Hello everyone,

I’d like to bring this topic back up, as it seems to have been somewhat forgotten, because I’d genuinely like to understand the direction VF intends to take with the latest changes to the MDM.

These changes have been the subject of much discussion, and I think that’s quite logical given how the game has evolved. We’ve gone from a relatively fast-paced game, where tactical decisions and regular updates allowed for dynamic shifts, to a much more static game, where matches between two active players become particularly long, repetitive and, let’s face it, frankly boring.

It’s becoming particularly difficult to make a difference during a match. Gaps are becoming rarer, xG figures are plateauing, the multitude of line-ups and playing styles seem to be losing their appeal in favour of a few favoured approaches, and it’s therefore becoming much harder to catch your opponent off guard. The game thus tends to become more linear, with an ever-greater advantage for the team that is strongest on paper. If tactical changes during a match are no longer really encouraged, as certain comments from Aymeric might have suggested. One might legitimately question what role tactical thinking still plays in a match.

I fully understand that some players appreciate this new way of playing, particularly those who wish to spend less time on their matches. This is a legitimate expectation, and it is clear that not everyone plays in the same way. However, why should we necessarily limit the options available to players who like to get stuck in, create more chances, anticipate their opponents’ moves and seek to make a difference through their tactical choices?

In any game, it seems normal to me that a player who wishes to put in more effort should be able to do so. Some might call it ‘tryhard’, but everyone is free to play as they see fit, as long as it remains within the bounds of the game. For many, in fact, it is precisely this opportunity to make a difference through their commitment, their reading of the match and their tactical choices that made the matches interesting.
However, with the current MDM, I feel that this commitment is being rewarded less and less. The match now seems to hinge mainly on a few key events, half-time and substitutions, whereas tactical depth and the ability to adapt during the match should, in fact, form a significant part of the experience. The game therefore seems far more predictable, and neutralising the opposition’s attacks seems much easier.

Nevertheless, it seems to me that some interesting suggestions for improvement have been put forward by the community and deserve to be given serious consideration. I’m thinking in particular of the return of extended updates, every three minutes, with the opponent’s changes hidden. Such a solution could be an interesting compromise, allowing for a greater sense of rhythm and more opportunities to adapt, whilst preventing players from reacting automatically to changes made by their opponent. This would restore value to anticipation, risk-taking and tactical thinking, without necessarily reverting to a system that requires players to constantly monitor their match.

Beyond my own personal feelings, I am seeing more and more members expressing their disappointment, or even considering quitting the competition because of this change. I certainly do not claim to speak for everyone, and I know that some players are happy with this new system. But I think it is important not to ignore those who deeply appreciated the game as it was before.

I would therefore really like to understand the objectives behind these changes. What is the aim? Is it to reduce the time spent watching matches, to rebalance the competition, or to place greater emphasis on the intrinsic quality of the squads?
If that is the case, aren’t we at risk of sacrificing a large part of the game’s tactical depth and, with it, the enjoyment of the most dedicated players?

The aim is not to criticise for the sake of it, but to understand the vision behind these changes. VF has always been interesting, in my view, because it was possible to make a difference in ways other than simply through the quality of one’s squad. I’d simply like to understand why this aspect seems so diminished today, and whether this is really the direction you want the game to take in the future.

Apologies for this long post; I just wanted to share my thoughts with you and try to understand yours. I don’t wish to spark an endless debate, but simply to point out that the unique flavour of VF is slowly fading away…

You’re right to apologise for the long-winded post! You’ve no idea what you’ve just done. Have you thought about those who usually struggle to string three words together? You’ve given them enough to finish off the box of paracetamol.

As for the substance of it, well, we always end up back at the same old thing. We’ll have the same discussions and, with a bit of luck, Aymeric will change something – but I’m not sure we’ll find the change any better or more in line with what the community wants. I think his vision is too far removed from that of the players.

Have a lovely Sunday, everyone!

The latest changes to the game only serve to reinforce the wish I have already expressed on several occasions:

To reduce the duration of matches to 15 minutes, with updates approximately every 30 seconds and a setting for the frequency of events (chances, goals, fouls, etc.) adjusted accordingly so that, ultimately, the current scale of events that occur over 90 minutes is maintained.

In short, replace 90 minutes where you find yourself yawning a bit with 15 minutes where you’re on your toes.

Or we could simply go back to the previous MDM!

Let’s not get carried away – I reckon the direction they’re taking will be the one that shapes the game’s future, perhaps with fewer players and more multiplayer to keep it going.

Les changements tactiques mettent trop de temps, c'est une catastrophe.
10min pour passer de gauche à droite.
Il faut modifier ça au plus vite...

Je vais me faire l’avocat du diable, mais moi je prends beaucoup plus de plaisir avec ce nouveau MDM plutôt qu’avec l’ancien.

Je pense que j’ai trop souvent rencontré des adversaires hyperactifs, qui changent 4 postes, 3 consignes individuelles, les consignes offensives et défensives, le style de jeu, tout ça dans les 5 dernières secondes de chaque actu pendant 90 minutes. Si t’es pas devant ton match à chaque minute, tu n’as pas la moindre chance de gagner. Et bis repetita toutes les 48 heures, saison après saison… Et quand par malheur tu accroches un résultat, ton adversaire te MP pour t’envoyer des mots doux et ton match termine sur des liens obscures du VForum et de ses fameuses carottes.

Tu défends le fait que les plus actifs sont récompensés, mais y a-t-il vraiment besoin de ça ? Je pense être actif chaque jour et pourtant j’ai pas envie de saigner des yeux tous les 2 jours parce que je dois fixer l’écran non stop et cliquer dans tous les sens. Ça a assez duré. Si on doit revenir à un truc comme ça, alors faisons un bond dans le passé et remettons des actu toutes les 5 minutes. Ça permet de pouvoir vivre en parallèle du match…

Et puis, pour un jeu qui se veut proche de l’IRL, ça fait totalement sens que les consignes appliquées mettent un certain temps avant d’être complètement opérationnelles. Je n’ai jamais vu un coach sur un banc de touche dire à son équipe « toi, tu étais milieu défensif gauche, passe attaquant de soutien droit. Toi, tu étais milieu offensif axial, passe attaquant gauche. Les gars, on jouait la possession, on arrête tout, on passe en longue balle vers l’avant pendant 48 secondes puis on se remettra comme avant »

Bref, le nouveau MDM se défend, si certains ne l’aiment pas et repartent sur une vague de formation je pense à tous ceux comme moi qui ont préféré former avec l’ancien MDM, dégouté de croiser ces managers qui avaient le feu au bout des doigts…

It’s fine as it is, mdm – Nicularo’s right :)

Enjoy the game, and pick up a new CD – it’s the sales at Fnac Musique xD

Otherwise, I think there’s a happy medium between the so-called ‘epileptic’ MDM mentioned earlier and the current one, which is brain-dead.
See the ideas suggested by Galy.