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

So I'm playing this system: http://i.imgur.com/4Pz553b.png

But we are not scoring as much as I would like, although I find that we are creating a lot. Most teams we face play defensive against us because we're predicted nr. 1. I would like my IF-A, Eilers, to score more goals, but I think he is playing too wide and rarely gets in goal scoring opportunities. So, what I'm wondering is, should I perhaps change the team shape from Highly structured to Fluid perhaps, to get more movement? I'm just a bit apprehensive to change something dramatic and ruin our good form in the middle of the season, that's why I'm asking for input.

You might consider just tweaking the IF-A a little bit rather than making changes that would affect the whole team. If he's staying too wide, you could perhaps give him the "sit narrower" PI, or make him a raumdeuter. Or if you changed the WB on that side to attack, that might stretch the defense more and open up space for your IF (obviously that comes with some risk though).

As far as team shape, maybe make a smaller jump than going all the way from highly structured to fluid. You could start with structured, see if you notice a difference and if you like it, then try to go up another notch.

You might consider just tweaking the IF-A a little bit rather than making changes that would affect the whole team. If he's staying too wide, you could perhaps give him the "sit narrower" PI, or make him a raumdeuter. Or if you changed the WB on that side to attack, that might stretch the defense more and open up space for your IF (obviously that comes with some risk though).

As far as team shape, maybe make a smaller jump than going all the way from highly structured to fluid. You could start with structured, see if you notice a difference and if you like it, then try to go up another notch.

Yes, I will try telling him to play narrower. Not a big fan om the Raumdeuter, because I've never gotten that role to work. And besides, the Raumdeuter will stay more wider, which I don't want. I've tried with the wingback on attack, but I find that when he's on attack the whole team tends to play the ball to him and effectively making the tactic into a "crossing tactic". My main concern is mostly if the highly structured shape will make the IF more cautious and not try to move into dangerous areas. Because even with roaming as PI he's a bit stationary imo.

So I'm playing this system: http://i.imgur.com/4Pz553b.png

But we are not scoring as much as I would like, although I find that we are creating a lot. Most teams we face play defensive against us because we're predicted nr. 1. I would like my IF-A, Eilers, to score more goals, but I think he is playing too wide and rarely gets in goal scoring opportunities. So, what I'm wondering is, should I perhaps change the team shape from Highly structured to Fluid perhaps, to get more movement? I'm just a bit apprehensive to change something dramatic and ruin our good form in the middle of the season, that's why I'm asking for input.

Does he has roaming on? If not, maybe you want to give it to him so he has more freedom to move around and make himself available.

I play two strikers and a guy in the AMC spot. How can I best set these guys up so they don't all get clogged up in the middle? I want the AMC to play through balls the other two guys can run on, or the three of them to create some nifty one-two's for someone to get a clear shot on goal. My initial setup was AP (s), DLF (s) and (AF), however they all tried to run towards the penalty spot and I had absolutely no width up front. Since then I have tried experimenting with AM (more risky passes, more direct, roaming) and replacing the DLF with a CF (s) and run into channels, however I am not seeing the behaviour I want from them.

What to do? Help?

I play two strikers and a guy in the AMC spot. How can I best set these guys up so they don't all get clogged up in the middle? I want the AMC to play through balls the other two guys can run on, or the three of them to create some nifty one-two's for someone to get a clear shot on goal. My initial setup was AP (s), DLF (s) and (AF), however they all tried to run towards the penalty spot and I had absolutely no width up front. Since then I have tried experimenting with AM (more risky passes, more direct, roaming) and replacing the DLF with a CF (s) and run into channels, however I am not seeing the behaviour I want from them.

What to do? Help?

Umm...you are playing with an AM and two strikers but you don't want them to clog up the middle?? What sense does that make? :?

Have you tried play wider?

If I set the general training on low, is the individual training more effective then ? If not what would be your suggestion for the general intensity?

I often see very fast players slowing down dramatically as soon as they receive the ball. Is there a specific attribute or preferred move related to this that can be trained? This dramatic slowness with the ball hinders fast strikers like Vardy to outrun slow defenders, as he seemingly does with ease in real life.

I often see very fast players slowing down dramatically as soon as they receive the ball. Is there a specific attribute or preferred move related to this that can be trained? This dramatic slowness with the ball hinders fast strikers like Vardy to outrun slow defenders, as he seemingly does with ease in real life.

I would say the three main attributes are:

Agility: If he needs to turn this will affect the speed of the turn.

First Touch: Controlling the ball.

Technique: Ability to do more complex moves to control it.

PPM of avoids using weaker foot (or just having a weaker foot) could affect how they can control the ball.

If the players role has "Hold Up Ball" they will tend to wait for support.

