|
|
转贴自：playcm论坛
翻译者：zeusyuan、valencia_h
文中提到的第一部分在：
http://fmfans.cn/viewthread.php?tid=103403&extra=page%3D1
第一部分前几天看见有人贴了 还给翻译了 偶刚刚读完第2部分 感觉受益非浅 share给所有同学们
原贴位置： http://community.sigames.com/gro ... 519717/m/5802097871
TT&F Default Tactics: A Rule Document for Tactic Building
This thread will run in conjunction with the Tactical Theorems and Frameworks Thread. Its aim is to list the series of rules that the TT&F thread has discussed in detail and make them easily accessible to anybody who wants to build their own tactics. In conjunction with the threads we will post some of our own default tactics in the new Download Centre. It is important to remember if employing one of our defaults that they must be tweaked to suit your own team and are supposed to be replacements for the FM06 Defaults only. They will be posted as: TT&F Default (Formation i.e.4-4-2, Type i.e. Normal).
这个帖子是上一篇"战术理论与框架理论"的延续。目的是将上文中提到的一些规则做一些详细的描述 好让每一个想自己创建战术的人更容易接受前文所提到的理论 此外 我们还提供一些更具这些理论创造出来的阵型在下载中心。 如果你使用了其中的阵型 请一定记住根据本队的情况作相应的修改
Default Tactic Building
When default tactic building it is imperative that the construct follows a set of pre-defined rules or the tactic becomes personalized rather than standardized and runs the risk of being labeled a super-tactic. Thus, the builder must follow the rules listed here to the letter, so that all default tactics follow the same philosophy.
Default tactics focus on player positioning above all else. The builder will define player mentality, creative freedom and closing down as we believe they all impact on player positioning. All other individual settings will be at mixed /default.
The following document lists pre-defined terms for player types and a set of rules to be followed by anyone wishing to build a default tactic.
当创建一个新阵的时候， 这个新阵一定要遵循一些已经“事先定义”好的规则（字面翻译，可以理解成 基础的 被大家认可的规则）， 否则这个阵将变得过于个性化 而不符合标准（被大家认可的） 同时还要承担被人称为 “超级阵”的风险。 因此，新阵应该“严格（字面的意思该是涿字涿句）”遵循下面所以条的规则 ， 这样任何新的阵就可以有一个共同的理论基础。
默认战术中把球员的位置看得比任何其他设置都重要。 现在我们还将定义球员的 心态（进攻/防守），创造度，逼抢程度，因为这些都将影响球员的位置 其他的单项设置都将设为混合/默认
下面我们将定义球员的类型 和一系列的用来创造新阵的理论
Player Definitions 球员定义
GK: Goalkeeper
DC: Central defender
FB: Full-back
WB: Wing-Back
DMC: Defensive midfielder
MCd: Central midfielder with defensive responsibilities 负责防守的mc
MR/L: Deep lying wingers 不怎么突前的边前卫
MC: Central midfielder
MCa: Central midfielder with attacking responsibilities 负责进攻的mc
AMC: Attacking Midfielder
AMR/L: Advanced wingers
FR/L: Wing forwards
ST1: Deep lying striker 拖后的前锋
ST2: Advanced striker 突前的st
The Rule of Two 2的规则
The Rule of Two is based upon the assumption that players must have a variety of acceptable passing options available to them. If players are too close together they are too easy to contain, and passing breaks down. If players are too far apart, too many ambitious balls are hit, and passing breaks down. Therefore, each player must be able to pick out someone to pass too who has a mentality within two positions of his own.
Thus, in a 4-4-2 normal tactic, the system would run as follows:
2的规则是在在这个假设基础之上的 就是每一个球员都必须有超过一个的传球对象/接应对象 如果球员站位太靠近就会被互相制约 传球失败 如果太远 有难度的球太多（字面意思：太多的有雄心的球） 也会失败。 因此 每一个人球员 如A 都必须有一个接应的球员B 他(B)的心态必须要和A的心态设置不超过2格
按照这个理论 对一个默认的442来说 必须遵循以下规则 （数字代表心态设置）
CDs: Mentality = 6
FBs: Mentality = 8/9/10
MCd: Mentality = 8/9/10
MR/L: Mentality = 11/12
MCa: Mentality = 13/15
ST1: Mentality = 15/13
ST2: Mentality = 17
To implement a 4-4-2 defensive, the CDs would begin at 3, for attacking they would begin at 9. Obviously, barrows and farrows can be used to tweak the settings further, but the basic setup must follow the above. Furthermore, individual users can be told to tweak settings for some players, as long as they don’t stray too far from the original plan. For example, a user may want the ST1 to drop deeper, and for the MCa to support the attack. The MCa and ST1 mentalities could then be switched, with the basic rule remaining intact. This rule can easily be implemented into all formations and systems.
