Open letter to SI: The Realism or Without Arrows

[Neb]

I'm actually really glad this post came about. I've been playing this game for three years now, and it wasn't until this post that I actually realized that arrows weren't doing what I thought they were. Knowing this, I can see why some of the tactics I've been playing with weren't near as effective as I thought they would be, and also why some of the players I've been using have been under-performing in the positions I've been playing them in. I'm actually looking forward to trying some new tactics and getting more into the individual position settings. Thanks to wwfan and others for explaining how the ME is actually seeing these tactical options.

I've just done exactly the same thing... the number of goals I've conceded have dropped, my wingers don't get as tired and they seem to have more of a brain as well!

All by reverting to a 4-4-2 without the wingers arrowed to run forward 1 position.

quite a revelation! Thanks!

[TriAn]

There's a third answer and it is the most honest one. I don't know. I'd have to ask one. He could certainly use the words, but as to whether he would I really have no idea. However, I will still stand by my original post and suggest my translation of player movement instructions into manager-speak is the more likely one.

First of all, thank you for anwer. It's really hard to caught you. )

Question was not about "whether he would". Question was about "can he".

There is not something supernatural in such kind of movement. May be it looks illogical or something else (depends on point of view). But it's not impossible.

Can you agree with this? (Another one Y/N, please)

[wwfan]

First of all, thank you for anwer. It's really hard to caught you. )

Question was not about "whether he would". Question was about "can he".

There is not something supernatural in such kind of movement. May be it looks illogical or something else (depends on point of view). But it's not impossible.

Can you agree with this? (Another one Y/N, please)

I am not going to disagree about what a manager can do. If a manager wishes, he can tell his MCR to robotically move to the AMR position no matter where the ball is on the pitch before looking to make more play related movements. He can also tell him to hop around on one leg for the whole of the first half. He can also ask Carlton Palmer to play as a left winger because the opposing Norweigan right winger is tall. Despite your lack of interest in the speculative, the most important question is 'would he'? Apart from the last, when, if you are Graham Taylor, the answer would be 'yes', I believe not.

So, no, it is not impossible that a manager would ask players to play in the restricted movement manner your arrowed formations ensure. However, I believe it is exceedingly unlikely that he would and that doing so would be extremely bad tactical management.

[TriAn]

Ok. Thanks again.

Now let's forget about arrows. Arrows are just instructions that tell ME there must be player (how his X & Y coordinates must change depending on time). So we can operate only with movement itself (may be unusual, may be strange, but possible IRL) which can be described by function from time.

ME is the math model of football match with certain degree of approximation. So things possible on real field must be possible on virtual field and make the same (or close to it) effect (only if it's good math model, of course).

I'm worried that movement of player which possible IRL causes big problems to ME. Ideally there should not be such input data which possible IRL but can trouble ME (i.e. all things which are possible IRL must be handled correctly by ME). The fact that such input data exists tells me that this is not only problem of arrows but of ME too. This means that ME not completely reflects a reality.

Who can give his word that it's impossible now to repeat such movement or elements of it and again cause similar problems to ME, especially, taking into consideration the idea (which I think is wrong but who cares?) that tactical freedom was not reduced and has remained in full?

PS: As you see I can perfectly do without argument about tactical freedom reduction.

PPS: Once again I apologise for quality of my English.

[wwfan]

This is a much more useful argument and one that we can move forwards with, although not by running

There can be no guarantee that nobody will work out how to break the ME. However, the odds of that happening have been significantly reduced by the rigorous testing the ME has been put through over the last 1.5 years. The removal of arrows was a key component of that process. It's actually allowed testers and developers to pin down some really tricky issues that had been hidden previously. When developing feedback about where the ME should progress, you need to have some playing time with a stable ME. The amount of time spent with a stable arrowless ME has led to some very interesting ares being targeted and reworked. With arrows, it is very unlikely they would have ever been picked up as the arrows distorted things too much.

