Game Development idea

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.

norwich 0 watford 1 63% 8 crosses adebayor goal 3subs 3sups 2goods

norwich 1 watford 1 64% 6 crosses mcgeady goal 322

norwich 0 watford 0 70% 5 crosses 34 gyan poor

norwich 0 watford 0 67% 10crosses 421good 3chances3saves

seems crosses arent turning into chances as much as i'd expect.

so Will's idea of increasing the number of heights could work to help remedy this, I will try that later once ive finished testing the new field...

Maybe jaimies wingers are just crap

try it with a team with some proper wingers

norwich 0 watford 0 77% 16 crosses 421poor agger cfgood still only 5 chances still not right.

norwich 2 watford 2 62% 7 crosses 5 chances 3 saved 1sub5sups2good1poor agger again. thats seems a bit better certainly more exciting.

I have to use the same teams else all the stats change and I have to start again, but will try other combos as well.

norwich 0 watford 2 71% 6 crosses 7 chances 4 saves adebayor enrigue goals 3sups2subs1good thats much better I think its cracked for SLO standard.

norwich 0 watford 1 67% 6crosses 5chances 4saves gyan

norwich 1 watford 1 70% 3crosses 9chances 6saves

norwich 1 watford 3 66% 7crosses 5chances 2saves

this seems about right not taking into account individual situations in games like offsides,sendingoffs etc

so i'll try with rob's inter milan as they also play with SLO standard

ac 0 inter 1 55% 1cross 3chances 2saves higuain 0subs6sups2goods p2subbed

ac 0 inter 0 59% 1cross 2chances 2saves 1sub4sup3good lavezzimom

ac 0 inter 1 56% 0crosses 2chances 1saves ribery goal

ac 0 inter 0 63% 0crosses 0chances 2sub3sup2good

seems like 2 good sides cancelling each out atm

ac 1 inter 1 61% 1cross 1chance 0saves higuain

lets try something different

inter 3 ac 1 52% 0cross 5chances cavani dimaria pirlo

strange Inter dont seem to be able to score most of their games are ending up without them scoring more than 1

lets try this

inter 4 hull 0 63% 5cross 11chances 7saved

still not brilliant

What changed?

took try of winghalves

inter 5 hull 0 75% 9cross 9chances 4saved

yes thats much better, sometimes putting try on winghalves doesnt work, they can try too hard cos they already track back and get forward so sometimes get tired quicker. try is almost implied for winghalves.

high agg of 7 isnt helping them either

ac 0 inter 1

ac 1 inter 1

ac 0 inter 1

ac 0 inter 0

thats now working the way i would expect having taken out the trys and reduced the aggr so i9'll move on to the SLO wingbacks now with Roma.

ancona 3 roma 0 piatti2 i thought he might score a few 51% 0cross 0chances

hang on i just realised roma dont play the SLO wingbacks they play with an extra Dy instead of ST. so im just going to change that excess Dy for a ST just for the testing.

just got too say this is hugely enlightening for people wanting to swap formations/currently using the formation and a huge credit for you for putting so much time into the game!

i'm looking through my turn as ur posting changing things.

i forgot the Special Action for Wages, do you mind reminding me? lol.

ancona 1 roma 1 56% 4cross 4chances 3saves maxwell 1sub2sup1good

ancona 2 roma 2 46% 2cross 3chances 1saves pazzini2 1sub1sup4good

ancona played standard MIX 442 so they do outnumber roma on the wide areas.

ancona 1 roma 0 50% 2cross 1chance

seems to be working as id expect

Phil@Arsenal wrote:

just got too say this is hugely enlightening for people wanting to swap formations/currently using the formation and a huge credit for you for putting so much time into the game!

i'm looking through my turn as ur posting changing things.

i forgot the Special Action for Wages, do you mind reminding me? lol.

wages ? usually dealings give for players or rehire for staff

This is an awesome insight Paul - seems as thought people are getting better ratings as well which is always good!

Paul Hemmings wrote:

Phil@Arsenal wrote:

just got too say this is hugely enlightening for people wanting to swap formations/currently using the formation and a huge credit for you for putting so much time into the game!

i'm looking through my turn as ur posting changing things.

i forgot the Special Action for Wages, do you mind reminding me? lol.

wages ? usually dealings give for players or rehire for staff

Too set a Wage Group, Sorry.

Don't think you can do that anymore Phil

if i change roma back to how stuart had them setup we get

ancona 4 roma 1 52% 4cross 2chances pazzini

so the expanded field of play seems to be working for the standard SLO and SLO wingbacks tactic in this early test.

SLO with dynamos Paul?

Phil@Arsenal wrote:

Paul Hemmings wrote:

Phil@Arsenal wrote:

just got too say this is hugely enlightening for people wanting to swap formations/currently using the formation and a huge credit for you for putting so much time into the game!

i'm looking through my turn as ur posting changing things.

i forgot the Special Action for Wages, do you mind reminding me? lol.

wages ? usually dealings give for players or rehire for staff

Too set a Wage Group, Sorry.

cant do that anymore each player is treated as a separate command now, cos of all the different possible outcomes.

charlton 3 boro 1 72% 3cross 4chances lucas sturridge wilshere 1sub4sup3good3aver how do the perfs compare Tom with what you got this week ?