如果是防守阵型中卫设置成3， 攻击阵可以为9。 当然了 向后（back arrow 缩写barrow了）或向前(forward arrow)拉线可以对设置产生影响， 不过 基本的设置要遵循上面提到。 你还可以对一些球员作进一步的设置 只要他们和我们基本要求相差不远 比如 你可以让拖后前锋st1回撤更多 负责攻击的mca更多的参与进攻 这样mca和st1的设置就可以互相对换 这样就不会对基本要求不会有破坏。 这条理论可以在所有的阵型和战术体系中被使用。
Radius Theory 半径理论
Radius Theory assumes that creative freedom and closing down work by setting up a virtual circle around a player. Thus, if a player has a closing down of 15, he will close down any player who enters the virtual radius of 15. If he has a closing down of 5, the radius is smaller, so he will only close down when the player is on top of him. In relation to creative freedom, a player will wander around the pitch trying to find space within the defined radius of his creative freedom settings.
半径理论假设 创造自由度 和 逼抢 通过设置一个虚拟的以球员为圆心的圆形范围来工作的。 因此 如果球员的逼抢设为15 他就会逼抢进入他周围半径为15的圆形范围内的球员 如果逼抢为5 半径变小了 他就只会逼抢接近他的球员（on top of 是 紧接着的意思）。对于创超度来说 球员会在他的这个圆形范围内寻可能的配合
Logic suggests there shouldn’t be too many people on the pitch with high settings for either creative freedom or closing down. It is important in default tactics that the defence is set up correctly, with closing down/creative freedom between 3 and 5 for all defenders. However, we must assume that certain types of players have a role that employs higher settings for creative freedom/closing down. Thus, the following settings will apply to certain types of player.
逻辑上来说 场上不应该有很多的球员都有高创造自由度和逼抢度。 所以战术中 防守方面一定要设置正确 可以将所有后卫 创造力/逼抢 设置成3-5 当然我们必须让场上一些焦色具有较高的 创造力/逼抢 下面是对相应球员的设置
DMC: Closing Down to First Notch of Often 后腰 逼抢设置成经常的第一格
MCd: Closing Down to First Notch of Often 防守mc 逼抢设置成经常的第一格
MCa: Creative Freedom to First Notch of Often 进攻mc 创造力设成much的第一个（原文是often 估计是笔误 该是much）
AMC: Creative Freedom to First Notch of Often 同mca
ST1: Creative Freedom to First Notch of Often 同mca
ST2: Closing Down to First Notch of Often 同dmc
The logic behind these settings is that the DMC or MCd will sit in front of the back four and close down opposition players before they can get too close to the last line of defence. The ST2 will close down the opposition defence when they are in possession, but will also be sitting on the shoulder of a DC most of the time, which is the ideal place for him to be if possession is won and a counter attack is launched.
这样设置的理由是 dmc和mcd 应该在后卫线之前逼抢对手 尽量让他们不要和后防线靠的太近 拖后的st 会去逼抢持球的后卫 而且可以让这个st大部分时间都在在后卫的身边/侧面 这样一旦获得球权 他将处于一个完美的位置 可以形成一个反击
The MCa or AMC need to find space behind the front man, as they will be looking for opportunities to play killer passes. The ST1 will have high creative freedom, because as it is coupled with a deeper mentality, logic suggests it will help to pull the opposition defence out of position.
而对amc或mca来说 他们需要观察到前锋身前的空间 这样他们就可以寻找传出关键球的机会 st1设置成高 创造度因为他们被设成了相对较低的进攻心态， 逻辑上来说 这样可以把对方后卫从他们的位置上吸引出来
5x5/Defensive Line Theory 5x5防线理论
5x5 or Defensive Line Theory assumes that most teams will have a basic philosophy of five attack and five defend. Originally, the thinking here was that 5 players should have an equal defensive mentality, and five should have can equal attacking mentality. There were problems employing this type of system as there were big gaps between the attacking players and defensive players. The solution was to ensure the defensive line setting was equal to the mentality of the attacking players. Thus, attacking mentality is 15, defensive line is 15.
