Need help about arrows.

[Peter Renn]

That's why I don't think of arrows as 'position changes'. I think of them as desire or eagerness to get forward (or back). An MR with a red arrow tis still an MR in my mind, but its an MR that will get forward to an advanced position (and use more condition doing it) than if it had no arrow. I also think that a MR with a blue arrow will still attack but when the ball is lost he'll get back quicker than if no arrow (but again will lose more condition doing so).

In my mind it also sits better alongside the Mentality settings in Orders. You can use mentality to make the whole team eager to attack then use red arrows to make individuals even more eager to attack. But thats just me.

Im curious about the advanced position u mentioned, the advanced position of mr would be amr, and with blue he would go one position behind, would be dmr, so it is kinda position thing, just depends whether u have the ball o u defend.i think as u said u can take care of these things just by the mentality, and defender and dmc and normal midfielder i think still defend normal even if u use attack mentality, its not like they then only in the opponents half, i think attacking mentality just means they all go one step forward if u have the ball, so no arrows needed even with for example attacking mentality defender after lose the ball still defend back haha. I think half of top eleven user dont ever use any arrows n still win games n stuff, n i agree to the former post, blue on for example dc o wing back o red on Stricker is nonsense as there is no more forward or backward in their position play

[Buffs Mad]

Im curious about the advanced position u mentioned, the advanced position of mr would be amr, and with blue he would go one position behind, would be dmr, so it is kinda position thing, just depends whether u have the ball o u defend.

I mean it not as a 'fixed game starting position' sense - I could probably have said 'get forward, more advanced' instead. My personal belief (not based on any hard evidence) is that a red arrow doesn't change an MR to an AMR. It makes him more eager to get forward - he's still an MR and adopts starting positions in moves that an MR would,but then attacks quicker than a normal MR would..

For example: a 3-5-2 with red arrows on the wide men is not an 3-3-2W-2 which has no arrows (in my mind). In the 3-5-2 example the MR with red arrow will try to get forward (and possibly into the space an AMR would be in).....but he doesn't start as an AMR he is starting as an MR. Whereas in the 2W example the AMR starts as an AMR so in the same time it takes MR to move up, he will have moved forward too. In other words an MR with red arrow and an AMR in a foot race will start at different points but the MR will run quicker.

I'd be able to explain it better if I counters on a table that I could move to show you.

EDIT: lol, in the time I took to write and rewrite that I missed my match. Thank goodness that my team trolled 3 goals in the last 10 mins to win 3-1. >.<

[Peter Renn]

I mean it not as a 'fixed game starting position position' - I could probably have said 'get forward, more advanced' instead. My personal belief (not based on any hard evidence) is that a red arrow doesn't change an MR to an AMR. It makes him more eager to get forward.

For example: a 3-5-2 with red arrows on the wide men is not an 3-3-2W-2 which has no arrows (in my mind). In the 3-5-2 example the MR with red arrow will try to get forward (and possibly into the space an AMR would be in).....but he doesn't start as an AMR he is starting as an MR. Whereas in the 2W example the AMR starts as an AMR so in the same time it takes MR to move up, he will have moved forward too. In other words an MR with red arrow and an AMR in a foot race will start at different points but the MR will run quicker.

I'd be able to explain it better if I counters on a table that I could move to show you.

Yes of course i agree u always start in your position and then then for example the mr while attacking goes as amr and while defending he can go back into a dmr, but still normal position is mr i know, that what i try to say is it depends u attack o defend where ur player will be but i say if i play with dmc o amr i dont need red arrows on mr o dc cause i have players already in this position
And a dc o striker doesn't need red o blue arrows as they can't go more back o forward

[Buffs Mad]

Yes of course i agree u always start in your position and then then for example the mr while attacking goes as amr and while defending he can go back into a dmr, but still normal position is mr i know, that what i try to say is it depends u attack o defend where ur player will be but i say if i play with dmc o amr i dont need red arrows on mr o dc cause i have players already in this position

Yes, and if you play against a team with an AML and you have an MR you can put a blue arrow on the MR to try to get him to track back but he might not make it and won't do the same job as a DMR being there to specifically mark him....... but he will do a better job than an MR without an arrow.

But I'm not saying another way of thinking about it is wrong.....this is just the way I think about it because it makes more sense to me. But sense, logic and this game could be 'strangers' fated never to meet. XD

[Peter Renn]

Yes, and if you play against a team with an AML and you have an MR you can put a blue arrow on the MR to try to get him to track back but he might not make it and won't do the same job as a DMR being there to specifically mark him....... but he will do a better job than an MR without an arrow.

But I'm not saying another way of thinking about it is wrong.....this is just the way I think about it because it makes more sense to me. But sense, logic and this game could be 'strangers' fated never to meet. XD

It sounds correct n makes sense, so yea if u dont have a specific player arrows can do, but they don't replace a player for the position u simulate with arrows

[Peter Renn]

It sounds correct n makes sense, so yea if u dont have a specific player arrows can do, but they don't replace a player for the position u simulate with arrows

And so, what's with red for striker and blue for dc, where is the logic there?

[Buffs Mad]

And so, what's with red for striker and blue for dc, where is the logic there?

Well a striker will hardly ever be in that starting position that the game demands he be placed in. The red arrow merely means he'll break forward faster than if he didn't have it. For example if the opposition is attacking he might be back near the half way line but will break faster when his team get the ball. He might be back making a defensive header at a corner but he'll break faster when attacking. An important point in this theory is that since the arrow causes him to lose condition faster, he might become more tired than an 'unarrowed' ST....so the arrow advantage might be lost late on and he might even be slower than an unarroed st at the end....who knows. You can also think what happens at kick off.....the forward line are on the half way line taking the kick, whether they have arrows or not.....red arrowed strikers will get forward from the kick off quicker, if they have the ball ofc.

It's just a more helpful thing for me than the 1 box forward propsition. But I better stop there or people might think that just because I can rationalise it and fire out lots of words then it must be right - which is not true.

EDIT: Apologies to anyone forced to read this guff. I was answering questions and forgot where I was. Nothing here is true - no matter how convincing it might appear. Its just a way of thinking that helps me get through my daily games.