Starting Strategy Discussion

Just managing to get my head around the TC and Touchline Shouts now.

I was just interested in how people decide what strategy to start with.

I'll try and list the possible factors:

1. Pre Match Odds

2. Opposition Scout Report

3. League Positions

4. Form

5. Home or Away

In my Hinckley save I have been using the Pre Match Odds, but sometimes I am the underdog against teams in mid table despite being 1st after 22 games. I'm thinking that I'd be better off using Scout Reports.

What makes you decide your starting strategy?

i think the fact that you are listed as underdog might be more about reputation and playing away from home rather than the fact that you are top of the table.

Other than that, i think all of those factors can be considered useful for deciding on starting strategy. I'm playing as Arsenal myself (first season though, predicted to finish 4th), so it might be difficult to compare to lower leagues, but in this version i am finding that i increasingly use 'control' as my starting strategy, even when playing away to other top 4 teams or quality euro teams. I didn't do this at the start of the season and would choose depending on the factors you mention. I found that i was too inconsistent. What i do now that my team is settled is pick control, and then focus on adjusting player roles (ie in my 451 when playing another quality side i will play a ball winner at mc rather than an attacking mc) and shouts. I then watch the first 15 mins carefully to see how the team is going and adjust accordingly.

For me, #3 and #5 are included in #1, so I focus on pre-match odds, oppo scout report (and pre-match backroom advice when available along with assman's OI advice) and the nature of my starting X1. Oh, and don't forget pitch, weather and referee.

Also, playing with level 10 numpties I keep it simple even when the oppo have even less 'football intelligence' than my guys. So rigid, little CF and no roaming for me.

For me, #3 and #5 are included in #1, so I focus on pre-match odds, oppo scout report (and pre-match backroom advice when available along with assman's OI advice) and the nature of my starting X1. Oh, and don't forget pitch, weather and referee.

Also, playing with level 10 numpties I keep it simple even when the oppo have even less 'football intelligence' than my guys. So rigid, little CF and no roaming for me.

I think alot of FM players do this; it's a legacy of the creative freedom "bug" in FM09.

I think alot of FM players do this; it's a legacy of the creative freedom "bug" in FM09.

Dunno what you mean by that. In my FM09 save I was winning the EPL and challenging for global domination. I had the players to utilise CF. In my FM10 save I'm at the other end of the footballing universe, so need to create completely different tactics and strategies.

Dunno what you mean by that. In my FM09 save I was winning the EPL and challenging for global domination. I had the players to utilise CF. In my FM10 save I'm at the other end of the footballing universe, so need to create completely different tactics and strategies.

There was a tactical bug in FM09 where you set your entire teams CF to absolute zero and any tactic became 100% more effective.

Reallly? I never heard that. But then i wouldn't want to. i'm really enjoying the threads being put out by wwfan, SFraser and Cleon at the moment - they immerse us in playing FM as a true tactician. i got not fun at all out of looking for flaws in computer coding.

Reallly? I never heard that. But then i wouldn't want to. i'm really enjoying the threads being put out by wwfan, SFraser and Cleon at the moment - they immerse us in playing FM as a true tactician. i got not fun at all out of looking for flaws in computer coding.

Agreed

Back on topic, the touchline shouts I use instinctively depending on scoreline, morale and what needs to be done. I don't really follow any hard and fast rule.

I would say morale of the opposition(maybe under form in your poll choice). If the the opposition are average or poor or very poor, I would normally start with 5 players on attack duty instead of a normal 3. That's to force them to concede a goal early which will trigger the 'playing without confidence' in their players.

I would say morale of the opposition(maybe under form in your poll choice). If the the opposition are average or poor or very poor, I would normally start with 5 players on attack duty instead of a normal 3. That's to force them to concede a goal early which will trigger the 'playing without confidence' in their players.

Yes - my OI's are influenced by the mental state of the oppo players. Low morale, nervous or lacking confidence will have them tight-marked, closed down and hard tackled (ref permitting) to goad them into errors.

Or, say one DC is in a poor frame of mind. Tight mark the other one. That means the ball is more likely to be passed to the one who is liable to make a mistake. That one gets closed down/hard tackled.

I'm disappointed to see that this thread didn't develop into more of a discussion.

In my opinion, it's a great topic to discuss and one that the tactics forum should be having. I think it's one of the main difficulties that new FMers have when coming to the game and can cause all kinds of frustrations.

I'm going to give my thoughts below.

I'll try and list the possible factors:

1. Pre Match Odds

2. Opposition Scout Report

3. League Positions

4. Form

5. Home or Away

In my opinion these are all potential factors, as others have said. Some less than others, for me personally.

My way of playing the game is to try to role play as the manager and to imagine what a real life manager would do in the scenario I find myself in. I try to use all of the clues available to me in order to reach a decision on my starting strategy.

My first place to look is at the opposition scout report, which gives a lot of great clues about how the opposition will set up. The simplest of clues in this pre-match report is whether the opposition team will be using an attacking formation or a defensive one. It also gives you some idea of how they will be approaching the game. Here an obvious thought is to look at the opposition and ask the questions: 'are we superior, inferior or about the same?' and 'what do I expect to get out of this particular game?' These questions can inform your decision and help you to make a game plan.

The pre-match odds are something that plays only a minor part in my tactical decision but a major part in my team talks. In my opinion, pre-match odds are there to give an indication of how likely you are to get anything from the game and they are not a factor in tactical choices. You cannot really imagine Alex Ferguson saying to himself, 'well, we're evens in this game, so I guess we will go out and play Standard'!

Home and away factors do perhaps come into account for me but only in a minor way. For instance, while I may Attack at home against a side I feel I should beat, I may well go out and play Control away from home to be more patient and to be slightly more cautious in my approach. Equally, whereas perhaps Standard might be a home choice, Counter may be my starting strategy away. But there is no hard and fast rule for me. This is more a decision based on what I feel I should be expecting out of the game and how the opposition are likely to play. I could equally stick with Attack or Balanced when playing on the road, depending on the opposition.