If I set the general training on low, is the individual training more effective then ? If not what would be your suggestion for the general intensity?

You want general on high ideally and on balanced (if you want to make the most of player development) to make general training effective.

I would say the three main attributes are:

Agility: If he needs to turn this will affect the speed of the turn.

First Touch: Controlling the ball.

Technique: Ability to do more complex moves to control it.

PPM of avoids using weaker foot (or just having a weaker foot) could affect how they can control the ball.

If the players role has "Hold Up Ball" they will tend to wait for support.

Thanks, seems logical. I guess the "hold up ball"-instruction could be my main culprit, but waiting for support when you are alone with the goalkeeper, and letting the defense regroup seems to be a trend here.

Cleon, that's for FM16, right?

I remember read that in FM15 you used general training on low and balanced, right?

Cleon, that's for FM16, right?

I remember read that in FM15 you used general training on low and balanced, right?

Yeah as you can no longer set an individual intensity level for players.

You want general on high ideally and on balanced (if you want to make the most of player development) to make general training effective.

This has confused me, I was always under the impression that the lower general training the more time spent on individual, which allows for better player development. If I change this general to high this increases the overall individual training workload to very heavy, which I can assume isn't a good thing leading to more injuries, no?

This has confused me, I was always under the impression that the lower general training the more time spent on individual, which allows for better player development. If I change this general to high this increases the overall individual training workload to very heavy, which I can assume isn't a good thing leading to more injuries, no?

No.

More heavy training isn't a bad thing and doesn't really increase the risk of injury. On FM15 and before it was better to keep it on low because you off set that with the individual intensity which mean more individual focus time. However on FM16 the workloads are now combined so you can't do that. Players who complain about heavy workloads are the unprofessional types anyway, so they don't really make the most of training to begin with. If you have any of these in your side then try tutoring them to give them better personalities.

Lower workloads the less effective training is because they're not really being pushed or using training to full effect.

Yeah as you can no longer set an individual intensity level for players.

That makes sense, thanks.

If you are playing an AP in a amr/l position are they better opposite footed like a IF or same footed like a winger?

Thanks, seems logical. I guess the "hold up ball"-instruction could be my main culprit, but waiting for support when you are alone with the goalkeeper, and letting the defense regroup seems to be a trend here.

That sounds like Composure or an issue with his mental condition (ie. nervous).

What are the differences between AP S and IF S in the AMR position. And which one would be more suitable when AML is RMD and lone striker is F9. There is no AMC

What are the differences between AP S and IF S in the AMR position. And which one would be more suitable when AML is RMD and lone striker is F9. There is no AMC

You can tell by comparing their default PIs. The main difference is the AP has the Playmaker Focus whilst the IF does not. Suitability depends on more than just the striker and opposite side player; it's the system as a whole that matters.

Hmm I try to play possession game with a defensive midfield triangle with AP S and CM A with DM D behind them. Also the player in question to play in that position is Ozil or Chamberlain

Well ask yourself if you want Ozil / Chamberlain to be a focal point of the system or not. If you do want them to receive the ball more, then go for AP. However - make sure that the AP (S) in the MC line is on the opposite side (i.e. MCL) to avoid them "clustering" together.

You can tell by comparing their default PIs. The main difference is the AP has the Playmaker Focus whilst the IF does not. Suitability depends on more than just the striker and opposite side player; it's the system as a whole that matters.

Sorry I replied to you in the previous post but it didn't work as I am on my phone

Well ask yourself if you want Ozil / Chamberlain to be a focal point of the system or not. If you do want them to receive the ball more, then go for AP. However - make sure that the AP (S) in the MC line is on the opposite side (i.e. MCL) to avoid them "clustering" together.

Yeah the AP S is on the opposite side. I guess I'd rather the RMD be the focal point so IF is better?

Yeah the AP S is on the opposite side. I guess I'd rather the RMD be the focal point so IF is better?

Possibly, as the Raumdeuter should be close to the AP on that side, so should be an immediate passing target if he has space. As ever the only way to find out is to try it.

Possibly, as the Raumdeuter should be close to the AP on that side, so should be an immediate passing target if he has space. As ever the only way to find out is to try it.

While you are here. What do you think suits the Ramsey Wilshire midfield role wise. The aforementioned combination or do you have anything else in mind. Thanks

While you are here. What do you think suits the Ramsey Wilshire midfield role wise. The aforementioned combination or do you have anything else in mind. Thanks

If you want the Raumdeuter to be focal, then one of the two needs to be a Playmaker Role of some sort on that side. I'd probably go with Wilshere as AP (S) and Ramsey as BBM or CM (A). With Ramsey, you'd need to make sure that his path to goal isn't obscured by the AML/R player on his side.

Am I missing something obvious regarding the following:

Increase closing down from "Sometimes" to "More" increases tempo slightly.

