When do you decide to put red arrows on strikers? How do you think about applying arrows to this position? Curious about your thoughts on this.
Printable View
When do you decide to put red arrows on strikers? How do you think about applying arrows to this position? Curious about your thoughts on this.
The impact of red arrows can't truly be known unless Nordeus actually tells us what their impact is.
Regarding me, I treat arrows with the assumption of red arrows mean my players plays one position up while we have possession and blue arrow mean they play one position back when we're defending. I've never placed red arrows on my strikers!!!
With red arrows, ST make more shots, more aggressive, and lead more goals. With blue arrows, they do more assists. That's what I saw.
Red arrows will motivate a player to be more attacking (players have 2 skill sets Defensive and attacking and can use either 1 at any time). So a red arrow will increase the chance of attacking choices. This extra motivation also uses more condition on average.
eg an ML with a red arrow will NOT become and AML (Nordeus don't give free extra roles ;) ) but he will try to get forward more, play with greater physicality and choose attacking skills more.
Nordeus has given answers on this several times (3 I think) but sometimes used confusing language. ;)
My personal way of thinking about it is in Orders the Mentality changes things at a global level, Arrows do it at an ingividual level.
I don't understand why should I tell to my striker to join attack = to add red arrow on him? I use red arrows when my player has enough space in front of him. For example. I use 3n52 flat, opponent uses 53n2 flat. I'll use then red arrows on ML and MR because they have a lot of space in front until they reach fullbacks.
We can't know how big influence arrows actually have on game.
You don't tell your ST to join the attack, you don't tell him to stand next to the GK or in the net - you tell him to be more attacking. Just like a blue on a DC is not telling him to join the GK, it tells him to focus more on defensive skills.Quote:
Originally Posted by t11_fan
All its doing is is increasing the chance of using attacking skills. How much difference it makes is debatable because it depends on the initial chance of Attack and the increase applied....and the assumption (mine) that there is a number crunch/comparison in engine decision making.
We can't know how much influence anything has - but we can try to work it out or feel/sense what happens when we change things - without actually knowing.
But Nordeus has said things like (paraphrasing because I don't recall the exact text, they broke my favourites by moving news items I think >.<):
- an aml with red arrow will use striker skills (which I guess means 'attacking' skills rather than 'become a striker')
- red arrows focus a player more on attacking skills
- will move forward (which I consider means try to get forward more rather than ML+red = AML ;) )
It is also noticed that condition used increases with arrowed players (increasing physical skill use?) who are involved in play, just like those involved in pressing or higher intensity tackles or other physical activities.
.......and not knowing doesn't stop us making claims about formations, possession. mentality, tackling etc and performance. ;) Do ratings determine the results or does the result determine the ratings?
Its not like a large mmorpg where we can look at combat/action logs and individual results of actions and crunch the numbers - there are 'no wins a tackle'/'tackles for 99', 'loses the ball', misplaces pass', 'shoots', 'retains possession', 'moves to block', etc logged. Commentary is just a tiny snapshot of selected events and not even always the most important ones.).
So I guess, work out, apply thought, read what they say, observe.....and come up with my own special brand of guff. ;)