The importance of tactics??

I thought i would post this in here as im not actually requesting a tactic

Anyway, Ive just started a new game with Everton and so i looked at the team guide in the other section of the forum. Most people on there were signing the same players i was after (the obvious like Landon Donovan, Lukaku etc.). They were also playing the same formation I thought would be useful, 4-2-3-1. It is the most obvious one really with good attacking mids and not many good strikers. Ive seen on there people winning the league in their first season, playing the same formation as I and with similar transfers. In fact i thought i had done better in the market by getting Gary Cahill and Santa Cruz and Macheda on loan as well. But then i lose my first two games, against average opposition playing pretty poor. I cant see where the difference can be, I played a standard and balanced tactic, with zonal marking and high pressure. I tinkered with the player roles in order to suit the way they play and their best attributes. Also I used the Match preparation well and got good specialist coaches. I read on this forum about people winning the champs league with Vauxhall Motors or something crazy like that. Really my best game has been getting Southampton to the Europa League in a few years, probably my best ever actually. I have had every FM game for 10/11 years and am only really getting a bit bored of mediocracy now! Anybody else as average as me? the thing is I honestly dont see any more that I can do. I dont really want to download a tactic I would rather play it myself and try and find something that works - I guess im just confused as I cant see much more to do to suddenly make my team win the leaguie in the 1st season like others have done.

rant over!

It's important to play about with your tactic - until it works, and you're happy with it. Also important to have more than one tactic!

Ive got 3 different formations on the match preparation screen, and a couple of archived ones. I would think that the formation would be more important than moving a slider to determine something like the width of your team. I mean there is only what, 4 or 5 sliders on the advanced section? Another thing i would have thought to be more important would be getting the player roles correct, i feel like I have when you see what attributes are more suited to the roles.

To put it more simply, im playing pretty much the same players and in the same formation. I dont see how 4 or 5 sliders could make such a difference, from the same team winning the league and ending up something like mid table.

thats why youre not winning the league

i think if youre not that deep into using the tactics sliders, i would recommend playing the EA manager maybe?

To put it more simply, im playing pretty much the same players and in the same formation. I dont see how 4 or 5 sliders could make such a difference, from the same team winning the league and ending up something like mid table.

I have four main formations, I choose one before each game, and sometimes even change within the game three or four times:

- 4-4-2 to dominate smaller teams

- 4-4-2 for teams of equal stature

- 4-4-2 to defend a slight lead in the last quarter of a game

- 4-1-2-1-2 in case I have no available wingers (or if I fancy a change)

Then I'll change things further depending on the players selected (ie. tall strikers or small strikers)

Don't forget to make use of touchline shouts.

Try to apply your assistants "opponent instructions" every 30 minutes, or these players will not get picked up as well as you might hope.

OK fair enough, i mean its not something that has massively bothered me until now I have alway just liked playing the game. the specific instructions sliders are - Defensive Line, Team Width, Tempo and Time Wasting. I cant see that last one being significant to the way your team plays until the last 10 minutes or so when you are holding on to a lead. So that for me means that the success of you game hinges on 3 sliders? Because i usually just leave that bit alone, on default. If anybody is changing it im guessing it isnt drastically. Obvsiouly if I was playing without wingers i would play narrower but thats it. As for the playing style the only ones i would see as important are Marking, Closing Down, Philosophy and Starting Strategy. The others surely would be fine leaving default.

Stampler I have played FM since 01/02. There is no chance I would switch to EA Manager its a great game and i have spent way too much time on it like most on here! As i said i dont mind not winning the CL with Vauxhall Motors or something crazy i just wish i could get more involved. I wish there was more stuff to do in detail, instead of moving a couple of sliders. Really there is just a half hearted match preparation, a simple tactic creator and the training which never seems to matter much (even with plenty of specialist coaches). Maybe i just need to wait until FM12 as i have just played 11 to death.

So what is it that you would like to see?

Well if the Match Preparation gets expanded on that could be a useful tool. The Training screen hasnt changed much in years and could do with improvement. When i saw the Tactic Creator unveiled in one of Miles' blogs i was pretty excited. However all it is is a sort of summary of stuff you can already do anyway - not really new. The team insturctions part of the tactics is pretty much exactly the same as it was in 01/02, but with different names. I would just like to see more stuff that makes the way you play more personal to you and your team. So you feel its you that has achieved that. At the moment its just a few sliders that makes all the difference. I didnt make this thread with the intention of complaining, i just geniunely wanted to know if there was a way I could get more involved with the tactics to get more out of the game. It seems i could play exactly the same way as others and get totally different results. Whilst of course it would be rubbish every time you used a certain tactic it worked, I would like a little more consistency - (for example you can have a player get an average rating of 7.4 or something, then start the game again a few months down the line playing the exact same way and he is rubbish)

Look at your games and see where you're going wrong. View the stats - tweak your tactics to suit.

