Game Development idea

At the moment the field of play is five areas wide by 3 areas deep

so we have

wideleft - insideleft - centre - insideright - wideright

for defence midfield and attack

but I'm thinking of extending the depth to five areas as well.

so we would have

defence deepmidfield midfield attack goalline

this might give players more room to move around and develop play and therefore the potential for getting better performance scores is increased. on the downside it would make the match reports longer.

anyway i'm experimenting with it atm to see how it works out, but any thoughts are welcome of course.

paul this sounds like a good idea. one thing i've always noticed on my match reports its how play seems to go from back to front very quickly with less build up. I imagine this is due to the field of play and is like it is so that the match reports are as concise as possible, whilst retaining the important detail.

with 5 fields of play instead of 3...how much extra reportage is this likely to output? an extra page? I would assume so. I wouldn't have a problem with turns going up 30p or whatever if the extra page gave us some more insight on our team's performance.

how about having attackingmidfeld instead of goal line? or would that generate too much reportage?

Do we not have 5 areas already?

Def - lb rb cb cb
Deepmid - rk lk am bw
Mid - Lh Rh pm dy
Attack - tm
Goaline - cf st lw rw

or is that just the facade on the report ?

I'm all up for expanding the game and introducing new systems to expand tactics and flexibility...
Along as I keep on winning taken me 3 seasons to get a team and start winning don't think I've won 4 back to back apart from on championship! Lol.

Would it make things like long passing more important on the pitch?

Tom@Charlton wrote:

Would it make things like long passing more important on the pitch?

Was just thinking about this but I would presume it would and depend on how you set your team up.

For example if your AM doesn't have great LP skills I presume you could play your TM (if you were playing FAS) as a deeper player ensuring that more balls reach him?

Or if your AM has great LP skills then you could potentially play your PM higher up the pitch in MIX and bypass some of the opposition players?

Tom@Charlton wrote:

Would it make things like long passing more important on the pitch?

it wouldnt affect things like longpass, in current situations where players need to make a LP they would still need to make a LP, and where they currently make SP they would still be making SP. the actual distance the ball travels is not part of the systems calculations. so the extra depth of the field doesnt effect things like pass eff or pass type selection.

What it does is give players more room to move around in and therefore more chance of finding spaces, therefore more chance of being able to accept a pass, therefore more chance for better performances.

...

More goals?

for instance with FAS 433 we currently have

attack -- ST TM S2 --

midfield -- DL AM DR --

defence LB CL -- CR RB

under the new system we would have

goalline -- ST -- S2 --

attack -- -- TM -- --

midfield -- DL -- DR --

deepmid -- -- AM -- --

defence LB CL -- CR RB

alll of a suddenly there is lots more space for players to run into b4 taking a pass,

Tom@Charlton wrote:

More goals?

I will have to test it but I would expect more chances to be created but the amount of space in defence is the same, so no, not more goals.

In which case Paul, sounds good. I personally think anything to make the game more exciting and innovative is great!

Ive set up a little test area so I can try out the 5*5 pitch and play some practice matches on them. If you want me to play some matches including your team and post the results here then put your suggestions here then i can post the results and we can then discuss something a bitmore concrete.

Definately play with mine Paul, will be interested to see what happens.

Would be handy to have a cross section of different formations playing maybe?

Defo Paul - I'm in - would be really interesting to see how Rooney gets on with more space!

I think playing a team that play Slo would be good to see how the pm go d the players.

And a team that plays with wingers too see how they are involved and how easy it is to get the ball from midfield to Goaline.

Yeah would be interested to see how my lot go in the 5*5 pitch, might free Kun up to wreak havok!

I'll start by testing all 3 SLO tactics

standard SLO 442 LBCLCRRB LHPMP2RH CFST

dynamo SLO 442 LBCLCRRB DLPMP2DR CFST

wingback SLO 3142 CLCCCR AM LKPMP2RK CFST

and see how these get on...results to follow

I'm gonna use Watford as they play standard SLO, Charlton who play SLO dynamo and Roma who play SLO wingback.

norwich 0 watford 1 same result as in the league this week

much better performances though for watford 72% seems high

superb for smalling sublimes for enrique, diaby, lee, adam and mcgeady.

Paul Hemmings wrote:

norwich 0 watford 1 same result as in the league this week

much better performances though for watford

superb for smalling sublimes for enrique, diaby, lee, adam and mcgeady.

I assume Watford use the same formation that I do at Inter 442 with LH/RH?

norwich 0 watford 0 78% same 6 players on sublime

seems they are keeping the ball better but having trouble getting to the goalline in order to cross.

norwich 0 watford 0 74%

smalling good enrique/mcgeady superb diaby/lee/adam sublime

still only 3 crosses though and little sign of the CF.

paul use my slow tactic with wingbacks if you like. be interested to see if i get any joy from these wing backs.

does it have to be the same line-up as this week?

norwich 0 watford 0 61% thats better balance for possession

smalling good enrique,mcgeady,lee superbs adam and diaby sublimes

Cf made a show this time with 2 headers, but still not enough crosses or penetration.

norwich 1 watford 2 62% 7 chances 9 crosses

good for smalling,kompany, superbs for enrique,lee,adam,gyan and adebayor, sublime from diaby and mcgeady

thats much better and seems about right now. play a few more just to see b4 going to the next team.

just been looking at this.

just thinking about what u were sugesting about making the playing field bigger,what about distinguishing a little more between players heights, now that we are all a little more familiar with how the system works and the importance of players being able to see their Centre forwards.

So when a winger/winghalve looks for his CF there is more of a distinction between what is a Tall player and a very tall player or what constitutes what is more of a physical presence in the box

at the minute there is 6ft to 6.4 = tall & 6.4ft above = xtall.

at derby for instance we have paul green who is 6ft yet shaun barker is 6ft 3 - in the game there would be no difference in there phsical attributes yet in real life they are leagues apart.

granted this isnt the best example to the masses but i hope u catch my drift, the gap between a 6ft player and a 6ft4 player is quite significant in my book and im sure we can all name examples from our own clubs where to put to certain players in the same category isnt quite right, just a thought but

how about :

6ft - under 6.2ft = tall

6.2 to under 6.4 very tall

6.4 and above = extra tall.