We arnt all tactical masters FM, wheres the fun gone!!

Ok its like this ive tried the different tactics and players and ive tried telling different things to different players and i just cant win

So i had a little experiment blackburn v liverpool

442 - 11 players 3-0 liverpool

451 - differnt 11 players 3-0 liverpool

343 - mixed 11 players 3-0 liverpool

no matter what tactic formation or players i use its a horror show from my team with the same scorers and same score!!

this game i love is just gettin frustrating and annoying!!!

ill get closed by moderator i bet, so i just hope FM realise that everyone playing this isnt a tactical master and just want some enjoyment outta the game

maybe blackburn play a good counter attack game?

also i have found liverpool to be rubbish anyway this year and have had much better luck with other teams.

i am blackburn, sorry that is a little confusing the way i wrote it

Frustrates me sometimes too, you cant just win like in previous versions.

There are already threads like this as I have posted in them several times, that is not true and your tests are would not really be very conclusive either. You tried different formations with different players and only tested on one game and tactics are only one factor when deciding a match. It is very possibly to win with simple tactics.

There are already threads like this as I have posted in them several times, that is not true and your tests are would not really be very conclusive either. You tried different formations with different players and only tested on one game and tactics are only one factor when deciding a match. It is very possibly to win with simple tactics.

Yes, but do the other factors have a disproportionate influence on matches? That's the real issue where people have genuine disagreements. We've been here before!!

*still having a hard time*

*still wants to punch the game in the face*

The OP won the match everytime, so he clearly can win.

I'd have liked to see screenshots of this but I guess you don't have any.

Actually he lost every time, but it's hardly an exhaustive test and he's not really saying it's rigged he's just saying he isn't that great at tactics and he doesn't like the game being so dependent on them.

So, let me get this right. You're admitting you're not a tactical genius, yet you expect to be able to beat Liverpool with Blackburn?

are you sure its not just Blackburns leaky defense (pre-Allardyce era), and the inclusion of one Mr. Andrews.

Changing things every time isn't gonna help

Lets not get too pedantic here. The OP is voicing his frustration over what he feels is lack of control tactically. Snotty replies asking for screenshots are just ridiculous in this case.

There are a lot of posts in the T&T forum proclaiming the ease of winning with default formations, or making your own formation and winning with style. What I find interesting is why it seems to be easy for some, and incredibly difficult for others? I've had reasonable success in all past games, but not this one. Even after hours of poring over tactical posts can I not get anything out of the game. So if Cleon can win everything with the default 541, how come I can't? As has been mentioned here earlier, there are quite a few elements that affect the result of the game other than tactics, but should these elements outweigh tactics at the level it does currently? For lack of a better answer I think this has been the biggest shift from 08 to 09. The result: people like the OP and myself cant get any satisfaction from the game, because to us it feels like no matter what we do we can't win.

Ok its like this ive tried the different tactics and players and ive tried telling different things to different players and i just cant win

So i had a little experiment blackburn v liverpool

442 - 11 players 3-0 liverpool

451 - differnt 11 players 3-0 liverpool

343 - mixed 11 players 3-0 liverpool

no matter what tactic formation or players i use its a horror show from my team with the same scorers and same score!!

this game i love is just gettin frustrating and annoying!!!

ill get closed by moderator i bet, so i just hope FM realise that everyone playing this isnt a tactical master and just want some enjoyment outta the game

Have a look at the thread at http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php?t=61144 It should help you with tactics in FM2009 which are quite different from the previous game.

Lets not get too pedantic here. The OP is voicing his frustration over what he feels is lack of control tactically. Snotty replies asking for screenshots are just ridiculous in this case.

There are a lot of posts in the T&T forum proclaiming the ease of winning with default formations, or making your own formation and winning with style. What I find interesting is why it seems to be easy for some, and incredibly difficult for others? I've had reasonable success in all past games, but not this one. Even after hours of poring over tactical posts can I not get anything out of the game. So if Cleon can win everything with the default 541, how come I can't? As has been mentioned here earlier, there are quite a few elements that affect the result of the game other than tactics, but should these elements outweigh tactics at the level it does currently? For lack of a better answer I think this has been the biggest shift from 08 to 09. The result: people like the OP and myself cant get any satisfaction from the game, because to us it feels like no matter what we do we can't win.

