Open letter to SI: The Realism or Without Arrows

[shevelevee]

oh, it's so hard to talk with usres who think that they know everything about FM, but in fact they've only read arcticles on some forums...

Ok, if you think that "he play as AMC who defends out wide", can you say that in defence this AMC will usually play on right flang? (same example with farrow from MR to AMC)

[wwfan]

Shevelevee, if you are referring to Ackter and I, you couldn't be further off the mark. Both of us have played significant roles in ME feedback and development over the last 3 years. We do actually know what we are talking about.

[shevelevee]

Threre aren't arrows on football pitch, but before I'll say about runs, tell what do you mean. Short run without the ball to move on position, where player can get ball, short or long run with or without the ball to create an additional support for defence or attack, or on left or right flang or in center using free players, or it is special move from one position to another one unique player in team to disbalance opposite defence, or? What does it mean in English?

Arrows in FM is method for changing direction of player moves on field according manager instructions in overall, during the match, or period of match

[shevelevee]

And what? I must say that you're Gods, if you think so? You can't understand your mistakes, because you're too good for this? By the way I told about people, who read your article, wwfan, and think that this is absolutely and the last true. And can't have any points of view, except what they have read in articles...

[Ackter]

Arrows in FM is method for changing direction of player moves on field according manager instructions in overall, during the match, or period of match

No it wasn't - the arrows changed the type of player they were.

[shevelevee]

No it wasn't - the arrows changed the type of player they were.

When player have position ML and have no arrows, he moves in one directions. When player have position ML and arrow to AMR, he change directions of his moves. Or not?

[Ackter]

An ML with no arrows moves in all directions.

An ML with an arrow to AMR moves to AMR but does absolutely nothing on the way there., and by the time he's got there it's usually too late to do anything before he has to run back to ML again.

[Althaz]

oh, it's so hard to talk with usres who think that they know everything about FM, but in fact they've only read arcticles on some forums...

Ok, if you think that "he play as AMC who defends out wide", can you say that in defence this AMC will usually play on right flang? (same example with farrow from MR to AMC)

That's what the arrows are supposed to do, yes. In real life if there is a defensive hole on the right side and your AMCr has high enough closing down, has good decisions and positioning, he'll defend high-up on the right flank. Or at least, that's what should happen. Marking and closing down is flawed in FM08, but we have been assured that'll be fixed. With the latter you'll probably need lower mentality and forward runs set to rarely. You can't set it up exactly of course, as in real life I suspect some of these things are taken care of with common sense, which I am hoping players in FM09 possess. What most people think the arrows to do (direct MR to attack through the centre of the park) can more easily be handled.

Of course, like you I have not played FM09, I have only played previous FM titles, however, it appears however unlike you I know what the arrows were actually supposed to do, which is reposition your players, not give them direction on the pitch.

There are still some things I suspect you'll lose with arrows (notably sarrows and barrows, though the latter shouldn't be nessecary if movement has been improved propperly). The most notable is an MC or AMC that drifts wide not to cross, but to keep possession and exchange short passes with the central players. My hope is that there is a PPM "Drifts Wide" which can be applied to to central midfielders and strikers, though we'll have to wait and see on that. That would also allow you to play with strikers who drift wide so as to play in the attacking midfielders.

[Ackter]

Barrows have definitly not been lost, they've been improved on. My FML DM plays better now than he did when he had a barrow.

Sarrows are harder and their success is based more on the quality of player and space available (which is how it is in real life).

[wwfan]

And what? I must say that you're Gods, if you think so? You can't understand your mistakes, because you're too good for this? By the way I told about people, who read your article, wwfan, and think that this is absolutely and the last true. And can't have any points of view, except what they have read in articles...

They were not mistakes. The decision to remove arrows has improved the ME and tactical control for almost everyone who has played for any length of time with the arrowless ME. The only reason you are not seeing this is because you are clinging on to your own misunderstanding of what arrows were. I'm not trying to say that is bad. 90% of people saw arrows that way. That is a fault in SI's descriptions. However, not listening to us when we explain in some detail what they really did and why they were removed with a continuous diatribe about how your vision of arrows is the right one is getting us nowhere.

