Some complaints about the philosophy and direction of Football Manager

[Cougar2010]

The biggest problem by far Methos is that many users don't know what realism is which is why we see the same moaning threads on the forum week after week, month after month, year after year.

I believe this basically stems from the average football fan thinking they know more than they actually do about the inner working of football. You just have to go into any pub when a game is on or go to a live match and listen to what is being said by those watching.

The result is we end up with regular threads such as:

"There are too many injuries"

"The AI is better at scoring than my team"

"I dominate the stats but lose/draw too many games"

etc

etc

In a lot of those cases there is very little wrong and what the thread poster is complaining about stacks up fairly well when matched against RL stats which is where perception & realism come in. In the other cases its down to tactics/team talks/man management but the users aren't prepared to accept that they are doing anything wrong and don't want to learn how to improve.

[Candre168]

I play the game on the basis that, with superior players, if I create more chances than the other team, I should win more often than not. In EVERY game I've dropped points this season, I've had more CCC's than the other teams. I currently sit mid-table with a heavily invested Lille side that are not too far off PSG/Monaco player wise. I understand, sometimes the ball doesn't go into the net, sometimes bad things happen to your team, but on a CONSISTENT basis, I create more chances than the other team and for some reason my players don't want to score, or they do things that are plain stupid, i.e firing off a shot when they have a clear pass that would lead to a goal.

And 'it's your tactics' doesn't work here. A chance is a chance. One on one. Ball falls in the box at the feet of your poacher who's under no pressure. At that point your tactics don't matter, what should matter is the players attributes, mentality, and the attributes of the Goalkeeper. On my team, with my players, I expect to be scoring one of my many easy chances a game. And when you have world class players on your team, but they insist on taking on a wild shot instead of an open pass, your tactics shouldn't matter either. Don't tell me that Messi dribbles past 6 players and instead of playing the easy pass to Suarez to score, he instead tries to score from the right byline with his right foot because Luis Enrique 'didn't give him the right tactics'.

The one criticism I've consistently had of this game is that User players rarely match the AI's CCC to Goal ratio, and that no matter what you do, players will take on stupid shots for no reason.

This could all be solved by sliders, of course. But SI view sliders as the Anti-Christ. I don't see why I should have to play this game by someone else version of football when it's clear to me that the amount of easy CCC's my players miss is just unrealistic.

[Methos]

To Candre168: If there was a debug mode (that is not a suggestion in a any way - I wouldnt want it either) that for every shot your player takes (or the AI player takes) a random roll window popped up with a tooltip as follows:

roll 1-70 its a goal

roll 71-100 its a miss.

for the next player that has different skills the same window would pop up with different numbers

roll 1-10 its a goal

roll 11-100 its a miss

would people understand the game better and complain less?

should the chance element, the luck element be more visible and transparent if you wanted to so you see for yourself that the match engine is indeed flawless?

and if there was a flaw people could provide accurate feedback on what is wrong and what is right?

The point I am arguing is that the user doesn't know when he loses due to bad luck, or bad managing, or bad players, or bad morale and he feels cheated.

[Cougar2010]

And 'it's your tactics' doesn't work here. A chance is a chance. One on one. Ball falls in the box at the feet of your poacher who's under no pressure. At that point your tactics don't matter, what should matter is the players attributes, mentality, and the attributes of the Goalkeeper. On my team, with my players, I expect to be scoring one of my many easy chances a game. And when you have world class players on your team, but they insist on taking on a wild shot instead of an open pass, your tactics shouldn't matter either. Don't tell me that Messi dribbles past 6 players and instead of playing the easy pass to Suarez to score, he instead tries to score from the right byline with his right foot because Luis Enrique 'didn't give him the right tactics'.

When people say tactics what they often mean is every possible input you have into a match, this could mean your man management of the striker has left him in a poor mental state, your instructions could mean he is encouraged to rush a chance, his attributes might just not be good enough to make him a consistent goalscorer in those situations.

Your tactics matter 100% of the time, every choice and input you selected matters every time the ME makes a calculation which is 4? times per match second.

The one criticism I've consistently had of this game is that User players rarely match the AI's CCC to Goal ratio, and that no matter what you do, players will take on stupid shots for no reason.

and yet despite your criticism this has been proven wrong time & time again. The ME doesn't know where the inputs come from, other users can match and outperform AI CCC to goal ratio why can't you?

The first step is to accept you are can improve on what you are doing and the second is to learn how rather than sticking your fingers in your ears and going waah, waah, waah!

This could all be solved by sliders, of course. But SI view sliders as the Anti-Christ. I don't see why I should have to play this game by someone else version of football when it's clear to me that the amount of easy CCC's my players miss is just unrealistic.

The slider discussion has been done to death.

[Candre168]

Well look, just now I had a game v Stade de Reims in which I totally dominated and lost 1-0, on their only chance of the game. I literally have NO CLUE why I lost that game, but I can chalk it off as bad luck. But when that game keeps happening, that's when I start to lose my temper. What tactics am I supposed to change when players are refusing to score? I think your example wouldn't help because people would actually just feel cheated more, because they'd realise how broken the game is.

The thing is, when I play another game, and I suck, or I get killed, or whatever, I can figure out the reasons why I'm losing and what I need to do better. Wether it's a strategy game like Europa Universalis, or a console game, the reason why you suck should eventually become obvious. FM is the only game I know of where I literally have no clue what's going on. And SI need to remember that the market is not made up of people on this forum. The average person who's played FM will tell you the same thing, it's too hard, they don't understand anything, it makes no sense. People who sign up to this forum tend to be very serious players, but to the average person FM is as understandable as Klingon.

[Candre168]

When people say tactics what they often mean is every possible input you have into a match, this could mean your man management of the striker has left him in a poor mental state, your instructions could mean he is encouraged to rush a chance, his attributes might just not be good enough to make him a consistent goalscorer in those situations.

Your tactics matter 100% of the time, every choice and input you selected matters every time the ME makes a calculation which is 4? times per match second.

Domenico Berardi, Manolo Gabbiadini, and Divock Origi. Neither of those can beat a low end Ligue 1 GK one on one, with good morale. I've tried playing direct and high tempo, I've tried playing short and lower tempo, in fact I've tried everything and nothing makes a difference. I have a 4-5-1/4-3-3, 4-2-3-1 and a 3-5-2. I have even downloaded tactics. Nothing makes a difference.