55理论假设大部分的球队都有5名队员负责进攻5名防守。 原本这5名防守球员应该有相同的防守心态 5名进攻球员有相同的进攻心态。 但这样 会在进攻于防守球员产生很大的空间 解决办法是 防线设置成进攻球员的心态的位置 比如说 进攻心态是15 防线也放到15。
However, this must be slightly re-evaluated in conjunction with the Rule of Two. The Rule of Two insists on individual mentalities throughout the team, but in its normal setup has 5 players with mentalities of 10 or less, and 5 with mentalities of 11 or more, so still follows 5x5 thinking. Thus, the defensive line must be set to the same mentality as the most advanced midfielder. This will ensure the tactical framework remains tight and difficult to break down.
于是 这样我们就要从新思考“2的规则” 该规则非常重视球队中每一个球员的心态 通常我们会把5各防守的球员设成10或者更少 进攻11或者更多 这样还是遵循了55的理论 于是 防线设置必须设置成突前中场的心态 这样可以保证战术框架紧密 不容易被击破
Slider Theory 滑动条理论
As we believe width, tempo and time wasting have an effect on tactic type the following rules must be obeyed. In each case the setting will be the first notch of its type in the slider.
我们相信 宽度 节奏 和 拖延时间的设置同样会影响战术类型 因此下面的规则需要遵守。 每一想设置都是指该状态在滑动条的第一次出现的位置
Default Attacking Tactic: Width: Wide; Tempo: Quick; Time Wasting: Rarely
攻击阵 宽度设置成宽 节奏快 拖延时间 少
Default Normal Tactic: Width: Default; Tempo: Default; Time Wasting: Default
普通阵 宽度 默认 节奏 默认 拖延时间 默认
Default Defensive Tactic: Width: Narrow; Tempo: Slow; Time Wasting: Often
防守阵 宽度 窄 节奏慢 拖延时间 经常
Acknowledgements 这部分是感谢的话就不翻了
As always I would like to thank everyone who has contributed to the TT&F thread and helped to make FM06 a more enjoyable experience. I would especially like to thank RedefiningForm for the Rule of Two theory, Tays for Radius Theory and Asmodeus for the 5x5 Defensive Line Theory. I would also like to thank Corned Beef & Cabbage, Elrawkum, ntfc, Neonlights, GaryEFC, and mickthegreek for their suggestions and support, plus many, many others who have used the thread and commented on it
继续帖 以下均为 valencia_h 帮忙翻译的 多谢！
On Breaking Down a Massed Defence
破密集防守
This is extremely difficult to test, as once someone scores the AI changes tactics and you no longer face the same challenge. However, I do now have an idea on how to approach it.
关于这点非常难以试验，因为一旦得分之后，电脑改变战术，你就不再是面对相同的战术。可是对此我还是有一点办法。
You need to go against the 5x5 rule to an extent. This is because 5x5 is designed to compact your formation and make it difficult to break down, which you don't need to do if you are facing a team that is sitting back and focussing on not conceding, In fact, the only thing you need to worry about is a quick break, which a high defensive line makes more possible.
在一定程度上你需要违反5X5理论，因为这个理论的原意在于使你的阵型紧凑和不易被打乱。但是，当你面对的是一支收缩防守，不会压出来跟你对攻的队伍时，你需要防备的就只是快速反击了，而出现这种情况的可能性对于防线压得比较靠上的就比较大了。
The idea is to set a formation that has most of your players in space or looking for space all the time. Thus, you need to first deepen your defensive line to try and pull the other team out of their compact formation. You don't need to worry about their MCs getting between your defence and midfield, as they will have very defensive instructions and won't even try. You then need to up the normal RoT settings by 4 notches pretty much across the pitch. Make sure only your MCd or DMC closes down. That way you force the opposition to try things, rather than commit yourself to tackles, and generally your DCs mop up comfortably at the back. You also keep the rest of the team in space by reducing their closing down instructions. You will see that your MCs have a lot of space in which to operate and will be able to pick their passes,
而我的观点就是设置一个阵型，让大部分自己的球员尽量处于空档或尽力去寻找空档。因此，你需要深化你的防线，尽力去拉开对方紧凑的阵型。你不需要去担心对方的MCs在你的防线跟中场之间的破坏作用，因为他们都被严令全力防守，不会尝试进攻。这时你需要将正常设置的状态拉到大量的位置。保证只有你的MCd或DMC是贴身防守的，与其自己铲球，还不如迫使对方犯错丢球，然后自己的后卫可以在后方轻松处理。同时你也要减少其他球员的贴身防守设置来使得他们拥有更多空间，这样的话你就能看到你的MCs有更多的机会去从容处理球和更合理的出球。
You should hold up the ball with your front men. This is because you can't quick counter anyway because of the oppositions defensive setup, so you need to allow your MCs time to support the front men. Holding up the ball will bring them into play more. You also need to play with wide settings and a slow tempo, again to give players time to support the attack. Also play with mixed passing focus, as it allows for more angles in trying to break them down. Counter attack and offside trap should be off.