I completely understand how you want arrows to have worked. Apart from the precise contol of lateral movement (i.e winger moves to central midfield) what you are asking for is exactly how forward runs work. You either haven't understod this, or are so upset about the loss of lateral control, despite it not ever having worked the way you believed it to, that you are letting it obscure everything else you read.

[Alekos]

Since the removal of the arrows I hear from you guys saying all the time to give more Creative Freedom to players...

It is supposed that you give more CF to good players that have high flair and creativity...

If I start a game with a semi-pro team that the average flair of players is 2 then how am I supposed to give them CF to decide what to do and how they will move on the pitch??

In all my FM games I rarely give CF to my players because I want them to follow my tactics as said...

So removal of arrows means more CF to players???

That seems to be so random...

The game is not for giving CF to players hoping that they will do the impossible and maybe do what you want them to do...

So that's why removal of arrows worries me a bit...

[shevelevee]

An ML with no arrows moves in all directions.

An ML with an arrow to AMR moves to AMR but does absolutely nothing on the way there., and by the time he's got there it's usually too late to do anything before he has to run back to ML again.

But he move to center, and that give it a chance to him to destroy my defence with this move (as in real life), chance to get ball in center and create goal chances (as in real life) and he can make positional mistakes when he goes bach to another his position (ML) (as in real life)!

If you've exer see how professional football team trained, when manager learn players how to play in defence, or midfield, or attack, they show for every players where he play, show for every player his position in this situation. He don't ask very players where to run, he show them their position in various situation on the field.

[shevelevee]

They were not mistakes. The decision to remove arrows has improved the ME and tactical control for almost everyone who has played for any length of time with the arrowless ME. The only reason you are not seeing this is because you are clinging on to your own misunderstanding of what arrows were. I'm not trying to say that is bad. 90% of people saw arrows that way. That is a fault in SI's descriptions. However, not listening to us when we explain in some detail what they really did and why they were removed with a continuous diatribe about how your vision of arrows is the right one is getting us nowhere.

I completely understand how you want arrows to have worked. Apart from the precise contol of lateral movement (i.e winger moves to central midfield) what you are asking for is exactly how forward runs work. You either haven't understod this, or are so upset about the loss of lateral control, despite it not ever having worked the way you believed it to, that you are letting it obscure everything else you read.

Why do you think that only your point of view is absolutely right?

[Ackter]

I'm out.

This really is just a big trolling session now.

[wwfan]

OK. I give up. You're right. Removing arrows was the worst thing we have ever done to the engine. It makes the tactical module absolutely useless and I'll admit I've spent the last nine months just watching moving dots over which I have no control at all. Everything I've said about the new ME allowing you more tactical control has been a lie to cover how ashamed I am about the mistake to get rid of arrows. They did work exactly the way you have always used them and it is just my pigheaded arrogance stopping me from seeing that.

As you are seemingly unable to even see the middle ground from where you are, we may as well just ignore its existence.

[Ackter]

You may want to clarify that as some people won't spot the sarcasm.

[wwfan]

You know what, Marc, I can't really be bothered.

Let's put this into perspective. You and I have clashed and disagreed about ME development and changes in the past. We still do. However, when I disagree with you I don't tell you flat out that your feedback is a mistake. I explain why I disagree and we usually reach some kind of middle ground. Here, I feel I have been remarkably concise and patient, but it has got me absolutely nowhere. It may be a language issue, but nothing seems to have got through. It's like arguing with a brick wall.

The only good thing about the thread was the few users who have begun to see how they have misunderstood things previously and are enjoying FM much more because of it. I had hoped it would turn into an interesting discussion about how runs have replaced arrows. However, it is still just about 'no arrows = big mistake'. Totally pointless!

[shevelevee]

Ok, let's close topic and play in Illusion of Football Manager, or Wacth the Best Matches (ex-FM).

Btw, first of all this topic have name: Open letter to SI, and I don't know guys, why did you decide to prove me that I'm wrong with my start post. Relax, and wait, when somebody can give us more constructive ideas, not only "arrows were removed because you don't understand what they were in fact and you are troll, and because it give us more freedom, and the new ME looks greate"

Thanks for this.

[tomtuck01]

shevelevee

Why dont you just wait for the demo to come out so you can play with the new ME yourself before making such proposterous judgments about it?

wwfan and Ackter have both used the new match engine and know much more about it than either you or me. Take what they are saying on board, try out the demo when it's released, and then if you dont like how the new ME plays, you will atleast have some experience of your own on which to base your currently pointless moaning's.

