FM12 - What is your preferred tactical philosophy?

I'm interested to hear your preferred philosophy and the reasons for it being your favourite. I created a thread/poll like this a long time ago when the TC first came out. I'm interested to see what people's opinions are now that we are TC veterans having been using it now for several versions!

I've added a poll for fun but I hope that this will also generate a bit of discussion regarding the different philosophies available in the tactics creator. It seems to me to be the age old question of creativity and beauty versus pragmatism and success, so it's quite an interesting debate to have.

I, myself, have been a big fan of the rigid philosophy in the past, mainly due to the fact that I want my team to keep a clear shape and I am quite a pragmatic manager. However, I will often add more creativity and more roaming in order to encourage more 'fluid' movement in the attack if needed. I'd also go up to the balanced philosophy but that would be as near to the fluid ones as I would get! In general, I like precise and controlled football. As a manager, I am very controlling and I want my players to follow their instructions. I tend to pick just a couple or a few candidates to 'break' with my instructions and these players are the most talented in the side. Otherwise, the more organised and pragmatic approach suits my managerial style.

So, how about you?

If you don't use the tactics creator philosophies then feel free to vote for the option which most closely matches your tactical philosophy.

Personally I usually go for a fluid style.

Whilst I like my team to keep its shape I find rigid a bit too limiting going forward whereas fluid gives a little more freedom in attack without losing too much shape.

I always use Balanced.

Balanced generally, occaisionally rigid if I am playing a style designed to be hard to break down

I use balanced, i like that option best.

Most of the times balanced, sometimes rigid.

I tend to use Balanced when I am at a club with good players. If I'm playing further down the leagues I will use Rigid, but Balanced is my preferred philosophy.

very fluid....

I tend to increase my fluidity the better my sides become. Fluid would be my favourite.

I accidentally picked fluid on that poll. Anyway, usually:

Dry/gusty conditions: Very fluid-control-short passing

Wet conditions: Balanced-attacking/standard-direct passing

very fluid.

I normally go fluid as i like the interchange between positions, especially down wings. If ive got a very good narrow team then i go veyr fluid. However im currently doing a lower leage save where ifeel having a rigid formation gives the bets success as they need a bit more discipline.

I usually go with rigid philosophy in the lower leagues, and balanced if I'm not in lower leagues.

Very Rigid I think works best for this game but I almost always go with a philosophy that I think reflects (in my view) how a team plays in real life.

i used rigid while playing with mediocre / weak team , at least not much conceded , and play counter

I usually use fluid. I don't know why.

I used rigid in the lower leagues, since I felt the team needed to keep it's shape. Now I'm a bit higher up I tend to use balanced.

Deja Vu much.

As most people I would love to play attacking and creative football. However, in earlier versions my defense was always leaking way too many goals on a fluid philosophy.

Therefore I have usually used a rigid philosophy with added creativity and roaming with very satifying success.

That being said, I find that in FM12 defensive shaping is even more important and found selecting a fairly defensive formation very helpful in achieving that. Currently employing an assymmetric 4-4-2 (which I consider to be more defensive than a plain 442) for a relegation candidate team (predicted 17th of 18) and to alleviate the suspected lack of offensive power and to take advantage of the possible variations of attacks coming from my winger, my AMC or my inside forward I set the philosophy to fluid and I'm doing well so far (27 points from 20 matches, sitting in 14th only but 11 points ahead of 16th and only 8 behind 3rd). So we'll see...

It depends on which team you play, and against...

I've always used balanced.

I always use Rigid because I know I get results with it and I don't have the patience to use any of the others or experiment with them, both with big teams or small.

May start experimenting with Fluid though to help me breakdown stubborn defences...

Fluid is way ahead at the moment. Am I the only one who is slightly surprised by that!

depends what players/formation i'm playing

if i'm playing (for example) 442 diamond, and i want my wingbacks to attack and my strikers to close down fullbacks, i play fluid

if i'm playing (for example) 451, and i want my wingbacks to stay back, and my wingers to stay forward, i play rigid

most of the time i'm 50/50 between fluid and rigid. it really depends. i change my tactics before every match. but i very rarely do i use veryrigid/veryfluid/balanced

Fluid is way ahead at the moment. Am I the only one who is slightly surprised by that!

everyone wants to be barca thats why

everyone wants to be barca thats why

I don't!

Depends on the club I'm managing, and the formation I want to play. I think I use balanced the most as I rarely start the game as a large club, so I voted for balanced. Interesting to see that very few people use the 'verys.'

I don't!

Haha me neither If you can score a goal with three passes, why use twenty?

Generally with a standard philosophy, if you put creative players in creative roles, you'll still get them doing the pretty things that break oppositions down. So that's my approach. I'm always a bit wary with fluid that I might pull my defenders out of position.

I'm always a bit wary with fluid that I might pull my defenders out of position.

It's not too much of an issue with fluid. Very fluid is asking for trouble though.

To be honest, aside from defensive lines not existing with Very Fluid, I don't notice much of a difference.

I don't find exciting rigid and balanced mentalities. For this reason my preferred tactical philosophy is fluid

Balanced.

Fluid and Very Fluid may have less shape from top to bottom, but by their nature, they are very symmetrical from side to side since everyone in the same unit has the same mentality.

With Balanced, you can better adjust roles from game to game to target weaknesses/neutralize strengths in the opposing team.

Does fluid actually override the roles you set in TC?

And how does it decide which players are in which units (i.e. attacking/defending)?

Does fluid actually override the roles you set in TC?

And how does it decide which players are in which units (i.e. attacking/defending)?

It doesn't override the roles, but the individual roles (or more specifically, the duty you assign) mean less. So in Very Fluid, everyone will basically be on the same duty and, unless you have a specifically asymmetrical formation, they will generally play symmetrically from side to side (left wingers will basically act like the right winger and so forth). In Fluid, all players in positions from CMs up will have the same mentality (the attacking unit) and all players from DMs down will have a slightly lower mentality (the defending unit), but with a few exceptions, they will all be operating with the same basic duty. Thus, with Fluid and Very Fluid, to really adjust your tactic for different situations, you need to rely on universal Strategy changes and your changes will be much less specific.

With Balanced, you don't have huge gaps in mentality as you would with Rigid or Very Rigid, but switching an individual player's duty will have a much greater effect on their playing style than you would see in Fluid and Very Fluid. This makes it more versatile as you can counter individual opposition players or weak spots with a quick duty change.

Either balanced or fluid work the best for me. ATM I'm using a fluid 4-5-1 but I also have a balanced 4-4-2.

Once again, it seems fluid is way ahead as the most popular option!

Once again, it seems fluid is way ahead as the most popular option!

players trying to mimic barcelona

Depending how good my team is I use either fluid or very fluid usually. I like 4-4-2 and fluid helps fill the spaces that having no DMC/AMC creates. If I use 4-5-1 i'll go either balanced or fluid. I have used rigid for the lower leagues on the odd occasion I've managed there.

Used to prefer the old rule of two/rigid, at least until I became of the opinion that fluid always works best regardless of the caliber of players. Whether it's a top tier team or the most modest of lower league teams, I both score more and concede less with fluid in this version of the match engine.

Rigid, simply as I play catenaccio