前面的球员必须控制好球，这是因为对手是密集防守，你没有机会打快速反击，所以你需要允许你的MCs适时的支持前方球员，也需要设置球场宽度利用较多，比赛节奏较慢来给球员时间去进攻。同时，传球设置混合，这样可以多角度去破对方的密集防守。快速反击跟越位陷阱不要设置。
In testing I achieved the following results. I played 4-4-1-1, the opposition 4-4-2 with the MCs sitting deep, switching at half-time if still 0-0 to a 4-1-4-1. Please bear in mind it was the same match replayed 8 times. With other methods I lost twice and drew twice.
在测试中，我取得以下结果：阵型是4411，对方设置是442，MCs后撤，如果半场比分0：0的话改为4141。我重复打了这场比赛八次，其他方法失利两次，平两次。
（用作者的方法）3 wins and 1 draw (conceding 0 in total)
三胜一平，丢球0
10-14% possession advantage
百分之10到14的控球时间优势
75%+ passing vs 65%- passing
百分之75以上的传球成功率对百分之65以下的传球成功率
4.5/1 shot ratio
4.5比1的射门
4/1 on target shot ratio
4比1的射中门框
Two half-time remarks of 'The opposition haven't had a sniff'
两次中场评论是：对手没有喘息机会。。
However, once you score you MUST change formation, as it is extremely vunerable against midfielders who are trying to get behind the defence.
但是，一旦你得分了，你必须改变战术，因为对方中场球员很有可能会压上进攻。
Why Comebacks Happen
为什么大逆转会发生
I believe that the 'comeback bug' is an unfortunate side effect of SI's attampts to eradicate the succes of 'super-tactics' and not a huge game engine flaw as some are suggesting. Indeed, the possibility of a 'super-tactic' would indicate flawed AI, as it is unable to cope with a specific set of instructions, no matter how illogical they may be in real football terms. I can give a few examples. I would clean up in FM05 with an ultra-narrow/slow/short tactic. Others employed forum super tactics (PassnMove, 4-4-2 Domination, Supernova etc) that guaranteed big scoring wins. There is also the 'super-corner' routine that sets 8 players on the far post and one outside area that results in multituds of goals.
我认为“逆转bug”是Si为了根除所谓的“超级战术”而出现的，而不是有些人说的由于游戏引擎过大所导致的。确实，超级战术的可能性证明电脑智能的缺陷，因为它不可能去对付一个非常精确的战术设置，无论这个战术在实际的足球世界中如何不合理。举一些例子，我整理过FM05的一些战术（极少利用宽度、节奏慢、短传的战术，其他论坛的统治442，超级nova等等战术）这些战术都能保证大比分胜利。也还有所谓的超级角球战术，就是8个球员在后门柱，一个在禁区外这样的设置。
Did people hugely complain about these being 'game engine flaws'? No, because we are human and we like to win. I never used any of the downloadable tactics, but mine was just as 'super' as those and would not work in real life. SI's response to the success of the super tactic is to program a set of variables that could beat a variety of tactical systems. They would especially pick apart any flawed or unrealistic tactical setups and any team employing them would be havily punished. I will explain how I have come to this conclusion, and what I think can be done.
有人抱怨这些人为利用游戏引擎缺陷的战术吗？没有，因为我们都是人，我们喜欢胜利，我从未用过这些战术，但是，我的战术也是可以称为超级战术，也是绝对不可能在现实中发生的。SI对超级战术的出现的反应就是编出一套包含很多变量，可以应对各种战术的系统，它可以粉碎一切不现实或有缺陷的战术设置，使用这些战术的球队会得到重重的惩罚。下面我解释一下我怎么得出这个结论，我所想的都是已经经过实践的。
Buxton, one of the FM05 tactical magicians, started to become involved with the Tactical Theorems thread after ignoring it previously. He, like so many of you, had been extremely frustrated with FM06, to the extent he wasn't enjoying it at all. We entered a dialogue and he switched to a system similar to the one TT&F suggests, and immediately started having success at Barcelona. However, he still found it difficult to break down small teams with massed defences (logical, as that is difficult in real life) and would get hit on the break or revert to the long ball disaster many of us have experienced. He asked us to look at how we could approach breaking down such a system.