The first step is to accept you are can improve on what you are doing and the second is to learn how rather than sticking your fingers in your ears and going waah, waah, waah

I can accept I'm wrong, but I'd like to have a clear way of knowing how I can improve. Which is what happens in every single game on the planet other than FM.

For someone who supposedly runs two businesses you are very blinkered and narrow minded Candre but then that possibly explains the part time job.

Like I've mentioned before, criticise FM and the insults come

[Chinook2000]

I play the game on the basis that, with superior players, if I create more chances than the other team, I should win more often than not. In EVERY game I've dropped points this season, I've had more CCC's than the other teams. I currently sit mid-table with a heavily invested Lille side that are not too far off PSG/Monaco player wise. I understand, sometimes the ball doesn't go into the net, sometimes bad things happen to your team, but on a CONSISTENT basis, I create more chances than the other team and for some reason my players don't want to score, or they do things that are plain stupid, i.e firing off a shot when they have a clear pass that would lead to a goal.

And 'it's your tactics' doesn't work here. A chance is a chance. One on one. Ball falls in the box at the feet of your poacher who's under no pressure. At that point your tactics don't matter, what should matter is the players attributes, mentality, and the attributes of the Goalkeeper. On my team, with my players, I expect to be scoring one of my many easy chances a game. And when you have world class players on your team, but they insist on taking on a wild shot instead of an open pass, your tactics shouldn't matter either. Don't tell me that Messi dribbles past 6 players and instead of playing the easy pass to Suarez to score, he instead tries to score from the right byline with his right foot because Luis Enrique 'didn't give him the right tactics'.

The one criticism I've consistently had of this game is that User players rarely match the AI's CCC to Goal ratio, and that no matter what you do, players will take on stupid shots for no reason.

This could all be solved by sliders, of course. But SI view sliders as the Anti-Christ. I don't see why I should have to play this game by someone else version of football when it's clear to me that the amount of easy CCC's my players miss is just unrealistic.

You play the game that SI have made if you don't like it don't play it.You don't know what CCC's mean their are hundreds of answers if you bother to look yet what's the point in looking them up you don't understand them,when people try to explain you dismiss them instantly,you will just roll out the same question again and again running using comments that have absolutely no relevance at all but you don't understand this.Get you head out your arse listen try too understand if not **** off.

SI and FM are not perfect and the fans' of the game choose to be a fan and all want it too improve they are wise enough to go somewhere else for enjoyment if the do not like what they are playing.

Football does not have a final answer FM cannot be completed.If that's what you want an easy game to finish Play them.8 hours a day leaves plenty of time to do something else in life.

[Candre168]

You don't know what CCC's mean their are hundreds of answers if you bother to look yet what's the point in looking them up you don't understand them,when people try to explain you dismiss them instantly,you will just roll out the same question again and again running using comments that have absolutely no relevance at all but you don't understand this.Get you head out your arse listen try too understand if not **** off.

Explain them.

[Svenc]

NO reason to get personal, no matter who started this.

As for CCCs, this is what FM classes as CCCs:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ka6fDw8q9Dk

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cmj6thag7qI

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=80LbdEvajW4

A CCC is not a CCC, shots will be taken from different angles, different distances, under some pressure, no pressure, lots of pressure, . The player might approach the keeper from a straight line or an angle etc. etc. And every so often, what FM classes a CCC isn't all that reallyTactics can influence what kind of CCCs are created, by the way. They can also influence the opposition's likelyhood to successfully hit you on the break and score. Additionally there's some man management thrown into the mix. Even so, statistically there will be a good number of games that you dominate with your chances, but still won't win. The correlation between the team that is getting more shots going and winning the match in football is about 70%. I have no doubt that exceptional players aren't much troubled by this and better those numbers on the game, but realistically you should expect to have these kind of games in each of your season. Perhaps that helps already to calm. If it's still that bad, the assistant is definitely worth a try, and that is no kidding.

That said, I still find it puzzling though how anyone could deem the game as inaccessible, I really do, and then refer to the old tactics system as the solution, as that you might like or not like, but it has firstly little to do with the on-going issue (the AI has supposedly been better at converting ever since FM 1799 from memory) and secondly it's a tons more convulted system that certainly is far less accessible and more time consuming to both learn and get to grips to than the current one. The hardcore was *evidently* struggling to get grips with it too, so how could a person that has an hour to spend on the game each session maximum? As argued, I suspect habits being the cause, and been used to different systems for so many years.

[Chinook2000]

Domenico Berardi, Manolo Gabbiadini, and Divock Origi. Neither of those can beat a low end Ligue 1 GK one on one, with good morale. I've tried playing direct and high tempo, I've tried playing short and lower tempo, in fact I've tried everything and nothing makes a difference. I have a 4-5-1/4-3-3, 4-2-3-1 and a 3-5-2. I have even downloaded tactics. Nothing makes a difference.

I can accept I'm wrong, but I'd like to have a clear way of knowing how I can improve. Which is what happens in every single game on the planet other than FM.

Like I've mentioned before, criticise FM and the insults come

What's the point in trying to explain too you when so many have tried and you still don't read or understand?

Read the Tactics Forum if you want clues or if you want someone else to play the game for you or nurse you into it! The fact your in the wrong section of the Forum suggests you cannot be bothered too look in the right place for guides.

Perhaps you do not understand Football in general and then may I suggest that you try something else.My 5 year old gets it.

[Dagenham_Dave]

I play the game on the basis that, with superior players, if I create more chances than the other team, I should win more often than not. In EVERY game I've dropped points this season, I've had more CCC's than the other teams. I currently sit mid-table with a heavily invested Lille side that are not too far off PSG/Monaco player wise.

For your team to be in that position is all down to you I'm afraid. When you stop blaming the game and start taking responsibility for this, then you might just start getting to grips with it.

Why don't you upload the save, and let some others have a go. I guarantee that a high percentage of people who try will get your team winning and your strikers scoring. Then you could maybe get some advice as to where you're going wrong.

Or you could keep your head buried in the sand. It's your game, it depends how much you want to get out of it. Perhaps it's just not for you. Plenty of games over the years have fallen into that category for me.

[Chinook2000]

Explain them.

What's the point lifes too short you cannot be bothered to read the Hundreds of posts on the matter so why don't you try their first?

