Quickfire Questions and Answers Thread (Tactic and Training Questions Only)

During a game, my Assistant popped up with the advice that "We're simply giving away too many fouls and could benefit from a little more caution" and when I hovered over the Make Changes option*, it suggested it would remove my Stay On Feet TI. This really surprised me, as I thought staying on feet would have been the obvious option to PREVENT giving away too many fouls. At the very least, it should be no worse than the Diving In TI or none at all. Have I been misunderstanding this all along?

*I do this frequently, without actually following the nonsense advice, but to try and understand what each change would actually do in terms of my tactic

During a game, my Assistant popped up with the advice that "We're simply giving away too many fouls and could benefit from a little more caution" and when I hovered over the Make Changes option*, it suggested it would remove my Stay On Feet TI. This really surprised me, as I thought staying on feet would have been the obvious option to PREVENT giving away too many fouls. At the very least, it should be no worse than the Diving In TI or none at all. Have I been misunderstanding this all along?

*I do this frequently, without actually following the nonsense advice, but to try and understand what each change would actually do in terms of my tactic

In this particular case, I reckon its got to do with the roles of the players, some of the roles are defaulted to hard tackling. I doubt you should be looking at the TI in this case, cos that TI is meant to reduce the incidence of hard tackling. I would ignore the Assman in this instance

This might be a daft question, but what reason would your players not go up the pitch when you have the ball? I find when i want to play a short passing game or keep possesion, my players lack options or my DM and 2MCs are on each other

This would be down to 2 factors, improper role selection, i.e. too many players on support or a function of mentality and roles. I would be looking at their roles and the overall shape of a formation if my players weren't making forward runs.

I see, I have been reading more and have had a lot better results with my 433 DM wide now looking at roles, ment. Previously it looks like I have been picking the roles the wrong way, eg picking a formation and setup that's completely opposite to what I want

I still lost some games, but I wasn't watching most of the game with the oppo passing it around, I was finally getting some counter attacks, whipping balls in from deep to my TM.

But I still cant get a formation like this to work with short slow tempo

CD - CD - CD

WB-----------WB

-------DM--------

---CM-----CM----

----F9--CF------

Still suffering the problem of not being able to get out my box. But the CPU uses it to great effect and they also seem to got a lot of width with their WBs hugging the touch line

I think FM needs to introduce a pre season only mode which gives you a lot of time to practice formations without fear of getting sacked

Perhaps this is the most stupid question on this thread, but what PI is better to drag a defender out of his position: roam from position or move into channels?

Perhaps this is the most stupid question on this thread, but what PI is better to drag a defender out of his position: roam from position or move into channels?

Not stupid at all I have always wondered that. Plus what does a player do if he "moves into channels" and "roams from position"!! Tried that and TBH didn't see much difference from the default.

Not stupid at all I have always wondered that. Plus what does a player do if he "moves into channels" and "roams from position"!! Tried that and TBH didn't see much difference from the default.

*scratch this, it was unintelligible BS*. Moves into channels is limiting in that is specifies an area of movement . Roam can theoretically see the player in all sorts of areas on the pitch based on the player's off the ball, anticipation, decisions etc.

Perhaps this is the most stupid question on this thread, but what PI is better to drag a defender out of his position: roam from position or move into channels?

Roam increases a player's overall range of movement when the team is in possession. Move Into Channels specifically tells him to drift wide. Combining the two can see a player drift even wider than he normally would. To put that another way, roam increases the overall area in which the player will consider moving to find space, and MIC tells him to actually move wider (within the area in which he is permitted to move).

As far as dragging the defender out of position, it depends. In counterattack situations, MIC can force a central defender wide to close down a striker receiving a pass from deep, creating space down the middle for the run of a second striker or breaking midfielder. But in general open play, I find roaming is more likely to pull a defender out (mostly after the player has received the ball) whereas MIC is more useful for giving you some space to make a diagonal run at goal (without the ball) or across the defensive line (with the ball). MIC is also helpful for encouraging interplay with wide players.

I assumed from what I have read that "move into channels" is the space between the centre back and full back rather than a striker moving out wide?

I assumed from what I have read that "move into channels" is the space between the centre back and full back rather than a striker moving out wide?

It doesn't literally have to be between the DC and DL/R. After all, MCs and AMCs can move into channels as well. It's more like the outer part of the interior of the pitch.

Another question...... Do CWB's dribble more than WB's? My two Jenkinson and Cresswell have good crossing stats but not so good dribbling so assume they would be better played as Wing Backs?

