This is weird... (Side Back pushing forward when he shouldn't)

I would appriciate if anybody could explain to me what is going on over here ? Maybe I'm missing something...

Even the opposite deffender has total opposite, meaning he has the mentality slider all the way up to the attacking, yet funny thing - he is further back on the field than the player circled, with total deffensive mentality.

What is going on ???

(He didn't push up because he was running with the ball, in fact he is about to receive the ball - from the forward - for the first time in this play)

I went even further and switched off everything, and the situation still is unchanged...

May be something wrong with the match engine, but you are playing with a narrow formation and the game probably make the Fullback push up to give you width, but I'm just spitballing

Not sure. Does he have a PPM that he means he gets forward, or something like that? The only change I can suggest is getting him to Cross from Deep, though otherwise he can't get much more defensive...

Not sure. Does he have a PPM that he means he gets forward, or something like that?

Yes actually you may be right.....

check his PPMs

May be something wrong with the match engine, but you are playing with a narrow formation and the game probably make the Fullback push up to give you width, but I'm just spitballing

The game allows me to do stupid things if I choose to, like crossing all the time for the player who has 1/1 jumping/heading. The game has it's core, but this is to much of a big thing to totaly ignore my instructions.

Not sure. Does he have a PPM that he means he gets forward, or something like that? The only change I can suggest is getting him to Cross from Deep, though otherwise he can't get much more defensive...

Yes actually you may be right.....

check his PPMs

You were correct. The player on the right has indeed a prefered move "push forward whenever possible", but it doesn't count. I've checked on other players who have no prefered moves and the outcome is the same.

...

The player with 1 mentality, 1 creative freedom, and no running forward is pushing out of the deffensive line, sometimes very high up the field even, and what is most frightening, when both side backs are doing this, there are situations where my deffenders are 1v1 with the opposite duo of strikers.

This is TOTALY unaccaptable. In the previous games when a player was set to no forward runs, he did that - he kept his position in line with the other duo of center backs.

Can anybody else confirm this in their own game as well, or maybe even give explanation of why this is happening?

Very interesting find, mate. Are you sure other fullback with no PPM does the same?

I noticed that PPMs are much stronger in FM10 than it was before. Might be that...

Very interesting find, mate. Are you sure other fullback with no PPM does the same?

Positive.

What is more interesting, is why the side backs are not positioned behind the two center backs? (besides the fact that they push forward while they shouldn't!)

The left back/right back has both set their mentalities to 1, while the center duos have 7. The mentality setting should affect the position (vertical) of the player, but it's not the case over here. What the hell is going on ?!

...

This is the left back used in the first part of photos:

And here is the left back used in the last photo:

FM2006 for comparison.

Left back has no runs, mentality - 1, and creative freedom 1. Right back has mentality all the way up, creative freedom 1 and forward runs often. This is how the result will look like in most cases:

What will happen if I will do the same to the right back as I did to the left back? The play was stopped when Adriano was about to shoot the ball, as I wanted to show how they will act, when the player will have the ball in advanced position, and also the deffence was not used in the built up of the play. See how the deffense is beautifully alligned?

Obviously it won't be the case all the time, the players are dynamic, sometimes they will push up(a little), but mostly they will try to stay back as I ordered them. Also notice that I play the same formation(without wings) - 4-4-2 diamond.

We go back to FM2010...

Again, what is going on ?

I had the same problem with Bacary Sagna at Arsenal then somebody told me that Sagna had PPM's set to 'run with ball down the right' and 'get forward whenever possible' and this is why Sagna was nearly in my opponents penalty box.

This is a post I put on another thread, hope it helps.

This is a query I PM'd to PaulC from SI

Originally Posted by RossoneriGunner

Hi Paul, I PM'd you because I think you can help me as a member of the SI team. What takes priority in the match engine. 1. PPM's, 2. Players Individual Instruction. 3. Touchline Shouts. As you know I have been having trouble keeping my full backs at bay. Then Joor came up with what might be the solution...Sagna has his PPM's as Run With Ball Down Right and Gets Forward Whenever Possible. So which settings take priority.

Many Thanks

And this is Pauls reply.