[Candre168]

A CCC is not a CCC, shots will be taken from different angles, different distances, under some pressure, no pressure, lots of pressure, . The player might approach the keeper from no angle or no angle, etc. etc. And every so often, what FM classes a CCC isn't all that reallyTactics can influence what kind of CCCs are created, by the way. They can also influence the opposition's likelyhood to successfully hit you on the break and score. Additionally there's some man management thrown into the mix. Even so, statistically there will be a good number of games that you dominate with your chances, but still won't win. The correlation between teams getting more shots going and winning in football is about 70%. I have no doubt that exceptional players aren't much troubled by this, but realistically you should expect to have these kind of games in each of your season.

I'm talking about a consistent manner in which easy chances are missed. Of course, your examples of what the game classifies as CCC was very good, because it's true (and I had to learn) that a CCC doesn't necessarily mean a clear cut chance. But I still think that if you have one of the best teams in the league/in Europe, the success rate of creating more chances and winning is far too low. If someone has the time to perform an experiment, please do.

My argument is, more simply, if Suarez is given three One on One's, it doesn't matter what the tactics are, if he's in a good shape more likely than not he'll score one of those chances. If tactics are so powerful that they influence as basic scenarios as that, then I feel they have too much influence over the game.

That said, I still find it puzzling though how anyone could deem the game as inaccessible, I really do, and then refer to the old tactics system as the solution, as that has firstly little to do with the on-going issue (the AI has supposedly been better at scoring ever since FM 1799 from memory) and secondly it's a tons more convulted system that certainly is far less accessible and more time consuming to both learn and get to grips to than the current one. The hardcore was *evidently* struggling to get grips with it too, so how could a person that has an hour to spend on the game each session maximum? As argued, I suspect habits being the cause, and been used to different systems for so many years.

What old system? I'm not suggesting going back to a Match Engine like FM06/07 in which literally all you had to do was pick a team and win. But I am saying that if SI are going to have a complex system, like they do now, they need to explain the game better to their customers. Hell, if they release a manual for £15 I'll buy it. Or, as I have suggested before, Assistants and Coaches could provide more tactical input to help you make better decisions as in real life. But at the moment it feels like SI are tossing a complex and little understand ME at us without explanation.

As I said, just because experts on this forum find the game easy, does not mean the average person who plays FM/has played FM is like that.

[Candre168]

For your team to be in that position is all down to you I'm afraid. When you stop blaming the game and start taking responsibility for this, then you might just start getting to grips with it.

Why don't you upload the save, and let some others have a go. I guarantee that a high percentage of people who try will get your team winning and your strikers scoring. Then you could maybe get some advice as to where you're going wrong.

Or you could keep your head buried in the sand. It's your game, it depends how much you want to get out of it. Perhaps it's just not for you. Plenty of games over the years have fallen into that category for me.

If people are interested, I can upload the save a little later when I have more time.

[HUNT3R]

Candre, how are your main goal scorers doing? What's their shots attempted/goals ratio?

Upload that PKM or the save. You'd get a lot of pointers if you create a thread and make the file available.

[Cougar2010]

I was stating a fact Candre.

The bottom line is you don't accept you are wrong despite what you say, this is best seen in your insistence that the AI always have a better CCC to goal ratio despite it having been proven wrong on many occasions over the years.

All those threads, all that evidence over many years and yet you still say "The one criticism I've consistently had of this game is that User players rarely match the AI's CCC to Goal ratio" in post #52. Whether you call it tunnel vision, blinkered or something else you are seemingly choosing to ignore all the evidence in favour of your own misguided view.

Well look, just now I had a game v Stade de Reims in which I totally dominated and lost 1-0, on their only chance of the game. I literally have NO CLUE why I lost that game, but I can chalk it off as bad luck. But when that game keeps happening, that's when I start to lose my temper. What tactics am I supposed to change when players are refusing to score? I think your example wouldn't help because people would actually just feel cheated more, because they'd realise how broken the game is.

The thing is, when I play another game, and I suck, or I get killed, or whatever, I can figure out the reasons why I'm losing and what I need to do better. Wether it's a strategy game like Europa Universalis, or a console game, the reason why you suck should eventually become obvious. FM is the only game I know of where I literally have no clue what's going on. And SI need to remember that the market is not made up of people on this forum. The average person who's played FM will tell you the same thing, it's too hard, they don't understand anything, it makes no sense. People who sign up to this forum tend to be very serious players, but to the average person FM is as understandable as Klingon.

So it comes down to understanding why you lost and what you could have done better.

The first thing to understand is that this is football and as I think Kris pointed out in a recent thread its very chaotic. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose, sometimes you deserve win, other times you don't.

On a very basic level you lost the match because the opposition scored while you didn't. Restricting them to one chance in a match means you are doing something right and if you restricted teams to one chance every match you would generally keep a lot of clean sheets.

The next question is why didn't you score? and this links into your problem with converting chances which seems to be a major issue for you. You need to first understand that strikers miss more than they score IRL, in very general terms they convert one chance in three on average, within that they'll obviously have good spells where they score a lot and bad spells where they have a goal drought.

You need to identify why those chances aren't being converted, is it tactical? are the players in the right positions? are these good chances? or bad chances? what is the mindset of the player taking a shot? attributes? is he a good finisher or not?

There isn't a simple black and white answer but posting a thread in the tactics forum with examples and maybe uploading your save you can get advice but you have to be prepared to try and learn.

[Svenc]

My argument is, more simply, if Suarez is given three One on One's, it doesn't matter what the tactics are, if he's in a good shape more likely than not he'll score one of those chances. If tactics are so powerful that they influence as basic scenarios as that, then I feel they have too much influence over the game.

Well, a one on one resulting from a short through ball bang through the centre will result in a different situation than one that resulted from an angled pass for instance, that's all. In previous editions, for instance, players would focus entirelly on these balls through the centre, which was party possible to a weakness in the ME. This was done often by keeping wide players at bay and providing no outlets, narrowing play and then encouraging centre midfielders to bomb a single forward with through balls from memory. Statistically this way they created a lot of CCCs, but failed to recognize that often the forward was already being closed down or had to turn to the ball and rush the shot as he was already facing the keeper straight and from no angle or distance. The catch was that none of the AI default tactics was so focused on creating just this one (flawed) type of chance and channeling it all to this one finisher, as there usually were wide players to provide crosses and through balls too and other players were encouraged to get into the box and finish likewise. That way conversion didn't suffer. Firstly due to the multiple chance types. And secondly due to not overly relying on that one forward who can well have an off day, be not fit or out of form.