Good post. Exactly how I feel too.

I think the enjoyment has gone as the option to play players in areas of the pitch (IE wibwob on CM01/02, crazy arrows in fm08) that are 'free from AI presence' have gone. No longer can you get your 'crap' players to over-perform. I always felt this was the best part of the game. I used to like taking my Leeds team and making them play as good as possible. Now, it seems it is impossible to have my crap to average defence stop Torres/Adebayor/Ishmael Miller from having goalscoring opportunity after goalscoring opportunity.

I guess it's time to face facts and EXPECT defeat if your players are worse and hope these wonder players have a bad day against your side. Or cheat like mad with genie scout and buy loads of 'soul-less' random but better players you can't find from scouting for cheap prices.

Yes, but do the other factors have a disproportionate influence on matches? That's the real issue where people have genuine disagreements. We've been here before!!

My point is that you do not have to be a tactical master to be successful on the game. I honestly cannot see how anyone can disagree with that. I share your opinion on other things like getting the players to play the tactics you want can be difficult and seeing where you are going wrong but they are many people who are not tactical masters including myself that are successful on the game by just setting up some simple tactics which is enough to get you on the right track to be successful.

Tactics are terrible in this version.

I've played using a simple 442 altering slightly to fit players and played against an AI controlled team (of similar ability) playing with just a right back in defence.

Result - LOST 4-2.

Until this ends up as a serious win for common sense SI tactics are crap.

I'm sorry but it just isn't realistic is it?

My point is that you do not have to be a tactical master to be successful on the game. I honestly cannot see how anyone can disagree with that. I share your opinion on other things like getting the players to play the tactics you want can be difficult and seeing where you are going wrong but they are many people who are not tactical masters including myself that are successful on the game by just setting up some simple tactics which is enough to get you on the right track to be successful.

You can set up straightforward tactics which will win you a proportion of matches, I agree. But fundamentally I don't think we know why they work and I don't think we know what to do when we need to make changes. We're drifting around in a fog of obscurity caused by a poor ME and too many 'outside' factors affecting matches.

I just played and replayed a game. I used perfectly reasonable tactics (a 3-5-2) based on TT & F principles. I lost the first 2-0 and replayed. Because I didn't have a clue from the ME about what alterations to make, I replayed making my Def line a couple of notches deeper and my Att the same. Result - I won 2-0.

I'll assume for the sake of argument that, had I chosen those settings initially, I would have won 2-0 in that case (and I know that's uncertain because of all the random elements). But there was no particular reason to do so at the start. What setup I initially chose was basically a matter of chance. Furthermore, an alteration of 2 slider clicks in each case made a 4 goal difference. I didn't wildly change what I was doing - just a tweak.

The whole tactical process is simply too unclear and matches are affected too much by external factors (weather, team talks, press, etc) to make for satisfactory gameplay IMO. The whole thing is just too unpredictable.

My point is that you do not have to be a tactical master to be successful on the game. I honestly cannot see how anyone can disagree with that. "...." they are many people who are not tactical masters including myself that are successful on the game by just setting up some simple tactics which is enough to get you on the right track to be successful.

So what happens when those simple tactics start getting cracked and fail? Historically in FM you would tweak right? But whatever small level of intuity the tactical aspect had in previous games, have now gone.

Ok so I start a new series, setup a default tactic with minor tweaks. Lo and behold things go horribly wrong. Ok, thats cool, I'll crack this thing yet. I can see where the majority of the problems are, so I lower the D line or change the mentality slider. Not only are the results the same, the team plays the same way too. Ok, never fear, its just the starting formation right? So lets try something with 1 attacker, 2 attackers or 3 attackers. Maybe pack the midfield with 5 players. Hmmm....same results, same type of goals let in, same crap in offence.

I understand that the game has changed, but if the tactical aspects of FM used to balance on the tip of a sword, it's now grabbed the sword and stabbed itself in the gut.