[shevelevee]

I have used new ME too, and I said about this 5 times at least.

[Peter Henchey]

Your frustration is understandable, but the input from the two of you in this thread has been invaluable. I've been discouraged in large by the somewhat vague understanding I've had in the past in terms of the conflict of instructions and tactical arrows: having a far-sided midfielder with an arrow moving forward one or two spaces seemed like what a winger would do, but its always felt like I was putting strict confines on a player whenever I used them. The "robot" comment someone made seems to exactly describe it, which was also my issue with the WB/WOB screen going back to CM 01/02. I'm very excited at the promise of being able to set a general formation and using stronger instructions that guide players in their actions, but not confine them like arrows seem to have in the past. Shame such a great discussion had to get bogged down in misunderstanding, but I really feel you have made a strong case for what can be termed a somewhat radical, but decisive move on SI's part.

[wwfan]

What you still don't get, shevelevee, when it comes to explaining about ME and tactics development, Ackter and I can give you better information and feedback than any SI employee bar PaulC. We are simply more directly involved in it. I can guarantee you that Paul will tell you exactly the same as I have. Word for word.

You are waiting for something that won't happen because you have already received the best feedback you are likely to get. A part of my role as Tactical Mod is to give feedback and reassurance on all this stuff. Ackter just does it out of the kindness of his heart. As I was arguably the key player in the removal of arrows and the original conversation about their removal, you are not going to get a better answer than the one I give.

[shevelevee]

And you, wwfan, you put our lovely game in wrong direction! I don't want to play only with standart formation. A lot of your articles wrote about 4-4-2, 4-2-3-1 may be. But you don't see something special, unfortunately. If you want to be The Face of The FM tactic, you must experiement with match engine, see how it work when people whant to breake him, and ask SI (as the member of the FM community) to tune all possible aspects, to develop match engine, not to limit our possibility. You can say that arrows don't work properly - why don't make them working properly? Why remove them, answer my qustion, or I will decide that you're cannot answer me? If arrows aren't "runs", why arrows can't be developed and tuned better, why removed! You forgot about thousands of people who loves these... ok, let's say illusion of control, but they love this illusion as Guys Baltar loves Caprica in BSG... - you forgot about this people and onle remeber about your mind. Why?

[wwfan]

That statement sums up why this thread has developed into a farce.

Arrows could never work properly without their functionality becoming part of forward runs. This was discussed in depth and for a long time. Removing arrows was not my decision. It was made because removing them significantly improved the ME, tactical control and the overall playing experience. This is not just my opinion, but the opinion of many, including PaulC.

Arrows were removed for the long-term good of the game, not to satisfy the personal whim of one or two people. Thinking otherwise is hugely disrespectful to the development process. We recognised it would cause angst amongst a certain section of the user base, but that in the long run it was the best direction for the ME.

Arrows can't be tuned to be made better because they inherently unbalanced the ME. There was no solution that worked other than changing their usage to be the same as runs. Making them work properly made them into runs. Hence, arrows and runs became one and the same thing. If you don't get that, after all this time, then I don't see how we can go on.

[Ediocy]

Hehe, I've decided to drop another post after all. After observing the downward spiral of this conversation that was initiated by the obtuseness of the original poster (and some of his mates), I really commiserate with you Wwfan.

As a few others have already mentioned earlier in this thread, you've taken painstaking steps to help shed light on this tricky to explain matter and yet the most you have gotten with this crew is a simple rejection of your explanations with disparaging remarks. These people simply do not pick up and process what has been posted by yourself, Ackter and others who have tried to point the light out for them. And on that note, a "thank you" to yourself and Ackter for the insights into the development process as well as for your easy-to-understand explanations on this subject matter.

We could assume that it might be down to the language barrier, but when you read their posts, it does not give too much away that English is a second/third language to them. How they have presented their posts have been fluent enough, save for the occasional mis-spellings that is negligible. Rather, I am appalled by the lack of comprehension shown. It seems like a case of grasping their opinions tightly and battering away at all others blindly.

And just one question I would like to throw out there that may have something to do with why the original poster and his friends are so deeply concerned about Arrows and in particular Sarrows.

