Worked like a charm on 13, but I guess we're going to have to figure a way around it.

[wwfan]

Well that quite frankly, is a load of my left you know what. So basically in the haste to get rid of sliders and get everything and everyone onto player roles and that alone, on the tactics screen absolutely no thought was put into the fact that having each player weighted equally now for individual and team tactical instructions no matter if they were Lionel Messi or Ronaldo compared to Carlton Palmer or Bebe in the same team wouldn't have a detrimental effect to the users tactics as a whole? A player role is exactly that, a role you wish a player to play on the pitch, not the teams overall tactical plan.

If you want everything to go through one playmaker, only use one playmaker role. If you want a double pivot, use two playmakers. If you don't want everything to go through Carlton Palmer, don't make him a playmaker.

[soccer.joel]

To the left, is an icon that will display a player head to signify whether they have player instructions, or a club shirt, to show that they will follow team instructions. The ones to the right will show A/S/D/Auto, which is for the duty.

ok. Thanks it was the icon to the left i noticed

[gerardpique]

If you want everything to go through one playmaker, only use one playmaker role. If you want a double pivot, use two playmakers. If you don't want everything to go through Carlton Palmer, don't make him a playmaker.

Now now wwfan, just because you're the proverbial self flagellating be all and end all Christ figure of tactics for the last several years doesn't mean your idea of what football is and should be is always correct! To paraphrase Fergie is this game and your growing role in it over the last several years becoming or has become a glib " if you don't like it, f**k off and watch Chelsea" 1984esque scenario nowadays is it?

As you know well with the demise of sliders the only thing left to assign a role and duty etc to players is player roles to get them to play in a particular way. It was previously and still should be possible to have multiple players set to whatever their particular role is and still have one in particular as the main playmaker amongst those players, even if they are designated with the same "role". I.E, if I'm playing 4231 with a "double pivot", if you want to use buzzword phrases, which incidentally refers to the 2 deeper lying centre mids/ def mids in particular as I'm sure you're aware. What if I have three amc's in front then; 2 advanced playmakers and an enganche or attacking mid attack or vice versa? Under the new system responsibility is shared equally amongst them but as is often the case what if your best player by miles is one of those and they other 2's stats are merely best suited to that role also?

Or if I'm playing an amc and 2 wingers as the three in behind and my AML is my best player and I want the ball given to him as much as possible to get the ball in? If I play him as a winger and my amc as an attacking mid/ advanced playmaker they shall share the load equally as has been said. Now I can set it to focus passing down the left flank to get it in that area but that is then forcing me to play in a way that I don't want the team to play just to get the ball to that area whereas previously the team could follow my general tactical instructions and vary the play and get the ball to the playmaker in varying situations and positions as opposed to, using the above example, focus passing down left flank.

[wwfan]

Now now wwfan, just because you're the proverbial self flagellating be all and end all Christ figure of tactics for the last several years doesn't mean your idea of what football is and should be is always correct! To paraphrase Fergie is this game and your growing role in it over the last several years becoming or has become a glib " if you don't like it, f**k off and watch Chelsea" 1984esque scenario nowadays is it?

As you know well with the demise of sliders the only thing left to assign a role and duty etc to players is player roles to get them to play in a particular way. It was previously and still should be possible to have multiple players set to whatever their particular role is and still have one in particular as the main playmaker amongst those players, even if they are designated with the same "role". I.E, if I'm playing 4231 with a "double pivot", if you want to use buzzword phrases, which incidentally refers to the 2 deeper lying centre mids/ def mids in particular as I'm sure you're aware. What if I have three amc's in front then; 2 advanced playmakers and an enganche or attacking mid attack or vice versa? Under the new system responsibility is shared equally amongst them but as is often the case what if your best player by miles is one of those and they other 2's stats are merely best suited to that role also?

Or if I'm playing an amc and 2 wingers as the three in behind and my AML is my best player and I want the ball given to him as much as possible to get the ball in? If I play him as a winger and my amc as an attacking mid/ advanced playmaker they shall share the load equally as has been said. Now I can set it to focus passing down the left flank to get it in that area but that is then forcing me to play in a way that I don't want the team to play just to get the ball to that area whereas previously the team could follow my general tactical instructions and vary the play and get the ball to the playmaker in varying situations and positions as opposed to, using the above example, focus passing down left flank.

If you can tell me why you want five playmaker roles in your team and why setting your AMCs to non-playmaking roles is non-negotiable, then I'll concede the point.

Personally, I don't see why you can't set up your AMC line as IF/S, AMC/S and W/A (for example) and have them fed by a single or double deeper playmaking platform. Or, if your AML is your best player, give him an AP role and give the deeper players non-playmaking but still expressive roles/duties.