Another question...... Do CWB's dribble more than WB's? My two Jenkinson and Cresswell have good crossing stats but not so good dribbling so assume they would be better played as Wing Backs?

They don't dribble more but, depending on the player, they might attempt more difficult dribbling techniques.

They don't dribble more but, depending on the player, they might attempt more difficult dribbling techniques.

So my two would be better off in your opinion as wing backs rather than CWB's?

Having said that I have had a thought. Both as I say are good at crossing and yet not the best dribblers. Up top I have Sakho and Valencia who have been pretty good for me in the air. One of the frustrations at times is that crosses don't come in enough. I took a look at the WB and CWB options and they are set for crosses at byline. Possibly what happens is that not being that great at dribbling both may not have the skill to get to the byline to make the cross. Full backs however have various options as from where they cross. Therefore possibly picking an attacking full back with a TI of cross more often will allow them to complete more crosses.

May I also bump my question from above as it really intrigues me.

In a 4132 like mine below which BBM would you all add "get further forward" to?

_______________DF S_______CF A______________

__________BBM S_____CM A_______BBM S_______

____________________DLP D___________________

WB A________CD D___________CD D________WB A

____________________GK D___________________

Reason I ask is that I have always had it on the right sided BBM thinking that logically he would support further forward behind the more advanced striker (CF A). However I recently changed it and seem to sometimes have more joy with the left sided BBM getting forward behind the DF S. Maybe it is better link up play that is the reason but just wondered how you guys would play it in the same formation?

As rough as I got it.

Roam for creative folks - chanels for poachers and wingers, right?

As rough as I got it.

Roam for creative folks - chanels for poachers and wingers, right?

As always, it depends on what you want from the player. Both can give a player space to receive the ball, but they might pull them away from areas where they would be more effective. A poacher stays central by default so he can pounce on the ball from an optimal shooting angle. Telling him to move into channels can get him on the ball or help him slip on the blindside of a centreback, but it can also see him getting caught up in un-poachery link-up play out wide.

Roam is the same way. The player will have a better chance of getting on the ball, but he might take up positions that see him further from his runners and poorly positioned to supply a killer pass.

In a 4132 like mine below which BBM would you all add "get further forward" to?

In most cases, neither. You already have 2 central runners. Setting them all to Get Further Forward would risk isolating your DLP(D).

So my two would be better off in your opinion as wing backs rather than CWB's?

If you just want them attempting crosses and using passing to get around the opposition's wide defenders instead of taking them on directly, FB(A) would fit the bill as well.

As always, it depends on what you want from the player. Both can give a player space to receive the ball, but they might pull them away from areas where they would be more effective. A poacher stays central by default so he can pounce on the ball from an optimal shooting angle. Telling him to move into channels can get him on the ball or help him slip on the blindside of a centreback, but it can also see him getting caught up in un-poachery link-up play out wide.

Roam is the same way. The player will have a better chance of getting on the ball, but he might take up positions that see him further from his runners and poorly positioned to supply a killer pass.

In most cases, neither. You already have 2 central runners. Setting them all to Get Further Forward would risk isolating your DLP(D).

If you just want them attempting crosses and using passing to get around the opposition's wide defenders instead of taking them on directly, FB(A) would fit the bill as well.

That's great many thanks for that. Light bulb moment with the Full Back attack so I will try that.

I'm getting a ridicilous number of yellor and red cards despite committing fewer fouls than my opponents every match. Always been the team with the least amount of cards, but in this game it's almost a red because of 2 times yellow and a penalty againts me every game.

Also getting emails on playing to close to the edge or cross the line to often, but I neve commit more than 10 fouls a game. Am playing with high pressure and high d-line, but gues this shouldn't affect these extra ordinary amount of cards.

I'm getting a ridicilous number of yellor and red cards despite committing fewer fouls than my opponents every match. Always been the team with the least amount of cards, but in this game it's almost a red because of 2 times yellow and a penalty againts me every game.

Also getting emails on playing to close to the edge or cross the line to often, but I neve commit more than 10 fouls a game. Am playing with high pressure and high d-line, but gues this shouldn't affect these extra ordinary amount of cards.

What are your aggression attributes like across the team? This will dictate how hard (i.e. enthusiastically) players will go in to challenges; also, there is a hidden dirtiness rating for every player, and you may have a few of those. It's not the quantity of the fouls, but the "quality" that is drawing attention. If you aren't happy, you can adjust the worst offenders by having them stay on feet and stand off opponents to reduce the times they go in a commit hard fouls. There are effects to doing this, of course, but otherwise there is not a lot you can do.