Players that drift around a pitch in real life, do they have a "fixed" position and then told to drift to cover other parts of the pitch according to the play, or are they assigned two or more positions to cover simultaneously by the coach?

My own opinion is the former. A player is given an initial position and then given a set of instructions based on how the play unfolds on the pitch. Everything should be relative to where the ball is and not specific spots on the ground per se.

So if a centre midfielder is to cover a portion of the right flank when joining in attack, he is ultimately still a centre midfielder and is thus given instructions to provide attacking support on his right whenever possible. He is not told to play as both a centre midfielder and a right midfielder at the same time. If at any point in the game, there is a need to overload the opposition on the right flank, he will then be instructed to take on the role of a right midfielder more actively and thus focus mainly on the right instead of the centre which he had been doing so up till that point.

I suspect the fundamental difference in opinions of both camps of this argument may lie in this. The original poster seems to be of the opinion that players are told to play in two or more positions simultaneously on the pitch and thus, even though the Arrows have been thus far, misrepresentations of actual run movement, to him it is behaving exactly how he thinks it should.

[Ayanami80]

Hi all, long time FM player and frequent lurker on the forums, but I thought I needed to chip in on this thread. I must say I feel sorry for WWfan, who has taken time to reply to questions posted on the boards and gets attacked for being responsible for what some forum members percieve to be a knee jerk reaction to the removal of the arrow system.

Just from reading this thread, it is obvious that the arrow concept caused nothing but confusion and contradictory tactics; and also on a smaller scale, exploitation tactics.

I sense a lot of fear as well from patrons who feel their tactics with arrows will become redundant with FM09 (as it obviously will)....why don't we all see that as a challenge rather than as an affront?

I see the new system that is being proposed as giving the manager more tactical control over players rather than expecting them to stay within the rigid formations that the arrow system defined.

"And you, wwfan, you put our lovely game in wrong direction! I don't want to play only with standart formation. A lot of your articles wrote about 4-4-2, 4-2-3-1 may be. But you don't see something special, unfortunately. If you want to be The Face of The FM tactic, you must experiement with match engine, see how it work when people whant to breake him, and ask SI (as the member of the FM community) to tune all possible aspects, to develop match engine, not to limit our possibility. You can say that arrows don't work properly - why don't make them working properly? Why remove them, answer my qustion, or I will decide that you're cannot answer me? If arrows aren't "runs", why arrows can't be developed and tuned better, why removed! You forgot about thousands of people who loves these... ok, let's say illusion of control, but they love this illusion as Guys Baltar loves Caprica in BSG... - you forgot about this people and onle remeber about your mind. Why?"

Because SI decided, after lots of internal testing, that arrows will not be a part of FM09. That is the simple answer. The game does not cater for just you. Why don't you embrace it and see that the new tactical system will allow for a lot more creative control? As WWfan said, you can still do the job of the "Arrow" by adjusting creative freedom, FWR etc etc.

[Amaroq]

wwfan, you may not have convinced the O.P. but you've laid to rest any concerns that I've had about the removal of arrows - and convinced me to rework my existing FM'08 formations in an arrowless fashion whilst anticipating the demo.

Hope you don't feel you've been wasting your time, because I've gotten a lot of value from the discussion.

[shevelevee]

As WWfan said, you can still do the job of the "Arrow" by adjusting creative freedom, FWR etc etc.

As I said, I can't ask my ML move to AMCR position for example, if my ML is left footed.

[anaheim_KB]

And you, wwfan, you put our lovely game in wrong direction! I don't want to play only with standart formation. A lot of your articles wrote about 4-4-2, 4-2-3-1 may be. But you don't see something special, unfortunately. If you want to be The Face of The FM tactic, you must experiement with match engine, see how it work when people whant to breake him, and ask SI (as the member of the FM community) to tune all possible aspects, to develop match engine, not to limit our possibility. You can say that arrows don't work properly - why don't make them working properly? Why remove them, answer my qustion, or I will decide that you're cannot answer me? If arrows aren't "runs", why arrows can't be developed and tuned better, why removed! You forgot about thousands of people who loves these... ok, let's say illusion of control, but they love this illusion as Guys Baltar loves Caprica in BSG... - you forgot about this people and onle remeber about your mind. Why?