The point is that you have to trade off player suitability to role for a coherent system. If you have five players best suited to playmaking roles (according to your Assistant, whose advice may be flawed anyway), that doesn't mean you have to give them playmaking roles. You can, but you have to accept the consequences if you do. FM would be far too simplistic if you could just assign best roles to each player and press continue. You have to think about a system and how to adapt the players you have to it.

[Lucas]

Now now wwfan, just because you're the proverbial self flagellating be all and end all Christ figure of tactics for the last several years doesn't mean your idea of what football is and should be is always correct! To paraphrase Fergie is this game and your growing role in it over the last several years becoming or has become a glib " if you don't like it, f**k off and watch Chelsea" 1984esque scenario nowadays is it?

As you know well with the demise of sliders the only thing left to assign a role and duty etc to players is player roles to get them to play in a particular way. It was previously and still should be possible to have multiple players set to whatever their particular role is and still have one in particular as the main playmaker amongst those players, even if they are designated with the same "role". I.E, if I'm playing 4231 with a "double pivot", if you want to use buzzword phrases, which incidentally refers to the 2 deeper lying centre mids/ def mids in particular as I'm sure you're aware. What if I have three amc's in front then; 2 advanced playmakers and an enganche or attacking mid attack or vice versa? Under the new system responsibility is shared equally amongst them but as is often the case what if your best player by miles is one of those and they other 2's stats are merely best suited to that role also?

Or if I'm playing an amc and 2 wingers as the three in behind and my AML is my best player and I want the ball given to him as much as possible to get the ball in? If I play him as a winger and my amc as an attacking mid/ advanced playmaker they shall share the load equally as has been said. Now I can set it to focus passing down the left flank to get it in that area but that is then forcing me to play in a way that I don't want the team to play just to get the ball to that area whereas previously the team could follow my general tactical instructions and vary the play and get the ball to the playmaker in varying situations and positions as opposed to, using the above example, focus passing down left flank.

Less of the confrontational attitude please. If you aren't willing to take advice from somebody who has input into the match engine, then I'd strongly suggest refraining from ranting.

[isignedupfornorealreason]

Now now wwfan, just because you're the proverbial self flagellating be all and end all Christ figure of tactics for the last several years doesn't mean your idea of what football is and should be is always correct! To paraphrase Fergie is this game and your growing role in it over the last several years becoming or has become a glib " if you don't like it, f**k off and watch Chelsea" 1984esque scenario nowadays is it?

I'm not his biggest fan but that's a bit strong, he didn't say much to warrant that.

On that note; WWFAN,

I assume that the lower down the leagues you go the less likely you'll want to have a 'dual-playmaker' system? Would I be right in assuming that creativity is going to play a more important factor on whether we should stick them on a bland 'CM-D/S/A' role or whether to go with a playmaker role now?

Also, I can't see the difference between a FB-D and a Limited Full back. I'm guessing, the FB-D will still occasionally move up the pitch? They seem to share the same stats and orders to be honest. Might be missing something obvious though.

[wwfan]

I'm not his biggest fan but that's a bit strong, he didn't say much to warrant that.

On that note; WWFAN,

I assume that the lower down the leagues you go the less likely you'll want to have a 'dual-playmaker' system? Would I be right in assuming that creativity is going to play a more important factor on whether we should stick them on a bland 'CM-D/S/A' role or whether to go with a playmaker role now?

Also, I can't see the difference between a FB-D and a Limited Full back. I'm guessing, the FB-D will still occasionally move up the pitch? They seem to share the same stats and orders to be honest. Might be missing something obvious though.

I don't think that level has anything to do with how you want your team to play. If you want to play a "dual-playmaker" system in the lower leagues and have a couple of players who can do the job at that level, then go for it.

The main difference between a FB/D and LFB will be his "clear the ball" decision making. The FB/D will be more likely to look for slightly risky passes when under pressure, whereas the LFB will just boot it. Likewise, the FB/D might be more inclined to cross from deep, whereas the LFB will try to give the ball to a better player.

This is a good example of how the removal of sliders can improve the ME. If sliders were still active, it would be impossible for PaulC to code the "clearing/give ball to better player" mentality of a LFB to a FB/D. Changing sliders would have overridden the differences, making the roles moot. The isolation of the role allows the implementation of this type of decision making.

[isignedupfornorealreason]

I don't think that level has anything to do with how you want your team to play. If you want to play a "dual-playmaker" system in the lower leagues and have a couple of players who can do the job at that level, then go for it.