You "honestly cannot see how anyone can disagree that you do not have to be a tactical master to be successful on the game"? For me its fairly obvious: When people raise the topic of struggling with tactics here, they are told to read the Tactical Theorems post to sort things out........thats 18,000 words!!! So if you have to read that to manage the tactical aspects of the game, you DO have to become a tactical master, because thats what the people who wrote that thread are.

when you design tactics you can use the "set to" function to change style of the players. like making the wide midfielders as winger settings, or for the full-backs to act like wing-backs etc

I've just played another match and won 3-1. BUT I had my team set to defend deeply and counter attack. I was barely out of the opponents' half for the entire match! While the ME continues to come up with stuff like this, which is, frankly, simply rubbish, the whole idea of fitting your tactics to what you see on the pitch is little more than a joke.

3-0 against Liverpool is perfectly realistic result though. If you'd played Wigan and lost 3-0 every game, then that might be different.

I've played Liverpool away and lost 4-0 before. I try never to play defensive against a great team because they always find a way to score goals against you and you lose anyway. I just aim to score 1 and then adjust my tactics slightly, doesn't work all the time, but I did beat Chelsea 2-0 at Stamford Bridge with IFK Hassleholm from Sweden using a combination of team talks and tactical adjustments.

I've just played another match and won 3-1. BUT I had my team set to defend deeply and counter attack. I was barely out of the opponents' half for the entire match! While the ME continues to come up with stuff like this, which is, frankly, simply rubbish, the whole idea of fitting your tactics to what you see on the pitch is little more than a joke.

This is the problem I see time and time again which is incredibly frustrating, when your tactical instructions just don’t seem to be visible on screen.

I’ve switched form a slow short passing game to a fast direct one and didn’t see any difference whatsoever.

I’ve tried pushing the d-line up and dropping them back but again I don’t see the difference.

I’ve tried setting my big striker to hold up the ball but again I don’t see the difference between not having the option checked.

Now I would never say that these changes don’t make a difference, but when you can’t visually see the difference on screen then it’s hard to know what changes are happening.

The changes likely do make a difference, but the ME is so bad at giving you a visual equivalent to the calculations that the AI is making that you aren't a penny the wiser about what you should be doing.

I think that the deficiencies are more obvious because we now have 3D. Too much of the time I feel I am just mucking around in ignorance because I don't have enough clear information to decide what to do.

Lets not get too pedantic here. The OP is voicing his frustration over what he feels is lack of control tactically. Snotty replies asking for screenshots are just ridiculous in this case.

There are a lot of posts in the T&T forum proclaiming the ease of winning with default formations, or making your own formation and winning with style. What I find interesting is why it seems to be easy for some, and incredibly difficult for others? I've had reasonable success in all past games, but not this one. Even after hours of poring over tactical posts can I not get anything out of the game. So if Cleon can win everything with the default 541, how come I can't? As has been mentioned here earlier, there are quite a few elements that affect the result of the game other than tactics, but should these elements outweigh tactics at the level it does currently? For lack of a better answer I think this has been the biggest shift from 08 to 09. The result: people like the OP and myself cant get any satisfaction from the game, because to us it feels like no matter what we do we can't win.

That's a very good post and one I can sympathise with. If you are open to learning then my new threads what will be posted shortly go into a lot more depth about actually understanding the sliders and what effects they have on other sliders. While I do try and do things simple in terms of tactics when trying to get points across, I also try and take into account others might not think the same as me and choose a different option. So what I hope to do, is make it crystal clear what each tactical option on FM does and controls.

You can set up straightforward tactics which will win you a proportion of matches, I agree. But fundamentally I don't think we know why they work and I don't think we know what to do when we need to make changes. We're drifting around in a fog of obscurity caused by a poor ME and too many 'outside' factors affecting matches.

I just played and replayed a game. I used perfectly reasonable tactics (a 3-5-2) based on TT & F principles. I lost the first 2-0 and replayed. Because I didn't have a clue from the ME about what alterations to make, I replayed making my Def line a couple of notches deeper and my Att the same. Result - I won 2-0.

I'll assume for the sake of argument that, had I chosen those settings initially, I would have won 2-0 in that case (and I know that's uncertain because of all the random elements). But there was no particular reason to do so at the start. What setup I initially chose was basically a matter of chance. Furthermore, an alteration of 2 slider clicks in each case made a 4 goal difference. I didn't wildly change what I was doing - just a tweak.