I am sorry, but lets step back and try to take the emotions out of this. We have had arguments for and against. However the developer of the concept, went with their decision. I repeat this, the developer of the concept amended his initial thought on the arrows concept. Does that say anything regarding the knowledge of the people giving advise?

This has been such a wonderful thread that I for one thing am really excited about playing FM 2009. I have gained such an insight into how FM really works from the postings.

Thanks again to all that posted and yes we all would like to play the same way, have the same options but remember this is Paul and Ol's baby, so they have a much bigger stake and somehow I will defer to their judgement any day.

What else can I say....perhaps lets wait from the demo..............unless we can more gems from WWFAN and ACKTER

http://community.sigames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[Ediocy]

As I said, I can't ask my ML move to AMCR position for example, if my ML is left footed.

I highly doubt coaches would tell their player to "right lad, get to this spot (demarcated AMCR) on the ground as often as possible when the play is on". In real life, as in game, I would presume that a certain degree of free reign is given, so the combination of forward runs, run with ball, mentality and free role as well as the player's vision and decision-making should sufficiently simulate a real life scenario.

[Mitja]

As I said, I can't ask my ML move to AMCR position for example, if my ML is left footed.

it's your tactics mate why would you do that anyway?

more I read your posts, more feeling I get you're 16 yo at most.

[Ayanami80]

As I said, I can't ask my ML move to AMCR position for example, if my ML is left footed.

As you also can't make your left fullback function as a right winger in attack.

You can't make your right fullback play as a auxiliary striker/target man in attack.

We can all quote examples.

What the new system appears to do is, it removes the ambiguity regarding the illusion that arrows meant FORWARD RUNS and allows you to tell the player "Hey, use your brain and be a bit more creative. If you feel the time is right, get in X position". All within reasonable limits of course.

[grokkk]

As WWfan said, you can still do the job of the "Arrow" by adjusting creative freedom, FWR etc etc.

no u can't

4example

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?

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.

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.

and amazing answer

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)

ok,i waite then all of you will try a new demo,and try to create some IRL formation(brasilian system,Hidding system etc).

And no, MLC with defensive mentality and forward runs rarely don't move to DMLC position(i have DMRC too,it's very easy 2compare). I try it a lot of time in FML

[Dukesh]

hm.. it is very hard to read this thread at all, so i can repeat, what have guys form fmfan.ru said already. As I see the problem.

1. FML

There will be a lot of newbies with FML release. Most of them guys who played FIFA or PES, yesterday and decided that they are pretty cool for club manage. These guys are so lazy for reading some tactical books or something like that. Most of them under 21 and the history of football is terra inkognita for them. SI politics is pretty simple. SI doesn't want that guys would quit the game after 2-3 weeks of play, losing to more expirienced players. So, removing arrows - is the try to level all players in FML. Actually, I am laughing, when I read that removing arrows have done for more realism. WTF realism in FML? Playing thousands of games per season is realistic? Nice joke, guys.

2. FM09. It is fact, that in all history of CM/FM series were "cheat tactics". But it is fact, that managers, who exploited ME never used them in single games - it is boring by the way.

I play CM/FM series since 1997. And all the time i see as SI try to hypnose the user by their vision of football. I remember "cheat" Everton, I remember 4-3-1-2 by Barcelona, I remember 3-5-2 when all progressive managers used this tactics, and so on.. Same thing here in FM09. SI have their own football vision and users have to accept that.

My position. I wanna play, I wanna create, this is MY game, and only I decide what MY players have to do. If I say to my AMR to go inside, and he doesn't do it or does it rarely, I will not use this player, cause he ignores my instruction. I don't want the game that depends of players' creativity, except my playmaker.

Sorry for bad English

[Ayanami80]

As I said, I can't ask my ML move to AMCR position for example, if my ML is left footed.

As you also can't make your left fullback function as a right winger in attack.

You can't make your right fullback play as a auxiliary striker/target man in attack.

We can all quote examples.

What the new system appears to do is, it removes the ambiguity regarding the illusion that arrows meant FORWARD RUNS and allows you to tell the player "Hey, use your brain and be a bit more creative. If you feel the time is right, get in X position". All within reasonable limits of course.

hm.. it is very hard to read this thread at all, so i can repeat, what have guys form fmfan.ru said already. As I see the problem.