Foggy94, you may have seen it already but in case you haven't: 'Meet The System' a thread by 'SFraser' in the tactics section might inspire you. I don't use 4-2-3-1 myself, but plenty of people who do, have gathered knowledge from it.

Unfortunately I don't know how to link you there.

While I am on that subject, could some kind soul advise me how to link to another thread.

Cheers

xxx

Foggy94, you may have seen it already but in case you haven't: 'Meet The System' a thread by 'SFraser' in the tactics section might inspire you. I don't use 4-2-3-1 myself, but plenty of people who do, have gathered knowledge from it.

Unfortunately I don't know how to link you there.

While I am on that subject, could some kind soul advise me how to link to another thread.

Cheers

xxx

Go to the thread and highlight the URL on the top. Precede by hitting "Ctrl-C" or by right clicking and hitting "Copy." Following that, go back to this thread and press "Ctrl-V" where you want to paste the link or alternatively just right click and hit "Paste."

I think more important than getting the tactics right, you must have the right players for the tactic. Often see people complaning about tactics, and then we'll see these people have chose wrong players for the diferents positions.

but usually, at the end of the day, as IRL, teams with better players win more games!

Go to the thread and highlight the URL on the top. Precede by hitting "Ctrl-C" or by right clicking and hitting "Copy." Following that, go back to this thread and press "Ctrl-V" where you want to paste the link or alternatively just right click and hit "Paste."

Thank you.

EDIT: Where exactly is this URL, I don't see it.

Also important to have more than one tactic!

disagree mate ive always stuck with the same tactic and had success. Depends on signing the right players for your system

Ive had a look at Sfraser's thread cheers and well...WOW! Confusing but at least it has confirmed that you can really get involved in your tactics. I guess over the years i have developed a habit of rushing a cutting corners. Gonna try and be more patient and build my own team. The 'meet the system' thread has me seriously questioning my knowledge about football, that guy knows his stuff!

Thank you.

EDIT: Where exactly is this URL, I don't see it.

I made a black box around it. Look towards the top.

http://img88.imageshack.us/img88/6462/urlir.jpg

that guy knows his stuff!

Get involved in your own tactics, training, youth development etc and so will you:thup:

I made a black box around it. Look towards the top.

http://img88.imageshack.us/img88/6462/urlir.jpg

Using IE9, found it top left corner. Mucho gracias my friend.

Now I'm off to the opticians.

I find that you should always play the game on normal speed. If i ever feel as though I am under pressure i will adjust the strategy as that seems to make the most difference.

At the start of the match If I'm playing away against a better team, I will play counter formation and rigid philosophy. I will also make my full backs play a support role. If i'm home against a team i'm expected to beat, I will make my full backs attack and play a control formation with fluid/very fluid philosophy. I find that adjusting these makes a big difference in how your team perform. Then when you are in game, if you seem to be on the back foot, I will adjust accordingly. In game tactics make a huge difference and if you just breeze through matches on very fast then you are more likely to lose.

The youth development is one im really getting involved in in my new game with Everton. Little money and some decent propsects so might have to rely on it! I can never get a hold of the training but im gonna try a trial an error system in this one!

Go for it. The rewards ingame can be huge, as will be your enjoyment of the game by delving deeper.

I think having players with good morale is as vital as a working tactic. For this I would suggest doing the pre and post match conferences yourself and not relying on the Ass Man

I'm in the same boat foggy,I've been playing for 15years I get abit of success but don't seem to push on to the next level,I need to get more advanced in tactics aswell

The argument that adjustment of some sliders up and down a few notches shouldn't make a world of difference is irrelevant.

The fact is that they do. One notch up or down could be the difference between a successful tactic and a tragedy.

You ask about the importance of tactics. It is only one of several things affecting performances. I would say team talks are the number one aspect, not tactics. If you can keep your team motivated with high morale and avoid nervousness/complacency, the team's quality and the tactics will both play secondary roles.

When you take charge of a new team, your reputation with the players starts out low. This makes it difficult to motivate them (check out what your assistant says before the match about this). "For the fans", for instance, works poorly with new players and players who don't feel motivated playing for you. Also, a new tactic requires time to settle, and you will perform poorly because of this.