The whole tactical process is simply too unclear and matches are affected too much by external factors (weather, team talks, press, etc) to make for satisfactory gameplay IMO. The whole thing is just too unpredictable.

Yes I understand that but people are complaining that you cannot win which is not true.

So what happens when those simple tactics start getting cracked and fail? Historically in FM you would tweak right? But whatever small level of intuity the tactical aspect had in previous games, have now gone.

Ok so I start a new series, setup a default tactic with minor tweaks. Lo and behold things go horribly wrong. Ok, thats cool, I'll crack this thing yet. I can see where the majority of the problems are, so I lower the D line or change the mentality slider. Not only are the results the same, the team plays the same way too. Ok, never fear, its just the starting formation right? So lets try something with 1 attacker, 2 attackers or 3 attackers. Maybe pack the midfield with 5 players. Hmmm....same results, same type of goals let in, same crap in offence.

I understand that the game has changed, but if the tactical aspects of FM used to balance on the tip of a sword, it's now grabbed the sword and stabbed itself in the gut.

You "honestly cannot see how anyone can disagree that you do not have to be a tactical master to be successful on the game"? For me its fairly obvious: When people raise the topic of struggling with tactics here, they are told to read the Tactical Theorems post to sort things out........thats 18,000 words!!! So if you have to read that to manage the tactical aspects of the game, you DO have to become a tactical master, because thats what the people who wrote that thread are.

You don't have to be a tactical master. I am not and others on here are not and still achieve a moderate amount of success. I never tweak my tactics either. I have 5 tactics set up and I switch between them but that is all I do. It is tricky to understand what is going on regarding tactics and that does need to be improved but it is not the reason people are unsuccessful. I outlined several reasons in previous posts about why they are most likely struggling.

I honestly think that people ARE unsuccessful because of the deficiencies of the ME. I switch between 3 tactics and it's a lottery about which one to choose and how or whether to tweak just because the ME is so bad.

It's rather like firing a gun in a totally dark room. You will hit somebody sometimes but whether you need to aim to the left, right, up or down more if you miss the first time is entirely beyond your ability to sort out.

That's a very good post and one I can sympathise with. If you are open to learning then my new threads what will be posted shortly go into a lot more depth about actually understanding the sliders and what effects they have on other sliders. While I do try and do things simple in terms of tactics when trying to get points across, I also try and take into account others might not think the same as me and choose a different option. So what I hope to do, is make it crystal clear what each tactical option on FM does and controls.

I'll certainly go through your new threads when they are posted. After all, I wouldn't be here if I didn't want to find out how I could get the enjoyment of the game back :-)

What seems to be changing more for each new FM game, is the amount of time required "studying" the tactical aspects before gaining any insight. I know how much time can be spent playing this game and enjoying the experience, but if the time required to study the game before playing becomes even close to proportionate with the playing time, then something is going a bit wrong imo.

Look forward to the new threads, hopefully in time for the 9.0.3 patch :-)

So what are these simple tatics that work?

I've stuck to 2 strategies for my teams.. 4-4-2 attack and 4-4-2 counter attacking. With pretty much no luck ..

Somebody on here has won the SPL with the default tactics. I know it is not that difficult a challenge as they were Rangers but it shows you can achieve what is expected even with just the default tactics.

If you want to win then be Liverpool.

If the game constantly let human manager wins against superior opponents in my opinion the game wouldn't be much fun. It goes back to the question of should there be a difficulty level I suppose.

It's not about winning .... its about understanding why we are losing. I wouldn't mind losing a game if I could understand why I lost, or better yet if I could see how my tactical changes are affecting the game. I think this is what a lot of people like Rupal and me are having trouble with. We do not want a simpler game, we just want to feel that we are making a difference, and be able to tell what the difference is when we switch those ambiguous notches around....

It's not about winning .... its about understanding why we are losing. I wouldn't mind losing a game if I could understand why I lost, or better yet if I could see how my tactical changes are affecting the game. I think this is what a lot of people like Rupal and me are having trouble with. We do not want a simpler game, we just want to feel that we are making a difference, and be able to tell what the difference is when we switch those ambiguous notches around....

