Hello.

First of all, I wanted to know if there really are managers here who enjoy changing tactics during a match every minute or even every 30 seconds for 1h30?

When I talk about it, I see a lot of tired people.

• Some of them are on their phones and aren't lucky enough to have access to dual screens.
• You spend 1.5 hours making tactical adjustments, only to end up with random match results.
• Personally, and I think that many people share this view, we have a family, friends, children and a job that doesn't allow us to be connected non-stop for 1.5 hours during a match.

In short, it's interesting to change tactics during a match, it's even great! But wouldn't it be possible to limit these changes? For example, a maximum of 6 times during a match?

I'm sure there'd be a whole other system to put in place, so I don't hold out much hope that this type of change will see the light of day.
But really, players like me who aren't available to focus on an entire match are at a huge disadvantage compared with clubs that are connected 24 hours a day, 365 days a year, and make 80 tactical adjustments during a match.

And I think that to attract new players to the game, we need to review this system, which is far too time-consuming.
I can imagine that many are giving up.

The tactical management of a match on VF is already not very advanced. Your idea would make it even worse.

It's mainly the odds of this mdm that need to be reviewed... and favour the players who are present and motivated...

hazard14: C'est surtout les probabilités de ce mdm qu'il faut revoir... et favorisé les joueurs présents et motivés...

Overall, I'm here. Every day m, almost every match.
But over 90 minutes I can't stay focused for 1h30 checking what my opponent is doing. That's what I'm complaining about.
If I make 5 changes during a match, some people will make adjustments within 15 seconds to counter you. It's impossible for me to win that kind of match. They're almost like robots

The race to the bottom...
You explain to us that you're unhappy to be rewarded less than the player who invested time to win the match...

sora02: Le nivellement par le bas…
Tu nous expliques que tu es mécontent d’être moins récompensé que le joueur qui a investi du temps pour remporter le match…

I'm sorry, but I wouldn't enjoy being connected to a match non-stop for 1.5 hours every day...

Like many people I have a life on the side. My life is not centred on VF alone.

I just offer something to satisfy more people. A happy medium...

It has already been suggested on several occasions that the effective time of a match should be reduced, but most of the old-timers categorically refuse because, in their view, that's what gives VF its charm....
I agree that 1h30 is far too long.

The match should even start 2-0 in favour of the moaners but pfff the old-timers don't want it.

It may not be the best, I agree, but it's VF's DNA and if there's one thing that shouldn't change, it's that.

I think it's normal that in any game, the players who invest the most time should be rewarded.

It's the same for MMORPGs, competitive FPSs, racing FPSs, etc... I'm not going to make a long list.

In an MMO, for example, you can play for 30 minutes a day, enjoy the game at your own pace and take a few months to reach high-level content. At the same time, Kevin the Roxxor, who plays for 3 hours a day, will have unlocked this content before you and will have farmed equipment that your investment won't get you for a long time. But you'll both have had fun playing at your own pace.

As far as matches on VF are concerned, there's already a slow stats loss/recovery mechanism that penalises in-match changes. And the probabilistic nature of the results means that a player who is less present can quite easily beat a player who is invested in every minute of his match.

In this sense, VF is already more 'egalitarian' than many other video games where the competition aspect is present.

I understand your reactions.
That's the charm of VF, yes. But I don't know many people who want to sit and watch 1 match lasting 1 hour 30 minutes every day. Especially in 2025 when the world is spinning fast.
Above all, I think that over time this will lead to a wave of departures as people get bored, departures that won't be compensated for by new arrivals.
But that's just my opinion.

As for the other toxic comments... What's the point? 😂

leniav: Je comprends vos réactions.
C'est le charme de VF oui. Mais je connais pas grand monde qui veuillent rester posé devant 1 match de 1h30 sur un jeu et cela tous les jours. Surtout en 2025 où le monde tourne vite
Je crois surtout que cela mènera sur le temps a une vague de départ avec la lassitude, des départs qui ne seront pas compensés par de nouvelles arrivées.
Mais ce n'est que mon avis.

Pour les autres commentaires toxiques... C'est quoi le but ? 😂

I think the wave you're talking about has already happened. How many managers are left who intensely follow 1.5 hours of matches 56 days a season? Probably very few, and that's a pretty good sign for the mental health of the community.

As far as I'm concerned, following my ie's intensively, my matches as coach of the agreement, and by far my league matches, is already a lot (understand too much). Adjustments, such as reducing the length of matches, have been proposed, without success. Paradoxically, I think that this would make it easier to stick to reality, in the sense that in reality a coach doesn't adjust his team's tactical positioning every minute.

On the other hand, I'm not convinced that restricting the number of times you can change tactics in a match is a good thing. I can imagine matches where, after 15 minutes, you've already made all the tactical moves allowed .... What to do for the remaining 75 minutes.

But then again, all that will only change if the mdj wants it to. Unfortunately, there's not much point in putting him back in the spotlight.

Real 30-minute matches (which can be 90 fictitious minutes, advanced by 3 minutes, with 30 news items.

Several events possible on a news item.

The problem is the duration.