[suggestion] Player tactical role "player's most natural role"

[Gangor]

Rather than having to change my striker's tactical instruction whenever I bring a new substitute on, it would be kinda nice if some positions could be designated "Player's most natural role" so that this task is handled automatically by my assistant when I make changes to the team

[Cougar2010]

Your tactical instructions should suit your overall tactic which means you shouldn't be changing your strikers role to his best one all the time.

If a lone striker is a DLF then changing the role to a poacher attack changes the overall setup of the tactic.

[gunner86]

This can also be done already in the Player Instructions, I believe

Not automatically, but you can assign players to perform certain roles when played in a certain position

[eriktous]

10 hours ago, Cougar2010 said:

Your tactical instructions should suit your overall tactic which means you shouldn't be changing your strikers role to his best one all the time.

If a lone striker is a DLF then changing the role to a poacher attack changes the overall setup of the tactic.

This part of the forum is intended for people to suggest things they would like to see in the game that would enhance it in their view. Posting a reply telling them that they're playing it wrong is rather useless.

[Cougar2010]

10 minutes ago, eriktous said:

This part of the forum is intended for people to suggest things they would like to see in the game that would enhance it in their view. Posting a reply telling them that they're playing it wrong is rather useless.

Its also for discussion of those ideas.

I was pointing out why this suggestion isn't a good idea.  Many users have enough problems with tactics without being spoon fed further bad decisions.

[eriktous]

Well, technically, the topic was labeled as [suggestion], so the OP didn't ask for discussion, but even disregarding this, you didn't add anything to the discussion. You made a statement implying that your way is the only right way to play the game. It isn't. Who's to say the OP isn't completely dominating the game tactically? They didn't ask for help with their tactics, they suggested a way to improve the game for them, which, by the way, isn't necessarily coming from a mistaken or flawed understanding of tactics, as acknowledged by SI in a sense, since the facility to do what they want is actually already in the game, as was helpfully pointed out by gunner86.

 

tl;dr This isn't the Tactics Forum.

[Cougar2010]

5 minutes ago, eriktous said:

Well, technically, the topic was labeled as [suggestion], so the OP didn't ask for discussion, but even disregarding this, you didn't add anything to the discussion. You made a statement implying that your way is the only right way to play the game. It isn't. Who's to say the OP isn't completely dominating the game tactically? They didn't ask for help with their tactics, they suggested a way to improve the game for them, which, by the way, isn't necessarily coming from a mistaken or flawed understanding of tactics, as acknowledged by SI in a sense, since the facility to do what they want is actually already in the game, as was helpfully pointed out by gunner86.

 

tl;dr This isn't the Tactics Forum.

I'll break it down to make it easier for you to understand:

A) Its posted on a forum with a right to reply therefore every thread is a discussion and every user of the forum is entitled to comment.

B) My reply added far more to the discussion than your two attempts.

C) My response was a response to the idea NOT the OP or his tactics.

D) My use of the words "your" & "you" was referring to FM users in general terms NOT the OP.

[herne79]

Cut the bickering out please.  Only make further posts if you have something constructive to add about the OP.  I'll simply delete anything else now.

This is an open forum and anyone is quite free to discuss the topic at hand, which is the whole point of the forum - suggest, discuss, put flesh on the bones and perhaps ultimately improve the game.

[borivoje213]

I like the idea. Whilst I agree that players' roles should be specific and flexible dependent on the situation, there are cases where 90% of the time I default a certain play to a certain role.  Like If mostly building a tactic around a very strong individual who's contribution remains unchanged.

It'd then be quicker  to have a player/players preset for their use for the majority of the time, and that way saving time by only having to switch away from it on odd occasions.

Perhaps a simply lock and unlock role check box in the selected position in a player's profile. It could then save it for that specific position and box remains unchecked for positions that don't have one selected.

[Neil Brock]

Reviewed so locked.