1. FML

There will be a lot of newbies with FML release. Most of them guys who played FIFA or PES, yesterday and decided that they are pretty cool for club manage. These guys are so lazy for reading some tactical books or something like that. Most of them under 21 and the history of football is terra inkognita for them. SI politics is pretty simple. SI doesn't want that guys would quit the game after 2-3 weeks of play, losing to more expirienced players. So, removing arrows - is the try to level all players in FML. Actually, I am laughing, when I read that removing arrows have done for more realism. WTF realism in FML? Playing thousands of games per season is realistic? Nice joke, guys.

2. FM09. It is fact, that in all history of CM/FM series were "cheat tactics". But it is fact, that managers, who exploited ME never used them in single games - it is boring by the way.

I play CM/FM series since 1997. And all the time i see as SI try to hypnose the user by their vision of football. I remember "cheat" Everton, I remember 4-3-1-2 by Barcelona, I remember 3-5-2 when all progressive managers used this tactics, and so on.. Same thing here in FM09. SI have their own football vision and users have to accept that.

My position. I wanna play, I wanna create, this is MY game, and only I decide what MY players have to do. If I say to my AMR to go inside, and he doesn't do it or does it rarely, I will not use this player, cause he ignores my instruction. I don't want the game that depends of players' creativity, except my playmaker.

Sorry for bad English

Wait a minute.

So you're saying all previous FM games were utilising "cheats", then you complain about the removal of the arrows, which as we all know formed the basis of those so called diablo tactics?

You say that removing the arrows cater for the "inexperienced players", yet you say that you do not want a game that depends on the individual statistics for a player such as creativity, off the ball, team work, work rate etc etc?

Yeah you can tell your players what to do in a game, as managers do in real life, but that does not mean they do what you tell them. It all comes down to their level of intelligence, tactical nous, reading of the game etc etc. You can yell and scream at your players all you want, but when it comes down to it, if you have a poor player, sometimes they will not listen to your instructions. Try playing a lower league team and tear your hair out and your DM fails to pick up AMCs despite you telling them to mark tightly etc. That is a beauty of FM. I do not want a game where I rote learn a tactic and win every time...so boring.

If you want a game where you control what they do, EVERY SINGLE TIME and they follow your instructions, then try out something like SIMS 2.

[Dukesh]

I want to say that all non-arrows players decide what they have to do in depenings their creativity, decisions stats.

Some examples from real life.

Do you know any player in Getafe 2007-2008 or Hull City 2008-2009 with hight qulity of these stats? Or maybe in Rangers 2007-2008. But that teams are playing the football. Nice football by the way. Cause pleayers do exactly what head coach has said..

[grokkk]

Wait a minute.

So you're saying all previous FM games were utilising "cheats", then you complain about the removal of the arrows, which as we all know formed the basis of those so called diablo tactics?

You say that removing the arrows cater for the "inexperienced players", yet you say that you do not want a game that depends on the individual statistics for a player such as creativity, off the ball, team work, work rate etc etc?

Yeah you can tell your players what to do in a game, as managers do in real life, but that does not mean they do what you tell them. It all comes down to their level of intelligence, tactical nous, reading of the game etc etc. You can yell and scream at your players all you want, but when it comes down to it, if you have a poor player, sometimes they will not listen to your instructions. Try playing a lower league team and tear your hair out and your DM fails to pick up AMCs despite you telling them to mark tightly etc. That is a beauty of FM. I do not want a game where I rote learn a tactic and win every time...so boring.

If you want a game where you control what they do, EVERY SINGLE TIME and they follow your instructions, then try out something like SIMS 2.

i don't want a game where i can win only with buying good player(with good skills creativity, off the ball, team work, work rate etc)

FML is a good example 4this

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 ).

[Dukesh]

don't want a game where i can win only with buying good player(with good skills creativity, off the ball, team work, work rate etc)

That exactly i wanted to say. Thanx, Vlad

[shevelevee]

it's your tactics mate why would you do that anyway?

more I read your posts, more feeling I get you're 16 yo at most.

Because manager IRL can ask his players about everything, the only limit is common sence. And I whant to have this ability, as I had ability to set player positions as in CM01-02 for example - with or without ball

We're talking about Football Managerm and serious change in Tactic Control, not about me or you, and this is very strnage, when mods let you abuse me. (may be because you support mods' poin of view?)

