Tactics: A Less is More Perspective.

How many players of Football Manager think that a successful and well constructed attacking tactic requires a lot of high mentalities, lots of running and shooting, and lots of forward runs? How many football fans in general grow up watching Ronaldinho, Ronaldo, Zidane, Henry and Shearer and think that the key to success is tricky players doing dazzling things?

My personal opinion is that one of the fundamental flaws in the tactical side of Football Manager are inferior tactical concepts in the first place. The tactical sliders and options may be notoriously difficult to translate into easilly understood football concepts, but even a perfect grasp of the sliders and choices is futile in the persuit of success if virtual managers do not have a basic grasp of actual football tactics. One of the common complaints on these forums is a lack of goals, an inability to destroy inferior sides by heavy margins, the inability to breach the defences of lower table clubs, and the spurning of glorious chance after glorious chance. The point here is twofold, firstly this is realistic and secondly the solution to this problem requires thinking beyond the apparently obvious knee jerk conclusion.

In the last decade I have watched the English Premier Division evolve from a battle of physical prowess, desire and gung-ho football to a battle of tactical superiority, concentration and the ruthless exploitation of niaivety. Two seasons in particular highlight the completeness of this evolution. 1999 and 2008. In 1999 Manchester United's Treble was the epitome of free-flowing, creative attacking football combined with the legendary spirit English football is famous for. Without that relentless drive Uniteds tactical niaivety would have seen them undone multiple times throughout the entire season. 2008 was the polar opposite. Alex Ferguson, Arsene Wenger, Jose Mourinho and Rafa Benitez had forced the evolution of the Premiership into a tight, tactical battle of defensive organisation versus overwhelming offensive pressure and solid, hardworking team backbones. In 2008 Manchester United parried and blocked and feinted and counter attacked their way to a League and European Cup double.

This changing tactical face of football is what we are faced with in Football Manager, whether we like it or not. We are faced with 5 man midfields Saturday after Saturday, and then presented with Messi and Kaka and Ronaldhino on a Wednesday. To achieve anything in this game we have to understand the tactical challenges facing us and the tactical solutions to those problems, and then we have to impliment them on match day.

Less is More.

Modern football shows us that less is more. You cannot run past ten men, you cannot expect to score from crosses into a crowded box, you cannot blast the ball from thirty yards past a 4-5-1 with a half decent keeper. You need to create chances but before you can create chances you need to create space, and to create space against a packed defence you need to keep the ball, pass the ball and move around. You need cool heads, calm mentalities and composed instructions. Overly aggressive attacking tactics will be swamped in midfield, tackled down the flanks and subjected to counter-attack after counter-attack.

This translates into Football manager as low mentalities. Low mentalities mean careful possession, they mean balanced positions, they mean calm decisions. In Football manager what is needed is passing and movement with continued possession. Lots of free roles but minimal attacking mentalities and overuse of forward runs. You want players to move around, not rush forward with or without the ball. You want the ball given to your best passers, your best decision makers, and you want everyone else to offer a pass, keep the ball and pass it back. It is about playing football for 90 minutes and making more right decisions than the opponent, so that at the end of the match they have made mistakes and you have exploited those mistakes.

I made the mistake of taking talented attacking teams and going gung-ho for victory. In FM2008 it meant a lot of CR7 wonder runs, Silva curlers or Fernandez placers, but it also meant permenant exile for my strikers, poor possesion, and football that was obviously gamey and unrealistic. In FM2009 it means missed chances, offsides galore, leftbacks at Centreforward and a midfield playing 90 minutes of football with the central defence.

The match engine this time around is superior in every way to 2008, ofcourse not unbugged. Satisfaction requires an understanding of tactics in principle. FM2009 demands that a manager plays good football, not gung-ho football.

I do play the passing game of football,and it is quite sucessful.Teams try to not to let me play by playing 4-4-1-1,but i am always stick tight to that attacking midfeilder,so they carn't play.

It does generally work because i am always over that curtin team,and not that often i lose.

well said dude.

i personally noticed that the use of more mixed forward runs is likely to bring more success now, why? because it helps your team play football; moving the ball around and trying to find space for the killer pass.

"You cannot run past ten men, you cannot expect to score from crosses into a crowded box, you cannot blast the ball from thirty yards past a 4-5-1 with a half decent keeper."

