FIFA 11/12/13 Manager Mode Suggestions Thread

[TikTikTikTikTik]

I think the main difference is that I want the player to have both defensive and attacking duties within the same formation/tactics.

In your example a defensive style restricts Gerrard attacking instinct. I still want him to have that when the team is attacking, but I also want him to drop deeper when the team concedes possesion. So if you would edit that to how the formation would change you would get the following;

Attack:
----------GK-----------
-----CB-------CB-------
RB-------------------LB
----------DM-----------
---------------------LW
RW--------AM-----------(set to attack)
-------ST----SS--------

Defensive:
----------GK-----------
--RB----CB---CB----LB--
RW--------DM---------LW
-------AM----SS-------- (set to Balanced)
----------ST-----------

Both those set-ups would be within the 4-4-2 formation. That's why I would want the styles to be set up for both Attack and Defense.

For example say the team would be playing a CL away match I would set the team up as follows (also based on a 4-4-2).

Attack:
----------GK-----------
RB---CB-------CB-----LB
----------DM------LW---
RW------AM------------- (Set to Balanced)
------------SS---------
----------ST-----------

Defensive:
----------GK-----------
--RB----CB---CB----LB--
RW-----DM----AM------LW (set to defensive)
----------SS-----------
-------ST--------------

They may look a lot a like, however the difference (Gerrard is always the AM) is that I determine his positioning in both defensive and attacking situations with the same formation/tactics. If you have both you can determine in which lines/zones the player will operate, it's subtle but it will make a big difference in the match.

 

[nerf]

Ah, okay. Your original description of Gerrard was "to stay next to Masch (DM) even when the team is attacking", which is why I suggested a Defensive Style.

It sounds like you want tighter control over how deep/high in their zone they are in each phase. Essentially what you're asking for, I think, is a 'Defensive Positioning' [Deep/Med/High] and an 'Attacking Freedom' [Cautious/Balanced/Free] setting (which would also affect attacking positioning).

My problem with that is we've sort of talked ourselves round in a circle and are back almost at square one, or at least square one-point-five. Because then we have the same number of settings as always, just exchanged Edit Base Position for Defensive Positioning and exchanged Player Work-Rate for Attacking Freedom. It's an minor improvement but it's not very close to the elegant solution that I was originally hopeful for.

Perhaps the ideal solution here lies in tandem with the way the AI positions itself in relation to its teammates. EA claim they've worked on improving the organisation of the defensive line this year, but have they extended that to the midfield shape? Probably not, but they really need to. The midfield should be treated as a second defensive line (and possibly third, depending on strata), not as the messy collection of individuals they have been so far.

Rather than rely on the proposed Player Style setting to adjust the position of the player defensively (which would create a disjointed midfield, another argument for removing Edit Base Position), midfielders simply need to know what shape the midfield is supposed to be from the roles that they are given. For example, a midfield of RM RCM LCM LM should know that defensively they should hold a flat line, a bank of four. If you then gave the LCM a backwards arrow they should know to become more of a 1-3 shape, with the now-DM sitting in the pocket behind a flat line of three. The common world cup midfield of LDM RDM LAM CAM RAM would be 2-3, but if you then give the RAM/LAM backward arrows it would become a 4-1. And so on.

The defensive line already does this (adopt an appropriate shape based on roles rather than instructions), so there's no reason why the midfield shouldn't be treated the same.

If that was the case, you would be able to create the defensive shape you were looking for by simply using the white positioning arrows, which is exactly their purpose, and not worry about their Style instruction misaligning them in the defensive phase. The Style setting would then become purely about freedom and positioning in the attacking phase, which was my intention for it in the first place.

To summarise, what I'm suggesting is that the Playing Style setting only affects a player when their team has the ball. Defensively, his position would be defined by a combination of his Role and any white positional arrows he's assigned. Combine this with a necessary AI improvement in adopting a proper, disciplined shape without possession, and that should give you sufficient control, shouldn't it?