Here are some of Suarez' real-life stats from a couple seasons ago, talking about him. http://eplindex.com/14273/best-premier-league-striker-opta-stats-analysis.html Being one of the top scoreres he converted 27% of his "cccs" and bearing in mind FM's sadly serious issue, that can be a good deal fewer than that. There are very few strikers who convert 40% or more of the situations. Now FM's ME is always going to imperfect, but that is the kind of thing the game is aiming for. At least, it should.

What old system?

The aforementioned sliders. As argued by someone, no need to go back there again and debate. Suffice it to say they aren't the solution of the problem (which is rarely new) and as means of tactical input system a good portion of the hardcore/regulars has been struggling with them too, so I struggle to see how anyone who has little time for the game (which is fine) wouldn't.

[Cougar2010]

My argument is, more simply, if Suarez is given three One on One's, it doesn't matter what the tactics are, if he's in a good shape more likely than not he'll score one of those chances. If tactics are so powerful that they influence as basic scenarios as that, then I feel they have too much influence over the game.

In general terms yes you would expect him scoring one of them but there are extra issues that arise from them being in the same match.

If he misses the first chance his mentality has an effect on the next chance. There is often more pressure on the 2nd chance because he has already missed one, does he have the hidden attributes to handle that, is he a glass half full or glass half empty type of personality. Strong personalities see it as another chance to score shaking off missing the first one while weak personalities can crack under the pressure.

If people are interested, I can upload the save a little later when I have more time.

Absolutely, more and more people are uploading saves this year which is great. It means we can look at your save the same way we view our own which tends to lead to better advice.

[thomit]

What you're instructing should be clear. As I mentioned in Clear Cut Chance, how many people know that the D-Line and Tempo automatically adjusts depending on the mentality you choose? I've seen many users build tactics, use an Attacking mentality, only to stack Higher Tempo and/or Push Higher Up on top of that because they just assumed they needed it for an attacking strategy. They had no idea it was already high. Closing down also increases the higher your mentality is. Do people know that? Judging by the amount of Hassle Opponents tactics I see, the answer is generally "No".

I agree that that there should still be room for tactical errors, but all I'm asking for is better explanations or illustrations of the existing instructions. Tactical errors should be tactical errors, not errors because of ambiguity.

Well, we used to know all that, simply because we had visual clues with the sliders. We could see what different mentalities did with them, and we could also see what the changes were when we added further instructions. We could also see that d-line got lowered if we went from a formation with no player in the DM position, to one that did. Just to mention a couple of examples. These visual clues have been taken away from us, with much frustration and cluelessness as a result. We who have played CM and FM for a long time, can go by memory - even if the sliders are gone, we can (often) remember what they did, and so we know that different mentalities sets a different d-line, for example, and so also know that it will be fairly high with some mentalities, others not. And then we also know that if we set d-line even higher, it may be too high ... and so on. Assuming that the mechanics underneath are the same even if the sliders themselves are gone. People new to the game will have no clue about any of this. And on top of that, it isn't explained very well in the manuals. But even if it were, the lack of visual clues as to what you're really doing, is a huge negative with the new game compared to older.

I want sliders back; not to be able to directly control them, but just having them as a visual clue as to: where on the scale is my d-line setting? Where on the scale (from really really slow to really really fast) is my tempo setting? And what changes if I do this and this? What happens to my general passing length if I do this? Or this? What players/positions/roles are effected if I do this or that? The sliders did a good job as visual tools. If not sliders, then something - anything - visual. It would make life easier for everyone.

[Dagenham_Dave]

Surely watching the actual match is the best 'visual tool' you can have?

[thomit]

Surely watching the actual match is the best 'visual tool' you can have?

To see if what you're trying do works or not; yes, certainly. To see what instructions you're actually giving your players on how to play; not likely. At least not to the detail that is necessary. I don't think you understand the problem: A rl manager wouldn't have a problem with knowing what he actually tells the players - we, as virtual managers, don't have the adequate tools to know exactly what it is we're saying. That's where the problem lies. We need better tools so that we can be pretty sure that what we're saying is what we actually want to say. Without the adequate tools we're not quite sure. And that's why I think sliders was a good visual aid. It was educating, and helped us (some of us, at least) to understand things better. What's wrong with understanding the details about what you're actually changing, when you change things? "Play shorter" .. do you know what this means? Really? Because when we had sliders as visual aids, we could see that this meant more than just "play shorter", and that it didn't mean the same for every player. I think many will have great difficulty seeing this from the FM 3d match screen. A real manager would just know; we don't. And the textual descriptions are far from good, and far inferior to some sort of visual aid. We need tools to see what it is we're saying. In my opinion, the sliders were good visual tools to aid us.

[grade]

Tactics - well. Enough has been said about that. There is some great threads on the T&T forum to help, more than enough users willing to put time into it and help. What people fail to realise is how gun-ho their tactics leaving more space for the AI to create and score. 99% of the time that is the problem.

Am i the only that sees this an issue? FM or CM never needed threads helps for Tactics? The old games you could easily understand the mechanics of tactics in this example. Now you need to additional read stuff to understand the mechanics of tactics, let alone the other stuff.

Like I said, FM has entered the category of 800 pages manual. I for one gives a very big rash just thinking of it. But my love for the game (perhaps the enjoyment of previous games keeps coming back with the hope of getting better, and I always will have that sentiment).

My biggest grippes with the game isn't the tactics or how complex they have become, it is wasting time with useless time,like press conferences in LLM. I really wish to see a real life LLM Press Conference or media coverage, just for fun, not as it exists kind of stuff. Or the UI being too confusing, no matter how much I play I'm still need to think where stuff are, it is not intuitive as it use to be or News Items has become pretty much a filler of waste of time (but of course that can be edited out, but still feel by default is a bit much).

These little things are not game breaking, but makes that game feel like combersome, repetitive and adding all together, takes the fun out of the game. That is why I like FMC.

For those that just say, that I say this because I want an easy game, then shame on you!

[thomit]

problem with sliders was exactley this. you thought you knew what you were changing but your sentence above says that you really had no clue. you just had an impression of having control.

the d-line slider wasn't set in stone and if you put it all the way on right didn't mean your d-line is going to stand in the middle of the pitch. neither did pushing it all the way to left mean the d-line will stand on the 16 yard box.

it was dependant on your mentality,aggression... and effectively it is the same thing now.

didn't want to be rude, just people are often blinded sticking to this or that system while in reality they are both the same and we need something completely different.

