My Thoughts on Tactics in FHM 5

[Pax25]

First off, I want to say that I like the streamlined tactical system in FHM 5. By this I mean only having to select one role per player, being able to select any role, but at the same time being prevented from playing guys that are clearly "Grinders" (just as an example) from playing as "Snipers" (again, just an example).

Some have said that we should be able to select more roles for Power Plays and Penalty Killing, etc., but personally I think this is unnecessary since it's usually obvious that you want a player to play offensively on the powerplay and defensively on the penalty kill. Adding more roles to select each time a player has to be changed in and out on special teams would simply add a lot of wasted time.

Now for the negative. The main criticism I have now is that you have completely removed the coach's/GM's (i.e.- our) ability to see the appropriateness, familiarity, and interaction with our opponent's current tactics. While this may be taking place "under the hood" somewhere, it seems like it could have been implemented very simply in this version of the game. I felt that while FHM 4 was a bit too complicated for some people and made it necessary to make tons of changes at the start of each game (to maximize your counters), it was heading in the right direction and had some redeemable qualities that should have been built on.

For example, and this is just a suggestion. I think it would be easy to start by adding up a team's total player numbers on the PP, SH, etc. to get a base value in each situation. Then that number could be modified by the team or line's tactics' appropriateness (for the players carrying it out), the team or line's familiarity with the tactic, and what kind of effect it has on your current opponent (and what kind of effect your opponent's tactics are having on you). In practice, each global or line tactic could have three ratings or color codes next to it showing, again, how appropriate this tactic is for the player's you have, how familiar they are with it (i.e.- how long it has been in use), and how much it will act as a counter (i.e.-how many points it will take away from your opponent). I think really emphasizing how familiar a team or line is with a certain tactic and how appropriate it is for those players, will prevent what happened in FHM 4, where you could simply change each of your players' role at the start of each game, and get the maximum countering on your opponent.

I realize the manual attempts to do some of the above, and maybe this is all going on "under the hood", but I think this is something that should be visible since right now there is not a whole lot to do when you choose to coach games because you can't really tell how your team matches up against another, or how they are doing, other than looking and the score and maybe shots on goal. This goes along with my belief that the momentum bar should be brought back as well.

In conclusion, I think the tactics are a bit improved in that they are more streamlined and it allows those players who want to make a defensive "Grinder" play a bit more offensive (by changing his individual setting, just as an example), but by losing the ability to see how tactics interact with the team's players, how much they've practiced them, and how they are affecting your opponent, I believe is taking a step back. Especially, for those of us who really know the game of hockey. While this is still a great game, the tactical system is moving more towards Eastside Hockey Manager, where you can pretty much use any tactic, with any group of players, and not really have a clear picture of how your tactics are doing, except for viewing your wins and losses.

Just some thoughts. Would be interested to know what other players and the developers think.

Thanks.

[Savoie45]

Originally Posted by Pax25

First off, I want to say that I like the streamlined tactical system in FHM 5. By this I mean only having to select one role per player, being able to select any role, but at the same time being prevented from playing guys that are clearly "Grinders" (just as an example) from playing as "Snipers" (again, just an example).

Some have said that we should be able to select more roles for Power Plays and Penalty Killing, etc., but personally I think this is unnecessary since it's usually obvious that you want a player to play offensively on the powerplay and defensively on the penalty kill. Adding more roles to select each time a player has to be changed in and out on special teams would simply add a lot of wasted time.

Now for the negative. The main criticism I have now is that you have completely removed the coach's/GM's (i.e.- our) ability to see the appropriateness, familiarity, and interaction with our opponent's current tactics. While this may be taking place "under the hood" somewhere, it seems like it could have been implemented very simply in this version of the game. I felt that while FHM 4 was a bit too complicated for some people and made it necessary to make tons of changes at the start of each game (to maximize your counters), it was heading in the right direction and had some redeemable qualities that should have been built on.

For example, and this is just a suggestion. I think it would be easy to start by adding up a team's total player numbers on the PP, SH, etc. to get a base value in each situation. Then that number could be modified by the team or line's tactics' appropriateness (for the players carrying it out), the team or line's familiarity with the tactic, and what kind of effect it has on your current opponent (and what kind of effect your opponent's tactics are having on you). In practice, each global or line tactic could have three ratings or color codes next to it showing, again, how appropriate this tactic is for the player's you have, how familiar they are with it (i.e.- how long it has been in use), and how much it will act as a counter (i.e.-how many points it will take away from your opponent). I think really emphasizing how familiar a team or line is with a certain tactic and how appropriate it is for those players, will prevent what happened in FHM 4, where you could simply change each of your players' role at the start of each game, and get the maximum countering on your opponent.