Finally, league positions and form play their part in an indirect way. With a side on form and playing well, with good morale, I may be more adventurous than if my team have just lost a few in a row and the team are struggling. My own personal experience has been that form can play a key factor in how the AI managers will tend to approach a game against your team. If you are on excellent form, I find that the opposition managers tend to become more defensive, often regardless of your stature. This certainly seems to be the case in the lower leagues, whereas in the Premier League, for instance, I have found that the team reputation seems to come into it more and the AI managers are more likely to stick with their guns. I would be interested to hear other opinions on this.

The key here, in my opinion, is to not 'over think' the situation. Read the scout report, think about how your teams compare, and make a decision based on real life principles.

Very few teams in real life would start a game playing 'Defensive' and certainly I would doubt any team would play 'Contain' from the start. To me, these are strategies to consider during the match as you find yourself in different scenarios. Equally, I would say that very few teams would start a match playing 'Overload'. So you are really, in my opinion, looking at four potential starting strategies: 'Attack', 'Standard', 'Counter' and 'Control'.

So you've picked your strategy and now your team is playing the match. Absolutely key here, in my opinion, is not to go changing strategies all of the time. Stay calm, watch the highlights and don't make any early decisions. You can't imagine the likes of Ferguson or Wenger abandoning their match plan after 10 minutes, can you? Unless you see something hugely wrong, you should stick with your hand.

The time to make a decision is potentially after a goal, at half-time, or towards the end of the game. But don't go 1-0 up after 10 minutes and then abandon your game plan to go all out defensive for the rest of the game! Equally, going 1-0 down early on is no sign that you should suddenly give up on your game plan. Try to stick with it and only make a decision to change if you see major problems.

A key thing for me is switching at least to extended highlights, or perhaps even full, if your team is struggling. Then try to spend some time analysing what the opposition are doing. Are they making lots of forward passes and what is their tempo like? Are they pushing wingers and fullbacks forward, and how many players are getting into your final third when they attack? Are they spreading the play wide and is their defensive line pushed right up? Reverse these questions to analyse if they are playing defensively. When a highlight starts, look to see how their attacks are starting. Is it a quick break or are they building things up slowly from the back? These will give you some clues as to how the opposition are playing and you can then choose to counter them and to reduce their threat, or perhaps you aren't attacking enough, making enough chances or getting the ball forward quickly enough. This is where you earn your managerial wings.

That's not to say that you have to counter the opposition at all. A common complaint I have heard on the forums before is the idea that you always have to counter the opposition as if the game is some kind of rock, paper, scissors affair, which is utter rubbish. If you are a big club, you may decide to always pick attacking strategies regardless of how your opposition plays. It may even be your philosophy to be a manager who always looks to play attacking football and to let the opposition think about dealing with you and not the other way around. This will be more successful with some clubs than it is with others but it is your choice.

As for changing your game plan. If you are sure that you need to do this, then half-time is a good time in my opinion. You may be losing at half-time and feel that you can motivate your squad to get out there and play 'Attack' in the second-half. Alternatively, you may be 2-0 up away and feel that your best chance is to kill things in the second-half and try to catch your opposition on the break with 'Counter'.

As the game progresses in the second-half, I am always thinking about my strategy and possibly looking at the touchline shouts as a way of turning the game in my favour. I will tend to stop the game at intervals, say on 60 mins, 75 mins and 80 mins, in order to make decisions about whether I need to go for broke and get a goal, or whether I need to kill the game.

The 'specialist' strategies are ones that I highlighted above as not being starting strategies in my opinion. These are 'contain', 'defensive' (which I suppose you may use, rarely, to start a game) and 'overload'. In my opinion, these are to be used to kill of a game in the last 10 minutes or maybe to chase it with 10 minutes left on the clock. But try not to go to crazy here. Sometimes a draw is a good result and selecting 'Overload' a risk that might result in defeat rather than glory.

My opinion is that away games may be more likely to require a change in strategy than home ones. I recommend watching on 'extended' at least for most close games away from home. I find the opposition manager is more likely to change things and have a go at you on his home patch, so you may find yourself starting off on, say, 'Control', but needing to finish a game on 'Counter' or even 'Defend'/'Contain'. At home, this seems less likely to happen.

One final word on strategies. Sometimes, it isn't the tactics. Sometimes, your team isn't motivated, the other team is very motivated, your team has low gelling, certain players aren't fitting in or struggling. Equally, fitness may be an issue or match practice. Morale is also absolutely key. Additionally, maybe you have a stroke of bad luck or maybe the opposition are just the better team. My point here is to always look for clues and don't abandon your tactical ideas because of one or two poor performances/results. It could be that when morale is higher, and team gelling has increased, you storm up the league, for instance.

This is all just my opinion and I'd be interested in hearing what others have to say.

So I take it that nobody is interested in discussing this?

So I take it that nobody is interested in discussing this?

It's same with a few of the discussions I got going on. People just aren't getting involved, its a shame really as topics like these can make a big difference to someones game.

So I take it that nobody is interested in discussing this?

Speaking for myself, when the discussion falls onto the creator & shouts I get a little shy :o. Maybe I am old fashioned in terms of using the tactical options, I still haven't used it once and actually think that it is too complicated . Can't teach an old dog new tricks I heard...

But I think your detailed post has a lot of good angels that can make a difference when determining starting strategies. Getting this part right is actually the most important step into understanding the mechanics behind the Match Engine. It might not be real life language but how else are you going to translate commands/instructions into a cold calculating mechanism?