The main difference between a FB/D and LFB will be his "clear the ball" decision making. The FB/D will be more likely to look for slightly risky passes when under pressure, whereas the LFB will just boot it. Likewise, the FB/D might be more inclined to cross from deep, whereas the LFB will try to give the ball to a better player.

This is a good example of how the removal of sliders can improve the ME. If sliders were still active, it would be impossible for PaulC to code the "clearing/give ball to better player" mentality of a LFB to a FB/D. Changing sliders would have overridden the differences, making the roles moot. The isolation of the role allows the implementation of this type of decision making.

Oh I see, a FB-D would still be forward thinking and a Limited FB would just play it no-nonsense...

Well, the reason I brought up the division level, is because usually the lower you go the more simple you want to keep it. Joe Bloggs, isn't going to be a brilliant playmaking force, I can't imagine, at least not unless he has stats that fit firmly into that role. Least that's what I'm assuming, I don't think I've played a playmaker down the ladder anyway... Maybe I'm overthinking it.

Anyway I agree with the no-slider change, I do recall this was something people clamoured for iterations back and I'm glad to see it's happened.

By the by, thanks for the clarification.

[wwfan]

How you view the suitability of playmaker role is and should be down to your interpretation of football. If you feel that lower league players should only be trusted with simple responsibilities, but would prefer to build a higher league team around a creative fulcrum, that's a perfectly valid footballing opinion. Others might want no, one, some or multiple playmakers at whatever level they play.

The difference in such opinions is what makes football endlessly fascinating.

[YKW]

On previous games I have sometimes had small, fast strikers (used as AF) and set them as the target man with setting run on to ball. How would this be possible now? The player in question would obviously be unsuitable to a target man role.

[wwfan]

On previous games I have sometimes had small, fast strikers (used as AF) and set them as the target man with setting run on to ball. How would this be possible now? The player in question would obviously be unsuitable to a target man role.

Not sure. I asked for the Poacher to be treated by the ME as a Run Onto Ball type of target man, but I'm not sure if it has been or will be implemented. However, you increase the feed to quick front-line players by employing the Pass into Space strategy (think it is still called that).

[YKW]

Ah ok so each of the roles has inbuilt characteristics.

Another situation I used to use was setting my really tall amr as target man, he would win all the headers against the full back (goalkeeper distribution was to him) and get on the end of crosses from the opposite side (aimed to target man). Are any of the wide roles set as aerial target men? If not, how could I implement this?

To use a real life example, this season Spurs have been using Chadli on the left wing as an attacking pivot with long balls into his head (both from goal kicks and open play). He is the aerial target man. Soldado up front has also been a target man, but mainly with balls into feet or in behind (but NOT aerial balls, those go to Chadli.)

How could I reenact this in FM?

[wwfan]

There's a target winger role, which would do exactly what you are asking for for the AMR. I think Solado is more of an all round forward rather than a TM, so would probably use a DLF or CF role for him. That would result in players feeding him balls to feet and TBs, depending on the situation.

Be wary of winger crossing if you use Chadli as a WTM though. If you set them to aim at the TM, they'll be going for him all the time, which might not be the right option for you.

[RocheBag]

There's a role specifically for that now. Target Flank Man I believe it's called.

[YKW]

Wow thanks! Target winger, that's cool.

[guspjmh]

Regardless of whether you agree with the sliders or not, I just cannot understand why there was a need to remove them when so many people value them.

[ham_aka_stam]

Regardless of whether you agree with the sliders or not, I just cannot understand why there was a need to remove them when so many people value them.

It's been explaining in this very thread by wwfan.

Removing the sliders and adding roles means that things that were previously not possible to control via the match engine (such as more complicated wideplay such as CBs moving wide for a HalfBack, or risk-avoidance clearances) can now be controlled by the player by changing roles.

[YKW]

it's the concept of how you want the player to play vs how you want the team to play.

This. Although I would include 'how the player wants to play' as a similar, yet hugely neglected factor. The lines between these are becoming increasingly blurred, to a confusing end imo.

For example, I doubt there any many players who don't know what position they like to play and pretty much exactly what they like to do when playing there. It would be very hard to stop Taraabt dribbling, or Jermaine Defoe shooting, or Scott Parker turning 360 degrees to beat a player. Look all around the premiership and you can see players doing the same things over and over again, which aren't tactical. Take Weimann at Villa (pretty sure its him), he refuses to run with the ball at all, even when unchallenged. The ball barely moves between him receiving it and moving it on. Michael Dawson always plays long balls. I've been at WHL and seen multiple managers shouting at him, and his teammates having a go as well, but it didn't stop him. Thierry Henry moved out into the left channel before attacking the goal on his stronger foot. This wasn't tactical, it was his own preferred play.