In terms of clarifying exactly why tactical freedom has increased, lets have a look at exactly how arrows were restrictive. Let's say, for example, your DMC has just won possession. With arrows, as soon as he does so all arrowed players would robotically move towards their attacking position, thus limiting the passing options of the man in possesssion. None of them would make themselves available for the pass as the arrows restricted that type of movement. Often, that would lead to the DMC being isolated and having to make a backpass or a lump forward. This largely explains your arguments as to the paucity of the defence-attack transition phase in FM08. The longer the arrow, the longer the length of time a player is out of the move.

Without arrows, the first choice of movement for many players will be to offer support for the DMC. No player is ever forced out of the game by a rigid movement instruction. They are give flexible and play related movement options allowing play to evolve dynamically, rather than following a series of static, set moves. This enables the transition phase to progress much more smoothly. It plays much more like real football.

Your main argument is that a reworked version of arrows should have remained. My argument is that they have, in the form of reworked forward runs. Yes, we have lost the lateral 'control' but we have gained in fluidity and logical decision making of players in relation to what is happening on the pitch. Arrows totally disabled that. I'd agree that a 'player drift slider' to aid lateral movement would be advantageous and made the suggestion myself, but with improved player off the ball movement and decision making it's not that big a deal.

I've been weighing up as to whether I think it is a good or bad option recently. From watching and reading about football, it seems that, in general, this lateral movement is player specific and there is little the manager can do about their preferences. Thierry Henry loved cutting in from the left. Michael Owen is deemed by Fabio Capello not to offer enough support play movement. Managerial instruction or player choice/ability? I'm becoming more convinced it is the latter, which is why I'm all for increased importance of movement PPMs. You then construct your tactic around the players you have rather than using arrows/drift sliders to force players into doing things they never would in reality.

[gullee]

In terms of clarifying exactly why tactical freedom has increased, lets have a look at exactly how arrows were restrictive. Let's say, for example, your DMC has just won possession. With arrows, as soon as he does so all arrowed players would robotically move towards their attacking position, thus limiting the passing options of the man in possesssion. None of them would make themselves available for the pass as the arrows restricted that type of movement. Often, that would lead to the DMC being isolated and having to make a backpass or a lump forward. This largely explains your arguments as to the paucity of the defence-attack transition phase in FM08. The longer the arrow, the longer the length of time a player is out of the move.

I used to play with attacking 442 and making the arrows on the ML and the MR longer when I was a goal down or something. When doing this, I often noticed the situation you are describing where DM or CM doesn't pass to the wings. I didn't know why not until I read this thread. If I had known, I would have never used arrows at all. When I read the first post in this thread, I was convinced that people should be complaining about removal of arrows but now I think it was a wise decision. I still think that the drift bar you are suggesting should be in there because even though it is partly down to player tendency, it has to be in part up to manager instructions.

[anaheim_KB]

Amazing post, what a concept, throw out a bone and see what happens. Congrats to the poster.

We get a recipient, Sir, WWFAN, who is willing to share (and what a to your young rookies, please teke note!)

We get an in depth knowledge of how the game works far over the bounds we thought possible and perhaps we now know things that we thought that as a computer game that was not possible.

Looking at the posts we already have users who are rethinking their concepts which has to be positive.

I have always been a computer game fanatic since I got my first PC back in 1984 !!, yes that right, 24 years ago . I think that CM and now FM is the best simulation that you will experience. If you want the graphical experience then take one of the EA versions but you will be back.

Back to the topic, let me be direct, lets cuts out to the grief we are giving to Rich, I am looking at his input, not his response to the same question posted over and over again on how the whole premise of removing the arrows is so much better.

General question, how do you watch the game, do you sim in extended, key, goals, or whole match. I dont like to be blunt but if you answer other than the later then are you looking at the complete picture?

I have been playing since CM2. I must confess that I not a tactical guru and have previously used the technique of buy the player and "glory will come". It is not been easy but when I did get the perfect team and my beloved Villans got into the Champions cup it was both a high and a low. The last few releases have not been so easy so that is when I found the wonderful site of fmbritain and then I started to see the wonderful part of the game.

It is still not easy but this thread had really thrown out thoughts how we should look at Paul and Olivers brainchild, embrace it and really appreciate it.

