A Closer Look at Mentality.

Some great threads in this forum got me experimenting with some equally great tactics and during the last few days of a marathon run of FM2008 I have come to a new understanding of player mentality.

There are some theories around saying that no player should be outside of a certain range of the average mentality of the team, that individual extremes that vary greatly from the team are universally bad. This stems from the idea that mentality determines how you wish your players to play. Slightly defensive within an attacking formation, slighty more attacking within an attacking formation. This idea takes the team mentality as the baseline, and varies player mentalities according to the general idea of the teams mentality.

I disagree with this view. Through playing and experimenting I have come to see mentality not as an indicator of how attacking or conservative a player is relative to the team, but how attacking or conservative a player is within their role. There does not seem to be much difference at first glance, in an attacking formation you obviously want everyone to be slightly more attacking than the midline. This is sensible theory, but its most obvious weakness is the problem of the isolated striker.

It is the lone front man that reveals the truth about mentality. Using the usual theories of mentality it takes a highly talented striker to play any role in team that utilises one front man, no matter the mentality of the team as a whole. Even reducing mentality to near midline will see good strikers marked out of the game and constantly offside in a lone striker formation, with regular 6's and a passing stat of around 3 per game. The lone striker shows that mentality is not how attacking or conservative a player is relative to the team, but how attacking or conservative a player is relative to his starting position, or to put it another way mentality determines what type of role is played within the starting position.

It is my view that midline mentality means a midline role for that position. A midline striker will play as a midline striker, neither dropping deep nor forcing the opposition defence deep or to play offside. A midline centreback will neither push up nor drop deep, but will hold the defensive line and contend with attacks using his own ability and individual instructions alone. The game states "if you find yourself leaving too much space behind your defence, try dropping your centrebacks to ultra defensive, or using a deeper defensive line." This means that ultra defensive will see your centrebacks trying to stay between striker and goal at all times as their first priority.

I suggest designing mentality for each player based not upon the team mentality as a blueprint, but upon the role for that player within their position. Ashley Cole should always be higher than Wes Brown, John Terry should always be the last man triggering the offside trap, Rooney plays deeper than Heskey no matter the target man advice for mentality given previously.

Remember that just like Hard Tackling does not mean play a high tempo game, nor does team mentality mean "do your own thing but more/less attacking." Team mentality automatically sets the individual mentalities of all players to a certain level, player instructions means customising that players role in his position.

I may be wrong and I hope for some feedback on this idea on mentality.

Great OP.

I'd agree 100%. However, you need to take FWRs into consideration. For fluid passing moves, you require a combination of passing, mentality and FWRs to ensure players don't bunch too much and can also pass to players immediately within range. As FWRs are aggressive moves, an FC with FWRs often and mentality 19 plays totally differently, and in a completely different area of the pitch, than an FCd with mentality 14 and FWRs rarely. Get the right set up plus the right player for the right position and you will see fabulous attacking plays.

Well if you're going with a high mentality striker then you're trying to get in behind. If you're using a low mentality striker you want him to drop deep. As the OP says. So there isn't much variation is there? Can you do anything else other than often and rarely respectively and get effective play from the striker?

I'm not sure if it is as simple as FWR Often for a high mentality striker and FWR Rare for a low mentality, except ofcourse if that is precisely what is desired.

If mentality is the setting for customising a players role within that position, and is like it is claimed the most important setting, then the other player instruction options would appear to be means of reinforcing or contradicting associated features of the role. For example an ultra defensive fullback with high closing down, because one would associate an ultra defensive fullback with continually dropping deeper and standing off an opponent while forcing him down channels, but you may want your fullback to hold a deep and solid line but aggressively harass whoever enters his zone.

The Xabi Alonso position might be described for example as a CM with a mentality of 7 (for CM), FWR Rare, RWB mixed, Direct Passing, TTB often, Long Shots Often. A mentality 7 CM would on its own hardly ever play a forward pass, but Xabi Alonso is no mentality 15+ CM positionally, though his passing might be.

I would suggest that if you want to get in behind a defence with a fast striker you need to give him space, which implies drawing the defence out of position and running from deep, which implies a lower starting mentality. You will need to contradict the associated features of a low mentality striker with FWR Often, Direct Passing, RWB Often, TTB Rare, Cross Often and from byline and a very low creative freedom.