 

[TikTikTikTikTik]

Agree, I think the problem we have is that we don't know whether defensive AI for the whole team is going to be sorted. I'm assuming it's not, but it would be far better, as you describe above, that the roles indicate a solid base positioning and you use the arrows for additional positioning.

Then playing style is free for attack.

It's a shame that atm the defensive AI is so poor that I feel the need to have this extra control just to get them to defend as a unit. Would love to see the team line-up in 2 solid banks of four when defending.

 

[mfmaxpower]

QUESTION: How will Personality+ and player growth work in CM this year? I don't see personality as static - a young attacker with poor defensive discipline can become more disciplined - so I'm curious how players will change over multiple seasons in CM.

It would be cool if, say, I had an RB who didn't make many overlapping runs, that I could coach him so that he improves in this area.

 

[mfmaxpower]

I never use the scouting feature, personally. Like you say, it's totally unrealistic. I don't like the fact that the players are fake. They don't cost a transfer fee either, do they? All seems a bit 'cheap' to me, in more ways than one.

Isn't it kinda funny: for all we criticize the way scouting is done in MM, isn't Man Utd getting Bebe the perfect example of it actually working like that in real life!

So keep upgrading those scouts!!

 

[mfmaxpower]

I think it's fair to say the consensus on scouted computer-generated players is they suck - no faces, fake and sometimes stupid names, no emotional attachment etc. How about the following solution:

This has probably been suggested before, somewhere, but would a nice solution be to recycle retired players? Not necessarily in-game players that retire but players that are retired at the time of the game's release. So, for example, you could find a Maradona or Pele (wouldn't you just shit your pants?!). Of course there should only be one in the game world at a time, and of course they should start with more realistic attribute ratings for their age.


Thoughts?

 

[Nick Cave]

I think it's fair to say the consensus on scouted computer-generated players is they suck - no faces, fake and sometimes stupid names, no emotional attachment etc. How about the following solution:

This has probably been suggested before, somewhere, but would a nice solution be to recycle retired players? Not necessarily in-game players that retire but players that are retired at the time of the game's release. So, for example, you could find a Maradona or Pele (wouldn't you just shit your pants?!). Of course there should only be one in the game world at a time, and of course they should start with more realistic attribute ratings for their age.


Thoughts?

As long as it's an option to be turned on and off, I'm not against having old stars in the game, makes it a different game though...

 

[mfmaxpower]

As long as it's an option to be turned on and off, I'm not against having old stars in the game, makes it a different game though...

Of course I'm not against having options, but how does it make it a different game?

I'm not talking about just stars but retired players in general - there should be a huge variety. I just Maradona and Pele as extreme examples. The potential for getting poor vs quality players would ideally stay the same, so you'd get the equivalent to scouted players rated 55 as well as 80, or whatever.

I'm just really not a fan of the computer-generated players, but I tend to use them quite a bit because I like to start at crappy lower league clubs and they tend to be the most affordable options to upgrade my squads. I'd be happier if they had faces and were given last names that the commentators would use.

 

[TikTikTikTikTik]

They had that in PES aswell, I remember playing with a 19yo Davids who ran the show as he had ridiculous growth stats.

TBH I would rather have a more hands-on scouting/signing process. Have a trainingsession with a selection of youth players. That will give far more attachment then having players being recycled. I would rather have fake names then end up signing Laudrup, Brolin and all that.

 

[Placebo]

http://gamersyde.com/news_gc_fifa_11_gameplay-9772_en.html

Here we are finally at the Gamescom with this first gameplay video of Fifa 11 filmed yesterday evening on a PS3, at 60 fps of course.

 

[Placebo]

Oops that'd be the wrong thread

 

[nerf]

Personally I wouldn't like to see recycled legends. I always disliked that in PES. I'd much rather have youth players generated that have realistic names/nationality/abilities and some character...

 

[mfmaxpower]

Well fine then, I'll trash the recycled player idea (get what I did there? Just go with it, it's one of those days).