Maybe SirAlex won't be saying that since the odds are even that he will play 'standard', but he might come to the conclusion that both teams are relatively equal in terms of quality so he might play a more balanced game by saying that the team needs to work at both ends of the pitch. If he were home against a weaker team he will make sure that the team gets more forward and will emphasize more on getting the ball into the box. The ideology behind the wizard is so you can quickly get into the strategy part, but you still need to know what strategy will be a good starting point for your upcomming match.

Match odds can indicate how your team fares against the opponent so you can begin to see a pattern in what type of strategy can work for this match. You have to realistic in this assumption phase or you could suffer. Home teams naturally get an increase in quality in comparison to away teams to reflect real life, so you have to have a good judgement and maybe increase or decrease your strategy in conjunction with this aspect. At least when this starts to make sense then the rest of the things become easier to handle...

Good post, crouchy...

If you are on excellent form, I find that the opposition managers tend to become more defensive, often regardless of your stature. This certainly seems to be the case in the lower leagues, whereas in the Premier League, for instance, I have found that the team reputation seems to come into it more and the AI managers are more likely to stick with their guns. I would be interested to hear other opinions on this.

I think you are correct- its a combination of your reputation and recent form. I have taken Shrewsbury town to the premiership and this season am predicted mid-table/ possible european spot- i think odds of 26-1 of winning the league. This would suggest my reputation is mid-table and by no means large.

My last match was against Man City at home. They were unbeaten in several games and i was unbeaten in about 3, not all wins though. Pre-match odds had me as slight underdogs despite being at home, and as they had a number of world class players i was worried about them and starting strategy was not too adventurous.

I was amazed to see 30min into the game that they switched to a highly defensive, time wasting tactic. I then had to switch up a strategy to high pressure them.

I am not sure of why the AI acted so defensively there- they were favourites and unbeaten. i can only imagine it was my recent form + being at home.

As for rock, scissors, paper- there is still an element of this in the game for me. as above- see a timewasting tactic and you have to switch to high pressure. score first away from home and the AI will always come out and attack you if they are a half decent side. should you then go defensive/ counter to nullify this. paper beats rock, doesnt it?

It's same with a few of the discussions I got going on. People just aren't getting involved, its a shame really as topics like these can make a big difference to someones game.

I agree Cleon, which is the main reason I revived this thread.

Speaking for myself, when the discussion falls onto the creator & shouts I get a little shy :o. Maybe I am old fashioned in terms of using the tactical options, I still haven't used it once and actually think that it is too complicated . Can't teach an old dog new tricks I heard...

It does really matter too much because you effectively design your own match strategies using the classic system Loversleaper.

Getting this part right is actually the most important step into understanding the mechanics behind the Match Engine.

I totally agree.

Match odds can indicate how your team fares against the opponent so you can begin to see a pattern in what type of strategy can work for this match. You have to realistic in this assumption phase or you could suffer. Home teams naturally get an increase in quality in comparison to away teams to reflect real life, so you have to have a good judgement and maybe increase or decrease your strategy in conjunction with this aspect. At least when this starts to make sense then the rest of the things become easier to handle...

So, am I to take from this that you put quite a bit of emphasis on the match odds Loversleaper? I guess that I was a bit dismissive above. It's certainly true pre-match odds are there to give an indication of how likely you are to get anything from the game and in that respect they can be a factor in tactical choices.

Of course, I find the most important thing is to carefully watch certain games - especially those tricky away ones - in order to see how the opposition are playing, so sometimes my starting strategy can be quite neutral (standard) and might change to become more defensive or attacking as the game progresses.

The other important thing, I think, is to go with your instinct about the game thinking about what result you expect and would be happy with at the end of the match. I play the game using real life principles and this approach has normally served me well in the game.

I agree with a lot of what you say, Crouchy.

Personally, I make my own judgment based on past encounters, league positions and form as to what strategy I'll use. I don't use control if it is raining. I'll sometimes be tempted to play longer passes against weaker sides, and use control against stronger sides, for example (in terms of physical strength, not footballing ability). Let's see... if something isn't working, I'll change strategy. I won't change simply because we've conceded a goal, I look at the whole match, and see whether that goal was simply unfortunate or not.

I don't like using standard, it just feels wrong, even though it should feel right. I only use if it nothing else fits.

Interesting comments there SCIAG and some good tips.

I think Standard can be a good way to start a match if you are feeling really unsure about how to approach it. You can then analyse things and see where you need to go from there. It's quite good for close matches, I find, where you think you might be able to get something but a draw would also be a good result.

Just to state the obvious, the ME often tells you when the AI has changed strategy. The common ones are such as:

"they now appear to have a more defensive outlook"- e.g AI is playing more defensively

"they are looking for more options in the final third"- playing more attacking

"reverted to their familiar style"- they have gone back to their starting or normal strategy (whatever that may be)

"xxx is in no rush to take this throw/goal kick/ free kick"- AI is playing ultra defensive time wasting tactic.

If you are into rock, scissors, paper, these can give you clues as to what you might want to play to get the desired result.

Interesting comments there SCIAG and some good tips.

I think Standard can be a good way to start a match if you are feeling really unsure about how to approach it. You can then analyse things and see where you need to go from there. It's quite good for close matches, I find, where you think you might be able to get something but a draw would also be a good result.

This in kind of how I play, especially in those tricky away games against opponents who you don't quite know what to expect from them.

Just to state the obvious, the ME often tells you when the AI has changed strategy. The common ones are such as:

"they now appear to have a more defensive outlook"- e.g AI is playing more defensively

"they are looking for more options in the final third"- playing more attacking

"reverted to their familiar style"- they have gone back to their starting or normal strategy (whatever that may be)

"xxx is in no rush to take this throw/goal kick/ free kick"- AI is playing ultra defensive time wasting tactic.

That's a good point actually. The game itself does give you plenty of clues about how the opposition is setting up.