PPM's. Although if a player has a PPM of shoot often, and you tell him to shoot rarely, he'll take the middle ground. Where a PPM has a matching PII think of it as an offset on the PII.

Touchline shouts affect PII's anyway ( as long as you havent changed the PII in classic mode ) so they are also subservient to certain PPM's.

Thank you for your response.

However:

1. I do not use touchline shouts.

2. The players don't have (at all) the Prefered moves like I've shown in the screens above.

3. Individual instructions are set to keep them the most deffensive they can be(even more than the center backs - mentality 7...10), and also give them the smallest amount of creative freedom and yet they still push up the field, and in many occasions leave my 2 center backs with 1vs1 situation at the back.

4. It worked in FM2006. I've showed it above your post.

Why it is not working now? This is totaly unacceptable, that I can't tell my full backs to stay back at all times. This is like telling a player to make a short pass, yet he will still go for long passes all the time despite having 3 players around him that are not marked, because "the game knows better". That's what are the instructions for over there, to obey them. I am aware a player has atributes and "own mind", but I expect him to follow my instructions(when creative freedom - 1) in >90% of the cases, and yet they always do this. This is unacceptable.

You can check it in your game. Take someone with no preffered moves and try to make him stay over there at all times. Don't know if the type of formation influences the side backs decision, but it shouldn't(that much!). I can play with no wings, and if I do that, it is my choice, I don't want the game to choose for me "because I need width". If I tell my player to stay there, I expect him to stay there in (at least) 9 out of 10 situations, unless I give him more creative freedom/he has very low teamwork.

I have posted quite a few times regarding this as I had the same problem so I know where you are coming from. Are you using the wizard to set your teams philosophy etc, if so then I suggest you read the TT10 document. It explains how it affects your players when you set your teams philosophy i.e. Rigid, Balanced, Fluid etc. At least reading it, it will give you some insight to why your players are acting the way they are.

It will be rational if we could have somebody from TT explaining why they think this is happening. It is unacceptable if we cant tell our players to stay behind when we wont them to. Lukair has explained very well his case, he has some good descriptiones with screenshots and comperative ex. regarding FM 06-10. I at least cant find any logical explenation for why this is happening.

What about your opponent tactic?

I think that they push forward so high cause there are room to exploit, and this could happen for 2 reasons:

-Your shape, you have no wingers and no side forwards, and so they provide to give you some width.

-Your opponent shape: did they play a narrow formataion? Did they flood the middle of the pitch?

By the way, did you try to give your formation a very narrow setting?

I also put screenshots and descriptions on here about 2 weeks ago and I even PM'd some of the SI guys and one of their respones is in post no.10. So you want somebody from TT to come on here and put exactly what they have put in their TT10 manual. You will find that the manual explains WHY it happens and not as you say that they THINK they know why. If you have read TT10 you will know that..as I said in my last post..it explains what happens to your players if you use different pholosophies ie. Rigid, Fluid etc, it can also change the shape of your formation as well by making it play narrower or wider.

I also put screenshots and descriptions on here about 2 weeks ago and I even PM'd some of the SI guys and one of their respones is in post no.10. So you want somebody from TT to come on here and put exactly what they have put in their TT10 manual. You will find that the manual explains WHY it happens and not as you say that they THINK they know why. If you have read TT10 you will know that..as I said in my last post..it explains what happens to your players if you use different pholosophies ie. Rigid, Fluid etc, it can also change the shape of your formation as well by making it play narrower or wider.

This has nothing to do with the wizard. It does not matter whether the tactic is Rigid, Balanced, Fluid etc, because Lukair have set the instructions for his sideback manually, where both the mentality, creativity etc. were set on minimum. Thus this overwrites the instructions of the wizard put down on his sideback, by using his own set up in advanced option. I have read TT10, and TT09 if that have some importance.

Huuum... seems like another instance of SI trying to condition the player movement to the ways that do not crack their ME, by making players behave according to their template and not according to what the tactical instructions, supposedely, do....

Are you using the wizard to set your teams philosophy etc, if so then I suggest you read the TT10 document.

I don't. I come from old school of CM and I like to set everything myself.

What about your opponent tactic?

I think that they push forward so high cause there are room to exploit, and this could happen for 2 reasons:

-Your shape, you have no wingers and no side forwards, and so they provide to give you some width.