TBH I would rather have a more hands-on scouting/signing process. Have a trainingsession with a selection of youth players. That will give far more attachment then having players being recycled. I would rather have fake names then end up signing Laudrup, Brolin and all that.

Personally I wouldn't like to see recycled legends. I always disliked that in PES. I'd much rather have youth players generated that have realistic names/nationality/abilities and some character...

Yeah, I guess you two are probably right - as long as greater realism is brought to the fake players, they'll suit the mode fine.

At the minimum we need what nerf is saying, especially the last part, some character. Here's an idea that just popped in the head (I know, uh oh) but what if when the computer generates scouts you are given the various stats but if choose to sign them you would have the option to edit their appearance? Maybe even choose their last name so they can be referred to by commentary? Also, going along with Personality+ and the VPs, which from what I got from Rutter's Q&A you will have options of traits to choose for your VP, what if you'd also be able to select 1 out of 3 traits for character?

I know, none of that is well thought out but might be nice addition. Certainly not important, more of a luxury. (Although having names used by commentary, imo, is an important step toward greater immersion.)

Definitely I think the ideal is something like TikTik is saying, making it a more involved process, especially if we could go in the direction of replicating an academy-type system.

 

[mfmaxpower]

Oh, and speaking of an academy-type system, it'd be nice if in the future we could get a simulated reserve league feature. I know some people on the forums have asked for a playable reserve league, but I think that's a bit much, not that I'm against it necessarily.

IMO, this would be great for a couple reasons, such as 1) your lowest rated players, thus your least likely used players, would not always be on poor form; 2) opportunity for reserve players to impress and grow.

It might be that a reserve league/academy system could actually replace the scouting system - each year a certain number of players could be automatically generated for your academy, and through the reserve league players that may be ready for first team action could be made known to you.

 

[Nick Cave]

There should always be a scout!
You could also get agents contacting you to push their players too..
The reserves/youth is a great idea and you should get regular feed back from the youth/reserve coach with stats and maybe a small montage of the players best bits and some core stats and strengths of the players he feels are ready to try...

 

[nerf]

I was wondering this morning if we could come up with a concise, well-defined list of what realistically we would like to see as the focus for FIFA12's CM.

We all have hundreds of ideas that we would like to see in a career mode, I'm sure, but an endless scroll of little touches is not likely to be all that constructive at this stage. The mode is feature-light.

I'd like to strip our suggestions right down to the building blocks. Take the big picture, imagine you were creating the first ever management mode, and consider what it is you most want to interact with within the mode.

Remember that this is EA we're talking about, as well as an annual dev cycle (in real terms: a few months). Adopt a pragmatic stance based on where we are now, rather than indignation about where we should be. Forget bugs. Leave aside the Football Manager-esque depth and talk about exactly what it is, in pure gameplay terms, you would most enjoy doing next in CM.

In terms of what you actually interact directly with when you're playing, CM presently consists of these gameplay building blocks:
1. Transfers & contracts
2. Player Growth

The new transfer system seems in pretty decent shape, I think. Again: just thinking about features and actual gameplay, not bugs or UI issues. I can search for players, shortlist them, negotiate a fee with the club, and negotiate/renew player contracts. Do you think there are any glaring fundamental omissions here? Is there anything you feel you need to do/have that you presently can't/don't?

Player Growth. We'll see how 'balanced' this is post-patch, but feature-wise it appears to be: player OVR rises and falls based on matchday performances. Gameplay interaction feels minimal, in fact it's basically choosing who to give playing time to. What is the next interaction that you would most like to have besides this?

Finally, what third (and fourth/fifth, if you prioritise) 'building block' would you add next?

 

[mfmaxpower]

Hmm, didn't we already do this? Didn't we already come up with a few things for Nick to pass on, or am I imagining things again?