What are these sliders u talk of?

haha but seriously i stopped sliding years ago, the new template system is much better and just make minor adjustments in advanced section.

imo there are 2 types of manager, Harry Redknapp type who can sign the right players but gives his team broad tactical instructions and Mourinho type who studies opposition deeply and adjust every detail for each game. I am more Harry since i can sign nice players with great attributes in correct position but i dont really mess with my tactic from one game to next, i have had a lot of success with this style tbh

i used to play FM Live until it was defunct and there were super managers on those servers, i found that my team was top 20 (from 1000) and could win cups etc, in fact i won evy comp going even CL, but what i failed to win was the Prem title which i believe was down to my lack of tactical knowledge

atm i play attacking 442 with AML AMR and complete striker, poacher combo, short passing and adv playmaker supporting, it works nice for higher teams, eg Man City, Ajax but im not so sure i had much success in mid table like u say Everton or my team Villa, i think is needed a more direct style until u get the correct players, works nice in my long term game tho and have won leagues without changing it from game to game (apart from quick change menu eg play wider instruction)

someone did already mention but i think if u have problems u need to look at stats page, for example how many tackles won, passes completed, CCC's etc, to many people just look at shots on target and think they should have won which imo is misleading.

i bet u dont even check the tackle and heading percentage of your DC's, thats a basic thing many people miss

Tactics are only 1 part of a complex puzzle and, in my opinion, NOT the most important. Tactics give your players a playground in which to run riot - its the players themselves that really define a team. A great tactical set-up can turn average players into good ones, but great players can turn an average set of tactical instructions into something capable of dominating the world. I don't think Guardiola is the best tactician in the business but he sets up a mean system, employs players well and keeps those players well motivated - now that is a real skill.

Use your tactics to create a basic framework and tweak where you can but always remember, you can't polish a turd - if you haven't selected the right players for the right games then you're doomed to failure. Opposing DC has poor morale brought about by a series of bad mistakes, get your hard-working dynamo striker playing up against him. Opposing MCs like to pass the ball around, play your gung-ho aggressive MCs to kick the **** out of them. Your mazy, unpredictable winger has hit a rich vein of form, get the big man up front to get on the end of those crosses. Mishandled your volatile, young DR in the media, drop him and reintroduce him into the team as his morale picks up.

Try playing a creative player in midfield one game and the destructive one the next with EXACT same tactical instructions and watch the difference in their play. FM11, more so than other FMs, simulates individual players so well that picking the right team is more important than picking the right tactics.

Good players who are well motivated can conquer the world.

Tactics are only 1 part of a complex puzzle and, in my opinion, NOT the most important. Tactics give your players a playground in which to run riot - its the players themselves that really define a team. A great tactical set-up can turn average players into good ones, but great players can turn an average set of tactical instructions into something capable of dominating the world. I don't think Guardiola is the best tactician in the business but he sets up a mean system, employs players well and keeps those players well motivated - now that is a real skill.

Use your tactics to create a basic framework and tweak where you can but always remember, you can't polish a turd - if you haven't selected the right players for the right games then you're doomed to failure. Opposing DC has poor morale brought about by a series of bad mistakes, get your hard-working dynamo striker playing up against him. Opposing MCs like to pass the ball around, play your gung-ho aggressive MCs to kick the **** out of them. Your mazy, unpredictable winger has hit a rich vein of form, get the big man up front to get on the end of those crosses. Mishandled your volatile, young DR in the media, drop him and reintroduce him into the team as his morale picks up.

Try playing a creative player in midfield one game and the destructive one the next with EXACT same tactical instructions and watch the difference in their play. FM11, more so than other FMs, simulates individual players so well that picking the right team is more important than picking the right tactics.

Good players who are well motivated can conquer the world.

But without a framework, guidance and teamwork they could end up as ball jugglers in a circus. It's a team game, and for me, a team without tactics is a footballing mob, no matter how cultured the individuals. The players can be as average as you like, what counts is that they are the right player for the team.

But without a framework, guidance and teamwork they could end up as ball jugglers in a circus. It's a team game, and for me, a team without tactics is a footballing mob, no matter how cultured the individuals. The players can be as average as you like, what counts is that they are the right player for the team.

Agreed, there's definitely a synergy between the players and the tactic and the balance is what means that many different approaches can all garner good results. I just think that people often get hung up on their tactical knowledge (or lack there of) and feel that they are failing purely because they can't get their head around the TC or the sliders. The TC has been a revelation because it allows people to set up the basics of a system quickly and fairly easily and also to change the system fairly easily. The shouts further alter the system in a more intuitive way which means that you no longer need to worry about being a master tactician. If you're a good selector or a good motivator you can still succeed.

If the opposing GK is fumbling the ball alot then bringing on your quick, hungry STR will be more effective than getting your lumbering, old, experienced targetman to try a play in the keepers pocket using tactical instructions.

The argument that adjustment of some sliders up and down a few notches shouldn't make a world of difference is irrelevant.

The fact is that they do. One notch up or down could be the difference between a successful tactic and a tragedy.

Strongly disagree with this. It's spin like this that makes people think they don't understand tactics, and that they must suck up every word of "gurus" in order to be successful. One notch on the slider won't make a world of difference, because there are so mnay factors thrown in there. It is more important to get the slider in the correct "area" to achieve the effect you want than in exactly the right slot, because "exactly the right slot" doesn't exist.