No. this was not what I meant at all. Of course you would have to put things into context, even with the sliders as a visual aid. I wouldn't know for example, that putting a DM where there wasn't one before, would actually mean a lowered d-line. Lowered from notch 12 to 9 don't mean much, but to know that it's actually lowered does. It would have taken me a long time watching the 3d-match to see this, if at all. There was no text or description anywhere that told us this. I would have liked to know. Good thing then that I could know, because the shift in the slider told me. It has nothing to do with telling players to stay on 1, 10 or 20 on the d-line slider, neither does it translate to telling players to stay on 20- 25 or 30 yards. Nothing to do with that at all. I just want to know what I change when I change it, and I want to "see" what the total of all my tactical instructions means when they're all added up. I want to know if "play shorter" means that every player tries to play shorter passing, or if it means only some players, and if it means that width is being compressed at the same time, and I want to know if tempo is changed at the same time, even if all I wanted was to play a shorter passing game. I want to know about this, before I tell my players to do it. And I want to know what "retain posession" actually does. To the team, and to each and every individual player. And so on. Why? because a real manager would know exactly what he meant when he said "retain posession". And if the players didn't quite get it, he would tell them what he meant. I simply want the same ability, and I don't have it as it is now. I lack the tools.

I want that tool that helped me understand this, back. In some form or other.

[themadsheep2001]

No. this was not what I meant at all. Of course you would have to put things into context, even with the sliders as a visual aid. I wouldn't know for example, that putting a DM where there wasn't one before, would actually mean a lower d-line. It would have taken me a long time watching the 3d-match to see this, if at all. There was no text or description anywhere that told us this. I would have liked to know. And I did know, because the shift in the slider told me. It has nothing to do witj telling players to stay on 1, 10 or 20 on the d-line slider, neither does it translate to telling players to stay on 20- 25 or 30 yards. Nothing to do with that atr all. I just want to know what I change when I change it, and I want to "see" what the total of all my tactical instructions means when they're all added up.

I want that tool that helped me understand this back. In some form or other.

I understand what you mean. The sliders were not the right way to do it, but I agree.

[thomit]

I understand what you mean. The sliders were not the right way to do it, but I agree.

Awrite. But rather sliders than nothing, I say. But if they can come up with something better, great.

I agree that changing a slider from notch 10 to notch 11 wasn't the way to go, but just as a visual aid I think they could have kept them. Meaning: Look, no touch. You "set" your tactics through tactical instructions as usual, but keep the sliders as an aid to see what actually changes when you change things, and in what direction. That's all I want.

After all; If you have a good understanding of what it is you have actually told your players, you are in a better position to analyze what you see in the 3d match, and in a better position to rectify weaknesses.

[Preud'homme]

Awrite. But rather sliders than nothing, I say. But if they can come up with something better, great.

I agree that changing a slider from notch 10 to notch 11 wasn't the way to go, but just as a visual aid I think they could have kept them. Meaning: Look, no touch. You "set" your tactics through tactical instructions as usual, but keep the sliders as an aid to see what actually changes when you change things, and in what direction. That's all I want.

After all; If you have a good understanding of what it is you have actually told your players, you are in a better position to analyze what you see in the 3d match, and in a better position to rectify weaknesses.

That last sentence says everything there is to say! I just made a thread where I tried to come up with something better http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php/394339-Why-do-we-need-fluidity-and-mentality

[themadsheep2001]

Awrite. But rather sliders than nothing, I say. But if they can come up with something better, great.

I agree that changing a slider from notch 10 to notch 11 wasn't the way to go, but just as a visual aid I think they could have kept them. Meaning: Look, no touch. You "set" your tactics through tactical instructions as usual, but keep the sliders as an aid to see what actually changes when you change things, and in what direction. That's all I want.

After all; If you have a good understanding of what it is you have actually told your players, you are in a better position to analyze what you see in the 3d match, and in a better position to rectify weaknesses.

You cant keep the sliders (touchable or not) if they interfere with the mechanics of some of the roles. Hence them disappearing.

[HUNT3R]

After all; If you have a good understanding of what it is you have actually told your players, you are in a better position to analyze what you see in the 3d match, and in a better position to rectify weaknesses.

I agree with this, but for me it's difficult to really see it from that perspective. In FM13 and FM14, I watched a lot of matches in full. A lot. I paid a lot of attention to watching what my players do. If I saw movement or something else I didn't like, I made adjustments and carefully monitored the change in behaviour. I understand the tactical system and (IMO) I have a decent idea of how tactics IRL work and I apply that to FM.

I don't struggle tactically on FM14. Maybe it's because I know what I'm instructing my players because I watched a lot of matches in full. Maybe it's because I've been able to see the sliders from previous versions and that visual aid has helped me in this FM. I have no idea. I've been trying to see it from the viewpoint of people who are struggling, but I don't always understand it.

I think it's very valuable information for us and SI, that those who are struggling tell us what they struggle with and possibly even why they aren't "getting" it. A mindless rant helps no-one.

[kris0710]

Am i the only that sees this an issue? FM or CM never needed threads helps for Tactics? The old games you could easily understand the mechanics of tactics in this example. Now you need to additional read stuff to understand the mechanics of tactics, let alone the other stuff.

Like I said, FM has entered the category of 800 pages manual. I for one gives a very big rash just thinking of it. But my love for the game (perhaps the enjoyment of previous games keeps coming back with the hope of getting better, and I always will have that sentiment).

My biggest grippes with the game isn't the tactics or how complex they have become, it is wasting time with useless time,like press conferences in LLM. I really wish to see a real life LLM Press Conference or media coverage, just for fun, not as it exists kind of stuff. Or the UI being too confusing, no matter how much I play I'm still need to think where stuff are, it is not intuitive as it use to be or News Items has become pretty much a filler of waste of time (but of course that can be edited out, but still feel by default is a bit much).

These little things are not game breaking, but makes that game feel like combersome, repetitive and adding all together, takes the fun out of the game. That is why I like FMC.

For those that just say, that I say this because I want an easy game, then shame on you!

There may have been no need to have threads to help out with tactics and stuff in the past but surely that was because the tactic section was very much the same year in year out. I knew from one edition of CM to another that a tactic i had, 4-1-2-2-1 would work. Until this version of the game i had no idea that the T&T section existed, i wish i had.

Every October the game would come out and i would set up my tactic and roll with it. Never change, never try anything new. Nothing.

I stumbled across a tweet mentioning the T&T section in November last year and thought i would check it out. Started by reading the stickied threads and it opened my eyes to a whole host of this i never even considered before. I had started a career on FM14 and was going along nicely with this 4-1-2-2-1 but all of sudden i had ideas and thoughts that have opened this game up for me. I could smack myself on the nose for not playing this way in the last 15 years to be honest. I didn't go to T&T because i was having problems, if anything it has given me more problems because i can never settle on a formation or a way to play!

