Hello,

I’m starting this thread to provide an overall assessment of gameplay during matches. The latest update has been the subject of much discussion; the idea is that, based on this analysis, everyone can form their own opinion, even without necessarily having tried out all the interfaces.

The conclusion will lead us to realise that the recent changes cannot remain as they are, lest we face a bottleneck that could prove disastrous for the future of VF.

Warning: this is a lengthy post. However, this thread is not sponsored by the Romans!

To begin with, I’ll provide some context and outline the changes made over the last two years, the period when I actually started playing.

• Summer 2024: many VF managers have players with 99 NG; playing styles (short passing, counter-attacking, creative play, direct play, etc.) are very popular. They grant players a bonus of almost 70 per cent of the relevant stat. The style bonus is not affected by physical attributes.

To ‘counter/optimise’ these style bonuses, ‘marking’ players are very common.

VF players use them as follows: 99 in one stat for the bonus, 99 in marking to reduce the opposing attacker’s NG. The reduction to the attacker is more than half their NG.

Thus, even if the player has a NG of 1, mathematically speaking, the player is cost-effective.

NB: It should be noted that a style bonus will primarily provide stats in the centre. (25 per cent on the left, 50 per cent in the centre, 25 per cent on the right.)

• Late 2024 – early 2025: Faced with the proliferation of marking players, Aymeric, dissatisfied with their use, decides to reduce the impact of style bonuses by a few per cent, and he also drastically reduces the NG reduction provided by marking players.

With this change, and despite several tests, marking players are consigned to the scrapheap. This feature of the game gradually falls completely out of favour with managers.

This marks the first update to reduce tactical options.

• During 2025, there were occasional reductions in the percentage impact of playing style relative to a player’s points total, but these were relatively minor. At the same time, a few threads appeared on the MDM forum, with some users expressing a feeling that the game was unresponsive, particularly in big matches.

• Late 2025: another one-off reduction in the impact of playing styles; if I recall correctly, it fell below 65 per cent per point.

‘Style-based’ teams became increasingly rare, except on the PHJ, which remained highly popular.

• Early 2026: a consensus begins to emerge regarding the difficulty of seeing chances or goals in ‘big’ matches. This is particularly noticeable in the Champions League and the Europa League, when both managers are paying close attention.

Managers argue that there is an invisible ‘cap’ on xG. Consequently, many matches end in draws or 1–0 scorelines, where the manager’s influence over tactics appears minimal.

In response, Aymeric decides to remove the cap on individual XG per chance, as well as on XG generation itself, even in big matches. We occasionally see high-scoring matches; this continues until the start of summer.

As for the general mood, the community seems relatively calm regarding the game’s gameplay.

• July 2026: major changes to playing styles. Aymeric decides to increase the points allocation by a few per cent; however, physical attributes now affect points gained.

The previous appeal of teams built entirely around a single ‘style’ becomes obsolete. Mathematically, it would appear that the return after a few minutes of play is entirely negative for teams seeking a large bonus in ONE style.

This update begins to drive VF into a tactical ‘bottleneck’.

We were already seeing fewer and fewer ‘style’ players; this is the final nail in the coffin for managers who have taken this approach.

• Early September 2026: initially for no apparent reason, several major changes.

Firstly, several managers who played closely contested matches found themselves with a historically low XG, almost close to 0, in matches where there was a genuinely significant statistical gap.

Aymeric, in a comment, implied that managers should make fewer tactical changes.

It therefore becomes clear that an artificial ‘restriction’ is in place to prevent managers from making changes if they want to create something.

• A few days later, the gameplay version at the time of writing:

The intense artificial restriction is no longer quite so frustrating. Statistics are updated in real time with every change, whereas previously this happened every minute.

However, each minor change takes 10 seconds.

Consequently, several issues arise:

All these changes, and particularly the most recent one, will mean that managers watching their match will be forced to minimise the number of changes they make as much as possible.

• As the game currently stands, this means it will significantly reduce the number of usable tactics. At first glance, I think that having 2–3 line-ups will minimise the number of changes as much as possible. VF will lose some of its depth.

• The pointlessness of styles

The current state of styles is already at its lowest point in years. This may be intentional, particularly given the recent changes.

However, whereas we still saw clashes of styles before these latest changes, now you have to: click to view the opposition’s style, change your players’ styles, then switch back to the correct style.

That’s at least 5–6 changes just for that. At least 1 minute for ONE style. It’s unusable.

• This will force managers to follow their matches even more closely.