Albeit I play with a strong team (Liverpool), but I've come to ignore the pre-match reports, scouting etc. I use a 'control' strategy exclusively - unless chasing a game in the last 15-20 minutes when I'll go attacking (or overload, very rarely). Properly combined with other tactical options, 'control' can be an ideal attacking and defensive strategy, because it starts from a basic fundamental: the opposition can't score if they haven't got the ball. I'll start the game with in 'neutral' (no shouts, except very occasionally in the biggest away games) and later touchline shouts are then generally enough to react; to press forward more or 'close up', while still under an overall 'control' strategy.

How useful does everyone find the opposition scout reports?

There can be some useful clues in it. However, it tends to give the idea of how the opposition teams normally approach the match and, in my experience, the opposition can often approach a game differently to the way indicated in the scout report especially when they are at home. That's my observation anyway.

I'm sure someone from SI made a similar point about last year's edition of the game. I seem to remember them saying that a team will likely change its normal approach when playing at home, and this was the reason that many people were struggling with away games, because the opposition were changing their tactics at home.

Any opinions on the scout reports and how useful they are?

How useful does everyone find the opposition scout reports?

the opposition can often approach a game differently to the way indicated in the scout report especially when they are at home.

In FM09 my scout tells me that every team plays a "defensive xxx formation and looks to draw the opp...." which is often wrong. although it may be because my scout has rubbish tactical knowledge.

Chelsea in my game play a standard 4-2-4 home and away (Lampard is manager) and even then he tells me its defensive.

Scout reports are still useful for flagging formations, injured/unavailable players, quick attackers and slow defenders so they are of some use.

I tend to use control against most teams if I'm at home even if I think that we should beat them easily as I'm a cautious manager, on the odd occasion I'll play attack if I feel we're creating chances but not really going for it that much (if that makes sense). I have however played defensive home and away from the beginning against 'bigger' clubs in the championship (I'm QPR) and have won games playing it.

In FM09 my scout tells me that every team plays a "defensive xxx formation and looks to draw the opp...." which is often wrong. although it may be because my scout has rubbish tactical knowledge.

Chelsea in my game play a standard 4-2-4 home and away (Lampard is manager) and even then he tells me its defensive.

Scout reports are still useful for flagging formations, injured/unavailable players, quick attackers and slow defenders so they are of some use.

Rightly or wrongly, I use the information from the scout report as an indication of how the opposition would usually approach the game.

I believe that this is what it is supposed to be telling you when it says that they play a defensive or an attacking tactic. However, I believe that the opposition will change its tactics, certainly during the game depending on the scenario. So, in this example, you may find that Chelsea play defensively at your place, and you will have success on the attack, but perhaps away they will change their game and attack you more, so a different approach is likely to be required.

Here is the post from PaulC I referred to earlier suggesting that the opposition will most likely change tactics away from home - http://community.sigames.com/showpost.php?p=3137837&postcount=361

Naturally, I stand to be corrected but this is my interpretation.

Now this is turning into an interesting discussion!

Rightly or wrongly, I use the information from the scout report as an indication of how the opposition would usually approach the game.

I believe that this is what it is supposed to be telling you when it says that they play a defensive or an attacking tactic. However, I believe that the opposition will change its tactics, certainly during the game depending on the scenario. So, in this example, you may find that Chelsea play defensively at your place, and you will have success on the attack, but perhaps away they will change their game and attack you more, so a different approach is likely to be required.

Here is the post from PaulC I referred to earlier suggesting that the opposition will most likely change tactics away from home - http://community.sigames.com/showpost.php?p=3137837&postcount=361

Naturally, I stand to be corrected but this is my interpretation.

Now this is turning into an interesting discussion!

You also need to remember the scout reports only tell you about the last game the team played. The scout information generally tells you how they would start a match. But they adapt a lot in game and change things a lot. At least that is my take on the reports. They just represent a quick basic overview to give you a general idea on how you might want to approach the first 10 minutes of a game.

You see, I've often wondered about this.

My observation on scout reports is that the better I am doing, the bigger the club I am managing, and so on, the more likely I am going to be told that the opposition are playing a 'defensive 4-4-2' for instance. The smaller my club, or if my form is dodgy, the more more likely it seems that I will see an 'attacking 4-4-2' in the scout report, for example. So I have often taken match reports as being an indication of the approach the opposition is likely to take against me.

The language used in the scout report is such to suggest that this is the normal approach iof the club in question. It doesn't say, 'this is what they played in that particular game' but instead something like 'assistant manager xyz noticed that they play a defensive 4-4-2' etc. So that led me to believe that this is meant to indicate what would be their normal approach to the game.

I stand to be corrected on these observations. I just figured this was the way they were meant to work.

You see, I've often wondered about this.

My observation on scout reports is that the better I am doing, the bigger the club I am managing, and so on, the more likely I am going to be told that the opposition are playing a 'defensive 4-4-2' for instance. The smaller my club, or if my form is dodgy, the more more likely it seems that I will see an 'attacking 4-4-2' in the scout report, for example. So I have often taken match reports as being an indication of the approach the opposition is likely to take against me.

The language used in the scout report is such to suggest that this is the normal approach iof the club in question. It doesn't say, 'this is what they played in that particular game' but instead something like 'assistant manager xyz noticed that they play a defensive 4-4-2' etc. So that led me to believe that this is meant to indicate what would be their normal approach to the game.

I stand to be corrected on these observations. I just figured this was the way they were meant to work.

But on the other hand your scout only watches 1 match, so he wouldn't be too familiar with how they normally play. So I base it on that, I could be wrong but that's my take on it.

Here's a rough guide to what I do, which is based largely on pre-match odds and seems to work fairly well. Obviously there are times when I might need to be more or less aggressive in cup games or nearer the end of the season, and shouts which I tend to use with each strategy (and to combat some formations or weather conditions) but this is the basic setup.