Increase it again to "Much More" and the tempo drops back to the sometimes level.

I guess its so the players can get a breather after the extra energy to win it by closing down much more, I just find it strange that it does that change for us.

When talking to a player about tutoring, does the two dialogue options "...help to improve his game" or "...take him under your wing and tutor him off the pitch" focus on different attributes, or is the option merely cosmetic?

When talking to a player about tutoring, does the two dialogue options "...help to improve his game" or "...take him under your wing and tutor him off the pitch" focus on different attributes, or is the option merely cosmetic?

Both options are the same with one difference, the top one has a chance to pass on PPM's while the second option doesn't.

Am I missing something obvious regarding the following:

Increase closing down from "Sometimes" to "More" increases tempo slightly.

Increase it again to "Much More" and the tempo drops back to the sometimes level.

I guess its so the players can get a breather after the extra energy to win it by closing down much more, I just find it strange that it does that change for us.

It's possibly just a UI quirk of some sort. I'd consider raising it as a Bug.

It's possibly just a UI quirk of some sort. I'd consider raising it as a Bug.

Ok ta, i'll grab some screenshots when i'm at home and raise it.

Had a quick play around with this during pre-season, just want to make sure there's nothing stupidly wrong with it (apart from how blurry it is, haha) before I crack on with the season proper. Was thinking of adding 'Play Wider' as a TI, but half of me thinks that I'm just tinkering for nothing.

Will a defender with a low heading attribute lose most of his aerial duels, even with decent stats in jumping, bravery and strength?

Will a defender with a low heading attribute lose most of his aerial duels, even with decent stats in jumping, bravery and strength?

Pretty sure Heading only affects how accurately the player can send the ball to it's destination. So if he has good Jumping Reach, he'll win his duels, but the ball could go somewhere you don't want it.

Will a defender with a low heading attribute lose most of his aerial duels, even with decent stats in jumping, bravery and strength?

No, heading attribute is how good the player is at directing the ball with his head etc. In your case he will still win aerial duels, but a low heading stat means the ball will be more random in its direction, pace etc.

EDIT: Or what TheChoke said above

Had a quick play around with this during pre-season, just want to make sure there's nothing stupidly wrong with it (apart from how blurry it is, haha) before I crack on with the season proper. Was thinking of adding 'Play Wider' as a TI, but half of me thinks that I'm just tinkering for nothing.

How this will play out for you is dependent on a lot of things we can't control for in theoretical terms. To give you a little feedback, though, I'd offer a couple of observations that you might want to keep an eye on as you play:

That defensive 3 with two stoppers and a cover, along with wingbacks- you'll need to watch this as you could end up with an isolated CB when there are moves around your box. Not saying that will happen, but definitely something to keep an eye on.

The front three: should probably be okay, especially if you are getting good movement from the CF, but be watchful that you don't get them packed to close together and stifle attacking moves in and around the box

As for play wider, well, for me that TI is a situational one (as I feel most of them are). I wouldn't use it unless it was clear I needed to. Your formation is narrow and designed to work that way, so I would only play wider if you find you are getting too compressed through the middle, are playing too one-dimensionally, or are facing a team that is clogging up the center against you.

How this will play out for you is dependent on a lot of things we can't control for in theoretical terms. To give you a little feedback, though, I'd offer a couple of observations that you might want to keep an eye on as you play:

That defensive 3 with two stoppers and a cover, along with wingbacks- you'll need to watch this as you could end up with an isolated CB when there are moves around your box. Not saying that will happen, but definitely something to keep an eye on.

The front three: should probably be okay, especially if you are getting good movement from the CF, but be watchful that you don't get them packed to close together and stifle attacking moves in and around the box

As for play wider, well, for me that TI is a situational one (as I feel most of them are). I wouldn't use it unless it was clear I needed to. Your formation is narrow and designed to work that way, so I would only play wider if you find you are getting too compressed through the middle, are playing too one-dimensionally, or are facing a team that is clogging up the center against you.

That's OK, thank you for your feedback. Anything situational I'm fine with working out myself, just wanted to make sure all the fundamentals were correct. Thanks again!

I know this is probably a stupid question hence it been in here but no matter what opposition I play, whatever formation I use or against any other formation it always seems like the more attacking and aggressive you play, the more of a chance you have. I start most games with a standard approach, I close down but not over the top, I retain possession and I play out from the back. It isn't a ground breaking tactic and I understand some people will come in here and say post your system so we can see and I will if it will make a difference but just from viewing games (comprehensive highlights) it feels like my team only ever have any chance of getting points on the board even against the Chelseas and Arsenals of the world if I put them under pressure and play high up.