Just off the top of my head, top priorities for me are:

1. Player training (i.e. some form of input into player growth);
2. Youth academy (i.e. a real replacement for the old scout feature);
3. Form (should be based on match performance but maybe a little randomness included as well)

Honestly, if these three features aren't added, or something similar, there's a solid chance I wouldn't bother with FIFA next year and just go back to PES. However, if these three things are added I'd probably be satisfied considering my feelings on EA these days, though I'd still probably consider CM to be not nearly as deep as I'd like it to be.

 

[ibra77]

Suggestions for transfers

This may be too much to ask, as I don't know much anything about how these games are made or EA's policies, but I would imagine it is possible to set some loose parameters by which the transfers of CPU teams can be in tune with real life trends that are dominent and very clear. This has to be done loosely, perhaps using ratio's in a random lottery kind of way. Sort of like an NBA draft. The following numbers are not meant to be realistic but to demonstrate my point.

Nationality based parameters for going to a foreign league

English player leaving england (1/100 ), spanish rating above 80 from 3-4 star teams (30% chance), Italian above 83 (15% chance), French and Dutch above 80 rating (80% chance), Russian (70%) etc. etc.

Young up and coming players

high profile south americans tend to go to italy(25% chance), or Spain (40% chance) Early movers, 17-18 years old, to portugal (40% chance), and lower profile (young and low 70 ratings) go to russia, netherlands, or france ( 25% chance), east european or scandanavian would have similar parameters.
Similiar pramaters and percentages would have to be set on the basis of a team's Star rating, these would all have to work in unison in a random way.

Aging players

Players from Spain and Italy playing abroad, tend to go back home when they are past their prime. The same applies for France but these would have to be lower profile players (70-82rating), such as giuly, or makelele. higher profile players (rating 83 and up) such as Anelka or Henry, are less likely (10% chance) to go back to France.

Everything would have to be based on rating pools - 70-75, 75-80, 80-83, 83 and up, with a corresponding percentage of likelhood according to a programmed "case" or "scenario".
I imagine it could work. These "cases" could be determined by real life statistics of age, ability, and transfers.

 

[mfmaxpower]

Playing some UT and had a couple things come to mind regarding CM - why can't the chemistry and morale systems in UT be modified for use in CM? Shouldn't be too big a task to include considering much of the work is already done, right?

I'm not so much referring to how chemistry is done in UT - based on common league, club, and nationalities - but rather if chemistry is coded to influence gameplay in UT, can't that be modified for use in CM? The parameters would be different for how chemistry is computed but that's it. That really shouldn't be that big a deal, right? Isn't the hard part already done - coding its effects into the gameplay?

For morale, personally I have no idea how it works in UT, as in its effects have always been a bit of a mystery to me. Nonetheless, if it's coded to influence gameplay in UT - if the code is there - why can't it also be used in CM? Again, it would need to be modified as well. Still, seems like most of the work is already done for it.

Then there's also fitness - it's really frustrating that I have to worry about the fitness of my players in UT more than in CM. And not just match fitness, but I've received far more injuries in UT than in CM. Anyways, the fitness system in UT at least forces you to rotate your squad regularly (or use cards) and a similar system should be in CM.

When it comes to fitness and injuries, wasn't a reason (Placebo, Nick?) we were given that injuries weren't as frequent or severe as we'd like because they didn't want to make it too "hard?" Because I'm getting far more injuries in UT - and we know UT is known for its realism and difficulty - than CM, which is down right pathetic.

 

[nerf]

Hmm, didn't we already do this? Didn't we already come up with a few things for Nick to pass on, or am I imagining things again?

Did we? I don't remember, maybe we did. Not in this thread, at least.

Just off the top of my head, top priorities for me are:

1. Player training (i.e. some form of input into player growth);
2. Youth academy (i.e. a real replacement for the old scout feature);
3. Form (should be based on match performance but maybe a little randomness included as well)

Those are the same things I'd like to see next.

EA claimed they removed Form because they didn't have time this year to do it justice, so one would assume that it's likely to be something they'll put back in properly for 12. I think they need to tie it more obviously and logically to match ratings (although this might entail improving the match ratings first too), and it should not directly overwrite the OVR in the confusing way it did in FIFA10. Combining this with harsher fatigue accumulation would make selecting your lineup far more engaging.