Foggy- tactics aren't something you just set up and run with. You need to react to the situation in the match. If you need a goal, go more attacking. If you're comfortable, try and keep possession a bit more and save energy.

Strongly disagree with this. It's spin like this that makes people think they don't understand tactics, and that they must suck up every word of "gurus" in order to be successful. One notch on the slider won't make a world of difference, because there are so mnay factors thrown in there. It is more important to get the slider in the correct "area" to achieve the effect you want than in exactly the right slot, because "exactly the right slot" doesn't exist.

Foggy- tactics aren't something you just set up and run with. You need to react to the situation in the match. If you need a goal, go more attacking. If you're comfortable, try and keep possession a bit more and save energy.

Noone understands tactics in FM. A successful tactic is a consequence of trial and error, where unsuccessful changes are undone one by one until the tactic is working well enough for its creator. At that point, even fine tuning is often unnecessary or random. It is much like the 10 000 chimpansees using a typewriter eventually, given enough time, producing a shakespearian masterpiece.

This is because any implementation of sound logic is fallible due to the fact that the FM Match Engine isn't real life.

Any change you make to a tactic is therefore equally likely to ruin everything as it is to improve something. As you surely have understood now, nothing about this has anything to do with "understanding" tactics. It is experience, nothing more.

Erm.... FM Match Engine is almost certainly based strictly on the laws of logic and maths.

If you make a logical change then you'll logically get a logical answer. The manipulation of variables means you might not get the answer you were looking for (particularly when FM only visualises a fraction of the variables) but this is exactly the same as real life.

The argument that adjustment of some sliders up and down a few notches shouldn't make a world of difference is irrelevant.

The fact is that they do. One notch up or down could be the difference between a successful tactic and a tragedy.

Total rubbish. I've not looked at a team slider throughout this version of FM. If slider notches were so important, then that would be impossible.

Noone understands tactics in FM. A successful tactic is a consequence of trial and error, where unsuccessful changes are undone one by one until the tactic is working well enough for its creator. At that point, even fine tuning is often unnecessary or random. It is much like the 10 000 chimpansees using a typewriter eventually, given enough time, producing a shakespearian masterpiece.

This is because any implementation of sound logic is fallible due to the fact that the FM Match Engine isn't real life.

Any change you make to a tactic is therefore equally likely to ruin everything as it is to improve something. As you surely have understood now, nothing about this has anything to do with "understanding" tactics. It is experience, nothing more.

Equally as rubbish. If you understand anything about real world tactical history and theory, you will be able to make a successful tactical setup in FM in a few minutes, only using the TC. There are a few people in this thread who can do and have done that on a regular basis. You might have to spend some time perfecting it, but that is more down to buying the right squad and turning them into a highly motivated, well-discipline unit that is aligned to your tactical strategy than fiddling around with micro slider settings.

There is a perfectly valid argument that FM doesn't help users understand the TC well enough and/or it is not sophisticated enough to mimic all modern tactical theory. It can be difficult to impossible to recreate a Barcalone-esque tactic, for example (although a counter argument would be it is damn near impossible in real life as well). There are also numerous forum users who have obviously not got to grips with the fluidity and dynamism of the TC, as the following quote underlines:

When i saw the Tactic Creator unveiled in one of Miles' blogs i was pretty excited. However all it is is a sort of summary of stuff you can already do anyway - not really new.

There were no dynamic tactical changes possible in FM prior to the TC. In order to make tactical switches, you had to build two tactics and load between them. Things were far more static. With the TC, you have 100s of variations at your finger tips. Under pressure, then switch to a Defensive Strategy to see it out. Opposition is sitting back, then open space to draw them out. Pitch is heavy and churned up, then lengthen your passing and use the flanks to avoid the quagmire int he middle. Weather is sweltering and tiring the team out, then knock the ball around and keep possession as much as possible. Pitch and conditions perfect, then take advantage by maximising the technical ability of your players. Ad infinitum.

ALl of these changes are logical and work. That people haven't grasped this is a combination of poor documentation, their own misunderstanding of football tactics/strategy, and a forum history of designing super-tactics that has encouraged people to look for one tactic solutions, which is completely unrealistic.

I thought i would post this in here as im not actually requesting a tactic

The Tactics Forum is not about requesting tactics. It is about understanding tactical and motivational strategy. I suggest you pay it a visit as it is going to help you in a big way. Read all the stickied threads and the most popular unstickied ones.

Equally as rubbish. If you understand anything about real world tactical history and theory, you will be able to make a successful tactical setup in FM in a few minutes, only using the TC......That people haven't grasped this is a combination of poor documentation, their own misunderstanding of football tactics/strategy, and a forum history of designing super-tactics that has encouraged people to look for one tactic solutions, which is completely unrealistic.

Rubbish.

