FM16 vs. FM15 - Tactics

I've read a few opinions about this, but in general, would you agree that:

Easier to Succeed on FM15 using:

- Attacking tactics

- Narrow (2 wide men) tactics

Easier to Succeed on FM16 using:

- Counter tactics

- Wide (4 wide men) tactics

I know you can find ways to win using anything, but are we fighting upstream if playing narrow/attacking on FM16 or playing counter in FM15?

You'll probably get a lot of very subjective answers to that.

Bottom line - in my opinion nothing is easier or harder, just a bit different from one version to the next. Some people have come to grips with those differences while others are still plugging away with certain aspects.

Example - Counter Attacking has been changed from FM15 to FM16 so that counter attacks can happen a bit more often. However, you still need to set your system up in such a way so as to take advantage of this, which people don't always do.

It does seem, in my experience when up against a Countering 4-4-2 with High Tempo that you get overpowered white easily. The Atletico/Leverkusen/Leicester affect?

I did better on 15 with counter, and attack with 16.

Crossing is mad on 16, but was equally great on 15 until it got smacked with the nerf bat if I remember right. I'm pretty sure I was one of the few suggesting they keep crosses lethal in 15.

But yeah generalisations.

I can play both attacking and counter systems with no issues. If I were to take a 532, I could play that as an attacking system camping in an opponents half. Or I could set it up as a possession based 532. It really isn't an issue. I honestly felt that FM15 was too limiting, attacking tactics enjoyed way too much powar! In FM 16 you can play both styles equally effectively. You just need to figure out how to defend the flanks, and from what I have noticed this season, most people seem to find a problem with that.

I just think people are trying way too much to defend the flanks that they create imbalances. For example I don't have players hard tackling, when I play attacking systems. I tell em to stay on feet. I just think people have become so wrapped up that they have stopped seeing the big picture when it comes to playing the game. I plan to do something that will help people for FM17, and hopefully the fix works for FM16

FM16 isn't as plug and play as FM15, so it's "harder". At least, to me.

I can play both attacking and counter systems with no issues. If I were to take a 532, I could play that as an attacking system camping in an opponents half. Or I could set it up as a possession based 532. It really isn't an issue. I honestly felt that FM15 was too limiting, attacking tactics enjoyed way too much powar! In FM 16 you can play both styles equally effectively. You just need to figure out how to defend the flanks, and from what I have noticed this season, most people seem to find a problem with that.

I just think people are trying way too much to defend the flanks that they create imbalances. For example I don't have players hard tackling, when I play attacking systems. I tell em to stay on feet. I just think people have become so wrapped up that they have stopped seeing the big picture when it comes to playing the game. I plan to do something that will help people for FM17, and hopefully the fix works for FM16

Care to divulge some info on that "fix" ?

I think the best way to fix it is to have a tactic creator similar to what we used to have that asks questions about style of play and gives a recommended system st the end. This paired with an advanced creator like what we have could be for people with a better knowledge of what the ti's pis do to create their own systems.

Care to divulge some info on that "fix" ?

Not at the moment, no.

So far my discussions, which include one v one sessions, have clearly shown that some people are ignoring the basics altogether. Common issues:

1. Don't want to spend time watching the game to identify what's going on

2. Don't know what to look for, because when they make a system they pick players or roles without thinking how they play with and without the ball.

3. Don't know how to make a balanced tactic.

There are plenty of guides in the sticky section. We have been writing the same stuff basically for the last 20 years saying the same thing over and over again. Everyone seems to think the game takes a major turn each edition, which tbh, it doesn't. New features are added, but football as a game is still the same. People just overcomplicate the game and spend to little time doing the basics right. Like I've been saying for a long time, think things through, that's all it takes.

1. Don't want to spend time watching the game to identify what's going on

2. Don't know what to look for, because when they make a system they pick players or roles without thinking how they play with and without the ball.

3. Don't know how to make a balanced tactic.

Apart from the first point, don't you think that the other two are related with the lack of information that the game gives to the player?

I really like the tactic creator, and how it all based in the players roles (that are imo very well explained) and in preset instructions that are also well explained.

Where i think it all falls apart is when you start trying to relate all things.

For example, in the team instructions, there were made some steps to prevent this, because when you pick one instruction, others became unavailable. But in terms of the players roles that doesn't happen.

When you choose a tactic from the tactic creator, it automatically assume some players roles. But those players role don't take in consideration the way the user wants to plays.

Why not change the tactic creator, so that, when you pick a default tactic, lets say the 4231, the tactic creator ask the user some questions, like:

a) want to play attacking, possession, counter or defensive football?

b) want to play more direct, or more passing football?

etc etc

And with this, the tactic creator would set up, the instructions, but also the best players roles to fit the way the user wants to play.