If behaviour is going to be scripted in the ME, it has to be done for players, instead of or in addition to being done for players/roles.

I mean, if I play Timee Atouba at left back as a Limited Full back, is he now going to be cautious? In the game yes, IRL no! He will still try beating the same striker three times with Cryuff turns on the edge of his box (Kevin Phillips) because that's just him. The managers solution is to buy a new player.

Wouldn't it be more fun to scout players and actually have to watch their highlights to see what their tendencies were, and match them up to form a combination with an existing player or other new signing? For example perhaps I find a two full backs both with average all round stats, but in the first ones highlights I see that he plays a lot of effective long cross-field passes, while the second always finds a man short. If I play on the counter or have a tall left winger, then full back A would be my best choice, but if I want to play a slow possession based game then full back B is my best choice. Same stats, same position, different tendencies.

I'm not sure I really think tying in all these behaviours and patterns of play in with the tactical roles is a good idea. I'm interested to see how it plays, but the more I think about it the less I like it, it just means less for me to do.

[bbjgod]

I Still can't quite get it.

What is the new 'Run onto Ball' setting? Tried using a Poacher with Dribble Less & Shoot More Often, doesn't quite seem to work as the he isn't fed well enough.

[TOUGHGUY]

Although I doubt this is or will be a major issue I can see the downside. If I recall correctly, the tooltips used to say that using the playmaker function would make the player in question the primary collector and in turn distributor of passes by his teammates, say, when building up an attack from the back, or something along those lines. Coupling this with the playmaker player role does seem somewhat unfortunate. Is it too far fetched to think that one might want to utilize one player as the creative fulcrum (i.e. playmaker option) but at the same time task another with a playmaker role to make use of for example his higher creativity and focus on passing the ball? 'You won't be the key creative figure in our team but seeing as you are good with the ball, I want you to try risky passes and be more expressive anyway.' Right now it's either both players sharing the focus or the other being denied the opportunity to work within a playmaker role framework.

[Jamman]

A quick pacy striker who runs on to the ball shouldnt have to be classed as a poacher. A poacher is meant to be a fox in the box type.

[Jamman]

Although I doubt this is or will be a major issue I can see the downside. If I recall correctly, the tooltips used to say that using the playmaker function would make the player in question the primary collector and in turn distributor of passes by his teammates, say, when building up an attack from the back, or something along those lines. Coupling this with the playmaker player role does seem somewhat unfortunate. Is it too far fetched to think that one might want to utilize one player as the creative fulcrum (i.e. playmaker option) but at the same time task another with a playmaker role to make use of for example his higher creativity and focus on passing the ball? 'You won't be the key creative figure in our team but seeing as you are good with the ball, I want you to try risky passes and be more expressive anyway.' Right now it's either both players sharing the focus or the other being denied the opportunity to work within a playmaker role framework.

On the flip side it was always a bit annoying being able to only speficy one playmaker in the past.

[TOUGHGUY]

That is of course true, I think some sort of a '(don't) be the designated playmaker' button would be the obvious and ideal solution here. Most (all?) other options including the non-slidery ones have made their way as useful buttons on the player instruction screen so why not this one as well.

[Kriss]

I should point out here that some of this is negotiable as people get used to this system and find the flaws (there'll always be some) the ME will always be in development.

I'd also point out that if people rant and use insults instead of reasoned argument they'll get short shrift.

[RocheBag]

If you want someone to play like DLP but without being set as the team's playmaker, set him to DM and tell him to play riskier passes and more direct passes. It's so simple

[HUNT3R]

Suppose it's more apt to post it here than the other thread where I had it:

I can see why they got rid of being able to set a playmaker. Surely by selecting a playmaking role, you want him to be a playmaker? If you have more than one playmaking role, but only want balls funneled through one, then why have other playmaker roles assigned in the first place? Those players won't perform like playmakers would/should, so they should have a different role.

I am fine with them removing being able to set who your target man is too. We have roles for this for the flanks now and the striker position.

The one thing I do miss is being able to select where to play the ball to your target man. To Head, To Feet and Run Onto Ball is something we can't replicate currently (that I am aware of).

Actually, thinking about it some more, you can. Target Man roles will get it to those players quickly and also they will be a focus on crosses. So these are the bigger guys.

If you're after a Target Man - To Feet type, set a playmaker role. If you're after a Poacher type target man that runs onto the ball, just set more through balls on the supporting players.