I use a 4-2-3-1 which sometimes becomes a 4-1-2-3, either with a deep-lying playmaker (trying to retain possession and see game out) or an anchor man (trying to just defend) in the DM position.

CN = contain

D = defensive

CA = counter attack

S = standard

C = control

A = attacking

O = overload

Numbers on the left are minute of the game, numbers across the top are how far ahead or behind my team are.

Home games

Strong favourite

+3	+2	+1	0	-1	-2	-3
-----------------------------------------------------------
0-15	S	C	C	A	O	O	O
15-30	S	C	C	A	O	O	O
30-45	S	C	C	A	O	O	O
45-60	S	C	C	A	O	O	O
60-75	S	C	S	O	O	O	O
75-90	S	C	S	O	O	O	O

Slight favourite

+3	+2	+1	0	-1	-2	-3
-----------------------------------------------------------
0-15	CA	S	S	C	A	O	O
15-30	CA	S	S	C	A	O	O
30-45	CA	S	S	C	A	O	O
45-60	CA	CA	S	A	A	O	O
60-75	CA	CA	CA	A	O	O	O
75-90	CA	CA	CA	O	O	O	O

No favourite

+3	+2	+1	0	-1	-2	-3
-----------------------------------------------------------
0-15	C	C	S	S	C	A	A
15-30	C	C	S	S	C	A	A
30-45	C	C	S	S	C	A	A
45-60	D	C	C	C	A	O	O
60-75	D	D	C	C	A	O	O
75-90	D	D	D	A	O	O	O

Slight underdog

+3	+2	+1	0	-1	-2	-3
-----------------------------------------------------------
0-15	CA	CA	S	S	S	C	S
15-30	CA	CA	CA	S	S	C	S
30-45	D	CA	CA	S	S	C	C
45-60	D	D	CA	S	C	A	C
60-75	D	D	D	C	A	O	A
75-90	D	CN	D	C	O	O	O

Strong underdog

+3	+2	+1	0	-1	-2	-3
-----------------------------------------------------------
0-15	D	D	CA	CA	CA	CA	CA
15-30	D	D	CA	CA	CA	CA	CA
30-45	D	D	CA	CA	CA	CA	CA
45-60	CN	D	D	CA	CA	CA	A
60-75	CN	CN	D	D	CA	A	A
75-90	CN	CN	CN	CN	O	O	O

Away games

Strong favourite

+3	+2	+1	0	-1	-2	-3
-----------------------------------------------------------
0-15	CA	S	C	C	A	O	O
15-30	CA	S	C	C	A	O	O
30-45	CA	S	S	A	A	O	O
45-60	CA	CA	S	A	O	O	O
60-75	CA	CA	CA	O	O	O	O
75-90	CA	CA	CA	O	O	O	O

Slight favourite

+3	+2	+1	0	-1	-2	-3
-----------------------------------------------------------
0-15	CA	CA	S	S	C	C	A
15-30	CA	CA	S	S	C	C	A
30-45	CA	CA	CA	S	C	C	A
45-60	D	CA	CA	C	A	A	O
60-75	D	D	CA	A	A	O	O
75-90	D	D	D	O	O	O	O

No favourite

+3	+2	+1	0	-1	-2	-3
-----------------------------------------------------------
0-15	CA	CA	CA	S	S	C	A
15-30	CA	CA	CA	S	C	C	A
30-45	CA	CA	CA	S	C	C	A
45-60	D	CA	CA	S	C	A	O
60-75	D	D	D	S	A	A	O
75-90	D	D	CN	S	O	O	O

Slight underdog

+3	+2	+1	0	-1	-2	-3
-----------------------------------------------------------
0-15	CA	CA	CA	S	S	C	C
15-30	CA	CA	CA	S	S	C	C
30-45	CA	CA	CA	S	S	C	C
45-60	D	D	CA	CA	C	A	A
60-75	D	D	D	CA	A	A	A
75-90	D	CN	CN	CA	O	O	O


Strong underdog

+3	+2	+1	0	-1	-2	-3
-----------------------------------------------------------
0-15	CN	CN	D	D	D	CA	CA
15-30	CN	CN	D	D	D	CA	CA
30-45	CN	CN	D	D	CA	S	S
45-60	CN	CN	D	D	CA	C	S
60-75	CN	CN	CN	CN	CA	A	S
75-90	CN	CN	CN	CN	O	O	S

That's a very interesting and detailed system you've got there RT. I'll have to study this and get back to you with some thoughts.

A lot of it seems to be good commonsense. I take it you tend to be more flexible than this depending on your observations during the match?

And what about if you are facing a much weaker opponent (in terms of players) with a similar reputation to you thus giving skewed odds. Would you tend to do anything about that and maybe look to be more adventurous to secure a result?

I find that match odds are a good way to anticipate how the opposition are going to play, more than anything else. I think they more or less give you an idea of how the AI rates its chances of winning the game (which is then adjusted depending on how naturally attacking or defensive the manager is) and what strategies they'll likely start with.

In my experience, this is especially important when you've just been promoted and are predicted to go straight back down. Even if you think you have a better team than everyone else, it's worth paying attention to the odds and being a bit cautious - if you win a few games that way, your odds will start getting better. If you ignore them, there's every chance you'll get turned over. Basically, you sometimes have to earn your right to play aggressive, attacking football

I should point out that I don't actually play with that kind of table in my hand

That's just me putting it together, thinking how I'd do it in the game.

Sure, if the opposition's motivation was particularly bad let's say, or I know they've got a backup keeper in goal, I'd be more adventurous than normal. But in general, I always keep the odds in mind to know what to expect from the AI.

One of the main things I find when I'm an underdog is the importance of keeping it as tight as possible (ie, within 1 goal or 2 at worst) so you can have that last fifteen or twenty minutes of gung-ho madness. I get a lot of late draws that way

I just want to contribute from my point of view in relation to the theme. If it can contribute to rational discourse, and maybe help someone, it's just a big plus.