For example i've just played a world class Man Utd team and I got beat 1-0 which is fair enough we deserved to lose but I set out with a counter game plan where we get it to the striker and bypass their press and then my midfield who were full of energy, work rate and legs got past him and we created that way but what I was actually seeing was my CM get the ball with a perfectly good option out to his right at MR and he smashes the ball towards their centre halves who were actually Stones and Zouma so he had zero chance. We couldn't get out of the half and were pinned in by their DR and DL (Should probably call them AMR and AML) Florenzi and Shaw who were just playing up front almost and I couldn't seem to capitalise on that and I was getting annoyed.

At HT I switched to my control tactic 4-4-1-1 that has very high press, tight marking, offside trap (suicidal probably), get stuck in. You know all the gung ho instructions and suddenly my team had some control back in the game. They still dominated and I drew the second half 0-0 but that tactic shouldn't (probably the wrong word) work against fast, technical players that they have but it did and it didn't seem realistic which is what I try to play for.

I did read the thread about now you can punish people more who throw people forwards and that must mean this is more my problem as i'm not one of those who blame the game but even when I try to counter these types of teams, my attacks are rarely actual counters and more a build up attack which isn't what i'm after against the big teams. I have scored counter attacks and have had them scored past me but when I specifically try to play that way, those types of goals desert me and most of my game enjoyment is from a specific tactic that I see us playing.

One last thing as well is the new way of interpreting the team shape options with more spacing between the lines the more you gear towards highly structured and what would be best for different types of philosophy.

Probably a really stupid question, but:

Why do interesting threads get closed? I'm not a mod, I'm not someone who's doing all he can in his spare time to do the best for this forum, but I think good manners should be universal. There's nothing wrong with a thread that's spreading personal insights. I read a lot of (tactical) threads, and I didn't consider the "Insight in the new era"-thread any more dogmatic than lots of other threads, with popular dogmata, just as the number of attacking duties in relation to the mentality, the number of specialist roles, the ever recurring 'too many team instructions'.

Don't get me wrong. I appreciate all the efforts the mods do, but I think certain mods should appreciate the efforts of some members too. The 'pride' aspect is becoming too prominent. It does make this place less friendly, less nice. That's a pity.

And for the record: I don't know anyone personal here.

If you read the last bit of the last post in that thread, you'd see that the poster asked for it to be closed so he could start anew in a different thread.

I was referring to the first time it got closed.

is there a guide somewhere on how to use the match analysis?

totally changed from last year and cant get it to display what i want at all.

Thanks

I was referring to the first time it got closed.

If you'd seen the to-ing and fro-ing of posts in there, you'd have seen that the comments for and against the thread were from a variety of users. It descended to the point where the thread was closed, it was subsequently reopened and now it will be resurrected in a new thread. No point speculating any further really. If you ever take exception to what you consider over-zealous modding or generally poor posts from anybody, that's when to use the triangular icon to report posts.

Thanks for your response. Didn't know about the possibility of reporting posts. Hopefully, it won't be necessary anymore, but thanks for the information!

Anybody else notice that their tactic becomes almost useless after a couple of seasons?

I only have one save and it's happened at two different clubs now. I won the Portuguese third tier with Tirsense, missed out on back-to-back promotions by two points and then struggled to win the season after before resigning.

I'm now with Vaduz, we won the Swiss second tier in my first full season, only losing two games all season (one was a 94th minute winner, the other a ridiculous fluke so we should have gone the whole season unbeaten). We started our first season in the Super League really well but after six or seven games, we've become terrible overnight.

It really doesn't feel like the AI have 'worked out' my tactic/system - my players are making more errors and ignoring my instructions. We're conceding really terrible goals from sloppy passes and the ridiculous ping pong corners - goals that weren't going in before the meltdown.

We're scoring less but we're still creating loads of chances so that shouldn't be a long term problem. It's just demoralising to see your team play exactly how you want and then, out of the blue, start to ignore your plan before making a load of ludicrous mistakes.

Without posting specific tactical set-ups (It's a fairly basic 4-2-3-1 - I've tried 4-1-4-1 too but results haven't changed), has anybody else experienced similar. If you have, how did you solve it?

is there a guide somewhere on how to use the match analysis?

totally changed from last year and cant get it to display what i want at all.

Thanks

guess that's a no then

guess that's a no then

It's still the same as last year really, it just looks more fancy.

It's still the same as last year really, it just looks more fancy.

im trying to look at heat maps for the entire team in one go. so i tick the select all box but then I cant see how I can apply the filter to everyone. I have to individually click on their names and select the filter on every person? wasn't this long winded in 15

Just bought FM16 - Is it correct in my thinking (from reading some threads etc) that having more support players in a standard mentality wont necessarily mean a lack of creativity? Or a AP (s) and DLP (S) will still make forward runs and suppor the attack?