[TOUGHGUY]

The problem with using another role and changing it is twofold. First, its instructions might not (will not, probably) match the playmaker's settings, the one exact thing the player might be after, and second, by adapting it, you give up settings you might otherwise want to use by expending them on customizing the role in the first place. The idea of wanting a player well suited to a creative, passing game to play a role where he can utilize his skills better – but without becoming the focus of much of the play in the way designating a playmaker does – is hardly far fetched.

By defending the decision by saying 'why assign a playmaker role when you don't want to use the playmaker option' you equate the concept of other players being tasked to actively seek out a particular player more often than usual, getting the ball to him and him alone, and the player in question then distributing it, with simply fielding a skilled player and asking him not to be afraid to use his vision and technique somewhat more adventurously. Someone here or in some other thread has mentioned Modric, hardly the fulcrum of Madrid's attacking play, and other examples could easily be found.

[HUNT3R]

he problem with using another role and changing it is twofold. First, its instructions might not (will not, probably) match the playmaker's settings, the one exact thing the player might be after, and second, by adapting it, you give up settings you might otherwise want to use by expending them on customizing the role in the first place. The idea of wanting a player well suited to a creative, passing game to play a role where he can utilize his skills better – but without becoming the focus of much of the play in the way designating a playmaker does – is hardly far fetched.

What settings are you trying to replicate that you feel you can't?

By defending the decision by saying 'why assign a playmaker role when you don't want to use the playmaker option' you equate the concept of other players being tasked to actively seek out a particular player more often than usual, getting the ball to him and him alone, and the player in question then distributing it, with simply fielding a skilled player and asking him not to be afraid to use his vision and technique somewhat more adventurously. Someone here or in some other thread has mentioned Modric, hardly the fulcrum of Madrid's attacking play, and other examples could easily be found.

If you don't want the team to just seek out one player, you play more than one playmaker. The point of a playmaker is to make plays.... he can't do it without the ball.

[OZIL77]

I've been having this probelm as well there should be a option to choose your playmaker and target man

[TOUGHGUY]

Indeed the point of the playmaker option is for the designated player to become the creative focus of the whole team. I have never stated otherwise. But the point of a playmaker role is (or rather was and I wish still could be) for a player to utilize a particular set of player instructions suited to a more creative, passing game as opposed to closing down opponents/tackling hard/not being outstanding in any particular area/not run forward as much/other peculiarities of the non playmaker roles.

This isn't a hard concept to understand nor is it in any way illogical. As I have rather crudely said elsewhere, not every good passer of the ball needs to be the creative fulcrum of a team. But all good passers of the ball should be able to be told to play even riskier passes. Which covers both the inability to do that if another role is customized (as the instruction has been spent in doing that) and the inability of simply setting a particular role without the player becoming an exceedingly important figure of the team's game.

[HUNT3R]

Indeed the point of the playmaker option is for the designated player to become the creative focus of the whole team. I have never stated otherwise. But the point of a playmaker role is (or rather was and I wish still could be) for a player to utilize a particular set of player instructions suited to a more creative, passing game as opposed to closing down opponents/tackling hard/not being outstanding in any particular area/not run forward as much/other peculiarities of the non playmaker roles.

This isn't a hard concept to understand nor is it in any way illogical. As I have rather crudely said elsewhere, not every good passer of the ball needs to be the creative fulcrum of a team. But all good passers of the ball should be able to be told to play even riskier passes. Which covers both the inability to do that if another role is customized (as the instruction has been spent in doing that) and the inability of simply setting a particular role without the player becoming an exceedingly important figure of the team's game.

So what is stopping you from assigning a player a different role and giving him the "play riskier passes" instruction?

[TOUGHGUY]

Do you even read the posts you are replying to? Nothing is stopping me from doing that. But that is not what I want to do. As I said, what I would like to do is utilize the instructions of a playmaker role without that player becoming the designated playmaker.

[milnerpoint]

Do you even read the posts you are replying to? Nothing is stopping me from doing that. But that is not what I want to do. As I said, what I would like to do is utilize the instructions of a playmaker role without that player becoming the designated playmaker.

What would be the difference? If you want someone to try and play more risky passes you set them to do it, what difference does the word playmaker make in this instance?

[HUNT3R]

Do you even read the posts you are replying to? Nothing is stopping me from doing that. But that is not what I want to do. As I said, what I would like to do is utilize the instructions of a playmaker role without that player becoming the designated playmaker.

I read all of your posts, but it seems like you're being stubborn about the whole thing. You can tweak things like riskier passes and forward runs, that's why I asked what you wanted to replicate that you feel you can't. If there really is something, maybe it is something worth adding to the game. We all want the game to improve.