First a little about the scout reports: In many cases are they useless. According to my scouts, whatever their level of knowledge, all teams play defensive and counter-attacking football. How many times have you read that opponent: "play's defensive and often look to draw the opposition onto them before attempting a countar-attack"? I had this feedback even when I played as Forest against Liverpool at Anfield, and that was the first season while Forest were still in the Championship. The scout reports are based on the opponent's last match, ie they are based on one match. Thus, they are in many cases absolutely incorrect. How a team has played in its last game does not mean anything. They can line up and play completely different in the next match.

Now little about the choice of strategy: The Standard is not very neutral strategy. Select Standard strategy and go “advanced”. There you can see the Defensive Line is on the first notch of "push up", Width is the last notch of normal, Tempo is quite high and is also on the last notch of normal, and Time Wasting dead in the middle. This is according to my preferences quite attacking tactic, with a relatively high tempo, and high Def Line. To get neutral tactic you probably need to go down to Counter strategy. The problem with many is that they do not check what different stragies actually do, and believe ie that Counter is very defensive tactic and so choose the wrong start strategy. The reason for this is poor explanation in TT about what different strategies do and where it is most suitable to use which strategy.

Thus, I disagree with what was claimed earlier in this thread that Defensive strategy is not a strategy you should choose at the start of the match. In my game with Forest in the first season I have to start some of my matches with the Defensive strategy, even Contain, especially cup games where I meet opponent from the division above. Even Defensive strategy is not very defensive. Take a look at the team and player instructions under Defensive strategy. Your Def Line is still at "normal", as is the Tempo and Width. First after I conquered the upper part of the table, and after I have had a long period with good results, I can consider starting the matches with the Standard strategy for the away matches. Before that, it is suicide.

In fact, the only strategy that is defensive is Contain. It is only here you'll find team instructions that sounds defensive: Def Line is first notch of normal, Width is narrow and Tempo is slow.

Another thing that I struggle with is to decide when to change strategy, and when is it enough to use shouts. For example: If you play with Counter strategy and your team leads with one goal. Let's say it's 15 minutes of the match. Your tactic has worked well so far, but then the dilemma arises: should you use the Shouts (such as Stand Off, Drop Deep, Easy Tackling, Take a breather) or go Contain? Or do both?

In addition, it is not easy to identify how the opponent plays despite the fact that you watch your matches on full. There are actually very few forum members here who can actually read the match engine, and find out what kind of strategy the opponent uses. Cleon indeed have made couple of threads where he clarifies some moments, but most of us knows that Cleon is not using TC. The man who should be here to discuss this is the man who made TC, namely wwfan. Unfortunately, we do not see much of him, the same goes for his partner Millie. They have indeed released a “book” but the "book" is not free, so many choose not to pay when they have already spent money on the game itself.

I just want to contribute from my point of view in relation to the theme. If it can contribute to rational discourse, and maybe help someone, it's just a big plus.

First a little about the scout reports: In many cases are they useless. According to my scouts, whatever their level of knowledge, all teams play defensive and counter-attacking football. How many times have you read that opponent: "play's defensive and looking to drag the opponent in to their own half before counter-attack"? I had this feedback even when I played as Forest against Liverpool at Anfield, and that was the first season while Forest were still in the Championship. The scout reports are based on the opponent's last match, ie they are based on one match. Thus, they are in many cases absolutely incorrect. How a team has played in its last game does not mean anything. They can line up and play completely different in the next match.

And so little about the choice of strategy: The Standard is not very neutral strategy. Select Standard strategy and go “advanced”. There you can see the Defensive Line is on the first notch of "push up", Width is the last notch of normal, Tempo is quite high and is also on the last notch of normal, and Time Wasting dead in the middle. This is according to my preferences quite attacking tactic, with a relatively high tempo, and high Def Line. To get neutral tactics you probably need to go down to Counter strategy. The problem with many is that they do not check what different stragies actually do, and believe ie that Counter is very defensive tactic and so choose the wrong start strategy. The reason for this is poor explanation in TT about what different strategies do and where it is most suitable to use which strategy.

Thus, I disagree with what was claimed earlier in this thread that Defensive strategy is not a strategy you should choose at the start of the match. In my game with Forest in the first season I have to start some of my matches with the Defensive strategy, even Contain, especially cup games where I meet opponent from the divisions over me. Even Defensive strategy is not very defensive. Take a look at the team and player instructions under Defensive strategy. Your Def Line is still at "normal", as is the Tempo and Width. First after I conquered the upper part of the table, and after I have had a long period with good results, I can consider starting the matches with the Standard strategy for the away matches. Before that, it is suicide.

In fact, the only strategy that is defensive is Contain. It is only here you'll find team instructions that sounds defensive: Def Line is first notch of normal, Width is narrow and Tempo is slow.

Another thing that I struggle with is to decide when to change strategy, and when is it enough to use shouts. For example: If you play with Counter strategy and your team leads with one goal. Let's say it's 15 minutes of the match. Your tactic has worked well so far, but then the dilemma arises: should you use the Shouts (such as Stand Off, Drop Deep, Easy Tackling, Take a breather) or go to Contain? Or do both?

In addition, it is not easy to identify how the opponent plays despite the fact that you watch your matches on full. There are actually very few forum members here who can actually read the match engine, and find out what kind of strategy the opponent uses. Cleon indeed have made couple of threads where he clarifies some moments, but most of us knows that Cleon is not using TC. The man who should be here to discuss this is the man who made TC, namely wwfan. Unfortunately, we do not see much of him, the same goes for his partner Millie. They have indeed released a “book” but the "book" is not free, so many choose not to pay when they have already spent some money on the game itself.