Yeah that is spot on but for some people it is about winning or so it seems. I agree with Rupal and you on that. Rupal made a post in another thread that summed it up perfectly I thought that echoed the thoughts of your post here.

This game is the most fun since CM 01/02 in my opinion. You just have to have the right setup and dare i say it have some understanding of football. I'm not trying to cause any upset here but i've gone with the following and had immense enjoyment.

Setup 1

Ex Pro experience, Newcastle Utd. What i did here was set myself a top 10 finish and using the Ex pro experience helped. That way the players respected me and I had time to sort the team out without thinking about winning the league.

That i leave till later when i Can achieve this as my reputation is better, i can attract better players, and player more attacking.

Setup 2

Sunday League experience, Chester City. With me having a lower reputation telling my board this was a season of consolidation i gave myself time to sort out the team and build up my reputation. The media predicted a 21st place finish and i finished 14th.

I'm on to my next season now and i've told the board i'm aiming for mid table. The media say 18th this season so i'm hoping for anywhere mid table.

The point is i've realised my expectations and reputation and constructed a team and tactics to execute this.

Newcastle & Chester

Played 4-4-2 using the TT+F (Rule of One) and focused on a counter attacking strategy both home and away as i've got pace in the side and have accepted that i may lost 40% of my games because i'm not that good and also i'm a new manager to the club.

Until i've established myself at the club (Discipline and tactics) then i've got to accept i'm going to lose more than i'm going to win.

I don't consider myself a tactical expert but i know if i'm new to a club, the club is weaker than some teams and i'm not sure of the players i'm going to have to play it conservative.

You can't just pick up this game and Win (In my opinion) its a strategy game and always has been. That means that you will either be rewarded or punished for bad decisions. This could be the players you buy, the tactics you choose, how you train them, and since FM05? how you motivate them.

Just accept you are not going to get it right straight away and if needs be play with a lower rated team and earn the right to manage the clubs and you will not only enjoy the game more but also gain a sense of achievement. Much like when you complete any games

Keep the faith

It's not about winning .... its about understanding why we are losing. I wouldn't mind losing a game if I could understand why I lost, or better yet if I could see how my tactical changes are affecting the game. I think this is what a lot of people like Rupal and me are having trouble with. We do not want a simpler game, we just want to feel that we are making a difference, and be able to tell what the difference is when we switch those ambiguous notches around....

That is so true

I dont really mind the losing but why am i losing so i could fix ti..

My team passing is horrible so i slow down the tempo and go for short passes. It seems to have no effect ..

Im getting dominated in possesion so i up time wasting a bit and try to slow it down again.. Doesnt seem to work.

There counter attack is hitting me hard so i try to change things up to stop that. Doesnt seem to do any good..

Other games im dominating in most things but they still manage to score more than me. Why.. I have no idea

The asst manager doesnt tell yea crap.. I feel like i could just randomly choose sliders and it wouldnt really matter at times ..

with every fm that passes im becoming more and more aware that im playing against a specific match engine rather than a different team each week

After reading this thread....it is no wonder why you guys aren't winning. This years version has a lot of little things in it that can influence the outcome of a game and the winner is not decided by the manager that has best exploited glitches in the match engine. In previous years it was way too easy to create super tactics that were unstoppable.

This year it is all about putting the best team on the field with the best morale, team talks, and tactics and letting the players decide who wins. Don’t forget that they still have to play the game and sometimes the best team doesn’t win and sometimes the best tactic doesn’t win. The bottom line is your players need to be better and play better than theirs, and the tactics you use will not make up for the lower quality in your side compared to your opponents.

After reading this thread....it is no wonder why you guys aren't winning. This years version has a lot of little things in it that can influence the outcome of a game and the winner is not decided by the manager that has best exploited glitches in the match engine. In previous years it was way too easy to create super tactics that were unstoppable.

This year it is all about putting the best team on the field with the best morale, team talks, and tactics and letting the players decide who wins. Don’t forget that they still have to play the game and sometimes the best team doesn’t win and sometimes the best tactic doesn’t win. The bottom line is your players need to be better and play better than theirs, and the tactics you use will not make up for the lower quality in your side compared to your opponents.