The Youth Academy I think could be done in a very simple way, like I suggested on page 3. Generate a small group of randomised (within reason) 16-18 year olds (of your club's nationality) and 'spawn' them at the start of the season. You view, compare, and sign the ones that you want and can afford to pay. A bit like buying a UT Bronze pack and not knowing what you're going to get.

Some user input into player growth is necessary to improve the growth feature. Perhaps something basic like selecting the Training 'focus' for each individual: 1. General, 2. Physical, 3. Mental, 4. Skills.... or 1. General, 2. Attacking, 3. Defending, 4. Fitness, 5. Technical... something along those lines. You pick one category as a focus and it funnels subsequent XP into those attributes more than others.

All of these things would force/allow you to make strategic decisions, which is what keeps you entertained... and they don't have to be super-complicated to implement or interact with.

Playing some UT and had a couple things come to mind regarding CM - why can't the chemistry and morale systems in UT be modified for use in CM? Shouldn't be too big a task to include considering much of the work is already done, right?

What influence do chemistry and morale make on the pitch? Do you notice a difference? I do like the idea that players who have played together and/or share nationality will have a chemistry boost.

 

[Nick Cave]

Yeah, I passed them all on in one form or another and I'm trying to put together a post to the EA Dev's direct, giving my points and an amalgam of what we are discussing both here and in the GC forum, but work and home stuff are a bit mad at the moment so I'm a bit behind.
Forgive the Copy/Paste from the other thread but this say's where I feel we need to push EA and why we can't expect too much for 12 but it will be a massive indicator of where EA intend to take it...

This is always going to be the problem with us and EA, their game sells like hotcakes so why would they spend time and money drastically altering it. We have to be realistic in our hopes of moving the game more to the simulation we want, as you say their core market are pick up and play kids who will bash a few games on or off-line, then load something else.
There is already some backlash in how hard the game is now, granted some of this is down to AI manic pressure and in some modes the fact your team have been on an amphetamine bender before kick off.

I'm personally hoping EA embrace sliders in a big way as I feel this is our only hope for being able to accommodate both the casual gamer and us. An interface to lead you down two separate paths, where one gives you minimal options and the ability to load and go, the other gives you far more options to alter core parts of the game to suit your ability and style. This and a new Tactic and player description/implementation and interface are key for me.

We have pushed this at all the GC meetings I have attended, I have also spent a lot of time putting thoughts and questions from both here and the other forums directly to EA and at the GC meetings, so it does annoy me when we are labelled as some kind of EA free loading monkeys, as I'm Leeds based it's costing me time and money to participate in anything I have done with EA.

As for 12, this for me will be a true test of how much influence we really have with EA as the whole front end is looking tired and in my mind needs some real work. Now is the time for EA to embrace and work with some of our ideas, if we see a simple linear move from them to 12, I think it will be time for us as so-called Gamechangers to take a long hard look at ourselves...

 

[nerf]

Yeah, that's why I was trying to prompt a concise, high-level focus of what we'd most like next in CM, rather than getting too bogged down in details and the little touches. Just concentrating on the things that you most want to interact with, and keeping it simple and streamlined rather than weighty and convoluted.

 

[mfmaxpower]

The Youth Academy I think could be done in a very simple way, like I suggested on page 3. Generate a small group of randomised (within reason) 16-18 year olds (of your club's nationality) and 'spawn' them at the start of the season. You view, compare, and sign the ones that you want and can afford to pay. A bit like buying a UT Bronze pack and not knowing what you're going to get.

I agree with everything you said though I have two questions regarding the youth academy. First, all one nationality? A bit unrealistic isn't it? Are we just going to ignore overseas scouting?

Second, and this is connected to the first, I think people are missing the old scout feature of being able to "freshen up" your squad throughout the season. I'm thinking one way to go about with the youth academy is to have it some how not just be a feature you deal with once at the beginning of each season, when your players are spawned. I like your idea - your comparison to opening bronze packs is perfect - but it would be nice if the youth system is relevant throughout your season as well.