Keep in mind that I have not tried this particular setup so it is just theory, and I would appreciate any feedback on it.

This is when different match strategies come into play. For matches in which you expect to be the dominant team, Alonso can easily be played as a DM with a mentality of 15, but, and here is the key point, he has to be fitted within a holistic mentality structure in which this setting makes logical sense. With common FM settings having the DCs as 1, the FBs as 6 and the DMC as 10, we already have huge formation gaps, which will be accentuated with a further rise in mentality, leading to horrible gaps in the defence and incoherent defensive passing. If you regard Alonso's role as a key role for the team, then the defence has to be structured around his settings. The DCs need to be pushed much higher so they can provide a possession-friendly, short-passing base to feed him the ball and stop him from being isolated when he has the ball.

You then need to mirror this set up with lower mentalities to make a more defensively sound system for matches in which you'll be under pressure.

This is when different match strategies come into play. For matches in which you expect to be the dominant team, Alonso can easily be played as a DM with a mentality of 15, but, and here is the key point, he has to be fitted within a holistic mentality structure in which this setting makes logical sense. With common FM settings having the DCs as 1, the FBs as 6 and the DMC as 10, we already have huge formation gaps, which will be accentuated with a further rise in mentality, leading to horrible gaps in the defence and incoherent defensive passing. If you regard Alonso's role as a key role for the team, then the defence has to be structured around his settings. The DCs need to be pushed much higher so they can provide a possession-friendly, short-passing base to feed him the ball and stop him from being isolated when he has the ball.

You then need to mirror this set up with lower mentalities to make a more defensively sound system for matches in which you'll be under pressure.

I completely agree here, but is not it possible to fill mentality gaps with player instructions without sacrificing commitment to extremely different roles?

Take for example the AI Chelsea defence at game start of FM2008. They will push up to the halfway line and look to win every clearance when the attack has the ball but drop to their 18 yard line and let the hardworking midfield win the ball if the opposition is passing it around in midfield. This implies to me that they play very low mentality defenders with a high defensive line or vice versa.

FWR Often and direct passing CB could link up low mentality defenders with high mentality FWR Rare midfielders when in possesion of the ball, yet still maintain commitment to a deep strong flatback four when under pressure.

My point is that for a holistic system taking into account formation and mentality alone for general shape forces the player to keep mentalities close together to avoid gaps in key phases of play and key areas of shape, however player instructions determine behaviour and therefore positioning and shape and movement through zones during play as well.

A holistic system taking into account player behaviour via instructions as part of a formation and tactical plan for team shape, not just what you want the guy to do when on the ball, means that a wider range of mentalities can be explored and therefore a wider range of formations, shape and tactical options.

I like where you are coming from with this, but I think you might be headed into a world of pain when trying to separate mentalities too far. The most common method of plugging the gaps is with arrows, which, although fine in FM08, won't be an option in FM09.

Your idea of more direct passing, low mentality DCs is a fine one and many people play this way successfully in FM08. I believe this will be more difficult in 09. However, we can just take 08 as an example. The DCs must play a direct ball forward with those settings to reach the midfield. For Chelsea, this is unlikely to be a problem, as the opposition are likley to sit back and not put the DCs under pressure. For a poorer team with worse DCs playign against a more agressive opponent, the direct ball to an advanced midfield is horribly dangerous as it is too easily intercepted. It would be much better for the DCs to have all the team in range of a direct ball in this type of match so the passing options are varied and they don't have to take risks. They may still make an easy pass to an MC, but they could also pass a safer ball to the FC to hold up. Hence, you need to drop the mentalities of the whole team to help them out.

For an attacking formation, you want them to simply feed the MC. Why, in this situation, do you need them to play direct passes? Simply increase their mentality so they are closer to the MCs and tell them to play short passes. Under little pressure, they can form the possession backbone for the team by constatntly making easy passes to midfielders who are positioned close to them. The midfielders then make the more risky pass, which, if intercepted, doesn't matter as it is high up the pitch and has two lines of players covering for the break.

All of this works in the same manner as your ideas, but just takes it one level further. Hope it helps.