The reason people wins the major leagues by 20 points every season with any obscure team they decide to start with (given enough time) is that very few of those changes you speak of actually works. I really enjoy watching the AI teams pass the ball around aimlessly before shooting from 40 meters or holding up the ball so that my midfielders can crush their bones in a blistering tackle before starting a fast and efficient attack ending in a goal. Again and again. The best tactics in the Tactics forums all (to my knowledge) excel because they are designed in a way that bigger chances are being created than the standard tactics. Mostly through an excessive amount of one-on-ones. This is being achieved by letting 3-4 players wait up front for a through ball or long clearance when possession is won on your own half, or by winning possession on their half immediately playing a through ball.

Now, which team plays like that in real life? Is it efficient to have three or four strikers/wingers wait up front without bothering to help in the defense? If so, why don't the top clubs do that all the time?

Playing a high possession game with many men in front of the ball is extremely efficient in the real world. All the big clubs try to win this way. In FM it is tactical suicide. Sure, high possession as such can be achieved, but not by pushing 7-8 men forward in the bid to overwhelm the defending team (which is necessary in real life when you play like that) - rather like I do in my tactic: keeping all four defenders and both midfielders back for control and attack freely with the two wingers and strikers. The problem is that if you have a couple of central defenders and maybe a midfielder or full back on the defence while the rest of the team attacks, and they have one striker up front, the latter will almost always receive the ball unchallenged. This way, counterattacking is way overpowered in FM11.3. All other strategies will struggle to make an impact, and by extension also the tactical changes and shouts supplied by the TC which are meant to subtly change the inefficient strategies.

There were no dynamic tactical changes possible in FM prior to the TC. In order to make tactical switches, you had to build two tactics and load between them. Things were far more static. With the TC, you have 100s of variations at your finger tips. Under pressure, then switch to a Defensive Strategy to see it out. Opposition is sitting back, then open space to draw them out. Pitch is heavy and churned up, then lengthen your passing and use the flanks to avoid the quagmire int he middle. Weather is sweltering and tiring the team out, then knock the ball around and keep possession as much as possible. Pitch and conditions perfect, then take advantage by maximising the technical ability of your players. Ad infinitum.

ALl of these changes are logical and work. That people haven't grasped this is a combination of poor documentation, their own misunderstanding of football tactics/strategy, and a forum history of designing super-tactics that has encouraged people to look for one tactic solutions, which is completely unrealistic.

The thing is I have grasped this, and whilst learning to play this game I did all that you describe above and had a lot of success, and yet I now find myself with a tactic that I never need to change. Just because an approach is counter to what you believe doesn't make it 'completely unrealistic'.

All of these changes may be logical and work in your mind, but you have eleven other minds to deal with, who don't know the bigger picture, and are not renowned as great thinkers. You are asking your players to instantly understand, adapt and act on new instructions every time you make a change, and you are asking them to do it under varying conditions. I know this can work, as I said, I've done it myself, but I've found something simpler that works much better for me.

(ps. actually I lied, I change a yellow-carded player's tackling to easy).

Rubbish.

The reason people wins the major leagues by 20 points every season with any obscure team they decide to start with (given enough time) is that very few of those changes you speak of actually works. I really enjoy watching the AI teams pass the ball around aimlessly before shooting from 40 meters or holding up the ball so that my midfielders can crush their bones in a blistering tackle before starting a fast and efficient attack ending in a goal. Again and again. The best tactics in the Tactics forums all (to my knowledge) excel because they are designed in a way that bigger chances are being created than the standard tactics. Mostly through an excessive amount of one-on-ones. This is being achieved by letting 3-4 players wait up front for a through ball or long clearance when possession is won on your own half, or by winning possession on their half immediately playing a through ball.

I'll happily accept that advanced players do not track back well or realistically enough when on attacking mentalities. However, you are only referencing the 'super-tactic' uploads/downloads when you talk about the best tactics. In the last few months of FML, I pretty much proved that every one of these tactics (which most FML players were using) could be outdone by a logical system that matched formation, style, strategy and shouts against them.

Playing a high possession game with many men in front of the ball is extremely efficient in the real world. All the big clubs try to win this way. In FM it is tactical suicide. Sure, high possession as such can be achieved, but not by pushing 7-8 men forward in the bid to overwhelm the defending team (which is necessary in real life when you play like that) - rather like I do in my tactic: keeping all four defenders and both midfielders back for control and attack freely with the two wingers and strikers. The problem is that if you have a couple of central defenders and maybe a midfielder or full back on the defence while the rest of the team attacks, and they have one striker up front, the latter will almost always receive the ball unchallenged. This way, counterattacking is way overpowered in FM11.3. All other strategies will struggle to make an impact, and by extension also the tactical changes and shouts supplied by the TC which are meant to subtly change the inefficient strategies.