The reason so many get directed to T&T now is the sliders have gone and rather than sit back and embrace a much better system (IMO, obviously not everyone's) people seem to not be understanding what does what. For me, hovering over things and reading it's description is all i need, then watching the games i can see, mostly, where i am going wrong and what instruction it is that is causing it.

[thomit]

You cant keep the sliders (touchable or not) if they interfere with the mechanics of some of the roles. Hence them disappearing.

I don't understand this. How can they interfere with anything if they just visualise the effect of your tactical instructions?

[Loki679]

And I want to know what "retain posession" actually does.

Always gave me a little chuckle when you cancel that instruction mid-game. I imagine the manager standing on the sideline going 'Right lads, give it away, give the ball away'.

[thomit]

I agree with this, but for me it's difficult to really see it from that perspective. In FM13 and FM14, I watched a lot of matches in full. A lot. I paid a lot of attention to watching what my players do. If I saw movement or something else I didn't like, I made adjustments and carefully monitored the change in behaviour. I understand the tactical system and (IMO) I have a decent idea of how tactics IRL work and I apply that to FM.

I don't struggle tactically on FM14. Maybe it's because I know what I'm instructing my players because I watched a lot of matches in full. Maybe it's because I've been able to see the sliders from previous versions and that visual aid has helped me in this FM. I have no idea. I've been trying to see it from the viewpoint of people who are struggling, but I don't always understand it.

I think it's very valuable information for us and SI, that those who are struggling tell us what they struggle with and possibly even why they aren't "getting" it. A mindless rant helps no-one.

I too have a good understanding of what it is I am asking the team - and each individual player - to do. Long experience is a part of it, but I dare say much of it stems from remembering what the sliders showed me when I changed instructions in previous versions of the game. As a consequence, I do not struggle ... a lot. But I think I would struggle a lot more if FM 14 was my first experience with the game. How can I judge what I see my left full back do on the pitch, when I don't even know what I have told him to do in the first place? Other than in a very vague manner? I have told my team to play attacking, ok ... what does that mean exactly? It means nothing, in fact, if I know nothing more than what the description of "attacking" says in the tactics setup screen. As a manager, shouldn't I know exactly what I mean when I say "play attacking" to my players, what it means to width, tempo, passing, d-line etc? The sliders gave me a good understanding of what it was that I actually instructed my team to do, both as a team and on a individual basis. At a glance. As a manager, I shouldn't have to watch matches in order to find out if I have told my left back to play short passing or more direct, should I? But because I can't immediately see what I have instructed him, after all my changes to mentality, fluidity, team and individual instructions - that's what I have to do ... and that's just not right. I remember having more than one eureka moment in earlier versions, when I found out (by looking at the sliders) that one of my players had ended up being given a too short or too direct passing instructions - when it wasn't my intention at all. You need something to tell you where you are on the map - at least I do. Sliders helped with that.

I'll shut up about this now, it's probably a lost battle anyway. I'll just say that the lack of some sort of easily understandable, tactile feedback in the form of a visual aid has made it more difficult to "understand" the tactical aspect of FM for me - not easier as I'm sure the intention was. I'm just lucky that I have played CM/FM for years and years, and so can get away with it anyway.

Edit: And I repeat: I do not want to go back to adjusting my tactics with the sliders; I think the current regime is far better - I just want to see what I'm doing.

[Svenc]

Am i the only that sees this an issue? FM or CM never needed threads helps for Tactics? The old games you could easily understand the mechanics of tactics in this example. Now you need to additional read stuff to understand the mechanics of tactics, let alone the other stuff.

Tactical discussions looked vastly different.

However concluding that people weren't looking for help is wrong. If anybody remembers, Tactical Theorems (&Frameworks) quickly became the first spreading community attempt to mold the previous ambiguous instructions into a coherent overall tactical framework -- in fact as it was adopted by SI it is in many ways a logical part of the game still now. Some picked it up, some were averse to its ideas (some no less because their interpretation(!) of previous instructions differed), but many many many were looking for help. There were very long threads almost borderlining on campaigns to completely ditch some instructions altogether, and there were even some of the most prolific forumees merely drumming up theories on what some of the instructions might actually effectively do to the match action at hand. People were looking for help back then. They were pulling their hairs out over the utmost basic of instructions, in fact. I explained my situation when I arrived above, and as said, whilst it was reasonably easy-ish to set up basic tactical ideas from the go, it took me well over a year and a thread with some equally "enlightened" then already oldtimers to realize how some options would actually interlink. But as with the old-timers then continuing to merely theorize about some more options, it wasn't all finished by then. Additionally I've seen communities spreading myth, personal opinion and downright false information which was confirmed by SI was wrong for years (though they cannot be blamed as such).

As with some of the far more ambiguous instructions of old turning into "real world" tactical concepts that the AI also uses for a slightly better tactics decision making, discussions have become different. Rather than people obsessing about notches on their sliders, or starting thread campaigns to outright get rid of instructions altogether, or sharing their far more plentiful plug&play tactics that could abuse the match simulation, it is talks about which role to best suit into their system, and which system to employ in the first place, and which player to pick for that. As the entire system has also shifted from those ambiguous instructions to "football language", more people are able to enter the debates in the first place.

There is still, as was back then, a semantic debate and some confusion, and that likewise relates to, as some have demonstrated, a lack of clarity how a) some instructions interlink. And b) what some actually do, with "philosophy/fluidity" perhaps being the prime but not only example. Ideally none of the explanations given by the new batch of "old timers" should harken back to the tactical UI that is no more, that is clear. That is both the player's as well as SI jobs though. SI as they need to better both their documentation, perhaps rethink some in-game text and add some more visual cues. And adversely to an old timer, there is a new batch of players that isn't interested in knowing how some instructions interact underneath, and may come to accept that this is knowledge they simply don't really need and worry about any. Speaking of which, it would be interesting to have one of them in threads as these. There are some confusions, but by and large, at least certainly compared to the bulk of what went previously in terms of tactics -- everything important you click onto does encourage what it says on the tin. That doesn't mean by default that you can't encourage the illogical, naturally. It equally doesn't mean it all gets carried out to the letter. You're the manager, after all, no more, no less.

[kris0710]

Not for a second was i saying people were not looking for help!

I replied to someone that feels like the game NEEDS the T&T and an 800 page manual to understand it.