But if you whant to know, I'm russian policeman, officer, and I think that you don't know anything about football tactics in real life.

[wwfan]

don't want a game where i can win only with buying good player(with good skills creativity, off the ball, team work, work rate etc)

Nor do I. However, I don't want a game in which, simply by drawing a few arrows, you create a system that breaks the ME and allows very poor teams to heavily overachieve. It is all about creating a good balance.

[Ayanami80]

i don't want a game where i can win only with buying good player(with good skills creativity, off the ball, team work, work rate etc)

Neither do I.

Doesn't it make sense then that crap player X from team Y in division 7 will sometimes not know when to cut in from the wing or when to switch sides despite you telling him so, because his decision making is so poor? This is why I feel removing the arrow system made it more REALISTIC and less rigid in tactics. It flows better. Sometimes he'll get lazy and sit back despite you yelling at him to run forward and support the attack. Much like real life.

[Ayanami80]

Damn you WWFan, you are much too quick.

[Ediocy]

i don't want a game where i can win only with buying good player(with good skills creativity, off the ball, team work, work rate etc)

FML is a good example 4this

Hmm, my mind kind of boggles.

So the game will improve if players with lacklustre skills, bad work ethics, no sense of teamwork, poor movement can triumph over stronger opposition?

Your Hulls, Getafes and Rangers certainly do no qualify as teams with an abundance of said players. Taking Hull as an example since it is the freshest in memory, Phil Brown would definitely be laughing his socks off if you were to claim that his players lack good work ethics and suffer from the ability to work cohesively as a team. And certainly neither does Geovanni suffer from a lack of creative skills.

You should not have reason to fear that you need the world's best eleven to win games in FM 2009 just because Arrows as you know it in previous FM games are gone. However, you may need to rethink your formations and strategies to get the same desired result of play you are accustomed to, and that is not necessarily a bad thing.

[shevelevee]

Nor do I. However, I don't want a game in which, simply by drawing a few arrows, you create a system that breaks the ME and allows very poor teams to heavily overachieve. It is all about creating a good balance.

And we agree! We don't want this game. We want adequatу game with adequate tactic control and adequate ME, but when we talking about game, which simulate work of FOOTBAL MANAGER, we can't said that game, where manager can't ask players about changing position when team is in attack, or when team is in midfield, or in defence, isn't adequate.

[Dukesh]

Nor do I. However, I don't want a game in which, simply by drawing a few arrows, you create a system that breaks the ME and allows very poor teams to heavily overachieve. It is all about creating a good balance.

I don't want to exploit ME. But any manager can do it for example. So a little time later every guy (most of them from my first post) will use the same tactics. And in FML it will be no cheat, cause most of games will be played by human.

[wwfan]

Which is what you have got. Strewth.

[shevelevee]

Hmm, my mind kind of boggles.

So the game will improve if players with lacklustre skills, bad work ethics, no sense of teamwork, poor movement can triumph over stronger opposition?

Your Hulls, Getafes and Rangers certainly do no qualify as teams with an abundance of said players.

Look at EURO2004. Greece players have not good skills, but they have good tactics and good discipline. They won. It's impossible in FML today, for example. Everybody first of all buy all available skillfull players, and don't think about tactics too much.

[Dukesh]

Your Hulls, Getafes and Rangers certainly do no qualify as teams with an abundance of said players.

But they do a great work. Having worse players and overplaying others. For example Russian Zenith. UEFA Cup winners by the way. In their last European campaign the had only 2 good players - Arshavin and Tymoschuk. They won Bayern with tactics (i am not supporting them btw) - it is fact.

[shevelevee]

Which is what you have got. Strewth.

I saw FM09 and FML and I don't think that your words is true. Why? I've said many times in this topic. You think different. Let's stop convice each other without any arguments.

[wwfan]

Look at EURO2004. Greece players have not good skills, but they have good tactics and good discipline. They won. It's impossible in FML today, for example. Everybody first of all buy all available skillfull players, and don't think about tactics too much.

That's because the default tactics in FML produce solid football with no effort. However, I know from first hand experience you can significantly overachieve through tactical sophistication alone.

By the way, the FML Defaults will be useless against the FM AI.