A good post

btw I do use the TC when discussing things and creating new threads for here. Have done for a while now, as majority of people use that. So I decided to do threads based on the TC

btw I do use the TC when discussing things and creating new threads for here. Have done for a while now, as majority of people use that. So I decided to do threads based on the TC

Then I apologize. I based my assertion on the basis of your earlier statement that you like more classic way of creating the tactic then TC

And what about if you are facing a much weaker opponent (in terms of players) with a similar reputation to you thus giving skewed odds

Forgot to mention crouch:

I don't know exactly how odds are worked out, but they're a lot more flexible than team reputations. If you're predicted to come bottom of the table, you'll start off your first game as underdogs, certainly. But win 3 or 4 games on the trot and you'll find yourself slight underdogs or even slight favourites, especially if your opponents have lost their last few games. It's very dependent on form and changes quite quickly.

So, am I to take from this that you put quite a bit of emphasis on the match odds Loversleaper? I guess that I was a bit dismissive above. It's certainly true pre-match odds are there to give an indication of how likely you are to get anything from the game and in that respect they can be a factor in tactical choices.

Of course, I find the most important thing is to carefully watch certain games - especially those tricky away ones - in order to see how the opposition are playing, so sometimes my starting strategy can be quite neutral (standard) and might change to become more defensive or attacking as the game progresses.

Pre-match odds are the first step in my assumption and arguably the most important. This is because there is a difference if, for example at home, you are slight underdog or heavy favorite regarding what starting strategy I would attempt. It could be a difference of either playing mentality 14-15 (more relaxed attacking) or 17-18 (more the overloading ideology) in terms of team Mentality. User RT-- illustrates one way of looking at how the ME basically reacts to the settings and which ones are more 'accurate' that will give you a bigger chance of getting the result. This 'trend' basically applies all the way through home or away match odds. There are starting strategies that are better than others when you take this ideology into consideration, there are 'patterns' and RT-- visually shows this aspect...

Although Mentality is the foremost important thing to get right, the next most important aspect is to get the Cloasing Down & Defensive Line to somehow work close to the type of mentality settings implemented. That would mean it is better to close down more high and raise your d-line so you keep them in conjunction with the attacking Mentality.

Of course, it is advisable to take scorelines into account during the game - but usually you don't have to make too drastic changes from your starting strategy. Home matches usually don't require that much change during the match (given that your starting strategy is correct). The wizard was designed so that people would/could grasp this aspect - although I am not sure how successfull the SI 'strategy' was with this.

This type of game play won't always appeal to the masses but think that it is how the game-makers actually thought out the current ME. If you learn these aspects discussed in this thread thenI think that many will understand how to get around that old myth that the AI 'figures' out their tactics. You can always match or overpower the AI, you just have to know how...

Good posts from RT and Loversleaper. I agree with much of what is being said.

You hit upon something at the end of your message Loversleaper. We have been playing the game in this way for a long time (whether you used the old TT&F frameworks or your own ideas). It's by far the most rewarding way to play in my opinion. The wizard should have made this easier and more accessible for other users, but as you say, I'm not sure how successful it has been.

This kind of thread is pretty vital though, as you suggest, to grasp the fundamentals on choosing a strategy and adapting to the various scenarios a match might present.

The wizard should have made this easier and more accessible for other users, but as you say, I'm not sure how successful it has been.

What do you mean by this, crouch?

(Not disagreeing, just curious for you to expand)

What I mean to say is that playing with a 'one size fits all' tactic is still as popular as ever and the new tactics creator doesn't seem to have encouraged as many FMers as I had hoped to experiment with this way of playing the game (i.e. like a real manager, thinking through scenarios for each game, making the decision about whether to attack or counter etc.)

Coming back to a few comments made earlier in this thread.

But on the other hand your scout only watches 1 match, so he wouldn't be too familiar with how they normally play. So I base it on that, I could be wrong but that's my take on it.

It seems strange if this is the case. The scout report would not provide much useful information if it was just based on one match. I've always read it as I said above, that is to say that it is a general report on the opposition rather than just for one match. I'm not saying that I am right, or indeed you are wrong, but it does seem a bit ambiguous. It also leads to the question as to why 90% of my scout reports come back with the opposition playing a 'defensive' tactic. :confused:

I don't like using standard, it just feels wrong, even though it should feel right. I only use if it nothing else fits.

Just thinking about this comment as well. I'd suggest that 'standard' is probably one of the most common starting strategies in real life. Unless it's top versus bottom, or there is a real gulf in class, it's rare that a side would come out all guns blazing, or indeed, all backs to the wall from the beginning of a game.

What I mean to say is that playing with a 'one size fits all' tactic is still as popular as ever and the new tactics creator doesn't seem to have encouraged as many FMers as I had hoped to experiment with this way of playing the game (i.e. like a real manager, thinking through scenarios for each game, making the decision about whether to attack or counter etc.)

Ah right, I see.

It's always hard to get a picture of how 'most' people play the game, but my guess would be that the vast majority probably use the tactic creator. Just how many of them cycle through strategies rather than sticking with one, I'm not sure.

Obviously there are still some people looking for one-off tactics with modified slider settings, but they're naturally going to venture on to a forum like this and straight in to the tactics forum, so it's easy to over-estimate how many there are.

That's not to say that SI couldn't make the in-game tweaking even more user friendly, but this is their first effort and I'm sure they'll improve it. I think something like hot keys for adjusting strategies (F1 to F7, or whatever) might be interesting, as well as the option to have shortcut keys for certain shouts.