[Svenc]

Not for a second was i saying people were not looking for help!

I replied to someone that feels like the game NEEDS the T&T and an 800 page manual to understand it.

That was meant to be a reply actually to actually this claim, sorry. I picked up your direct reply to that as a follow-up and went with that to continue. I'm going to edit the post to make that more clearly. If any iterations needed a " 800 pages manual to understand it", it was the older versions of the game. In fact, "Tactical Theorems & Frameworks" and similar for many provided just that. The claim that nobody was looking for help back then is just wrong. And the main reasons why there was less, or at the very least, very different debate about the tactics part of the game were something else completely.

This was not arguing that the current system to be perfect or should be the finished deal. There's many voices raised in this thread I agree to, I've personally always been of the opinion that the ambiguity of the game shouldn't be in instructions, but in how those instructions actually get interpreted by the players. Just trying to put things into perspective.

[Lyssien]

To see if what you're trying do works or not; yes, certainly. To see what instructions you're actually giving your players on how to play; not likely. At least not to the detail that is necessary. I don't think you understand the problem: A rl manager wouldn't have a problem with knowing what he actually tells the players - we, as virtual managers, don't have the adequate tools to know exactly what it is we're saying. That's where the problem lies. We need better tools so that we can be pretty sure that what we're saying is what we actually want to say. Without the adequate tools we're not quite sure. And that's why I think sliders was a good visual aid. It was educating, and helped us (some of us, at least) to understand things better. What's wrong with understanding the details about what you're actually changing, when you change things? "Play shorter" .. do you know what this means? Really? Because when we had sliders as visual aids, we could see that this meant more than just "play shorter", and that it didn't mean the same for every player. I think many will have great difficulty seeing this from the FM 3d match screen. A real manager would just know; we don't. And the textual descriptions are far from good, and far inferior to some sort of visual aid. We need tools to see what it is we're saying. In my opinion, the sliders were good visual tools to aid us.

Agree 100%.

I agree with this, but for me it's difficult to really see it from that perspective. In FM13 and FM14, I watched a lot of matches in full. A lot. I paid a lot of attention to watching what my players do. If I saw movement or something else I didn't like, I made adjustments and carefully monitored the change in behaviour. I understand the tactical system and (IMO) I have a decent idea of how tactics IRL work and I apply that to FM.

I don't struggle tactically on FM14. Maybe it's because I know what I'm instructing my players because I watched a lot of matches in full. Maybe it's because I've been able to see the sliders from previous versions and that visual aid has helped me in this FM. I have no idea. I've been trying to see it from the viewpoint of people who are struggling, but I don't always understand it.

I think it's very valuable information for us and SI, that those who are struggling tell us what they struggle with and possibly even why they aren't "getting" it. A mindless rant helps no-one.

Hunt3r, I have watched full games for 5 seasons and I am still confused with many aspects of what I am asking my players to do. The decisions of my players and the exploitation of space are still mysteries to me. When something happens, is it because I have asked for it or because my player is an idiot? Or because of his ppm? Because of his attributes, maybe? Or because of a nearby role that changes the behavior of his role? Or maybe was it because a guy on the far end of the field has a personal instruction for more direct passing?

There is always going to be complexity and ambiguity, and that's a good thing. However, that shouldn't be incompatible with knowing exactly what we are asking our players to do.

[HUNT3R]

Hunt3r, I have watched full games for 5 seasons and I am still confused with many aspects of what I am asking my players to do. The decisions of my players and the exploitation of space are still mysteries to me. When something happens, is it because I have asked for it or because my player is an idiot? Or because of his ppm? Because of his attributes, maybe? Or because of a nearby role that changes the behavior of his role? Or maybe was it because a guy on the far end of the field has a personal instruction for more direct passing?

There is always going to be complexity and ambiguity, and that's a good thing. However, that shouldn't be incompatible with knowing exactly what we are asking our players to do.

FWIW, I'd like more clarity on the instructions too. On the PI screen, it's too difficult to tell what is activated by default for the role. It's easy to tell what you've activated (the green buttons), but that's not the point.

The situation you're describing, I usually don't struggle with. If I see something happening I don't like, I consider the possible reasons why it could be happening and I fix it. I tinker so much, I can't tell you if I get it right the first time I ever encounter certain situations. I don't know if knowing there are sliders under the hood, what the sliders do and roughly where they would be for each role affects my thinking.

For FM14, especially with the new roles, I don't know what slider settings they have because they never existing in FM13. I read the description of the role and the additional description of the duty for that role. From that I was able to make my mind up if it would suit my tactical system or not. If the role played too deep, I'd add "Get Further Forward" and so on. I always start with the "vanilla" role and add instructions based on how my tactic plays out. It's rare that I add any PIs before having seen the tactic in action, apart from "Move Into Channels".

What's your history with the game? Have you played every recent version? When the tactical creator was introduced, did you use it or did you only use it now because you're forced to?

[Lyssien]

What's your history with the game? Have you played every recent version? When the tactical creator was introduced, did you use it or did you only use it now because you're forced to?

I have played all versions (extensively) up to FM09. Then jumped to FM14, so missed all that happened in between. I was never a tactical genius, but I had success with my own tactics. In FM14 I generally still have success, but the vagueness of the tactical interface adds to the frustrations when I don't. My main problem is that this specific frustration (the vagueness of tactics) is not even realistic.

[Lyssien]

The situation you're describing, I usually don't struggle with. If I see something happening I don't like, I consider the possible reasons why it could be happening and I fix it. I tinker so much, I can't tell you if I get it right the first time I ever encounter certain situations. I don't know if knowing there are sliders under the hood, what the sliders do and roughly where they would be for each role affects my thinking.

For FM14, especially with the new roles, I don't know what slider settings they have because they never existing in FM13. I read the description of the role and the additional description of the duty for that role. From that I was able to make my mind up if it would suit my tactical system or not. If the role played too deep, I'd add "Get Further Forward" and so on. I always start with the "vanilla" role and add instructions based on how my tactic plays out. It's rare that I add any PIs before having seen the tactic in action, apart from "Move Into Channels".

By the way, I tinker a lot with the instructions too. As I said I am no tactical genius, but with FM14 I put a lot of mental effort into it. Sometimes I am mentally exhausted after an important match because of my effort, so much that I have to lie on the couch to get rest for an hour (really!). It sounds funny, yes, but that's the effort I put into it. Like the OP and thomit mentioned above, I often find it very hard to translate what I have in my head into instructions, not to mention the difficulty in getting feedback from the ME and replying accordingly. I could definitely do with fewer artificial difficulties.

