Jump to content

New Game Engine & Player Positions


Recommended Posts

...make 3133B, for instance, with the front three split with wingers and a #9. otherwise, you have to give these players F(RL) just like Mata.

 

...yes. M(RL) does indicate defensive responsibilities. and every player I listed does play with significant defensive responsibilities. well, James not so much anymore...

 
...the only reach is James Rodriguez, as he no longer plays there for Colombia and given it's unlikely Falcao will re-find his form, he probably won't play there again.

 

Who uses the 3-1-3-3 in real life? Name a big club which routinely uses it.

 

I still fail to see why you cannot grasp that AM(RCL) and M(RCL) are completely different entities in modern football. Sometimes they can play each other's roles, a lot of the time they cannot. If you are claiming someone can...I want to see consistent and recent evidence that they played in that position...that they were successful...and that the team was successful.

 

Not that Rodriguez played there once or twice a few years ago. Like I have said, John Terry filled in as a GK years ago when the keeper was sent off. Does this mean that Terry can play GK?

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

352 is an attacking formation. there are certain players attacking players who have the profile and skill-set to play wide of midfield in that formation. not every attacker can do this, but the ones I have suggested are fully capable. the only reach is James Rodriguez, as he no longer plays there for Colombia and given it's unlikely Falcao will re-find his form, he probably won't play there again.

 

 

3-5-2 is an offensive formation: yes, it could be. So I want to report Juventus FC example:

 

the two wide players his manager sends on the pitch for this formation are all fullbacks not wingers: Lichtsteiner D,DM,M(R ); Evra D,DM(L); Alex Sandro D,DM,M(L); Asamoah D(L),DM,M(LC); Cuadrado D,DM,M(R ),OM(RLC); Padoin D(RL),DM,M(RLC). So....

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I'm convinced BBB doesn't actually watch football. his ceaseless straw-man arguments are really growing tiresome.

 

 

Neither Isco, Roriguez or Iniesta are traditional forwards that can play in a front three, unless they want to perform badley. You may be thinking of 433 wingers, in that case, those guys you mentioned can play as the winger. Iniesta as a forward? No, it wouldn't work.

 

if SM wants to make more formations available with wing positions I'll happily drop this point. but right now, in a 3133 for example, I can't play any of those three players in the wide spots of a front three. and all three of them can play in the wide spots of a front three and have done recently.

 

make 3133B, for instance, with the front three split with wingers and a #9. otherwise, you have to give these players F(RL) just like Mata.

 

 

He played as a winger, not a traditional LM.

 

absolutely incorrect. he occupied LM in a 442 and had full defensive responsibilities associated with that position.

 
 
Isco played as a central midfielder and attacking midfielder, again not a traditional LM. He's an ATTACKING MIDFIELDER.
 
if you watch him play, which you clearly don't, you'll see him occupy the LM zones during buildup and defensive phases of the game. when he plays in a 433, he plays M(LC) when he plays in a front three, he also tracks into M(L) zones when in defensive transition (even beginning attacks from there). his positional data should basically be the same as Iniesta's except he can also play on the right too, albeit he does this rarely so if it was eliminated I'd have no argument.
 
 
Iniesta plays as a left CENTRAL MIDFIELDER or LEFT WINGER/ATTACKING MIDFIELDER, he hasn't played a traditional LEFT MIDFIELDER role in quite some time. It's been years. The movements you see do not indicate he is playing LM, he's just tracking on the left side.
 
he occupies those zones and has defensive responsibilities associated with a LM. he routinely plays close to the touchline and works up and down it in offensive and defensive phases of the game. that's why he has M(L) in his positional profile and that's why it should stay there.
 
 
No, they should not. LM or RM indicate signiifcant defensive responbilities, and neither of the players you mentioned play LM or are capable of doing that without penalties as SM accurately represents.

 

yes. M(RL) does indicate defensive responsibilities. and every player I listed does play with significant defensive responsibilities. well, James not so much anymore, but that's only because Falcao fell off a cliff form-wise. just because they're attacking players, or known as attacking players, doesn't mean they can't defend. your view of football is so reductive.

 

 

In formations such as the 5-3-2, 3-5-2, etc....where the left and right sides are dependent on defensive roles, any of these players are incapable of playing in that role!

 
there is a BIG difference between 532 and 352. the fact you don't seem to think so tells me everything I need to know about your understanding of football.
 
352 is an attacking formation. there are certain players attacking players who have the profile and skill-set to play wide of midfield in that formation. not every attacker can do this, but the ones I have suggested are fully capable. the only reach is James Rodriguez, as he no longer plays there for Colombia and given it's unlikely Falcao will re-find his form, he probably won't play there again.

 

 

"if SM wants to make more formations available with wing positions I'll happily drop this point. but right now, in a 3133 for example, I can't play any of those three players in the wide spots of a front three. and all three of them can play in the wide spots of a front three and have done recently."