Last point, dont kill the messager, listen and you shall be rewarded

(plug, if you want to get really interested, check out the FMBRITAIN site and then a wonderful podcast of Jordon and hist GETSACKED podcasts where youe will actually hear Rich (WWFAN) discuss the coming of the no arrows world (Episode 6 I think)

Just my thoughts, so apoligize if I have offended anyone.

[wwfan]

Aye, Episode Six is when we discuss the arrows going. Probably worth a listen for those who are worried. To be honest, I'd forgotten totally about it or I'd have linked to it earlier. It's difficult to hear though, or rather I am, so you'll need good speakers or headphones. Thanks for the reminder and for the kind words.

Personally, I think Episode 12 is the most entertaining one, although it is not related to the discussions here.

[RockyBalboa]

WWfan:

One of my favorite tactics was 4-3-2-1 (christmas tree as some call it). GK / DR-DC-DC-DL / MC-MC-MC / AMC-AMC / SC. I had the two AMC's with side arrows, so the would play as a winger in possesion.

One of the AMC's was actually a AML, but since he had an arrow to his natural position, this was no problem.

Without arrows this might not work as good as it did will it?

I know now I will be able to set instructions like cross often so he will look to run on the wing and go for a cross, but the player probably won't feel as comfortable as he used to in FM 2008, right?

Do you know if this tactic will still work without the side arrows?

[wwfan]

My belief is that any formation can work. There will need to be pretty major shifts in tactical design first, especially in relation to mentality systems, which will be far more important than previously, which will lead to frustration at first. However, from my experience, every formation can do well in the arrowless ME. Yours will be no exception.

[Magic75]

WWfan:

One of my favorite tactics was 4-3-2-1 (christmas tree as some call it). GK / DR-DC-DC-DL / MC-MC-MC / AMC-AMC / SC. I had the two AMC's with side arrows, so the would play as a winger in possesion.

One of the AMC's was actually a AML, but since he had an arrow to his natural position, this was no problem.

Do you know if this tactic will still work without the side arrows?

This is formation, not tactic.

[grokkk]

wwfan,simple question. Can irl manager tell player to move from zone of mrc to zone of amr then team gets the ball and only then he arrives in zone of amr try to find free zones with forward runs? Or, using another words, is such movement of player (then he firstly advances in strictly defined zone and only after that gets freedom to try forward runs) unrealistic and cann't be performed on field? [\QUOTE]

he will ask the mcr to get forward and wide in support of the attack. You can still that by asking him to make fwrs in a wide formation and look for crosses. I don't believe he will be told to shuffle to a specific secondary position prior to aiming to fulfil his supporting role. Football is more dynamic than that.

[\QUOTE]

What the hell does team width has to do with the movements of a specific player????

I want play narrow throw the middle,but i,as manger,want that specific MRC (strong left foot) move to right flank. I don't want him crossing,only want him to close free zone after my AMR go forward.

What the hell does mentality has to do with the movements of a player?

The mentality of the player is regulated only by his whereabouts on the field, in relation to his position of in other words, where he starts from during an attack. If his forward runs set to rare, he will maintain his position but will not shift down. The arrow just creates an illusion. I have tasted the mentality and forward runs for more than a day in FMLive and I can say for curtain that the player maintains his position.

Forward runs rarely is not equally to runs back,it's just mean that player will run rarely from his current position

wwfan – now we have a chess board on which all the pieces can move only one spot at a time. Now the game have turned from a tactical one to a game of "find a player with the best skills 2this position,and he will do a job" (that's what happens in FML, in my GW, out of top 10 managers, only two of them have a good tactic skills, the rest of the play in default and kick everyone's ass with team instruction and strong players ).

MC with a small mentality will play below the MC with big mentality but always will be there in attacks and on the defense.

Who told you that I want to play wide? I want to play narrow with short ball passes through the center, but I also want the right forward to shift to the right and cross to the center.

See above. AMC will play below an AMC with high mentality, but not an MC. I want to separate the actions of the team during attack and defense.

What the hell? Apparently, if I, as a coach, want to instruct a player to shift to a flank, I have to make him play with the other leg? And if I want him to move to the flank not for crossing the ball than it makes me no difference which of his legs is stronger?