[thomit]

"Retain posession", guys. Explain what this instruction does to team and individual instructions.

Then describe how you know what you know. I don't need guesswork, not even qualified ones. Facts.

"You don't need to know the details of it", SI says. "We keep it vague for your own good. You just push that button when you want to retain posession". Not good enough, and Yes I bloody well need to know! I'm the manager! If I don't know the details of my own instructions, I have no business being a manager.

I could go on with other instructions, but I think this one will do for now. I have a vague memory of the similar instruction from the slider era, but have no idea if things are still the same, and have difficulties seeing what goes on just by watching the matches. But the main point is - I shouldn't have to. Not fully knowing what I have instructed my players from the get-go, is for me very frustrating, and as Lyssien pointed out, totally unrealistic too.

[HUNT3R]

Retain Possession does for me what it says on the tin. "Retain possession instructs players to prioritise keeping hold of the ball"

It does exactly that. That play safer passes in order to not give possession away. This, at the cost of incisiveness. You'll see shorter passes and more sideways/backward passes.

[Dagenham_Dave]

"Retain posession", guys. Explain what this instruction does to team and individual instructions.

Then describe how you know what you know. I don't need guesswork, not even qualified ones. Facts.

"You don't need to know the details of it", SI says. "We keep it vague for your own good. You just push that button when you want to retain posession". Not good enough, and Yes I bloody well need to know! I'm the manager! If I don't know the details of my own instructions, I have no business being a manager.

I could go on with other instructions, but I think this one will do for now. I have a vague memory of the similar instruction from the slider era, but have no idea if things are still the same, and have difficulties seeing what goes on just by watching the matches. But the main point is - I shouldn't have to. Not fully knowing what I have instructed my players from the get-go, is for me very frustrating, and as Lyssien pointed out, totally unrealistic too.

Seriously sir, it's a game. You're thinking wayyy to hard about it. Retain Posession is as straight forward an instruction as there is. In that one situation, how could that instruction be any more obvious to you?

[thomit]

I know what I see. I want to know why I see what I see. Specifically. Shorter passes is a given. How does "more sideways/backwards passes" come about? Lower mentality?

Is that all though ... any players told to cross less often? If so, or if not so, why do I not know this? I am the manager; I have given my players these instructions, but clearly I have no clue how I go about to acheive this, if asked ...

It's bonkers.

Player: "Boss, how do we acheive retaining posession more?"

Manager: "I don't know, sorry. I just push this button, I have only a vague idea what it does. It may even give some of you instructions that I don't really want, but I have no idea if it does, so I have difficulties rectifying that if that's the case"

[HUNT3R]

Does it really matter how it comes about? You're giving the instruction to prioritise keeping possession. They do it. What's the problem?

[Methos]

Does it really matter how it comes about? You're giving the instruction to prioritise keeping possession. They do it. What's the problem?

You have bad signal on your cell phone when you are at home. You ask the provider for a better signal and the provider is offering you a free transmitter on the top of your house. A few years later you are diagnosed with cancer. You solved the bad signal problem but you created as a sideeffect an even bigger one.

Is it unreasonable to ask the means he retains posession so he can understand what the he is winning or losing in the trade and if there are any (unwanted) sideeffects?

[thomit]

It's called "wanting to know why things happen", Hunter. It's why we learn at all. It's the question Newton asked himself when an apple landed on his head. It's what makes humankind evolve. But more to the point; I would know all about what happens, and why, if I was a real manager. This game currently don't let me know. That is frustrating, and it's not very realistic.

[HUNT3R]

You have bad signal on your cell phone when you are at home. You ask the provider for a better signal and the provider is offering you a free transmitter on the top of your house. A few years later you are diagnosed with cancer. You solved the bad signal problem but you created as a sideeffect an even bigger one.

Is it unreasonable to ask the means he retains posession so he can understand what the he is winning or losing in the trade and if there are any (unwanted) sideeffects?

I wish you would stop with the bad analogies. The result of the instruction is clear.

[HUNT3R]

It's called "wanting to know why things happen", Hunter. It's why we learn at all. It's the question Newton asked himself when an apple landed on his head. It's what makes humankind evolve. But more to the point; I would know all about what happens if I was a real manager. This game currently don't let me know. That is frustrating, and it's not very realistic.

Your feedback so far has been good and overall I agree that instructions should be clearer, but now you're wanting to peek under the hood again. Retain Possession could benefit from a more detailed description like what I gave earlier, but beyond that, we don't need more. Logic would tell you that passing will be shorter, tempo lowered and (I'd think) even through balls curbed. What I guess doesn't matter.

You could pick a different instruction and I may agree with you, but Retain Possession is a simple instruction and one I was able to notice in-game in my first match after implementing it. I also saw noticeably less sideways passes and slightly more urgency in getting the ball forward with it removed.

[thomit]

That's not the point. If I don't know specifically why all this happens, I am being restrained from learning more. Then you don't really ever learn how to make good tactics in FM - you just learn what boxes to tick and what buttons to push in order to win most matches (hopefully). This is deeply unsatisfactory to us that want to learn something. You could just as well say "you win matches, it works, why does it matter how and why you win?" If you don't see how deeply unsatisfactory such an outlook is to many of us, we're clearly not on the same page, Hunter. And you have also then reduced FM from being a game that tests your skill and knowhow, (at least somewhat) to a game where it's just a matter of hitting the right buttons and ticking the right boxes. I don't play games that's like that.

[themadsheep2001]

That's not the point. If I don't know specifically why all this happens, I am being restrained from learning more. Then you don't really ever learn how to make good tactics in FM - you just learn what boxes to tick and what buttons to push in order to win most matches (hopefully). This is deeply unsatisfactory to us that want to learn something. You could just as well say "you win matches, it works, why does it matter how and why you win?" If you don't see how deeply unsatisfactory such an outlook is to many of us, we're clearly not on the same page, Hunter. And you have also then reduced FM from being a game that tests your skill and knowhow, (at least somewhat) to a game where it's just a matter of hitting the right buttons and ticking the right boxes. I don't play games that's like that.

That's not true at all. Certainly does not stop you learning either. The myriad of tactical threads are a huge testament to that. There is world of difference between having much clearer instructions and underlying mechanics.

And it certainly doesn't reduce FM to a matter of hitting the right buttons at all. That's a frankly bizarre conclusion to come to.