Here's my stoopid training question. It might not have a definitive answer, but I would appreciate opinions.

Is it worth hassling players who the coaches report as performing poorly in training?

I feel compelled to pull them up, but it often results in them getting really narked, and the ones who say 'right boss, I'll work harder'

inevitably re-appear as the offenders the next time.

I tend to ignore the veterans who are coasting downhill to retirement, and carpet the youngsters, but is that illogical?

It's an aspect of the game that's always bugged me for some reason.

Here's my stoopid training question. It might not have a definitive answer, but I would appreciate opinions.

Is it worth hassling players who the coaches report as performing poorly in training?

I feel compelled to pull them up, but it often results in them getting really narked, and the ones who say 'right boss, I'll work harder'

inevitably re-appear as the offenders the next time.

I tend to ignore the veterans who are coasting downhill to retirement, and carpet the youngsters, but is that illogical?

It's an aspect of the game that's always bugged me for some reason.

I always ignore coach reports, they have no idea what you are trying to achieve with player training plans.

Check yourself how players are progressing. If they are good, then all is well. If not, change their training, tutor them for a better personality and/or give them more match time.

I never talk to a player about training performance.

In this particular case, I reckon its got to do with the roles of the players, some of the roles are defaulted to hard tackling. I doubt you should be looking at the TI in this case, cos that TI is meant to reduce the incidence of hard tackling. I would ignore the Assman in this instance

I do ignore the AssMan, as he always seems to want you to regress to the mean rather than the particular tactic, but in this case, if I was to go through with the suggestions, it would have removed my Stay on Feet TI. Is this just a limitation of the game then, as it can't remove my PI but it feels it needs to do something?

As always, it depends on what you want from the player. Both can give a player space to receive the ball, but they might pull them away from areas where they would be more effective. A poacher stays central by default so he can pounce on the ball from an optimal shooting angle. Telling him to move into channels can get him on the ball or help him slip on the blindside of a centreback, but it can also see him getting caught up in un-poachery link-up play out wide.

Roam is the same way. The player will have a better chance of getting on the ball, but he might take up positions that see him further from his runners and poorly positioned to supply a killer pass

All right, I got it. So, what can you advice me if i want to drag CD or DM from his position to free the space for wingers or running midfielders? As I see it from your previous advice - move into channels suits better, and I can use roaming, if the defender in question is man marking my player.

All right, I got it. So, what can you advice me if i want to drag CD or DM from his position to free the space for wingers or running midfielders? As I see it from your previous advice - move into channels suits better, and I can use roaming, if the defender in question is man marking my player.

Unless the AI is specific man-marking one of your players, I'd say it's more useful for finding space to receive the ball than dragging players out of position off the ball, at least against a settled defence and especially one with a DMC. One of the benefits of a DMC is that he allows the DCs to sit tight and the MCs ahead of him to pressure aggressively (since he offers natural cover behind the midfield). In most cases, you'll be facing a zonal defence, so if a striker drifts, he'll just be passed on between markers. Having him move into the channels can help him find space to receive and maybe dribble back across the defence, it can also see him matched up against a marker who is less capable of dealing with him (for example, a smaller, more attacking fullback), but DCs are difficult to drag out of position with movement from the centre unless the fullbacks are out of position and there's no one protecting the space in front of them.

With that said, if the AI isn't using a DMC, having a striker in a support role or an attacking midfielder roam can force DCs out to close him down if he does receive the ball and open up a gap for a run by a winger or midfielder. Of course, it helps if that striker is very good on the ball and has the vision to see the pass.

With that said, if the AI isn't using a DMC, having a striker in a support role or an attacking midfielder roam can force DCs out to close him down if he does receive the ball and open up a gap for a run by a winger or midfielder. Of course, it helps if that striker is very good on the ball and has the vision to see the pass.

I guessed so. It is good to confirm this with experienced users. Thank you, very nice of you and the other mods to answer all these questions.

What does "Mark Tighter" PI on your striker does ? and is it worth using this PI, if i want my MCR to move down the right flank to help my DR in defense and to not get overloaded, how can i achieve this thing in FM ? The formation 5-3-2 with DR and DL

What does "Mark Tighter" PI on your striker does ? and is it worth using this PI, if i want my MCR to move down the right flank to help my DR in defense and to not get overloaded, how can i achieve this thing in FM ? The formation 5-3-2 with DR and DL

Mark Tighter is only relevant for defensive situations - i.e. typically at corners and set pieces.