-Your opponent shape: did they play a narrow formataion? Did they flood the middle of the pitch?

By the way, did you try to give your formation a very narrow setting?

Thank you for your insight.

1. I don't want them to give me the width. Maybe I'm doing it, so that the central deffender will have some cover from the side back, just in case? Or maybe because I'm afraid that the striker will roam to the open space on the wing and drag the central deffender with him? The reason is not important, settings are.

The fun of this game is that it is you who have the control over how your team plays. That's why I've set the instructions just to see how they will react. The game "won't stop you" from giving the forward with 1/1 pace/accelaration to run with the ball although it will be totaly useless. If you give a man marking option to your center back, you expect him to do his job. If he won't and I will say, well "the game felt you need something different" you will be very unsatisfied with this answer. You expect your center back to behave the way you gave him instructions. So am I.

2. What is the relation of the opposition to this? Obviously it has some factor, but the instructions are instructions and come way before how they should react in accordance to the opposition. The players should obey them, especialy when given no creative freedom. If I want them to stay back, thus not giving me any width that's my buisness why I'm doing it.

3. I didn't try narrow setting, but still what it has to do with how my players behave to my direct instructions ?

I understand your point of view, but the problem is more basic than your suggestions, and it should be looked in more basic way, the way I've started the topic:

I give my side back 1 mentality - that is the most deffensive I can set him. In the older versions of the game the player didn't do anything in attack when given this setting.

I give my side back 1 creative freedom so he should obey my orders >90% of the cases.

I give my side back no forward runs.

This is all to it. Those instructions are very simple, and they should be followed and they are not. That's the problem and I would like to know why.

This behaviour is totaly unacceptable because if my sidebacks are not behaving the way I want them too, they can find themselve in the situation when they are both in very advanced position, leaving my 2 center backs in 1vs1 situation with the opposition strikers. That is only one issue with it, and there are many more in accordance to your tactic, and the tactic of the opposition who can easily exploit this weakness.

This is enormous bug from the tactical point of view, and in my tactic it is crucial to make the deffensive tactic on the wings flawless, as there is only 1 player who plays on the side, and the rest are just supporting him.

Lastly, I've shown that this was handled in a different manner in FM2006, maybe in other versions as well. The tactics the same, the opposition is weak with a lot of space on the wings, and the side backs are behaving a lot differently, and more to the way I've put their instructions. I didn't play FM2009 a lot, but in previous versions I would notice it so I think this could be the first time I see this thing happening.

So why it is happening now ?

I also put screenshots and descriptions on here about 2 weeks ago and I even PM'd some of the SI guys and one of their respones is in post no.10. So you want somebody from TT to come on here and put exactly what they have put in their TT10 manual. You will find that the manual explains WHY it happens and not as you say that they THINK they know why. If you have read TT10 you will know that..as I said in my last post..it explains what happens to your players if you use different pholosophies ie. Rigid, Fluid etc, it can also change the shape of your formation as well by making it play narrower or wider.

I've looked into it. Not cover to cover, because I know most of these things as I played this series "a few times" over many years. I just looked for into the new stuff.

ps. I don't use the new framework, I choose the old one with convertion. I also tried those setting in the new environment though, and it's the same, so it's not the issue about using the new template or the old one, but it is the global thing, and most likely match engine issue.

What is worrying is that this is pretty big issue here, and I'm not confident anymore to set my tactics when there is such a big bug. Who knows what is around the corner.

This has nothing to do with the wizard. It does not matter whether the tactic is Rigid, Balanced, Fluid etc, because Lukair have set the instructions for his sideback manually, where both the mentality, creativity etc. were set on minimum. Thus this overwrites the instructions of the wizard put down on his sideback, by using his own set up in advanced option. I have read TT10, and TT09 if that have some importance.

That is well said, so allow me to respond to it and agree on it 100% to save my time.

I would love a reply from either wwfan or Millie as I see them answering in some of the threads.

ps. wwfan didn't you play with me 3 or 4 years back in a challange ("italian job chalange" started by justified) ? Your nickname sounds kinda familiar...