Such a biased claim. I always, always use Wing Back / Attack duties for my full backs, and do everything I can to get my FC dropping deeper and linking up play rather than staying high on the shoulder of the FC. I regularly get possession over 60% and can push above 70% on a good day. The point of the system is to keep the ball in deep positions with ball playing defenders and cultured central midfielders controlling the play. My FC drops deeper, enabling the AML, AMC and AMR to move into the space beyond him. I rarely use a more aggressive strategy than Counter, although I will go to Control late in a match as my possession level results int he opposition being 10-15% tireder than my team. Opening play out and playing more direct passes in the last 15 mins has pretty much always resulted in my side breaking the deadlock, which is usually followed by another couple of goals as the opposition's will goes and exhaustion takes hold.

Your method has been a standard way for many to play FM for edition after edition. It partly succeeds because the user manager can dominate in the transfer market as AI logic in that area is pretty weak. Once you have the strongest squad, you should do relatively well simply by being aggressive. However, it is by no means the most efficient way of setting up tactics. It requires extremely high quality forwards who are motivated to play and capable of skinning markers and scoring goals while moving at pace. If your forwards go on a dry run, then goals won't come from anywhere as chance creation is so one dimensional, resulting in the user manager screaming 'cheating AI', 'superkeeper' and 'it is not my tactics' across this forum. Any user manager worth his salt will be able to break such a system apart with very little difficult. Unfortunately, the AI is not sophisticated enough yet. Give it time and it will be.

The best advice I can currently give is to set up the league combination to maximize the opportunity for AI teams to keep their squads strong (load up top flight leagues for all the traditionally world class international teams). It will then be more difficult to win simply through developing a super squad and attacking until you eventually score.

The thing is I have grasped this, and whilst learning to play this game I did all that you describe above and had a lot of success, and yet I now find myself with a tactic that I never need to change. Just because an approach is counter to what you believe doesn't make it 'completely unrealistic'.

Searching for a super-tactic is unrealistic. Developing a playing system based on the strengths and weaknesses of your playing squad isn't. I play all of my home games the same way and 75% of my away games too. That is because I have a squad of a certain character/skill set and this way of playing maximizes my advantages over other teams (technical, fitness and world class full backs). However, I do have a few go to strategies when the starting ones aren't working.

Searching for a super-tactic is unrealistic. Developing a playing system based on the strengths and weaknesses of your playing squad isn't. I play all of my home games the same way and 75% of my away games too. That is because I have a squad of a certain character/skill set and this way of playing maximizes my advantages over other teams (technical, fitness and world class full backs). However, I do have a few go to strategies when the starting ones aren't working.

I don't search for tactics, I made my own based on a lot more than just my individual players strengths and weaknesses and it took a very long time to get what I now have.

Never quite seen the attraction in skinning cats but apparently there's more than one way to do it.

As long as you are comfortable with the logic you are using and, more importantly, it is working, then all is well. The thing that annoys me is the assumption that only a certain type of tactic does well. Every, and I mean every, time this argument comes up, it is the same type of tactic with the same glaring, illogical weaknesses. People using such tactics are the first to complain about player motivation, cheating AI etc., etc., because their tactics do not create multiple chance types.

That is not to say the game is blameless. There is not enough help regarding tactical logic in game or in its documentation; CCCs are ridiculously over-generously measured, resulting in lots of user frustration; the TC needs to become more sophisticated; pre-match and half-time screens need to be more tactically useful; and a few in-match AI issues need to be sorted out.

I agree with what you say in your second paragraph,(although I've never been hung up over CCCs) but I believe a seemingly illogical approach, in the face of unwavering logic, can be devastating. As an example, I would speculate that most people would choose a defensive strategy with an outside chance of nicking an away goal when facing Real Madrid at the Bernabeu(sp?). It makes sense, it's logical and as such it will be thought of in the same way, probably, by the opposition, and the last thing they expect is you to go all out attack from start to finish. 3-0, that'll do nicely.

I don't think the choice of strategy is ever illogical. The lack of logic comes in the holistic of a tactic. As in an above example, keeping 6 players back and 4 forward at all times is an illogical system. It might work to some degree because of a few ME flaws, but it isn't holistically sound. It will suffer from goals drying up because the striker is having a bad day, as, because it isn't opening up angles by having attacking players drop deeper and defensive players push up, most of the chances created will be very one dimensional (hurried one on ones). Add in the CCC issue and many of these chances might not even be good ones, although the manager is being told by the commentator they are.