Would anyone care to explain how basically every opponent offensive player is capable of dribbling 2-4 players several times per match, while my own players (all with more than sufficient stats to do the same) barely manages to dribble one defender once or twice per match? Or how no matter how hard you tell your players to tackle, they still just run along next to the oponent? When I say "Tackle harder", I literally mean sweep his ****ing legs if you can't take the ball. Pressing is a joke, where my players either react to the opposing attacker a whole second to slow, or positively JUMP out of line to intercept a player not even involved in play.

And don't get me started on the seemingly unmotivated bad passes going nowhere NEAR the correct player.

Oh, and why is it players can't pick out a run with a killer pass no matter what you tell them? I've had inside forwards and strikers making runs and being as open as a five dollar whore, without even the most creative players in the team even trying to pass them - even after being told to play direct, try risky passes.

I more and more get the feeling this years FM is suffering from it's own attempt to pander to every concievably requested function, role and command from the community.

/rant over.

That's perception bias for you. Rants aren't welcome in this section of the forum, so please either go outside and shout in the garden, or take the rants elsewhere.

Super quick question on trainign/development: using the winter update of FM2015.

Season 1 Harry Kane, Euro Golden Boy etc - was rated by JPC/JOA 19/19 Head of Youth Development as "World Class" and the rest of the coaching staff. His CA stars matchis PA stars (4.5). No injuries, nothing, kept banging them in 7+ AvR.

Then I changed the player role from AF to CF-S and in two seasons he became a club legend, was downgraded to 3 stars CA and PA and described as leading prem player. Some other players improved (Eriksen, Lucas Romero).

Also - as a rule I only play him in the league games, rarely cup or Europe unless semis or Final.

He still tends to score when he wants.

Any idea what might have happened to the CA rating?

Super quick question on trainign/development: using the winter update of FM2015.

Season 1 Harry Kane, Euro Golden Boy etc - was rated by JPC/JOA 19/19 Head of Youth Development as "World Class" and the rest of the coaching staff. His CA stars matchis PA stars (4.5). No injuries, nothing, kept banging them in 7+ AvR.

Then I changed the player role from AF to CF-S and in two seasons he became a club legend, was downgraded to 3 stars CA and PA and described as leading prem player. Some other players improved (Eriksen, Lucas Romero).

Also - as a rule I only play him in the league games, rarely cup or Europe unless semis or Final.

He still tends to score when he wants.

Any idea what might have happened to the CA rating?

The star ratings you see in your squad screen do not show you how much CA or PA a player has.

The stars show you how each player compares to the rest of the squad. If you load up a non-league team, there will still be some 4 and 5 star players - but move those same players to a Premier League team and they'll be lucky to have one star.

Kane probably does compare favourably with his team mates at the start of a game, but after two or 3 seasons as your squad has improved with transfers and player development, he probably doesn't show quite so favourably. It isn't because he's lost anything, it's because the squad has got better.

I have a wonderful DL who can play as a WB. I've had a few injuries of late and I have been playing him in a DW position in my formation as he has good stats for that position, even though he is totally untrained in playing on the wing. I've even played him in a striker position once due to his good all-round stats. He had performed as well as the players he has replaced.

From the outside looking in, I feel as long as a player has the right stats for the position he is playing, actually not being a natural or accomplished in that position doesn't seem to count for such a huge amount.

What sort of disadvantages should I expect to see by playing this player like this out of position?

I have a wonderful DL who can play as a WB. I've had a few injuries of late and I have been playing him in a DW position in my formation as he has good stats for that position, even though he is totally untrained in playing on the wing. I've even played him in a striker position once due to his good all-round stats. He had performed as well as the players he has replaced.

From the outside looking in, I feel as long as a player has the right stats for the position he is playing, actually not being a natural or accomplished in that position doesn't seem to count for such a huge amount.

What sort of disadvantages should I expect to see by playing this player like this out of position?

He takes a hit on his decision making, so basically it affects everything. However if he has the attributes for the role he'll be fine.

thank you herne79 you are right, the star rating does go down.

It's more the wording on the view of all the coaches that he was World Class, but he was then rated as Leading Prem player seemingly with no reason for that to drop.

That's perception bias for you. Rants aren't welcome in this section of the forum, so please either go outside and shout in the garden, or take the rants elsewhere.

I'm sorry. It was originally meant to be a series of questions, but I seem to have spun out of control.

I'm gonna give it another go.

I'm sorry. It was originally meant to be a series of questions, but I seem to have spun out of control.

I'm gonna give it another go.