I'm just giving the perspective that may be involved. Basically it is to make players less robotic and more reactive to the situation and the numbers. In other words it depends on what is happening in match. Look at the screenshots versus 06 and tell me which looks more natural in your opinion. Have you ever played as a full back where the manager said do not make forward runs? Generally you set up a system and the full back on the flank where the attack is progressing would not just robotically stay back with the rest of the defense unless it made sense to do so. If he is being conservative he’ll push up for the out ball without overdoing it, but generally if the numbers game at the back looks okay and possession seems secure enough he’ll look to support rather than staying pegged to the line.

If you disagree with the way it functions then compile some tests and write a report arguing why it shouldn't function the way it does.

Personally I think the overall positioning of the line players should be done in relation to the two strikers and when I get the chance (or motivation) I’ll do something concrete on it. In other words when the right back pushes forward to support the right flank (I like it even with FWR = rare), the left back needs to be holding with the line and the line needs to shift across relative to the opposition attackers staying forward. If against two attackers one of those attackers drops deeper then one of the 3 stay back players needs to be willing to cheat forward from the line while the other two triangulate around the remaining attacker ready to shift and squeeze should the opposition look to break. So yes I agree the opposite side flank full back is pushing on too much but I like the fact the same side full back comes to support when it makes sense to do so.

Just as an example identical players and settings

Against a lone forward

Against 2 strikers set to Mentality 20, Runs = Often

Against 424, front 4 Mentality = 20, Runs = Often

Just to state here despite all the conspiracy bollocks that gets posted around these forums, SI aren’t out to get anyone or force the Creator on anyone. As I said if you disagree with how it is functioning or have specific examples where you feel the right things aren’t happening in terms of positioning re settings, then post a detailed analysis of a pkm or 2 in the Match Engine bugs forum. They may well disagree with your assessment but no harm in trying.

From personal experience I’ve seen 3 man midfield behaviour get tweaked for 09 based on the analysis of a forum user, so if you can argue successfully you may see some changes.

I would love a reply from either wwfan or Millie as I see them answering in some of the threads.

ps. wwfan didn't you play with me 3 or 4 years back in a challange ("italian job chalange" started by justified) ? Your nickname sounds kinda familiar...

Not me, I'm afraid. isuckatfm's answer pretty much sums things up as I see them and certainly reflects the logic of the ME AI.

Not me, I'm afraid. isuckatfm's answer pretty much sums things up as I see them and certainly reflects the logic of the ME AI.

But what about the side back on the other side of the ball? Even your predecessor said that sideback is pushing to much up the field.

I'm just giving the perspective that may be involved. Basically it is to make players less robotic and more reactive to the situation and the numbers. In other words it depends on what is happening in match. Look at the screenshots versus 06 and tell me which looks more natural in your opinion. Have you ever played as a full back where the manager said do not make forward runs? Generally you set up a system and the full back on the flank where the attack is progressing would not just robotically stay back with the rest of the defense unless it made sense to do so. If he is being conservative he’ll push up for the out ball without overdoing it, but generally if the numbers game at the back looks okay and possession seems secure enough he’ll look to support rather than staying pegged to the line.

If you disagree with the way it functions then compile some tests and write a report arguing why it shouldn't function the way it does.

Personally I think the overall positioning of the line players should be done in relation to the two strikers and when I get the chance (or motivation) I’ll do something concrete on it. In other words when the right back pushes forward to support the right flank (I like it even with FWR = rare), the left back needs to be holding with the line and the line needs to shift across relative to the opposition attackers staying forward. If against two attackers one of those attackers drops deeper then one of the 3 stay back players needs to be willing to cheat forward from the line while the other two triangulate around the remaining attacker ready to shift and squeeze should the opposition look to break. So yes I agree the opposite side flank full back is pushing on too much but I like the fact the same side full back comes to support when it makes sense to do so.

Thank you for your post.

I understand what you're saying perfectly, and how the modern full-back should behave. However, I will not be convinced, that when I set my side back to 1 mentality and I will give him no forward runs(rarely or whatever) then he should ALWAYS be pushing up the field. This is simply unacceptable and it is not logical and not realistic and my instructions means squat at the moment.