If you have a system in which defensive players support attacks, attacking players do some deeper work and the midfield links the two, you will create multiple chance types. For example, my FC is very streaky. Last season he scored just under a goal a game for the first 1/2 - 2/3rds of the season, then barely scored again for the remainder of the campaign. However, it didn't make a jot of difference to my overall form as other players still converted with regularity and the FC was still doing his secondary job of dropping into midfield and playing angled balls ahead of the wingers. This season he's also been off the boil, although signs are he's coming good again. This lack of goalscoring form is costing me some of the really heavy wins of the previous season, but not stopping me picking up the three points week in, week out, as other players are hitting the back of the net, often from moves he was involved in. If you are playing a system which absolutely relies on his scoring, then his lack of goalscoring form risks destroying the season.

I have to say I agree here, IF you match your tactics to your squads abilities you will get great results. Again I learnt this through FML and overcoming top class teams while managing a club made of purely Sierra Leone internationals at times, as i found that a fun challenge.

For instance, at Tottenham, I can dominate with a free flowing passing 4-4-1-1, and get a huge number of goals from midfield. However, if i pick that same tactic up and take it to another club, it does not work without a few transfers to match the formation and play style. In that formation I have Neymar up front, and the midfield, van der vart, modric etc often make up for his lack of goalscoring form when he goes through patches of poor form. I may not be as good at explaining what is happening as wwfan is, but i do believe that tactics are important, and the tactics creator is an incredibly powerful tool.

The most important thing is being able to understand the sliders and what they mean. This is not easy and I still feel they should revamp it to make things more clear.

I don't think the choice of strategy is ever illogical. The lack of logic comes in the holistic of a tactic. As in an above example, keeping 6 players back and 4 forward at all times is an illogical system. It might work to some degree because of a few ME flaws, but it isn't holistically sound. It will suffer from goals drying up because the striker is having a bad day, as, because it isn't opening up angles by having attacking players drop deeper and defensive players push up, most of the chances created will be very one dimensional (hurried one on ones). Add in the CCC issue and many of these chances might not even be good ones, although the manager is being told by the commentator they are.

If you have a system in which defensive players support attacks, attacking players do some deeper work and the midfield links the two, you will create multiple chance types. For example, my FC is very streaky. Last season he scored just under a goal a game for the first 1/2 - 2/3rds of the season, then barely scored again for the remainder of the campaign. However, it didn't make a jot of difference to my overall form as other players still converted with regularity and the FC was still doing his secondary job of dropping into midfield and playing angled balls ahead of the wingers. This season he's also been off the boil, although signs are he's coming good again. This lack of goalscoring form is costing me some of the really heavy wins of the previous season, but not stopping me picking up the three points week in, week out, as other players are hitting the back of the net, often from moves he was involved in. If you are playing a system which absolutely relies on his scoring, then his lack of goalscoring form risks destroying the season.

Yeah, something which renders 1-striker tactics useless in the game except when used as you say. 4-1-2-2-1 as used by the AI is extremely impotent when the striker is missing his chances. The thing is that in real life, ANY conceivable logical formation with 4 defenders performs well, if the players are good and their instructions play into their strengths. FM11 fails to reflect this, as some things are more efficient than others. However, I agree that this doesn't mean that it is not possible to dominate everything without those "supertactics".

When playing for Molde FK in Norway, Manchester United's Mame Biram Diouf scored most of his goals on through balls from an attacking midfielder in a 4-2-3-1 wide formation (just like yours?). Target men holding up the ball to allow his teammates to run forwards for support are not common in Norway, but in England the strikers coming deep like in your tactic is seemingly the default role of any striker if he is not a poacher (but these are less and less common in top football). The result of this thinking is that in FM passes to the striker are to feet regardless of formation and player instructions. When playing with one striker, through balls to him are not placed in the area behind the defenders where a fast striker like Diouf would surely get a one-on-one with the keeper, but a few meters in front of him - often ahead of the defenders.

Another way English ideas of football are differing from those in other football cultures is what "counter-attacking" means. The FM manual and comments in-game seems to indicate that counter-attacking football is a high-possession style where the counter-attacking team seeks to keep the ball in their defense, trying to lure the other team higher so that there is space behind them to attack in. This may have been the case in the 70s and 80s (and 90s with Romania in the world cup), but I have to say that this is now the polar opposite of counter-attacking football. A counter-attacking style means that you seek to win possession in lucrative positions (primarily in the midfield) on the pitch and then immediately attack with as many men as you can throw forward while the opposition defense is unbalanced or in minority. This means that the 433 "supertactics", and to a certain degree my 4-2-2-2 tactic wouldn't get the amount of ccc's they get if they were designed to play counter-attacking football as intended by FM. Both tactics push up and attack with high closing down and aggressivity and the AI is unable to cope with it because they believe that we "defend deep and attempt to go on the counter-attack".

In FM2010 and many other versions two strikers were utterly useless compared to the power of either one or three. In FM2011, however, two and three strikers are good while 1 striker is bad.