I agree, put out best players, tactics, morale and I can shoot out to a 2-0 lead at half time. Then watch AI team go from a local pub team to Barcelona and string together passes and CCCs throughout second half. I think part of the problem is that everything gets trumped by the half time talks, so it is nearly impossible to make judgements on tactics.

How do I respond to a first half that had me 2-0 up, 10+ shots, 4-5 CCCs and basically shut down AI attack followed by a second half where the results are roughly flipped? Did my tactics suddenly stop working? Did the AI make small tweaks that I can't see? Or did they give one of their absurd team talks?

And if our tactics can't make up for better AI teams, why can inferior AI teams make up for better human tactics, players, morale and conditioning with a few words at half time?

I didnt realise my post which was just a bit of venting would cause a stir

Im not saying i should be beating liverpool every game or that i think the game is fixed!!

What im saying is with 3 different tactics with 3 different teams of players ( one with a youth GK ) the same result with same scorers happened all 3 times, its not the losing its the consistancy of result with completely different tactics!

Im not good with tactics and before thats never seemed to matter, but it does in this game and its frustrating for me

After reading this thread....it is no wonder why you guys aren't winning. This years version has a lot of little things in it that can influence the outcome of a game and the winner is not decided by the manager that has best exploited glitches in the match engine. In previous years it was way too easy to create super tactics that were unstoppable.

This year it is all about putting the best team on the field with the best morale, team talks, and tactics and letting the players decide who wins. Don’t forget that they still have to play the game and sometimes the best team doesn’t win and sometimes the best tactic doesn’t win. The bottom line is your players need to be better and play better than theirs, and the tactics you use will not make up for the lower quality in your side compared to your opponents.

what are all these little things?

I dont really have a problem with team talks keeping morale up is rather easy as long as you dont go on a big time skid ..

I know my players are better than some of the opponents i lose to. If you just went by the stats alot of the time you would think my team won that game

But instead i got 2-0 losses even tho i lead in all the match stats..

Or just totally and utterly dominated by an inferior team. Now i know these things happen and i dont have a problem with it .. But it happens way to often and i have no idea why...

Although I do like the new challenging tactical system, I do agree that sometimes, the game makes you "destined" to lose.

I've found you need the right players for your tactics and the teams needs time to learn your style of play, I changed from direct passing to a shorter passing style and was horribly inconsistent for a year or so before it seemed to click, try having your reserves and under 18.s playing the same tactics that way when you play a young player they will already be used to your formation. Now my team is almost totally made from young players who have graduated from my reserves or youth team they play really well most games

The problem i find most times is that a simple 442 formation just doesnt work anymore even tho most prem teams play such a formation

The problem i find most times is that a simple 442 formation just doesnt work anymore even tho most prem teams play such a formation

How can a 4-4-2 NOT work? it's not an expansive formation, so relies heavily on individual settings and team talks.

It surely quite realistic that Liverpool would beat Blackburn 3 times out of 3?

Mates, I am going to ask you one question:

Are you really sure which slider influence which aspect of play (visibly) in the match engine?

There are few on which I can say YES, I know and see what are they effecting: mentality, forward runs, tempo, run with ball, cross from and tackling (some of them should be called else).

With rest of the sliders, I am not sure whether they are functioning or what are they effecting (there is no visible effect in match engine).

What about you?

I'm not convinced that even the ones you've mentioned clearly show up all the time !

And one thing that really worries me is, why PaulC as father of ME simply can not explain which slider is doing what in ME? The game manual is not very good and we all are trying to gather as lot as we can from "tactical gurus" via TTF. But where is the truth and what is correct about tactics sliders?

I will not mention any other aspects of this game as they seem to be mythical too (training facilities, re-training, loaning out, footedness etc.)

Also when you instruct your players to pass preferably to the flanks do they???

Having watched games in full with ball down middle and then wide I notice no difference. Perhaps we should have stats to say where tha ball has been (left/centre/right)?

Also I find passing, tackling and crossing %s to be completely useless unless its supported with how many.

i.e. Passing completion 75% (75/100)