Some years ago side backs were not behaving like they behave in modern football. They were deffenders and that's it. In this game, you can't set up a line of deffense that will only focus on deffense. This is an assumption made in the game and it limits me as a tactician, because right now I have to think what will happen if the side back will push up the field and how I should cover for it.

All you've said, should be a consequence of a different set of settings for my side back. Forward runs mixed, and higher mentality. This is logical. I say to my side back that he can push up, and his mentality should tell him how often and how much risk he can take.

I want you to think about something like that:

You have a DM who covers your team. You play someone, there is nobody in front of DM and you play possesion football. Your DM has 1 mentality, 1 CF and no pushing forwards. Currently with those settings your DM will stay back ALWAYS no matter what and that is what you expect of him. But what if "the game" would ignore your instructions and think that it is ok for him to push up because he has so much room in front of him? He does so, the opposition wins the ball, and thanks to their fast players they move up with all the center of the field free cause the DM didn't move back in time. You concede a stupid goal. Will you be ok with the development like that? Probably not. You don't care there was nobody in vicinity of 20m in front of your DM, he is your cover man and he should stay there all the time.

This is the situation right here. I say to my side backs: "I don't want you tu push up no matter what", but because the game was made in assumption the side backs should always support the attack in some degree, I am not able to do that.

I'm not playing with my side backs the way I've set them in this thread. Obviously I like them to be involved in offensive play, and in fact I play with my side backs with forward runs set to often. I was adjusting my side backs, because something didn't work so I tried extreme cases, and what I found is that the side backs are not behaving the way I want them to.

I would like to repeat that what you all said, should be the consequence of different set of instructions. The game has it's core, but my instructions should be followed. If they are not I feel the game is cheating on me, I don't feel the control over my game.

"Have you ever played as a full back where the manager said do not make forward runs?"

Have you watched the game Inter vs Barcelona? Maicon who is the most offensive and the best side back in the game currently didn't push one time in the second half. All he did was keeping the deffensive line with the others and was not involved in offensive play whatsoever. Most of the teams playing Barcelona are not pushing their side backs up, because of the threat that Barca has on the wings mainly through Messi.

I can't do it over here.

Lastly I would like to show my screens I did yesterday. It is interesting, that one of yours is the case I wanted to present. Playing against 4-2-4, where the side forwards have 20 mentality and forward runs often.

The instructions for my side backs in 4 line deffense are as follows:

The opponent has the ball and is starting posession play:

After couple of passes I get to the ball and my player is about to kick it up the field

My forward receives it, and in the mean time my side backs....

After couple of passes the situation looks like that:

And this is from another play in the match, the situation with the side backs is the same

The opposition side forwards number 10 and 19 are open free despite my side backs having no forward runs, and mentlaity ultra deffensive.

However there is something different in my last screenshot and your screenshot showing the exact same situation(against 4-2-4, your deffenders stay behind the opposite wing forwards, my deffenders stay in front of the opposition wing forwards). This is strange...

Look at the screenshots versus 06 and tell me which looks more natural in your opinion.

The question is not which one looks more natural. This is the wrong question.

The right question is "which screenshots show the behaviour of players who are following my instructions, (even if they are stupid), and which one doesn't". That's the right and should be the only question here.

So lets see:

a) mentality 1 - my player should be as deffensive as he can possibly be, doing everything with a lot of caution and even more, staying very far back

b) no forward runs - player should make no forward runs whatsoever

c) creative freedom 1 - player should follow my instructions at all times

And lets look at 2 screens.

1) FM2006 screen:

2) FM2010 screen:

The question: Which screen show better understanding by my side backs of the instructions that I gave them ? Screen 1, or screen 2 ?

I will go further. Because of that, FM2006 allows me more freedom and if we'll look only at this one single issue, it is the better game. I can easily do in FM2006 what you showed in your screenshots(side backs pushing forward). All I have to do is give them forward runs mixed, that way they will still get forward, but with mentality 1 they will keep in mind that they can't risk a lot, so they will push forward whenever there is very small danger that comes from doing that.

In that regard FM2006(probably other versions as well) beats FM2010 by a mile. It gives me a freedom to do what I want to do and they are doing exactly what I order them to do.

No answer to the question :

"which screenshots show the behaviour of players who are following my instructions, (even if they are stupid), and which one doesn't" ?

wwfan, maybe you will spare a minute ?