I agree with wwfan..you should be able to get players to play a variety of styles even if you have their mentalities within a certain band. You can do that already in FM08. However too wide a range of mentalities is not a good idea. Although theoretically you can make a formation work with Ultra defensive defenders, you can get them to perform much better if their mentalities are closer to the fullbacks and the dm in your formation. That way they work more as a unit. The mentality spread isn't too large to leave pockets of isolated players which is still possible in FM08

I agree with wwfan..you should be able to get players to play a variety of styles even if you have their mentalities within a certain band. You can do that already in FM08. However too wide a range of mentalities is not a good idea. Although theoretically you can make a formation work with Ultra defensive defenders, you can get them to perform much better if their mentalities are closer to the fullbacks and the dm in your formation. That way they work more as a unit. The mentality spread isn't too large to leave pockets of isolated players which is still possible in FM08

This is where it all gets confusing for me as if I want my fullbacks to play with an attack minded approach but my ovbiously my centre backs to play with a defensive minded approach, surely the mentality split should be wide between the centre backs and full backs?

This was Ov's explanation of Mentality

"In terms of mentality, this is really about when they are deciding what to do in a given situation, how much risk do they take in trying something more attacking? i.e. do the they go for the simple square ball, that 90% of the time will not be intercepted, so they keep possession, or, if they have been told to play with a more attack-minded approach, then should they attempt that more ambitious forward pass/through ball?

It would also affect their movement too - with that gap opening up in-front of them, with a defensive mentality they would be less likely to be inclined to run forward (with or without the ball) and use that space."

This tells me that yes, I use a higher mentality for my full backs to play attack minded and running in to space that opens up in front of them but I use a lower mentality for my centre backs as I want them to stay put a play safer passes.

This is where I get confused and need to experiment to see what actually happens.

This tells me that yes, I use a higher mentality for my full backs to play attack minded and running in to space that opens up in front of them but I use a lower mentality for my centre backs as I want them to stay put a play safer passes.

This is where I get confused and need to experiment to see what actually happens.

I'm liking this post by the way, very interesting stuff

Just putting my 2 cents in: I'm playing Dinamo Kiev on FM08 now and I've been working on my 5-3-2 sweeper-based formation for weeks now.

I initially set my sweeper and both CBs to lowest defensive mentality. This worked good, but sometimes my midfield got isolated when a SW or CB had the ball, and they had to make a long pass even thought overall the team is set to direct. I feel this happens more often with an attack-minded opposition, as they will have more players between your defenders and midfield

I tweaked the two CB mentality only a few notches more attacking, and now this works much better.

So to conclude, I think most formations can work fine 90% of the time with vastly different mentality for defence/midfield/attack. But, if you move them closer together but still far enough to serve the purpose of the tatics, it will generally be more ideal.

This worked good, but sometimes my midfield got isolated when a SW or CB had the ball, and they had to make a long pass even thought overall the team is set to direct.

My understanding of football is that direct passing can be long as a direct style is one that gets the ball forward as fast as possible.

I've just done a search on google and found this

"More often associated with counter-attacking football than with possession football, direct football means that players spend little time with the ball before passing. In order to achieve this, each player frequently uses only one or two touches. The direct attack is sometimes associated with the long-ball style. Long ball is the term used in association football to describe an attempt, often speculative, to distribute the ball a long distance down the field via a cross, without the intention to pass it to the feet of the receiving player. It is a technique that can be especially effective for a team with a tall striker to get in the box."

I agree footynut, I've always believed that direct passing just reflects how well you bring the ball up. Or how well your wingers use the ball. i tend to be specific with the players who have this and it helps if they have the right attributes

My understanding of football is that direct passing can be long as a direct style is one that gets the ball forward as fast as possible.

I've just done a search on google and found this

"More often associated with counter-attacking football than with possession football, direct football means that players spend little time with the ball before passing. In order to achieve this, each player frequently uses only one or two touches. The direct attack is sometimes associated with the long-ball style. Long ball is the term used in association football to describe an attempt, often speculative, to distribute the ball a long distance down the field via a cross, without the intention to pass it to the feet of the receiving player. It is a technique that can be especially effective for a team with a tall striker to get in the box."

On FM it differs from longball because direct means to get the ball from defence to midfield to strikers as fast as possible without bypassing for example defence to striker.