In FM11 the Passing attribute is evidently so insensitive that there is basically no difference between 1 and 20, something which explains why the 433 "supertactics" (and for that matter my wide 4-2-2-2) aren't being punished for having so few midfielders any more than any 442 or even 451 defensive tactics: the midfield, regardless of how many players you put there, are being cut through as if with a red-hot knife through butter both in the BSN/S and when teams like Barcelona or Real Madrid play.

The most important thing is being able to understand the sliders and what they mean. This is not easy and I still feel they should revamp it to make things more clear.

You can play without ever looking at a slider through the TC. Why is this such a problem?

When playing for Molde FK in Norway, Manchester United's Mame Biram Diouf scored most of his goals on through balls from an attacking midfielder in a 4-2-3-1 wide formation (just like yours?). Target men holding up the ball to allow his teammates to run forwards for support are not common in Norway, but in England the strikers coming deep like in your tactic is seemingly the default role of any striker if he is not a poacher (but these are less and less common in top football). The result of this thinking is that in FM passes to the striker are to feet regardless of formation and player instructions. When playing with one striker, through balls to him are not placed in the area behind the defenders where a fast striker like Diouf would surely get a one-on-one with the keeper, but a few meters in front of him - often ahead of the defenders.

Historically, and I'd argue contemporarily, the deeper lying striker has never been part of the English game. With the exception of Rooney, Sheringham and Beardsley, nearly every modern capped English striker played high. Owen, Bent, Fowler, Wright, Cole, Shearer, Linekar, Phillips, Bull all play/played on the shoulder of the last man. Some looked to hold it up, whereas others looked to run onto through balls. The forward who drops the deepest in the modern game is Messi, who hardly plays an English style!

Another way English ideas of football are differing from those in other football cultures is what "counter-attacking" means. The FM manual and comments in-game seems to indicate that counter-attacking football is a high-possession style where the counter-attacking team seeks to keep the ball in their defense, trying to lure the other team higher so that there is space behind them to attack in. This may have been the case in the 70s and 80s (and 90s with Romania in the world cup), but I have to say that this is now the polar opposite of counter-attacking football. A counter-attacking style means that you seek to win possession in lucrative positions (primarily in the midfield) on the pitch and then immediately attack with as many men as you can throw forward while the opposition defense is unbalanced or in minority. This means that the 433 "supertactics", and to a certain degree my 4-2-2-2 tactic wouldn't get the amount of ccc's they get if they were designed to play counter-attacking football as intended by FM. Both tactics push up and attack with high closing down and aggressivity and the AI is unable to cope with it because they believe that we "defend deep and attempt to go on the counter-attack".

This also seems to be in reverse. The win ball in the final third / get it forward quickly is primarily a British / Scandinavian method. The retain possession deeper, slow the game down before swiftly countering as the opposition over-press is far more Southern / Eastern European in design. It has become more prevalent in the UK with the influx of European managers, but it is far from being the standard method of counter attacking football in England, which is quicker, direct and looks to overload high up the pitch. Many european teams do press high, with Barca being a prime example now, and Milan in the late 80s/early 90s, but a lot of their possession play is/was in deeper positions, from which they launch counters. The deep lying playmaker who sits behind a screening midfield and controls the tempo is pretty much a continental invention and has never been part of the UK game.

In FM2010 and many other versions two strikers were utterly useless compared to the power of either one or three. In FM2011, however, two and three strikers are good while 1 striker is bad.

Not even remotely true. Previous versions of FM have enabled a central FC to dominate, but it has always been possible to play with 1, 2 or 3 strikers. It has always been possible to get your defence to minimise the impact of the central striker while being able to do well with two standard ones. It might be more difficult to get a certain combo from working, as you are not exploiting an ME hole, but it has always been possible if you know what you are doing.

In FM11 the Passing attribute is evidently so insensitive that there is basically no difference between 1 and 20, something which explains why the 433 "supertactics" (and for that matter my wide 4-2-2-2) aren't being punished for having so few midfielders any more than any 442 or even 451 defensive tactics: the midfield, regardless of how many players you put there, are being cut through as if with a red-hot knife through butter both in the BSN/S and when teams like Barcelona or Real Madrid play.

This will only happen if your tactical is structurally unsound and leaving gaps they can pass/run through.

You can play without ever looking at a slider through the TC. Why is this such a problem?

Because many people don't consider it to be really creating their own tactic which has always been the soul of this game. If we have to use presets because we can't understand the sliders then the game is in trouble.

Because many people don't consider it to be really creating their own tactic which has always been the soul of this game. If we have to use presets because we can't understand the sliders then the game is in trouble.

The TC is about a lot more than just presets. It gives you a starting point very quickly and this can be your end point perfectly feasibly if you want. It's more intuitive and more realistic than sliders (which are TOTALLY abstract).

I enjoy a good game of hunt-the-slider but I'll happily leave it behind as the series evolves and it is evolving away from sliders and from such an abstract presentation.