Listen lukair, I get what you are saying in terms of control but as I said posting in the bugs forum with a detailed analysis of a pkm or two would be a better place to raise your argument but this does seem to be a conscious coding decision so they may take a little persuading

Having had a quick read and looking at your screenshots I'd have to agree that the positioning of your fullbacks is not what you would expect given the instructions you have set for them.

The way I was taught was that if your team has possession of the ball the full back on the side of the pitch that you have possession joins in the attack with the two centre backs and the other full back moving across the pitch. When possession is switched to the other flank, the opposite full back goes forward and the original full back drops back to cover his centre backs.

Now this isn't the case all the time and some teams like by beloved Chelsea usually have both full backs supporting the attack but it is a steady and common sense way of playing. It is generally good practice to outnumber the oppositions players left forward by one so that if they have two up top, you leave three back etc.

One other thing I noticed is that the two left backs you highlighted Brozek and Zanev have natural positions of AML and WBL so their natural instinct would be to play further up the pitch. I'm not sure if this is the problem or not but it may well be why they are positioned higher.

Although I realise that players do not always do what managers tell them to what FM has always lacked is the ability to "SCREAM" at a player who does not follow instructions. I want to hurl abuse at a player who cannot follow simple instructions!

Listen lukair, I get what you are saying in terms of control but as I said posting in the bugs forum with a detailed analysis of a pkm or two would be a better place to raise your argument but this does seem to be a conscious coding decision so they may take a little persuading

I'm not attacking you isuckatfm I hope you didn't get my posts like that.

I think you understand now my point of view.

As for reporting this in the bug forum, I don't see the point. As you've said it is something that is coded as a framework of behaviour for a side back, and it is probably a very naive to think it is the only position in this game that is set like that. And so, it would need a lot of tweeking in other areas too probably. I just think it is the lost cause, and it's not like I have many more years ahead of me I started with CM2 and I got many good years as manager

I think SI should go to the basics and start from there. Maybe they have some issues with AI and that's why they're doing these, but nevertheless I much more preffered for example FM2006 ME even without all those nice fancy things.

The way I was taught was that if your team has possession of the ball the full back on the side of the pitch that you have possession joins in the attack with the two centre backs and the other full back moving across the pitch. When possession is switched to the other flank, the opposite full back goes forward and the original full back drops back to cover his centre backs.

Yes, that is also how I like to play. 1 full back going attack, and the other covers the back with the 2 center backs, and maybe a DM in front of them. Hovewer in this years FM you can't do that, because the players don't listen to you.

It looks like the side backs/full backs, have a framework set on them that they will follow, and your instructions come in the second place.

Now this isn't the case all the time and some teams like by beloved Chelsea usually have both full backs supporting the attack but it is a steady and common sense way of playing. It is generally good practice to outnumber the oppositions players left forward by one so that if they have two up top, you leave three back etc.

No argument there. But this is talk about football/tactics, it is in no relation to the case where players don't listen to me in FM2010.

One other thing I noticed is that the two left backs you highlighted Brozek and Zanev have natural positions of AML and WBL so their natural instinct would be to play further up the pitch. I'm not sure if this is the problem or not but it may well be why they are positioned higher.

This is correct, I didn't notice it before but when I think of that, there is small reason why they should behave that way because their natural position is much further up the pitch. I agree it could affect them a bit because they are naturaly more offensive/deffensive, but not that much. No way.

Good point though.

I'm not attacking you isuckatfm I hope you didn't get my posts like that.

No offence taken Having a mess around with this even against the 424 although I posted screens of the FB holding, he did ramble forward. But the thing is that in 90 minutes it was never punished and it more often than not worked to my advantage with him coming into space and the opposition winger behind him, receiving the ball and beng able to do as he pleased with little to no pressure. So in that way I can't decide if it is an issue or not but I suppose all it takes is one instance to where you get hit on the break to **** you off

I think you understand now my point of view.