I'm liking this post by the way, very interesting stuff

Just putting my 2 cents in: I'm playing Dinamo Kiev on FM08 now and I've been working on my 5-3-2 sweeper-based formation for weeks now.

I initially set my sweeper and both CBs to lowest defensive mentality. This worked good, but sometimes my midfield got isolated when a SW or CB had the ball, and they had to make a long pass even thought overall the team is set to direct. I feel this happens more often with an attack-minded opposition, as they will have more players between your defenders and midfield

I tweaked the two CB mentality only a few notches more attacking, and now this works much better.

So to conclude, I think most formations can work fine 90% of the time with vastly different mentality for defence/midfield/attack. But, if you move them closer together but still far enough to serve the purpose of the tatics, it will generally be more ideal.

On FM it differs from longball because direct means to get the ball from defence to midfield to strikers as fast as possible without bypassing for example defence to striker.

Are you sure about that Cleon?

Are you sure about that Cleon?

Yups read the manual explains it.

Yups read the manual explains it.

I've got the manual in front of me but I can't see where it says that. Not in the section under passing anyway.

Not to worry, I'll figure it out o)

I've got the manual in front of me but I can't see where it says that. Not in the section under passing anyway.

Not to worry, I'll figure it out o)

It does under the passing sections in the FM08 manual

I have been experimenting further with mentality in an attempt to resolve my lone striker woes, as well as combining my 4-4-1-1 with Jawsarbricks Libero defence, and while an attacking mentality centreback is an ingenious structured position the same cannot be said for a defensive lone striker.

I find it nearly impossible to achieve any kind of effective use of my striker no matter his instructions when his mentality is set near the defensive third. Two things come to mind here, first that his mentality is not suited to his role of both dropping deep and finishing off moves, and secondly that a lone striker is a position where PPMs have a dramatic effect.

Setting his mentality to just above normal still has him playing very high up the pitch, but I bought a new striker with the PPMs shoots from distance and places shots with high dribbling, acceleration, long shots and finishing and this guy has started putting away half chances on a regular basis. With this is mind I think that a deep dropping lone striker requires the PPM comes deep to pick up the ball.

With this is mind I think that a deep dropping lone striker requires the PPM comes deep to pick up the ball.

Try no forward runs and look for high teamwork. Teamwork is the key attribute if you want your player to move without he ball - to help the ball carrier .

If you want to see what I meen - use an editor and change the strikers teamwork to 20 for a few games .

Also set him as targetman - pass to feet.

Perhaps playing the striker like Totti does for Roma would be one possible way of playing a lone-striker with low mentality (although not defensive IMO).

I don't often play with a 442, though recently in FML I have...whenever I choose to play with a deep lying striker I usually like to define his role very clearly.

If he is meant to link midfield and the striker then he plays on a low mentality with NO forward runs, in fact for FM2008 I'd put him with a Barrow.

I don't often play with a 442, though recently in FML I have...whenever I choose to play with a deep lying striker I usually like to define his role very clearly.

If he is meant to link midfield and the striker then he plays on a low mentality with NO forward runs, in fact for FM2008 I'd put him with a Barrow.

Yeah I was doing that for a while but an aggressive attacking 4-4-1-1 formation with a low mentality MC and CF seems to do the job of providing a deep lying second striker far better than any 4-4-2 mentality and player instructions I have come up with. The problem with the barrow is that you want the player to aggressively attack from a high AMC position. A low mentality barrowed CF will play conservatively but still too high up the pitch if you have the ball in midfield.

Try no forward runs and look for high teamwork. Teamwork is the key attribute if you want your player to move without he ball - to help the ball carrier .

If you want to see what I meen - use an editor and change the strikers teamwork to 20 for a few games .

Also set him as targetman - pass to feet.

This is a great suggestion because it is completely correct. Something else I have found is that if you give the FC a free role he will drift to the flank that has the most space, generally on the opposite side to that chosen by the AMC, while without a free role he will tend to stay central.

I do have one other question though, and that is how to get the best out of my wingers, given that my FC tends to drift to one flank with a Free Role, and that my central attacking formation is staggered or lopesided, like a slightly tilted Z. I have played about a little bit with one winger going gung ho with FWR often and long Farrow, with another with a medium farrow and FWR mixed. I get good results with my current formation, wingers both at near max mentality, FWR often, but I don't think im getting the maximum out of them.