I realize the manual attempts to do some of the above, and maybe this is all going on "under the hood", but I think this is something that should be visible since right now there is not a whole lot to do when you choose to coach games because you can't really tell how your team matches up against another, or how they are doing, other than looking and the score and maybe shots on goal. This goes along with my belief that the momentum bar should be brought back as well.

In conclusion, I think the tactics are a bit improved in that they are more streamlined and it allows those players who want to make a defensive "Grinder" play a bit more offensive (by changing his individual setting, just as an example), but by losing the ability to see how tactics interact with the team's players, how much they've practiced them, and how they are affecting your opponent, I believe is taking a step back. Especially, for those of us who really know the game of hockey. While this is still a great game, the tactical system is moving more towards Eastside Hockey Manager, where you can pretty much use any tactic, with any group of players, and not really have a clear picture of how your tactics are doing, except for viewing your wins and losses.

Just some thoughts. Would be interested to know what other players and the developers think.

Thanks.

Which is why I'll be glad when they finally add a way to actually watch the action play out, so that way you'd be able to see more of what effects the tactics are having on the team. So if having the pressure set to intense is causing you players to lose position, then you could scale it back during the game.

Maybe they could add it into the assistant coach feedback before they finally add the visual aspect. After a period the assistant gives some things the team is doing well and things that need improved upon. This way you'd have a better idea of adjustments you might need to make during a game.

[eh`]

I agree that seeing what tactics are doing well or poorly for your team is what's missing. I love the new flexibility of the tactics system from 4, but I can't see a way to figure out which are working. In 4, it was pretty clear that if you were giving up too many goals, you changed your defensive system.

Each line has a star rating for OFF/DEF/Speed/Toughness/Skill, but I would love a way to figure out if I need to change my neutral zone defence, offensive zone tactics, etc.

[Gerry58]

I agree. Sometimes i feel like don't know what i'm doing and why.

[bjernagris]

A rating scale, perhaps 1-20, to see how well a certain tactical setup suits a player/line would be helpful. Something like how the different player roles are graded for each player, but for tactical setups.

Although this might make setting tactics a bit too easy, right now to me the only way to find the right tactics is trial/error rather than skill.

[DFyvie]

I actually like the way it is. I don't want it to be too easy. By referring to the manual you are able to discern what type of style your team should be playing. Adding colours or numbers to it takes away from the illusion in my mind. When FHM4 made it about numbers and colours I feel they ruined it.

JMO

[Pax25]

Originally Posted by DFyvie

I actually like the way it is. I don't want it to be too easy. By referring to the manual you are able to discern what type of style your team should be playing. Adding colours or numbers to it takes away from the illusion in my mind. When FHM4 made it about numbers and colours I feel they ruined it.

JMO

Thanks for your comment. You make an excellent point and this is something that I had definitely considered.

However, I think where this argument breaks down is in the fact that we are presented with so much information about about a whole number of things in this game (and any management game) whether it be with numbers, colors, or stars.

Just to name a few examples, we know what type of role a player is best at (by numerical indicator), what position is most appropriate for them (through another numerical/color indicator), how likely they are to get hurt and where (through colors on a human figure), what line they should be playing on (through the scouting report), how much potential they have (again, through the scouting report), etc. I could go on and on.

That's why it seems a bit odd to me that we are given so much information about everything else, but when it comes to tactics, which is the most important thing when it comes to coaching a game, we are somewhat left in the dark. The only light being the vague explanations of the various tactics pros and cons in an online manual.

Just a suggestion, maybe a "Fog of War" option could be available for those who don't want to know the exact numbers when it comes to tactics, just like you can choose not to know a player's exact ratings.

However, I think a happy medium can be reached. For example, based on how highly skilled your coaches tactics ratings are, and how long your team as been together, etc. will give you an idea of what tactics are most appropriate, most familiar, and will counter your opponents tactics the most. Nothing will be guaranteed though. Like in FHM 4, just because you had the tactical edge didn't guarantee a victory. However, it should give you an indication of how likely you are to gain the advantage and ultimately win the game.

[Savoie45]

and Fog of War is available so....