What does "cheating, to me, it's that we can use strange arrows and AI can't" mean? Why do the options to configure tactics even exist? The human brain has more options then the AI anyway. Lets just all play with default tactics in order to be even with the AI ( its coming to that tactical individuality will be a thing of the past ).

By the way, when you play a shooting game or an RPG, you have the same options as the monsters you kill?

P.S Yes i play FMLive and i saw FM09 beta version

don't ignore my post.

wwfan i want 2see your answer

[Ched]

grokkk - can i just point something out:

Flange -

1.a projecting rim, collar, or ring on a shaft, pipe, machine housing, etc., cast or formed to give additional strength, stiffness, or supporting area, or to provide a place for the attachment of other objects.

2.a broad ridge or pair of ridges projecting from the edge of a rolled metal shape generally at right angles, in order to strengthen or stiffen it.

3.a ring or collar, usually provided with holes for bolts, and screwed or welded over the end of a tube or pipe to permit other objects to be attached to it.

4.(in plumbing) a plate or flat ring bolted to the flange at the end of a length of pipe to close the end or to connect it with the flange of another such length: blind flange; spectacle flange.

Flank -

1.the side of an animal or a person between the ribs and hip.

2.the thin piece of flesh constituting this part.

3.a slice of meat from the flank of an animal.

4.the side of anything, as of a building.

5.Military, Navy. the extreme right or left side of an army or fleet, or a subdivision of an army or fleet.

It would make your posts a little easier to read if you used flank rather than flange - i keep wondering why you want your wingers to move to the projecting rim of the pitch

NB: I've presumed you're not english - hence this post is meant in the nicest possible way

[grokkk]

grokkk - can i just point something out:

Flange -

1.a projecting rim, collar, or ring on a shaft, pipe, machine housing, etc., cast or formed to give additional strength, stiffness, or supporting area, or to provide a place for the attachment of other objects.

2.a broad ridge or pair of ridges projecting from the edge of a rolled metal shape generally at right angles, in order to strengthen or stiffen it.

3.a ring or collar, usually provided with holes for bolts, and screwed or welded over the end of a tube or pipe to permit other objects to be attached to it.

4.(in plumbing) a plate or flat ring bolted to the flange at the end of a length of pipe to close the end or to connect it with the flange of another such length: blind flange; spectacle flange.

Flank -

1.the side of an animal or a person between the ribs and hip.

2.the thin piece of flesh constituting this part.

3.a slice of meat from the flank of an animal.

4.the side of anything, as of a building.

5.Military, Navy. the extreme right or left side of an army or fleet, or a subdivision of an army or fleet.

It would make your posts a little easier to read if you used flank rather than flange - i keep wondering why you want your wingers to move to the projecting rim of the pitch

NB: I've presumed you're not english - hence this post is meant in the nicest possible way

thx a lot:D

corrected

[Mitja]

WWfan:

One of my favorite tactics was 4-3-2-1 (christmas tree as some call it). GK / DR-DC-DC-DL / MC-MC-MC / AMC-AMC / SC. I had the two AMC's with side arrows, so the would play as a winger in possesion.

One of the AMC's was actually a AML, but since he had an arrow to his natural position, this was no problem.

Without arrows this might not work as good as it did will it?

I know now I will be able to set instructions like cross often so he will look to run on the wing and go for a cross, but the player probably won't feel as comfortable as he used to in FM 2008, right?

Do you know if this tactic will still work without the side arrows?

i think quite the opposite. with free roles and higher CF, your AMC's are going to exploit free space and roam around. you won't see them move robotically to their pre-defined 2nd position. for example if the ball is on the right flange one of them will move to the wing and other will come to support him centrally or he will go into the box...they'll move depending on their ability (decisions and off the ball) not some strange instruction.

with arrows, no metter what happens on the pitch, they would just follow their instructions like robots.