Maybe a way to combine the two would be a) you choose which players from your spawned youth bronze pack to enter your academy; then b) throughout the season you will intermittently receive an email saying so-and-so player has improved and is ready for a senior squad call up (thus simulating the old scout feature). You could even do something like the scout feature where you only see a general potential list of a player's abilities when they spawn, but then you see their full stats at these moments.

Anyway it's done, the point is I think it would be preferable to have the youth system relevant throughout the season and not only important once a year - CM is desperate for more stuff to do during the seasons.

Some user input into player growth is necessary to improve the growth feature. Perhaps something basic like selecting the Training 'focus' for each individual: 1. General, 2. Physical, 3. Mental, 4. Skills.... or 1. General, 2. Attacking, 3. Defending, 4. Fitness, 5. Technical... something along those lines. You pick one category as a focus and it funnels subsequent XP into those attributes more than others.

Regarding player growth, and scouting as well, it is VERY important to me that we are finally given player potential information. I want to be able to base my transfer decisions not just on a player's current stats but on their potential for growth. EA started doing something like this last year with the player potential graphs but it wasn't near specific enough to be useful. To me this is a MUST.

And I'm not even asking for specifics, or for them to be 100% accurate, because growth should depend on performance as well as potential. But if I'm buying a winger I want to know what type of winger he has the potential to become. If it's an issue of potential doesn't vary between different abilities, only between player OVRs, then I'd at least like an idea of his OVR cap. Preferably, though, different abilities would grow at varying rates; i.e player X has more potential to put on muscle and increase strength relevant stats vs agility/speed, etc.

All of these things would force/allow you to make strategic decisions, which is what keeps you entertained... and they don't have to be super-complicated to implement or interact with.

You know what's sad? I'm having to do this far more managing my current bronze team in UT than I've had to do in CM/MM. Not only is fitness a factor (as well as contracts) but I'm getting multiple injuries in a game! Last night I had two of my star players go down with multi-match injuries and a star striker go out with a red card - nothing like that I think has ever happened in CM/MM for me. And this was going into a final cup match, which I lost, and it was great because I actually had squad selection issues!

What influence do chemistry and morale make on the pitch? Do you notice a difference? I do like the idea that players who have played together and/or share nationality will have a chemistry boost.

Honestly I have no idea what specific influences they have but they definitely make a difference. When it comes to morale, my understanding is players play a little slower, a little more sluggish, a little less likely to get to 50-50s, etc. when on low morale. That's the easier of the two to explain.

Chemistry is meant to be based on specific relationships within your squad, although each player has his own chem rating based on those relationships. If a player has a low chem rating, I suppose he's meant to play worse but I'm not sure how his performance would differ from low morale. The other factor are the chem links with players on his squad in nearby positions. The stronger the link, the better they will play together. Again it's hard for me to say how chem plays out between players but I can say it makes a difference - the thing I seem to notice the most is that player movement is much better with higher chem.

Forgive the Copy/Paste from the other thread but this say's where I feel we need to push EA and why we can't expect too much for 12 but it will be a massive indicator of where EA intend to take it...

Call me unrealistic but this is the opposite attitude I'll be taking into 12. After this year's "update" I expect FIFA 12 to have some major new additions, including within CM, and to actually feel like a new game. PES is now back to a level that putting up with another frustrating and disappointing year of FIFA, not to mention the accompanying B.S. from EA, is simply not worth it. PES isn't back to the level that it's fully satisfying for me but as long as it continues its current path next year that may not be the case.

I'll be the first to say, though, that I'm pretty optimistic for next year, for both games. As much as I hate EA atm, FIFA I feel is very close (at least gameplay wise) while PES has a great foundation to build from for next year. I was never optimistic for FIFA 11 but I've been more optimistic for 12 before 11 was even released. That's gameplay at least - CM I'm really not so sure about.