Tactics per line

dhendricks71 · 12-17-2016, 04:00 AM

I was wondering if there was ever any thought put into having different tactics for each line? Like giving your 1st line be very offensive minded tactically, while having your 4th line may be your grind line/enforcer line?

Amono · 12-17-2016, 06:40 AM

+1 I really like the tactical system but maybe it's little too restrictive. Maybe make the global tactics per line so you can give 1st & 2nd more offensive freedom etc. . Also I really like the player role system but sometimes I would like to change the player roles within the lines.

beezer2434 · 12-17-2016, 02:24 PM

I like that idea as well, i think theres not enough freedom with the tactics at the moment

JeffR · 12-18-2016, 04:01 AM

There'd be a few big problems with doing that.

First, and most importantly, is the general concept: the tactics are part of the team's overall system, which should generally be consistent across all lines. Making tactics variable by lines would presumably have the goal of making tactics more customizable, but that's the main reason the individual tactical roles exist - to allow teams a reasonable degree of customization of their particular system, but still within the scope of having a coherent overall approach/philosophy.

Then there's the issue of player/team experience and effectiveness with different tactics - that would get extremely complicated if tactics varied by line. If a player is moved to a line with a different tactic, should he become less effective? What if it's in the middle of the game and he's covering for a penalized/injured teammate and he's only there temporarily? How should the team's tactical effectiveness be changed if it changes only one line's tactics? The only real way to handle all of that would be to add a lot of additional tracking data, which would have an unpleasant effect on game performance. And it tends to underline how individual line tactics are antithetical to the whole strategy concept in the game - a major point of having a team system is uniformity throughout the team, so guys can move between lines and still have a basic idea about how to do whatever job's assigned to them, because it's still within the common framework of the overall system.

There are some additional issues as well, like what to do with defensive pairs. But in general, it's probably not a direction we're likely to go in.

Which isn't to say I don't want to make the tactics more customizable; far from it. But the route you'll probably see me take is the addition of more tactics, particularly by adding more variations of existing ones, so in addition to completely new tactics you'll also have, say, a variation of the trap where the first line is allowed a lot more offensive freedom. And I think we can still make the tactical roles a little more flexible, maybe by adding a third level of acceptable roles in addition to the primary/secondary ones.

12-17-2016, 04:00 AM	#1
dhendricks71 Minors (Rookie Ball) Join Date: Nov 2016 Location: Detroit Posts: 22	Tactics per line I was wondering if there was ever any thought put into having different tactics for each line? Like giving your 1st line be very offensive minded tactically, while having your 4th line may be your grind line/enforcer line?

12-17-2016, 06:40 AM	#2
Amono Minors (Rookie Ball) Join Date: Dec 2016 Location: Hyvinkää, Finland Posts: 24	+1 I really like the tactical system but maybe it's little too restrictive. Maybe make the global tactics per line so you can give 1st & 2nd more offensive freedom etc. . Also I really like the player role system but sometimes I would like to change the player roles within the lines.

12-17-2016, 02:24 PM	#3
beezer2434 Minors (Triple A) Join Date: Apr 2013 Posts: 254	I like that idea as well, i think theres not enough freedom with the tactics at the moment

12-18-2016, 04:01 AM	#4
JeffR FHM Producer Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Kelowna, BC Posts: 17,394	There'd be a few big problems with doing that. First, and most importantly, is the general concept: the tactics are part of the team's overall system, which should generally be consistent across all lines. Making tactics variable by lines would presumably have the goal of making tactics more customizable, but that's the main reason the individual tactical roles exist - to allow teams a reasonable degree of customization of their particular system, but still within the scope of having a coherent overall approach/philosophy. Then there's the issue of player/team experience and effectiveness with different tactics - that would get extremely complicated if tactics varied by line. If a player is moved to a line with a different tactic, should he become less effective? What if it's in the middle of the game and he's covering for a penalized/injured teammate and he's only there temporarily? How should the team's tactical effectiveness be changed if it changes only one line's tactics? The only real way to handle all of that would be to add a lot of additional tracking data, which would have an unpleasant effect on game performance. And it tends to underline how individual line tactics are antithetical to the whole strategy concept in the game - a major point of having a team system is uniformity throughout the team, so guys can move between lines and still have a basic idea about how to do whatever job's assigned to them, because it's still within the common framework of the overall system. There are some additional issues as well, like what to do with defensive pairs. But in general, it's probably not a direction we're likely to go in. Which isn't to say I don't want to make the tactics more customizable; far from it. But the route you'll probably see me take is the addition of more tactics, particularly by adding more variations of existing ones, so in addition to completely new tactics you'll also have, say, a variation of the trap where the first line is allowed a lot more offensive freedom. And I think we can still make the tactical roles a little more flexible, maybe by adding a third level of acceptable roles in addition to the primary/secondary ones.