[wwfan]

I'm finding it quite frustrating that I'm expected to detail exactly how I would achieve certain formation scenarios in order to prove that removing arrows is a good thing. Firstly, I can only give educated guesses about something I haven't tried. Secondly, I have constantly reassured people that everything I have tried to get working I have managed with little fuss. This is over a range of formation shapes that cover almost the entire spectrum of modern football. If it is impossible to get your player to do exactly as you want, it will be for one of three reasons:

1: It's a bug (which you can then report)

2: It is unrealistic (which you can then argue)

3: Your tactical settings are wrong (which you can then ask about)

As for the rest:

The Chessboard/FML analogy: Not true. The FML default tactics and the skills system make everybody play in roughly the same way, which I think is a weakness of the game. It is perfectly possible to overachieve quite significantly once you work out how you need to approach tactics in an arrowless ME. If you believe it is flawed from the start, you unlikely to work out it out. If you approach it with an open mind, you'll soon start getting results.

The RPG Analogy: You can't possibly be comparing FM with an RPG. In FM we need the world to be as perfectly simulated as possible. It is the entire point of the game. Giving the human manager a totally unfair edge over the AI makes the whole process of playing pointless.

Mentality and Forward Runs: The Forward Runs Rarely MC acts exactly like a barrowed MC would do in FM08. This was a key part of the testing. The FCd also drops deep with the right settings. I can't quite see how you are missing it.

[Ackter]

I made damn sure that you could get players dropping back without arrows and badgered Paul C for weeks until I was happy with it.

[peter-evo]

I made damn sure that you could get players dropping back without arrows and badgered Paul C for weeks until I was happy with it.

Wow, so you now know that you influenced an aspect of the game, therefore you are part of FM!

[weelillad]

Since I managed to read the entire thread from start to end, I figured I should at least say something about it.

The original poster started with a well written post and made a very good point. Subsequently however the quality of his posts dropped badly and he lost quite a lot of his credibility and my respect. Instead wwfan won my respect for his clear explanations that clarified the issue, and for patiently replying even to posts that were obstinate, offensive or just plain nonsense.

Let me summarise what I feel are the main points of the post. Hopefully I can then save people from going through all 418 previous posts.

1. Arrows are no longer available in the tactics screen in FM09.

2. Arrows have been badly misunderstood by many players. What they do is force your players to go to another position when the team has possession. They might be a reason why the match engine does not seem realistic (20 shots on target and no goals) and also why some of us find the individual instructions hard to understand (because they interact badly with the arrows).

3. There will be improvements to the tactical interface in FM09 to make up, somewhat, for the loss of expressivity from the removed arrows.

HOWEVER

4. Arrows are a convenient and easily understood way of giving simple tactical instructions.

5. Arrows will appeal to casual and beginner players who have no knowledge of tactics or the patience to fiddle with them.

6. Arrows are also useful for giving more specific instructions and designing more detailed tactics and set pieces.

At any rate, I think that screaming WE WANT OUR ARROWS BACK will not achieve any effect, since the developers have already decided that we're better off without them. Why not instead focus the discussion on how we think arrows can be introduced back into the game? If we can come up with something that looks like it can work well, the developers will definitely consider it. So we should try to come up with answers to these questions:

a) What will the arrows control?

b) How will they interact with the individual instructions? Which will take priority?

My idea is to have forward run arrows that mirror the sliders in individual instructions. In this way they provide a more intuitive interface for beginners and casual gamers without causing any conflicts. What I mean is to have forward arrows for each player. The length of the forward arrow is directly related to the forward runs slider. The longer the arrow, the further the slider shifts, and vice versa. The angle of the arrow can also be tied to a new slider that controls how wide/narrow the player plays.

My idea doesn't solve some of the issues that have been brought up, so please feel free to comment and contribute. But I hope such an approach to the issue will be more likely to bring some response and action from the developers.

[Ackter]

a) the arrows in FM2009 will control the frequency of forward runs (as that's what they do in FML and I doubt SI will have changed them yet again)

b) therefore they are individual instructions and will not cause conflict.

[peter-evo]

a) the arrows in FM2009 will control the frequency of forward runs (as that's what they do in FML and I doubt SI will have changed them yet again)

b) therefore they are individual instructions and will not cause conflict.

I like this, it is a better way to have arrows in the game!