Part of the community would appreciate not having to be glued to their matches quite so much.

This change does not address that issue, as from now on, with updates happening in real time and no changes allowed after 10 seconds, the defending manager can quickly find themselves in trouble.

Whereas before they had a 1-minute breather, now there is none at all.

• Even more randomness

In fact, two managers battling it out would each take turns trying to create a favourable 1-minute window. The cumulative effect of these favourable updates would determine whether or not the manager gained the upper hand.

Now, with these 10-second updates, this information can be taken into account at any moment, and one unlucky micro-update is all it takes for a match to go down the drain.

Note:

• These changes will make no difference to two absent managers.
• These changes will make no difference in the case of an absent manager versus a present manager, unless the latter is making changes all the time.

However,

It would appear that these profound changes to gameplay are linked to several factors:

To do away with the ‘55-00’ meta, where the fastest/most agile manager is rewarded.
It would appear (I don’t wish to pass judgement) that some managers have been caught botting. These changes would therefore (hypothetically) serve as a preventative measure against this.

Given these factors, I propose several solutions:

• An update to the playing styles to bring them up to date.

This could involve a different impact on on-pitch statistics than the current 25 G/50 C/25 D.

It could involve other factors, but as things stand, it seems very clear that this would spell the end for managers who have taken that approach.

• Removing the ability to see in real time via the ‘live’ feed what opposing managers are doing.

This would inevitably be linked to regular but non-systematic match updates.

But the benefit would be to prevent managers who don’t want to play the ‘55-60’ game from having 1 minute to prepare their attacking and defensive tactics.

VF would resemble a head-to-head battle with an interesting ‘mind game’ element.

Perhaps linking this with a punitive MDM, even if it means conceding numerous goals, could be a great added bonus.

• Restoring some prestige to marking.

As things stand, and regardless of how it’s used (even when boosting a marking player’s NG), this profile is of absolutely no interest.

Admittedly, it used to be overused, and a reduction in its utility was necessary. However, today, it has completely disappeared. One less tactical variable.

• Return to the 3-minute ‘dry’ update system?

Some VF managers say they don’t like having to be glued to the screen every second of their match.

Potentially reverting to the old system, with 31 very strict 3-minute updates, might satisfy both the most dedicated players and those who’d like to relax.

There are probably other options I haven’t thought of.

In any case, the situation seems crystal clear: the current gameplay is frustrating everyone who wants to play.

In the medium to long term, the very charm of VF – its tactical ‘rock-paper-scissors’ match-ups – will fade away. Many tactical variables will fall by the wayside.

Taking preventative measures against abuse may seem necessary. However, at present, it’s the whole of VF – regardless of a manager’s profile – that ends up being penalised.

Solutions need to be found to satisfy everyone. The game is rich; matches allow for hundreds and hundreds of variables – let’s not over-restrict it.

Apologies in advance for the massive post. Sorry for any mistakes.

Thanks to those who’ve read this, and I hope this thread doesn’t go off on a tangent!

Il est clair qu’en l'état on va dans le mur.

Le combo timer-actualisation à la seconde c’est pas viable. Les matchs entre deux managers actifs c’est une plaie à suivre.

==> Les changements sont à la fois incessants et hyper compliqués à faire et hyper restreints.

L'actualisation à la seconde des stats c’est déjà une très mauvaise idée en tant que telle.

VF est un jeu qui doit etre accessible. L'avenir des jeux c’est pas de passer 90 minutes non stop devant son écran sans savoir exactement ce qu’il se passe.

Le coeur du MDM et les tactiques permettent suffisamment de profondeur. Pourquoi tout compliquer et tout rendre illisible ? Revenons à des événements discrets en cachant les mouvements adverses.

L’autre solution c’est de complètement changer l'outil tactique du jeu pour coller à ces nouveautés. Mais il y a tellement plus simple à faire...

Je comprends pas que ca ne saute pas aux yeux...

VF va juste perdre des joueurs, parce qu'au delà de l'aspect sympa et nostalgie pour d’autres, si le cœur du jeu est pas bon les joueurs vont pas rester.

Et là, soyons clair, le coeur du jeu n'est pas bon du tout, c’est meme mauvais : c’est pas plaisant à jouer, c’est pas clair du tout et ca manque terriblement de profondeur pour peu que deux joueurs veulent jouer leur matchs à fond.

• La particularité de VF, sa grande force, c’est son moteur de match. Il n'est pas mis en valeur en ce moment.

Il ne suffit pas de grand chose pourtant.