As for reporting this in the bug forum, I don't see the point. As you've said it is something that is coded as a framework of behaviour for a side back, and it is probably a very naive to think it is the only position in this game that is set like that. And so, it would need a lot of tweeking in other areas too probably. I just think it is the lost cause, and it's not like I have many more years ahead of me I started with CM2 and I got many good years as manager

Fair enough But if you continue playing and start to concede reasonably consistently from a FB advancing when he shouldn't having a knock on effect, then save the pkms. I would assume it was implemented for realism's sake so it may be the case that certain settings/combinations create scenarios the coders did not expect (or generates behaviour not really intended). So picking out these moments so the code can be refined would probably be useful to the match engine coders at SI.

I think SI should go to the basics and start from there. Maybe they have some issues with AI and that's why they're doing these, but nevertheless I much more preffered for example FM2006 ME even without all those nice fancy things.

1010101010

But this does kind of highlight the difficulty of coding it and how it can be very subjective. For example with the FB pushing ahead of the opposition forward in the 424 another person might see it as a bug that the attacking player consistently lets the FB make runs past him into space without making any effort to press.

Can you upload a pkm? I'm just curious to see if something else is contributing to the separation of the CBs from the FBs when you clear your lines.

Can you post a screenshot of your defenders stats as well ? Maybe his mentality / aggression / decisions is affecting how far up he plays too

There was a long discussion about where FBs should push to when the team had the ball and, having watched a lot of games, it seemed like the DM stratum pretty much set their position. even with FWRS rarely and low CF, the FBs should push up a stratum. If they are going much further than that without PPMs suggesting they will, then I'd agree there is a problem. However (there's always a however), we also looked at players naturally surging in support, which might see the odd extra forward movement if it is a no-brainier option to go there in support.

In my opinion we're moving in the wrong direction. What Lukair wrote in the first post and what he show in the pictures is pretty clear and at least for me he is right.

I mean : I am the coach in this game. I study a formation and i study how my players HAVE to move. I could use Messi as CB if i want. ME have to simulate using my istructions. Now i can understand that Messi as CB will cause me lot of goals taken. But if i set Messi as CB i expect he act like CB following the istructions i give to him.

According to the pictures at the beginning the FullBack HAVE to stay down. That's all.

Conclusion : the ME at the moment has a bug.

Personally I agree with the original post on this one.

What's the point in having instructions if the ME is just going to decide by itself how they behave? It's hard enough setting up tactics to players play the way you want them to, without having to think about influences you have absolutely no control over.

I'm going to meet everyone half-way. I think there could be a bug in the ME in regards to extreme settings, however I also think that the settings and actions of players are taking in their attributes. What I mean by this is if you set one or two players on extreme settings they will act in reaction to what you've told them to do but also in relation to your overall team settings.

If your team is on a nice setup aimed at attacking, a full-back with extreme defensive settings with (now) use this settings within your team's framework. What's the point, the full-back may "think", in being a total defensive nutcase if the rest of the team isn't. He would be left in total isolation. Considering that the players in question are defenders, this would be a disaster for the team at the back.

Essentially I'm saying that in older versions the players reacted to your instructions no matter what they meant to the overall team framework but in this version of FM this isn't the case. They are actually trying to use your instructions within the team's framework. This is what I am gaining from seeing the screen shots and playing the game myself. Now, is the game this fluid and intelligent? I don't know but I would guess that it is probably very close. Is this what some managers want? No. Is it realistic? In my opinion, yes.

Bestie.

Sorry 7Bestie7 , I see where you are coming from but nothing has changed in terms of inputs to the match engine. Individual instructions override team instructions. There is no reference to how the Creator based tactics were formed re strategy etc., nor is there any direct reference to how other players are set up.

The players react to what is happening with respect to the opposition. So if the opposition is ultra defensive with a single striker the FBs will push up further. If they have someone to deal with they will generally hold back (although messing around after reading this thread suggests some 'subjective' issues as highlighted by lukair). DMs will do the same as will CBs pushing on if all strikers are dropping back to defend.

From my experience full-backs push forward a hell of a lot more in wingless formations than when they have a player ahead of them. They appear to naturally respond within the match engine to the formation, as in this case they would be the only source of width to the team. If you give the same balanced instructions to a full-back in a 4-4-2, he will go nowhere near as far as a full-back in a 4-1-2-1-2.

Death,

That is also what I am thinking. I just don't see the game as basic as "do exactly this no matter what is happening in the ME".

Bestie.