Buxton是FM05的战术大师，开始玩06的时候非常艰难，他沿用了原先的战术思路，忽视了之前所提到的SI的系统会对超级战术进行惩罚。结果遭受严重挫折。之后他就再也不用了。他沿用了“TT&F”所建议的一套设置，马上在巴萨收到成效，可是，他仍旧发现难以破小球队的密集防守战术，而且经常被反击得分或者远射得分（这是合理的，现实中也是如此）。他的经历让我们有了寻找在06这个系统下破密集防守的想法。
I rarely came up against that kind of thing in my game, as I am in LLM, but I found a match where it was happening, and tested some theories. It was a perfect match for the test, for although they employed a 10-men behind the ball system, they were, player for player, better than me. I found that I had to abandon some of our theories, especially the 5x5 Defensive Line Theory in order to succeed. I discovered that you had to spread your team to win a match of this type. I dropped my defensive line deep, in oppostion of 5x5 Theory, and widened my formation, employed a slow-tempo passing game (again, going against some of our theories which believe high-tempo is better for attack) with both front men and a MC holding up the ball. The theory was I would allow players time to get into position, and I shouldn't compact the pitch with a high defensive line as space was paramount. What it meant was that the defensive line was out of synch with the rest of the formation, but it didn't matter, because the opposition weren't trying to flood the midfield or attack except via two-man breaks. I achieved a fair degree of success in breaking down a massed defence doing this.
我很少提及在我游戏中发生的同样事情，但我发现比赛从哪开始，而且检验一些理论，测试理论的比赛是非常完美的，即使是十个人都在防守的阵型，他们阵型非常严密，比我的还好。我发现有些理论必须摒弃，尤其是5X5理论。我发现要在这一类型的比赛中获胜就必须展开队伍阵型。我把防线回收，扩展阵型，（为了反驳5X5理论）沿用慢节奏的传球（同样为了反驳快节奏更有利于进攻），用两个前锋跟一个MC控球。这个理论在于我给球员时间去落位。我不把防线压上的原因在于空间是非常重要的，虽然有可能造成阵型脱节但是不要紧，对方不可能压过中场或者进攻超过两个人的反击。所以在破密集防守方面我取得了一定成功。
However, this system will get destroyed if a team starts to flood the midfield. In that situation you will have a deep sitting defensive line, full-backs pushing, with no midfield cover. The opposition will get their midfield between your MCs and DCs and will undoubtedly score. So, you need to compact your formation to stop it happening. Our basic theories are based on a compact and difficult to break down system, so switching to a counter attacking version of one of our setups tends to tighten things up once the opposition start to push forward, and you will likely score again on the break and kill the match off.
但是，如果队伍开始压过中场的话，这个阵型就会被破坏，在你将防线后撤，中场又全力进攻，防线缺乏中场保护的情况下，对方会将他们的中场置于你的中场球员和后卫之间的空档，得分也就不难了。所以你必须让阵型紧凑来阻止这种情况发生，我们的理论是基于一个紧凑和难以打乱的阵型，所以一旦当对手开始进攻的时候就要改变战术，设置快速反击和贴身防守。
Here, we are looking at two tactical systems that must be employed when facing two very different tactcial setups. One is to break down a stubborn foe, the other is a solid formation that is both difficult to break down, but also creates chances. However, the first system, although great at creating chances against poor teams, or massed defences, is easily attackable once the other team starts to push forward and actually tries to play football. The second system, although good against most teams, falls down against a massed defence, and you are vunerable on the break. SI have obviously looked at how super tactics work, and programmed in an AI reaction to a variety of formation types, and created opposing tactics to break down all forms of 'supertactism.' It does seem that the 'comeback bug' is an unfortunate side effect of this.
这里，当我们面对两种不同的战术设置时，就必须采取不同的战术体系。一种是全力进攻以对付密集防守的对手，一种是让阵型难以被对手打乱，同时也能创造机会。可是，第一种体系，虽然在对弱队或者密集防守时容易创造机会，但一旦对方改变战术反攻，也容易被对方得分，第二种体系，虽然适合对付大多数球队，但是很难破密集防守。SI注意到超级战术的原理，开发出一套程序来应对。让电脑可以创造战术去破超级战术。所以大逆转就是这样产生的。
I agree that a poor team shouldn't be able to comeback against a big team from 3 goals down. However, I believe if the user employs an illogical tactical system, he should be punished for it, not rewarded, as the 'supertacticians' tended to be, This is what I think the 'comeback bug' is doing; ensuring illogical systems DO NOT work. It also means that an open pitch, ultra-attacking system is hugely risky to keep on employing against a compact, pushing team that is trying to get back in a match, as it would be in real life. It means a manager must have a set of tactical systems to employ for a variety of situations/teams. I think that is a massive, massive step forwards in terms of realism and game-play. One tactical system = a lot of frustration and defeats. A mulitude of systems to be employed at the right time, although not guaranteeing success, will hinder failure.