[bigdunk]

a) the arrows in FM2009 will control the frequency of forward runs (as that's what they do in FML and I doubt SI will have changed them yet again)

b) therefore they are individual instructions and will not cause conflict.

Can you still click and drag the arrows out, or do you have to specify it from the forward runs slider?

[zeke]

Intresting debate. The first thread I read for a long time.

Personally I would like to have kept the arrows in the game. Those where actually quite simple to use. Nothing wrong with giving player an positional instruction on where he should be when controlling the ball and when not in possession.

I used to be very intrested and involved with tactics in the early days. (Wibble wobble) Now, I really don't bother.

Instead of removing the arrows they really should have removed the sliders. I mean 1-20 what is the point of these numerous variations. To be honest ie. I really don't see a point to adjust my defensive line from 5 to 3 in order to get something working. Personally I find these kind of adjustments ridicilious. I could live with few sliders but not this many. Sometimes you feel you are using MS Excel spreadsheet than playing a football manager game.... and that feeling really isn't good... I mean sliders for each player.. you have sliders for various team orders etc etc.

Just my 2 cents.

[peter-evo]

In the hints and tips section when saving it says something along the lines of

"in the tactics screen you can drag (something) to set or change player runs",

how could SI be suprised people mis-understood the arrows when they are putting up the wrong definition on there own hints and tips section?

[isuckatfm]

In the hints and tips section when saving it says something along the lines of

"in the tactics screen you can drag (something) to set or change player runs",

how could SI be suprised people mis-understood the arrows when they are putting up the wrong definition on there own hints and tips section?

That's just a semantics issue.

The arrows are a positional tool. When we have the ball go here. In order to get there the player makes a run. It's pre defined and deterministic.

Once he gets there his forward runs then become how he moves. So a long farrowed M R in a 442 will move to line up with the strikers. If you give him forward runs rarely then he won't move much from there (free role, CF come into it). But give him Forward Runs often and what you see is him running in behind the full back either to get onto a long ball towards the line or diagonally across the full back towards the goal for a through ball (width permitting).

Not saying a long farrowed forward runs rarely winger will do nothing, just he'll be less inclined to especially if you set his Creative Freedom low. That's my interpretation of it based on observation anyway. Might well be wrong

So playing without arrows but with high mentality, forward runs, high creative freedom you should see a bit more variety in what the winger does as opposed to him just running in a straight line to where the farrow tells him to go.

[Ackter]

Can you still click and drag the arrows out, or do you have to specify it from the forward runs slider?

Both work the same.

[TriAn]

This is a much more useful argument and one that we can move forwards with, although not by running

There can be no guarantee that nobody will work out how to break the ME. However, the odds of that happening have been significantly reduced by the rigorous testing the ME has been put through over the last 1.5 years. The removal of arrows was a key component of that process. It's actually allowed testers and developers to pin down some really tricky issues that had been hidden previously. When developing feedback about where the ME should progress, you need to have some playing time with a stable ME. The amount of time spent with a stable arrowless ME has led to some very interesting ares being targeted and reworked. With arrows, it is very unlikely they would have ever been picked up as the arrows distorted things too much.

Oh! My god! Another long long post... It's killing me... )

Now I tell you why there cann't be any guarantee. It's very simple. ) Because before removing arrows it was nessesarily needed to fix all ME problems caused by them. And only after that it was possible to remove them with such guarantee.

In terms of clarifying exactly why tactical freedom has increased, lets have a look at exactly how arrows were restrictive. Let's say, for example, your DMC has just won possession. With arrows, as soon as he does so all arrowed players would robotically move towards their attacking position, thus limiting the passing options of the man in possesssion. None of them would make themselves available for the pass as the arrows restricted that type of movement. Often, that would lead to the DMC being isolated and having to make a backpass or a lump forward. This largely explains your arguments as to the paucity of the defence-attack transition phase in FM08. The longer the arrow, the longer the length of time a player is out of the move.

Without arrows, the first choice of movement for many players will be to offer support for the DMC. No player is ever forced out of the game by a rigid movement instruction. They are give flexible and play related movement options allowing play to evolve dynamically, rather than following a series of static, set moves. This enables the transition phase to progress much more smoothly. It plays much more like real football.