 

Proof?

 

"ake 3133B, for instance, with the front three split with wingers and a #9. otherwise, you have to give these players F(RL) just like Mata."

 

Why? Iniesta is not a forward.

 

"absolutely incorrect. he occupied LM in a 442 and had full defensive responsibilities associated with that position."

 

No, he was a winger.

 

"if you watch him play, which you clearly don't, you'll see him occupy the LM zones during buildup and defensive phases of the game. when he plays in a 433, he plays M(LC) when he plays in a front three, he also tracks into M(L) zones when in defensive transition (even beginning attacks from there). his positional data should basically be the same as Iniesta's except he can also play on the right too, albeit he does this rarely so if it was eliminated I'd have no argument."

 
He's not as LM....He's a attacking midfielder/central midfielder that sometimes drift left.
 
"he occupies those zones and has defensive responsibilities associated with a LM. he routinely plays close to the touchline and works up and down it in offensive and defensive phases of the game. that's why he has M(L) in his positional profile and that's why it should stay there."
 
Nope...he hasn't played LM. See above.
 
"

352 is an attacking formation. there are certain players attacking players who have the profile and skill-set to play wide of midfield in that formation. not every attacker can do this, but the ones I have suggested are fully capable. the only reach is James Rodriguez, as he no longer plays there for Colombia and given it's unlikely Falcao will re-find his form, he probably won't play there again."
 
3-5-2 may be an attacking formation with attacking wingbacks...I have yet to see a 3-5-2 formation that utilizes wingers.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Who uses the 3-1-3-3 in real life? Name a big club which routinely uses it.

 

I still fail to see why you cannot grasp that AM(RCL) and M(RCL) are completely different entities in modern football. Sometimes they can play each other's roles, a lot of the time they cannot. If you are claiming someone can...I want to see consistent and recent evidence that they played in that position...that they were successful...and that the team was successful.

 

Not that Rodriguez played there once or twice a few years ago. Like I have said, John Terry filled in as a GK years ago when the keeper was sent off. Does this mean that Terry can play GK?

 

Bayern Munich does use the 3-1-3-3 time to time...so it's not very unrealistic. If you check Van Gaal's Ajax for example, the wide players were wingers, but they were also forwards, and Iniesta isn't that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

3-5-2 is an offensive formation: yes, it could be. So I want to report Juventus FC example:

 

the two wide players his manager sends on the pitch for this formation are all fullbacks not wingers: Lichtsteiner D,DM,M(R ); Evra D,DM(L); Alex Sandro D,DM,M(L); Asamoah D(L),DM,M(LC); Cuadrado D,DM,M(R ),OM(RLC); Padoin D(RL),DM,M(RLC). So....

 

Bayern Munich play 3421 a lot and have used Lahm, Alaba, Bernat as wide midfielders... but also Robben, Ribery, Coman, Costa.

 

or Liverpool under Rodgers when he played Sterling, Ibe and Markovic there.

 

Chile used Jean Beausejour.

 

a whole host of teams in Italy, and the Peru national team, used Juan Manuel Vargas.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bayern Munich play 3421 a lot and have used Lahm, Alaba, Bernat as wide midfielders... but also Robben, Ribery, Coman, Costa.

 

or Liverpool under Rodgers when he played Sterling, Ibe and Markovic there.

 

Chile used Jean Beausejour.

 

a whole host of teams in Italy, and the Peru national team, used Juan Manuel Vargas.

 

You are confusing true RMs/LMs and wingers.....are you telling me Coman was a RM/LM?

Link to post
Share on other sites

For Tactical matters :

a). Corelation between your new tactics with player's position, if you said could change player's rating & also could make player's performance could be low/bad, then these is very very very serious matter. I suggesting 3 option for this matters :

ⅰ). Fixing all "3 defender" formations that provided in "New version" into "Old version" ie : 3-5-2, 3-4-3, 3-4-2-1, 3-4-1-2, 3-2-2-2-1. Why? Because Right/Left Midfielder made players out of position. We couldn't sell our AM (RL) players & switching with low rating players that suitable with new position (pure M (RL)). This is the era of flexible strategies, so many players could be played minimum into 2 or 3 positions (including AM (RL) could play as M (RL), for REAL). For this matter, your option are fixing it, or providing us with more type of that formation ( "B", or "C", or "D" & etc). I think many users very need this.

ⅱ). Configuring new tactic model based and/or liked the old one, and with some improvements. Example : variant of 3-5-2 named "3-1-4-2" with AM (RL) could play as M (RL).

ⅲ). From basic formations that you provide, users could make it to be "Custom" formation as like as user's need. Example : Based formation 3-5-2, display in match game "3-5-2 Custom".