This, i believe, would help alot the players, and allow them to start playing with a much more balanced tactic that would better fit the match engine.

You're getting into the realms of pre-made tactics there.

On the face of it, that could be a good idea for people who either have low interest in developing their own tactical systems, don't understand it or just don't have the time.

The problem is this is also the realm of plug and play tactics, and plug and play tactics don't work.

Further, some formations lend themselves better to different styles of football. The 4231 (with AMC/L/R) you mention is an aggressive formation and as such isn't really suitable for Counter attacking football.

Similarly, define Attacking football (for example)? You can set up an attacking system with the Defensive mentality just as you can with the Attacking mentality - and everything in between.

I agree the level of information could improve in game, but pre-made tactics are a bit of a minefield. It's a good idea, but it's beyond me how you go about implementing it.

You're getting into the realms of pre-made tactics there.

On the face of it, that could be a good idea for people who either have low interest in developing their own tactical systems, don't understand it or just don't have the time.

The problem is this is also the realm of plug and play tactics, and plug and play tactics don't work.

Further, some formations lend themselves better to different styles of football. The 4231 (with AMC/L/R) you mention is an aggressive formation and as such isn't really suitable for Counter attacking football.

Similarly, define Attacking football (for example)? You can set up an attacking system with the Defensive mentality just as you can with the Attacking mentality - and everything in between.

I agree the level of information could improve in game, but pre-made tactics are a bit of a minefield. It's a good idea, but it's beyond me how you go about implementing it.

Re: Plug and play, it should work... In theory, I mean if as is said all that is required is a solid foundation then a basic formation with basic roles that complement each other should be more than enough for those who have no interest etc. It wouldn't be optimal, but that shouldn't matter.

Though, I think there's a 'reason 4, 5, 6' there as well (for Rashidi) in that the game has moved on and some of the player-base hasn't, which is fine, nothing wrong with that. The option is either there for the fans to get learning, or for SI to 'go back' for them, if it is such a repeat problem, then the second option is worth considering.

Though, I think there's a 'reason 4, 5, 6' there as well (for Rashidi) in that the game has moved on and some of the player-base hasn't, which is fine, nothing wrong with that. The option is either there for the fans to get learning, or for SI to 'go back' for them, if it is such a repeat problem, then the second option is worth considering.

Exactly that.

Reason 4 in rashidi's list would be that when you're watching the match and spot the issues, the range of possible fixes is so vast and you realize there's a giant trial and error wall in front of your so you just give up.

That problem reflects even in rashidi's (generally amazing) videos. Sometimes he makes certain small TI or PI changes without really explaining why in detail and you're left wondering what's going on. Due to his knowledge, his tweaks mostly work, but when you look at him doing it everything looks so willy-nilly. Of course he knows exactly what's he doing, but an average user at that moment comes to the wall of trial and error I mentioned. Common football sense can take you only so far.

Exactly that.

Reason 4 in rashidi's list would be that when you're watching the match and spot the issues, the range of possible fixes is so vast and you realize there's a giant trial and error wall in front of your so you just give up.

That problem reflects even in rashidi's (generally amazing) videos. Sometimes he makes certain small TI or PI changes without really explaining why in detail and you're left wondering what's going on. Due to his knowledge, his tweaks mostly work, but when you look at him doing it everything looks so willy-nilly. Of course he knows exactly what's he doing, but an average user at that moment comes to the wall of trial and error I mentioned. Common football sense can take you only so far.

Sometimes those changes don't work :-(, I have considered doing the videos on comprehensive but that's only when I am trying a tactic out the first time, when I am actually looking closely at whether my transitions are working. By the time I am on key highlights I know how my transitions should look like. I know what my team is capable of doing, so my shouts are really simple. Its either I push up my defensive line to take some risks...go attacking to take some risks....or go structured to open the pitch, lock down my defense, and hope my players rapid movement unlocks teams.

Its really really important that people look at their team without the ball, and know what goes into making a good attacking duty, support duty and defend duty.

I have considered doing the videos on comprehensive but that's only when I am trying a tactic out the first time, when I am actually looking closely at whether my transitions are working.

Such videos would be absolute gold. I imagine they'd take too much time to make properly, though.

Such videos would be absolute gold. I imagine they'd take too much time to make properly, though.

The videos would be like 1hr long :-( boring as hell and a lot of work. Cos I will need to do overlays with graphics showing..."see the transition..see how this player moves up now"...and everyone has to watch a tiny dot on a screen moving.. I am working on something that should help, but its taking a lot of work to compile.