Persevere. Keep your thread running and we'll see what happens.

thank you herne79 you are right, the star rating does go down.

It's more the wording on the view of all the coaches that he was World Class, but he was then rated as Leading Prem player seemingly with no reason for that to drop.

That might be down to how well your Assistant Manager knows your squad, and how good his attributes are in judging CA and PA.

If you look at your Assistant Manager's screen, click the Overview tab and select Information. Towards the bottom of this screen you will see a section called Backroom Advice. In there you will see "Knowledge of Club Players" and a blue progress bar next to it. This will improve over time, so at the start of your game this bar may have been low and thus gave you a slightly inaccurate profile of Harry Kane (and everyone else). After 2 or 3 seasons that knowledge should now be better (assuming you have kept the same assistant) and give you a more accurate player profile.

Persevere. Keep your thread running and we'll see what happens.

True that. Just posted a wall of text and images in my thread, hopefully someone will come to my rescue, this game is turning my hair grey.

I'm currently managing in the English Premier League, and I'm seeing a lot of teams playing with an advanced playmaker in central midfield (CM), and the same team then emplying an advanced playmaker in the attacking midfield as well.

Could anyone tell what benefits this has? And perhaps could someone also point to a team in real life that uses this setup just to get my head around it?

I'm currently managing in the English Premier League, and I'm seeing a lot of teams playing with an advanced playmaker in central midfield (CM), and the same team then emplying an advanced playmaker in the attacking midfield as well.

Could anyone tell what benefits this has? And perhaps could someone also point to a team in real life that uses this setup just to get my head around it?

Generally what we see with AI behavior is that it will allocate roles and duties based on the players it has rather than trying to accommodate a specific system. In your case, those clubs likely have two first teamers that are viewed by FM's metrics as being best suited for that role based on their attributes, so you will see it being used. This is one area where that needs some work, and I think SI is looking at dealing with this for future versions.

Generally what we see with AI behavior is that it will allocate roles and duties based on the players it has rather than trying to accommodate a specific system. In your case, those clubs likely have two first teamers that are viewed by FM's metrics as being best suited for that role based on their attributes, so you will see it being used. This is one area where that needs some work, and I think SI is looking at dealing with this for future versions.

Thanks, mate. Seems likely. I'm guessing that also explains the large number of teams playing without a balancing midfielder.

Thanks, mate. Seems likely. I'm guessing that also explains the large number of teams playing without a balancing midfielder.

Yes it does; the AI will come out with some absolutely funky role and duty combinations sometimes

How do you guys know what roles the AI is utilising? All I can tell is that the formations jig around ever so slightly in the formation, which might hint at some major differences in roles, but I couldn't be confident even then?

How do you guys know what roles the AI is utilising? All I can tell is that the formations jig around ever so slightly in the formation, which might hint at some major differences in roles, but I couldn't be confident even then?

They are posted before every match.

They are posted before every match.

Does it? I can only see formations... Where does it tell you the roles?

They're only visible in some third party skins.

They're only visible in some third party skins.

Just wondering: if possession % can not be compared because FM and football stats use different criteria, is there any other issues that might have a different interpretation ? and I'm thinking about Tempo.

Just wondering: if possession % can not be compared because FM and football stats use different criteria, is there any other issues that might have a different interpretation ? and I'm thinking about Tempo.

Tempo is generally a more subjective area, and doesn't have a stat as such, so isn't comparable - full stop!

Tackling is also known to be different - tackles in FM are statistically way higher than real life because FM can't simulate physicality properly so you get tackles in FM where in real life you'd get general upper body contact etc. Again, not a flaw as such, just a different way in which the ME models and captures things.

Tempo is generally a more subjective area, and doesn't have a stat as such, so isn't comparable - full stop!

Tackling is also known to be different - tackles in FM are statistically way higher than real life because FM can't simulate physicality properly so you get tackles in FM where in real life you'd get general upper body contact etc. Again, not a flaw as such, just a different way in which the ME models and captures things.

Thanks mate. My thinking was about the quick or the low moving around the ball, when thinking about low in football I always remember brazilian league matches; when thinking about quick, UK is a good example. So, if comparable, I was wondering if low and quick tempo in FM can be translated from these two examples.

Thanks mate. My thinking was about the quick or the low moving around the ball, when thinking about low in football I always remember brazilian league matches; when thinking about quick, UK is a good example. So, if comparable, I was wondering if low and quick tempo in FM can be translated from these two examples.

Yes, that's probably a fair way of translating high / low tempo.