我同意一支弱队不应该能在对一支强队的时候，在落后三球时还能扳平或反超。可是，我相信，如果玩家采取超级战术的话，他会得到惩罚。这就是我认为“逆转bug”的工作原理，就是保证非常规的战术不起作用。这样也就意味着在对付阵型紧凑，没有全力密集防守，要压上扳回比分的队伍时，开放的，全力进攻的战术需要冒着极大的风险，就像在现实中一样。这意味着一个教练必须有一整套战术体系去应付各种情况和各种队伍。我想那就是根据实际情况一步一个脚印去走。一套战术体系是伴随着许多挫折跟失败，在合适的时间用合适的战术，虽然不一定能确保胜利，但是可以防止以后的失败。
The 'comeback bug' may have to be slightly tweaked, but I hope it isn't too much, as it is the tactical intracacies of the current game that have a fair few of us drooling at its improvement. The down-tweaking of AI logic will, in my opinion, hurt the game. I agree that it would be nice to have a few AI managers try to shut up shop and not get embarrassed when 3-0 down, but I don't want many of them to do that. I would prefer them to at least get their team trying to play football, so I can employ a different system to stop them.
这段没什么战术的内容，大意是说“逆转bug”也许会得到SI的控制，但是作者不希望电脑大比分之下放弃比赛，还是要尽力争取逆转。这样才会让游戏更有趣味。
Saying that, I do still (sorry PaulC) have an issue with man-marking. I would like to employ it, but think it is hugely flawed, and that a man-marking system will make comebacks more likely, so until I see an improvement or announcement that it has been changed for 6.0.2, will continue with zonal. I think AI teams do have an advantage in that they can micro-manage man-marking, whereas we cannot (we can, but boy is it hard work and frustrating). Other than that, it is a pretty fair playing field, and the introduction of neccessary tactical swtching a huge plus from previous games.
说到这里，我还要说说SI设计的盯人，虽然我喜欢盯人，但是还是有缺陷，就是这个盯人系统让大逆转变得可能性更大。所以如果6.02没有改进的话我还是会用区域防守。我觉得电脑的队伍在微控盯人方面比我们有优势。
To sum up, comebacks will happen if you do the wrong thing. Pretty unrealistic they may be, but then again, how many real life managers do the wrong thing when they are 3-0 up. Not many I'm sure, or they will soon be out of a job. I read Paul's example of a manager taking off three players at half-time for a rest, yet leaving two exhausted FCs on the pitch. Hello! That is obviously bad management. Furthermore, the defender hitting a ball across his own box, or standing around and doing nothing,is how the AI reacts to poor instructions. I don't see it any more (although I did) so it must be user error, and not game engine flaws. I don't see that as flawed logic. If I have stopped it, as have many of the contributors to TT&F, then surely everyone can. It is not as if I have never seen it happen, I have, but I have reacted to it and solved it. In terms of an instant fix, I do suggest scrapping man-marking and heavy closing down across the pitch, as they will hurt any formation.
总的来说，大逆转发生在你犯错的情况下，虽然相当不合理，但是在现实中也有许多教练在大比分领先是犯错，我见过一个例子，一个教练在中场休息时换下三个球员。留下两个筋疲力尽的前锋。此外，还有后卫乌龙，站着看，不盯人等等。那么电脑会怎么处理玩家出现的错误呢？所以大逆转是玩家犯错，而不是游戏引擎问题，作为建议，我不推荐采取盯人防守跟过分贴身紧逼。因为它们会破坏阵型。
I hope this is seen as a logical argument towards solving a problem and not someone defending the game to the hilt despite all evidence. I believe there are some minor flaws and one major one, but it is still highly playable and rewarding. It just takes time to adjust.
这段是希望大家指正的谦虚话，就不翻译了。 |
|
发表于 2005-12-2 13:11:53
置顶卡
变色卡
千斤顶
显身卡
发表于 2005-12-2 13:14:13