The videos would be like 1hr long :-( boring as hell and a lot of work. Cos I will need to do overlays with graphics showing..."see the transition..see how this player moves up now"...and everyone has to watch a tiny dot on a screen moving.. I am working on something that should help, but its taking a lot of work to compile.

I like your written work - Just stumbled on your Raumdeuter article again, and I'd like to watch your videos, but do you have any subtitled by chance?

The videos would be like 1hr long :-( boring as hell and a lot of work. Cos I will need to do overlays with graphics showing..."see the transition..see how this player moves up now"...and everyone has to watch a tiny dot on a screen moving..

A lot of work, yes. Boring to watch, not. Well, maybe boring for a passer-by, but not for anyone who's struggling with FM tactics. And that's A LOT of people.

Rash's stuff is quality and if understood can massively help -- problem as with any of the greats is that more oftenly than not people simply copy&paste the formations and roles though which without knowing what to watch for during matches is kind of moot. I'd argue a lot of people are outperforming what an AI man would do with the very same squad without realizing too. A level of understanding and holistic thinking such as rashidi's is like 500% beyond any AI manager, in particular as they still seemingly appear to operate without any kind of context right at the very top. Hence why somebody like Guardiola who as per his traits edited into the db insists on 90 minutes of playing super high lines even when he's repeatedly leaked goals in the same match already to players that are exploiting it regularly, in fact, he's likely to push up even more upon conceding. Likewise the improved counter attacking is great, but when you start out trying to replicate Leicester and have AI top dogs playing that aggressively, sometimes starting out at 0-0 with keeping but one guy covering their attacking corners, Vardy and co. will have a field day. Additionally the shape setting which I personally have never obsessed about, AI managers pick that purely based on their flamboyancy attribute if research guidelines published by some are to be believed [some argue it to be taken out of the game].

Those are imo quite very much football basics. I think the reason can feel trial and error are:

- you don't understand football basics or fail to translate them into the game (due to UI, etc)

- you have problems in reading the ME or overobsess about micro details (positioning stuff is by far the most important thing) -> this is important in particular as no AI really truly is able to "read" much either way

- you think of anything as on/off switches when realistically it's subtler than that

- you have unrealistic expectations in relation to your squad's quality

In some way I can't see anyone going that far off even when still following wwfan's 12 step thing to the exact letter. It's not only a game of tactics, it's also one of better and worse players and squad/man management, and as for the AI some basic in-match decision making rather than hoping for the best that things would turn around / stay that way (often in quite intriguing ways, such as the many instances in two legged ties where in the first leg it completely shuts up shop only to to the exact opposite in the return or vice versa, which can happen even if you're Barcelona...). However the way the ME is programmed, there's meant to be multiple ways of skinning that cat, so for instance if you have that tall forwards, you can try to encourage playing down the wings and peppering the box with crosses if you fail to break down that stubborn box, same as you could try to stretch things with a more technically side, that's the beauty of it or meant to be anyways. Same as a more technically side my try to encourage to recycle possession when clinging onto slender leads vs. a less technical one may clear their bloody lines.

Never ever let yourself get spoiled by some of the crappy downloads winning stuff every time with weak sides. I call them crappy as common football basics don't apply when there's 8 players peppering the OPs box for 90 minutes. It'd be a poor game if you wouldn't ship soft goals at least on occasion and at the moment arguably only happens not often enough as AI managers aren't able to spot such basic things. If they would, they'd simply sit a couple forwards up top who don't track back. Additionally in FM too as in football (Busquets Spain anyone), having players deep are the key of ever feeling in control of a match, else it's totally lottery. As argued, football logics oft don't apply and opposed to FM 2011/2012, where the schtick was making 7 players never running forward which was overly effective due to a couple reasons (ME weakness, AI decision making weakness), it's now gone the Kevin Keegan route of going attackattackattack nomatterwhat. In generally, the less you try to "play the ME" and the less you try to look for the PERFECTTACTICZ for patch x.y, restarting over and over, the more your enjoyment may improve.

In generally, the less you try to "play the ME" and the less you try to look for the PERFECTTACTICZ for patch x.y, restarting over and over, the more your enjoyment may improve.

Common issues:

1. Don't want to spend time watching the game to identify what's going on

2. Don't know what to look for, because when they make a system they pick players or roles without thinking how they play with and without the ball.

3. Don't know how to make a balanced tactic.

People just overcomplicate the game and spend to little time doing the basics right. Like I've been saying for a long time, think things through, that's all it takes.

Reason 4 in rashidi's list would be that when you're watching the match and spot the issues, the range of possible fixes is so vast and you realize there's a giant trial and error wall in front of your so you just give up.