It seems strange if this is the case. The scout report would not provide much useful information if it was just based on one match. I've always read it as I said above, that is to say that it is a general report on the opposition rather than just for one match. I'm not saying that I am right, or indeed you are wrong, but it does seem a bit ambiguous. It also leads to the question as to why 90% of my scout reports come back with the opposition playing a 'defensive' tactic. :confused:

I don't think the game is intelligent enough yet to do scouting how you think. If it was, then there would be different footballing cultures in the game imo. As it would all tie in. I honestly believe it is based on 1 game though. I can't speak for you, but I've had reports were my scout has said something along the likes of 'He didn't have time to watch the opposition' or something to that effect. Thinking about it, this could be whats said for all my friendly games. Now if it was done over several games or however its done, then the scout would always submit a report. I've had this happen in European games too. Which to me indicates that the reports are just a general overview and nothing more.

Sorry if that comes across as a I'm right you're wrong tone. I don't mean it like that, I'm just busy writing some stuff up and getting lost by posting on forums inbetween:thup:

I honestly believe it is based on 1 game though.

Doesnt the scout report say "Beardeye watched tottenham's 2-1 win at Arsenal and noted that Tottenham play a defensive 442 and look to draw...."?

If so (im at work so cant check) the report explicitly states that its based on this one match.

Although i do sometimes get reports that state "Beardeye watched tottenhams 2-1 win at arsenal and although they played a 4-1-2-2-1 they normally play a 4-4-2." this would suggest he has seen more than this one match. so i have totally contradicted my first point. nice.

What I mean to say is that playing with a 'one size fits all' tactic is still as popular as ever and the new tactics creator doesn't seem to have encouraged as many FMers as I had hoped to experiment with this way of playing the game (i.e. like a real manager, thinking through scenarios for each game, making the decision about whether to attack or counter etc.)

I'm probably fairly typical of FM players in that I *try* to dabble with tactics but find it so hard to see the impacts of my decisions that after a while on each release I just find a fairly reliable one-size-fits-all tactic and stick with it.

Contain, Defensive, Counter-Attack etc are all fairly intuitive terms so there's not really any complaint in that respect. Similarly with the shouts; Retain possession, Exploit the flanks, Get stuck in etc are also nice and intuitive.

Where it becomes hard to track though is when watching snippets of the match from the highlights. Is my team throwing away possession on every highlight because they're trying to Counter-Attack, or because they're not good enough to keep the ball, or because the opposition is forcing them into errors, or because individual players think they have the Hollywood pass in their locker when they don't, or because individual players are 'playing nervously' etc? I've lost count of the number of times I've sat watching highlights with things like a Control strategy and Retain possession only to see my players lumping aimless balls forward and surrendering possession.

As I said, I do try to immerse myself in this side of the game but frequently just think "what's the point when I can't actually see the benefit/drawback of my tactics?". The assistant manager feedback is decent and there is undoubtedly a wealth of statistical information available on the various screens but, for me as a fairly casual FM'er, I just find myself wondering if anything I did in the previous 90 virtual minutes actually impacted on the final result.

Doesnt the scout report say "Beardeye watched tottenham's 2-1 win at Arsenal and noted that Tottenham play a defensive 442 and look to draw...."?

If so (im at work so cant check) the report explicitly states that its based on this one match.

Although i do sometimes get reports that state "Beardeye watched tottenhams 2-1 win at arsenal and although they played a 4-1-2-2-1 they normally play a 4-4-2." this would suggest he has seen more than this one match. so i have totally contradicted my first point. nice.

Surely it would be:

'Beardeye watched Tottenham's 2-1 win at Arsenal and noted that Tottenham played a defensive 442 and looked to draw....'?

That is, if he was just describing the one match. It would have to be past tense.

At the moment, the text says:

'Beardeye watched Tottenham's 2-1 win at Arsenal and noted that Tottenham play a defensive 442 and look to draw....'?

With this sentence, to me, suggesting that he watched a match and is telling you how Tottenham normally play. It is present tense and suggests a state of being (i.e. that is what they normally play) rather than a past tense occurence.

Hope you understand my point.

Furthermore, I would add that often, when I look at the match the scout watched, it makes no logical sense for the team in question to have played a defensive 4-4-2, for instance.

For example, my last scout report watched a game between Eastleigh (a team who are gunning for promotion in my game) and Gloucester City (a team who are at the bottom of the league and are struggling against relegation). Eastleigh were at home. You would expect Eastleigh to have played an attacking game and yet my scout report suggests that 'Eastleigh play a defensive 4-4-2....'

I watched the game in question and Eastleigh didn't look like they were playing particularly defensively. They weren't wasting time, they were playing at a decent tempo with quite a few forward passes, they were keeping the ball well with defenders looking for possession-based passes, their fullbacks were supporting and their defensive line was pushing up and pressing into the opposition half.

In addition to this, as you stated yourself, you are often provided with more information than the scout would have been able to get from one game, such as 'they normally play....'

So I cannot personally believe that it is just one match. I do have an idea for an experiment to conduct so I will get back to this thread shortly.

Well, I thought I had a good experiment anyway....

I decided to take over as Liverpool and Hull managers simply because they were to play each other in their second game of the season, therefore giving me the chance to manage each of them for one game and then compare reports.

For both of their first games, I played an attacking 4-2-3-1 deep formation (what the game calls 4-2-2-1-1 for some reason).

When it came to the second match of their season, that is the Liverpool v Hull match, an easy win was predicted for Liverpool.

I awaited the scout report and found the following.

With me still as both managers:

Liverpool's report was neutral, saying that 'although we lined up with a 4-2-3-1 formation last Saturday, they normally play 4-2-2-1-1'. The other comments were general (we like to mix it up a bit). Hull's report was exactly the same.

With me as just Liverpool manager (having sacked off the Hull manager):

Hull are likely to field a 4-4-2 formation. No other info.

With me as Hull manager:

Liverpool are likely to field a 4-4-2 formation. No other info.

So, that didn't exactly help....

What's the quality of the scouts like who view the games? Have you tried editing it via FMRTE or something to give them high stats and see if they still say the same?