B). The way in changing/switching players in tactical formation. We need players can be sort by rating, condition, position & morale.

c). Making our tactic instruction were hidden/private too in match's statistic tab. Giving basic formation (without movement) is more than enough. This will give flexibility for managers in creating their personal strategy.

Recently, I read some users debating about Right/Left Fullback can played as Centerback. Maybe we could remember how Guardiola given the role to Adriano as Centerback for many times. Many Fullbacks adapted as Centerback & feel comfortable, then Centerback become their primary position. Named Nesta & Zaccardo from DR, Chiellini & Mathieu from DL and manymore.

My opinion, this matter shouldn't be debated, because this is an era of flexible football, with more custom roles, instructions, playing styles & strategies itself. Cheers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a quick update (as I know some of you were asking on another thread) re making penalties harsher for those players who play out of position. Well the update was made yesterday and we have increased the penalty. So if a player is played out of position and it displays yellow on the tactics page for example, they will be penalised and won't perform to their full potential.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Apologies if someone has mentioned this already:

Firstly, I'm not a fan of the update for the iPhone app. I had been using the desktop version as I preferred the practicality of its interface. Since the update, the old desktop site is technically available, but it's proportions are all distorted. Please can SM bring back the old version of the desktop site for people who want to use it?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

Just a quick update (as I know some of you were asking on another thread) re making penalties harsher for those players who play out of position. Well the update was made yesterday and we have increased the penalty. So if a player is played out of position and it displays yellow on the tactics page for example, they will be penalised and won't perform to their full potential.

 

not penalised enough (or at all, it seems).

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...

As a Gold manager I find the new player positions being tied so specifically to a single position is a step too far.

 

It has made setting up a fully compatible team in the tactics section a nightmare. I feel it has made the game far less realistic and less fun.

 

I find it almost impossible to field a realistic squad now!

 

For instance with a formation like 3-5-2 are you really going to field no attacking midfielders in a real match???

 

Of course not! Yet now I cannot field a single attacking midfielder in a midfield role for many of the available formations.

 

Also defense! If I want to play 3 at the rear then I require 3x CB

 

If I require 4 at the rear I require 2xCB and 1 x RB and LB

 

therefore I would have to have 2x RB, 2xLB, 6x CB to maintain match fitness and some formation options.

 

Or I would require 6xCB just to keep a 3 at the back formation fit and happy.

 

This is impossible and I feel these restrictions are going to and are killing any enjoyment of playing this game.

 

I played 1x winger and 1x AM, 1x DM and 2x CM in middle and 2x forwards upfront.

 

Whats not realistic about that?? yet now I cannot do this without 3 or 4 players in my team being penalised for seemingly being played out of position!!

 

Im not going to complain about the new look but I do think they have to look at the enjoyment and realism of there over impeding player positions, as its killing the game.

 

I should not have to sell my team and buy new players for positions they once played in with no issue at all

 

And like I said its making managing a team properly almost  impossible.

 

If they wanted to penalise people for fielding say 5x attacking midfielders in a midfield all at the same time, why not apply it to there game engine and punish them for not having any defensive players in midfield by allowing the other team to score more goals against them as thats probably what would happen in reality.

 

I hope soccermanager can have a re think as for now im re considering my Gold membership. If it aint broke dont fix it.

 

If anyone knows how else I can bring this up with soccermanager please let me know as I see no way of contacting them about this directly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to add I do not dislike the new style menus etc and the new realistic player values etc

 

but the player positions is wrong

 

please SM look at what I wrote and try it for yourself you will see what I say makes sense ;)

 

To keep players fit and happy you require at least 2 for each position in your team with a couple of utility players but the new player position system makes this impossible and unrealistic.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

Game now is so broken: team with highter value win 90% times. It's impossible to do a season like Leicester now. And 4-3-3B is a terrible BUG

Yes, I've been noticing the same with the new match engine, higher rating generally seems to get the win majority of the time now.

You can research/scout teams and find formations that they're weak against, but the chances of winning using tactical strength seems a lot less less now, squad strength seems to be the overriding factor for results.

I'd be interested to see what would happen with a 92 rated team playing something like 334 against an 89 rated team playing 352, 4231 or 433B.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I've been noticing the same with the new match engine, higher rating generally seems to get the win majority of the time now.

You can research/scout teams and find formations that they're weak against, but the chances of winning using tactical strength seems a lot less less now, squad strength seems to be the overriding factor for results.

I'd be interested to see what would happen with a 92 rated team playing something like 334 against an 89 rated team playing 352, 4231 or 433B.

 

interestingly, high enough ratings can even override the new positional handicaps put in for out of position players.

 

my main opponent in a gameworld has been playing 3412 all season with Cristiano, Hazard, Ozil and David Silva as RM and LM and Marcelo as a LCB and is second in the league (to me) by just one point. he even beat me earlier in the season.

 

it's pretty laughable.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...