Your main argument is that a reworked version of arrows should have remained. My argument is that they have, in the form of reworked forward runs. Yes, we have lost the lateral 'control' but we have gained in fluidity and logical decision making of players in relation to what is happening on the pitch. Arrows totally disabled that. I'd agree that a 'player drift slider' to aid lateral movement would be advantageous and made the suggestion myself, but with improved player off the ball movement and decision making it's not that big a deal.

I've been weighing up as to whether I think it is a good or bad option recently. From watching and reading about football, it seems that, in general, this lateral movement is player specific and there is little the manager can do about their preferences. Thierry Henry loved cutting in from the left. Michael Owen is deemed by Fabio Capello not to offer enough support play movement. Managerial instruction or player choice/ability? I'm becoming more convinced it is the latter, which is why I'm all for increased importance of movement PPMs. You then construct your tactic around the players you have rather than using arrows/drift sliders to force players into doing things they never would in reality.

I disagree with some things in this post but I don't want to discuss tactical freedom now. I hope we will return to this quesion next week.

Since I managed to read the entire thread from start to end, I figured I should at least say something about it.

The original poster started with a well written post and made a very good point. Subsequently however the quality of his posts dropped badly and he lost quite a lot of his credibility and my respect. Instead wwfan won my respect for his clear explanations that clarified the issue, and for patiently replying even to posts that were obstinate, offensive or just plain nonsense.

There is small misunderstanding. Original post it the Russian language was written by me. Of course I consulted with others, in particular with shevelevee and grokk. Then it was translated by grokk and posted by shevelevee. So it is a result of collective creativity.

Also you must keep in mind that it's very difficult to defend our possition because of language barrier. There are many things which are absolutely obvious to us but for some reasons do not find understanding here. That is why it is possible to note some loss of patience from our side.

[shevelevee]

wwfan and others. You said, that arrows are unrealistic, and they are replaced with forward runs. And forward runs are realistic?

So, with Forward Runs I can ask DL with ultradefensive mentality try forward runs often. How will this work in new system? Will "FR often" be rejected by mentality or creative freedom? If yes, the same situation - it seems very strange, if I can ask player to try forward runs often, and he will try (with ULTRAdefensive mentality).

If no, and he will not try, how can I ask my defender with ultradefensive mentality and minimum creative freedom to go on WBL position?

[Ackter]

You can ask him to do that - and he'll make forward runs from a very deep position.

[shevelevee]

Another one point - do you know that Forward Runs work only when player is without ball?

[Ackter]

Well obviously.

Otherwise there'd be no need for Run With Ball.

[wwfan]

Now I tell you why there cann't be any guarantee. It's very simple. ) Because before removing arrows it was nessesarily needed to fix all ME problems caused by them. And only after that it was possible to remove them with such guarantee.

If you think that, then your really, really don't understand how the process works.

You can ask him to do that - and he'll make forward runs from a very deep position.

And belatedly, as he will be disinclined to take risks. Everything will interlink much more obviously than before. IF your FB isn't getting into the position you want, when you want, then you will need to increase his mentality so he becomes more adventurous in his decision making and operates higher up the pitch, rather than just assigning him an arrow forcing him to do it.

[shevelevee]

Another one point: what will the player do. if

Forward Runs Often

Run with ball rarely

Cross from byline

Individual Creative Freedom minimal

He will stop playing, because don't understand instructions?

[Ackter]

Oh and the old arrows only worked without the ball as well.

The more you post the more obvious it is that you've massively mistaken almost every aspect of how tactics have worked in the past.

[Ackter]

Another one point: what will the player do. if

Forward Runs Often

Run with ball rarely

Cross from byline

Individual Creative Freedom minimal

When his team is in possession and he does not have the ball, he will make forward runs into space.

When he receives the ball he will most likely pass it to someone else because you've given him contradictory RwB/Crossing instructions.

He will however attempt to get into space near the byline so that he can cross.

[shevelevee]

If we can give player contradictory instructions without arrows, what's the sense of removing arrows? People will use strange combinations of FR, Run with ball, CF, Cross from, Mentality, Swap Position... But people can't ask their right-footed right winger cuts inside...