THIS so much (i mean the 2nd quote). There are very many ways to tackle an issue the user has spotted. Though they are not all so effective, and can very well create further issues on their own, there still are so many possible solutions

Where should we look first?

A small example: im playing a match, tactic is control v.fluid 4231(DM) on comprehensive highlights. Front 4 are: IF(a)-AM(s)-IF(s)-AF(a). I spot a worrying pattern where the attacking IF starts cutting inside but the AF has already darted forward so early, that his only good support pass is the AM(s).

I can readily:

a. change him to support. I don't want that because i fear my attack will suffer without him making forward runs

b. change the AF to a DLF role. I'm reluctant to this too, because i imagined him running into channels

c. change the tempo. I've found this can have a huge effect on how a tactic plays. However, i may well be masking the problem in this way

d. lower the team mentality (in a way similar to the previous point)

THIS so much (i mean the 2nd quote). There are very many ways to tackle an issue the user has spotted. Though they are not all so effective, and can very well create further issues on their own, there still are so many possible solutions

Where should we look first?

A small example: im playing a match, tactic is control v.fluid 4231(DM) on comprehensive highlights. Front 4 are: IF(a)-AM(s)-IF(s)-AF(a). I spot a worrying pattern where the attacking IF starts cutting inside but the AF has already darted forward so early, that his only good support pass is the AM(s).

I can readily:

a. change him to support. I don't want that because i fear my attack will suffer without him making forward runs

b. change the AF to a DLF role. I'm reluctant to this too, because i imagined him running into channels

c. change the tempo. I've found this can have a huge effect on how a tactic plays. However, i may well be masking the problem in this way

d. lower the team mentality (in a way similar to the previous point)

With all due respect, your thought process is a bit off. So, you've identified the problem as your passer and runner is out of sync. In order to find a solution to this problem, you first must have a tactical framework in mind, which the information you've given hasn't provided. For example, are you looking to play a more possession based style, so the striker should hold his run? Are you looking for a more direct style, so you want the IF to pass earlier? Your players are not synced, someone has to change.

Now, lets explore some solutions. It is true that much of this will be trial and error. That's just a fact of this game, just as it is a fact of RL football. There is no answer sheet, so you will have to try out tweaks for a run of games to find out.

a. While it is true that attack role is more aggressive, the support IF can make forward runs too. It's quite customisable. Just add the "get further forward" PI. Keep in mind that IF (A) might not be so willing to make though balls even if you give him the PI because he's also trying to make a lot of dribbles.

b. This doesn't make sense at all. Both roles are perfectly capable of "moving into channels" with the PI.

So far, if you were to have a tactical framework, you could eliminate one of them. Either change the IF to support, or even to a wide playmaker role so it feeds the AF, or change the AF to a support role so he holds his runs.

c. Of course tempo has an effect on the whole system. I'm not too sure what you mean by "masking the problem." Tempo is quite important to what you want to see happen though. If you want to feed your AF, it might be better to have a fast-ish tempo, so your striker makes runs earlier, and your passers make those early passes before the opponents get in position.

d. What exactly are you trying to achieve with a lower tempo? Or were you just including it because it's another thing to change, so you feel like you have to consider it?

I honestly feel the tactics just become more and more realistic as time goes on. People just get so bogged down in the fine details. Got to learn to walk before you can run. I think the way FM is now, people who watch a lot of football and have a decent understanding of what’s going on on the pitch, have a better chance of succeeding in FM. You often see a newby completely swamped in problems asking for all kinds of help and the first response is often “How do you want your team to play?”. If you don’t know much about football, how do you know how you want your team to play?

Yes FM has become more complicated, but you can do well with a very simple system with very few instructions – as long as you approach it in a logical balanced way. So much of it is just thinking through the simple stuff. When my team has the ball, who will move up the field and who will stay back? Where will the space be? Do I have too many players trying to attack the same area of the field? Will I leave big gaps when I attack that will give me problems when I lose possession? If people just slowed down and thought all these things through and read the excellent descriptions of the different player roles etc, I think people would be much more successful. Similarly people make it too complicated when they’re watching a game. “What do I look for? I don’t know all the things Rashidi knows so how am I supposed to know what’s going on?” But again, if you just slow down and watch one or two things only in a game and then change something and watch to see only how that change affects things. And like Cleon always says, make ONE change and watch the game. If you are new and you just made 10 changes, how can you keep track of them all and know what made a difference?

I feel like all these things become more & more important with every release. People CAN figure this stuff out for themselves if they have the patience. Just gotta start simple and work up from there. And people say “plug and play no longer works in 2016”. Silly. If you find a good logical system, it can be successful forever. Yes you may do even better by continually tweaking it, but it’s not necessary to be successful.