[Ackter]

You couldn't ask your right footed right winger to cut inside in FM08.

In FM09 he will cut inside if that's the best option for him.

[shevelevee]

Oh and the old arrows only worked without the ball as well.

The more you post the more obvious it is that you've massively mistaken almost every aspect of how tactics have worked in the past.

Sorry, I understand very well. But in contrast to you I don't want to say "All will be better without arrows"

[TriAn]

If you think that, then your really, really don't understand how the process works.

I forgot. Only very little steps are welcomed. )

Ok. I'll explain my point of view in detail later and I afraid once again you will not be able to disagree with me.

PS: It is not necessary to say constantly that someone does not know something. It is not polite.

[shevelevee]

You couldn't ask your right footed right winger to cut inside in FM08.

In FM09 he will cut inside if that's the best option for him.

If you don't believe me, believe your own eyes, and please, try to play FM08. I saw my right winger in center every time when my team have possesion, if I used arrows.

[Ackter]

Sorry, I understand very well. But in contrast to you I don't want to say "All will be better without arrows"

But you have clearly misunderstood the fundamentals of what the arrows actually did - and instead of trying to understand you're just putting your fingers in your ears and refusing to even try and understand what we're explaining to you.

[Ackter]

If you don't believe me, believe your own eyes, and please, try to play FM08. I saw my right winger in center every time when my team have possesion, if I used arrows.

I give up, you're wasting everyone's time now.

[shevelevee]

***** I need to record video from my matches to prove my words?

[Ackter]

Go back through this thread and pay particular attention to wwfan where he has painstakingly and patiently explained, time and time again, that what you were seeing is not what you think was happening.

[shevelevee]

Ok, I'm understand. I'm blind. When I see player on AMC position, he isn't on AMC positon.

[Ackter]

He wasn't a winger cutting inside.

[wwfan]

I forgot. Only very little steps are welcomed. )

Ok. I'll explain my point of view in detail later and I afraid once again you will not be able to disagree with me.

PS: It is not necessary to say constantly that someone does not know something. It is not polite.

How many other ways can I explain things without being understood before I'm forced to be explicit in your being wrong? I've tried my hardest to explain in detail why and how things have been changed. When this is countered by uninformed opinion about how we should have proceeded in ME development, it is exceedingly frustrating. There are two considerations regarding how you would have liked things to proceed:

1: The likelihood, after considerable experience in trying, that the arrows as they were would never work, no matter how much time was spent on the ME, simply because they were fundamentally flawed from the start

2: If they were made to work perfectly (which, as stated many times, I believe to be impossible due to their fundamental rigidity and conflict with dynamic and decision based instructions), removing them would then make all the time taken to achieve it totally pointless

Removing them enabled the ME to improve in leaps and bounds never previously experienced and the football far, far more dynamic and fluid.

[Althaz]

If we can give player contradictory instructions without arrows, what's the sense of removing arrows? People will use strange combinations of FR, Run with ball, CF, Cross from, Mentality, Swap Position... But people can't ask their right-footed right winger cuts inside...

To get your winger to cut inside you use Cross Rarely and to get a midfielder to drift wide you use Cross Often. Use in conjunction with free roles and possibly high CF and of course the appropriate team width. This is the same as FM08.

A sarrow to AMC from your winger will not tell him to cut inside, it'll tell him to play as an AMC who defends out wide. This should happen without you having to give any instructions (unless there's a player out there already, in which case he should maintain position), which is presumably what will happen with the improved player dynacism (is that a word?) and movement of the FM09 ME. If you want a winger that cuts inside with the improved match engine then it'll be more possible, specifically because if you want him to do it more than instructions allow, you'll be able to assign him PPMs. Just like in real life he won't graft to your system of playing immediately, it'll take a few matches for his instincts to direct him inside rather than down the line. Welcome to Football Manager .

[Ackter]

It'll happen if there's space there for it to happen in.

Of course sometimes it'll happen anyway, but that's typical of footballers.

[wwfan]

Let's look at this in the simplest terms possible. In real life, what is important on a football pitch:

1: Runs

2: Arrows