And we don't expect it m8, but sadly this is what the AI does from time to time...

There are very serious problems here...

Again, I'm Man United, completely battered newcastle, 2-0 to me, and guess what? They have 2 corners the entire match and score 2 from that...

Nevermind I have only conceded 1 or 2 goals from corners the entire season

It's a joke, sorry m8

so your losing goals from set pieces, so

where did they aim the ball ie 6 yard box, penalty area etc.

did you have a man in that area

You're really unlucky to concede two goals, both from set peices. But well, as far as I've noticed, this happens VERY RARELY. Just because it happened in one game, doesn't mean you need to whine about it. Think about how FC Bayern must've felt after that '99 final..

Great, well thought out post by the OP. Would love to hear more commentary from the community on what he wrote.

Lots of free roles but minimal attacking mentalities and overuse of forward runs. You want players to move around, not rush forward with or without the ball.

That's one concept that I haven't seen written much on the forums. That idea sits well in my head and look forward to trying out that approach in the game. My tactics always seem so disjointed and without consistent play (from the tactic, not the players).

How low mentalities are we talking here? under 10? global?

SFraser - Lot's of good theory and practical real-life examples, but isn't it always a problem trying to emulate real-life tactics into any of the FM games? I know that you've managed Man Utd quite often from previous posts and I'm sure that you as well as I, try to emulate what you see the real Man Utd do, with your virtual Man Utd.

No matter how close I feel I've got within the game to doing just that, it's still never quite the same, regardless of the fact that I feel I've a very strong understanding of the tactical aspects of both real football and the virtual FM world. Interestingly, I've tried a similar perspective with Man Utd in FM to that you describe with the lower mentality "less is more" approach. What I witnessed in the match engine was pure football poetry in motion, but unfortunately not as clinical as I would have hoped. On the opposite end of the scale, the higher mentality approach I'm currently using isn't as attractive to watch perhaps, but certainly is more clinical.

I think to some extent it depends a lot on the quality of the opponents your facing in FM. By that I mean both the team reputation and the players. If you know you're facing a weaker opponent, I think it's fair to say that you can use a higher overall mentality approach with a higher defensive line and keep constant pressure on your opponent. Obviously against very strong teams with great players, you can often be caught out, on the break especially. That's perhaps where a lower overall mentality and patient approach can be more beneficial.

That said though, the biggest problem is that no matter how good FM is and continues to develop, it's never likely to emulate exactly what happens in the real game, much as we might think it does statistically.

Another excellent post though SFraser and definately food for thought.

Lots of free roles but minimal attacking mentalities and overuse of forward runs. You want players to move around, not rush forward with or without the ball.

Very very interesting peice. I too have been finding results from turning things 'off' rather than making my players do more.

I am a little confused by the quote above. Do you mean you should have lots of 'forward runs' or do you mean you shouldn't?

I am trying some of your theory out right now.

I have chosen global mentalities and most playing instructions are on mixed.

A question for you too, if you are having lots of 'forward runs', would you also be looking for lots of 'through balls'? The reason I ask is that there is no better sure fire way of losing possession than lots of players on TTB's!!!

LAM

I am a little confused by the quote above. Do you mean you should have lots of 'forward runs' or do you mean you shouldn't?

He means "shouldn't".

I do agree with that completely. Just see how many tactics uses both wingers and fullbacks with FWRs and how those two players duplicate each other. Also, while not using FWRs, there is much more space upfront and I have been more succesfull with having no often FWRs at all lately.

Problem with this is that there are hundreds of successful teams all over the world, in every league, that play differently and make their different styles of play work. If The Secret to Football was limited to one way, whichever way, we would've found it in the 1900s.

I'm not for one way over another, but I do take exception to crowning one particular way of approaching the game as "the way", when in reality it mostly depends on the kind of players you have and the kind of football they're able and comfortable to play.

That's real life. FM is a different beast altogether. Success in FM comes down to the temperature of the ice cream in your fridge, the colour of your bus driver's underwear, which celestial house Jupiter is in at the moment of kick off or another random element that shouldn't influence things so much but apparently does.

That's real life. FM is a different beast altogether. Success in FM comes down to the temperature of the ice cream in your fridge, the colour of your bus driver's underwear, which celestial house Jupiter is in at the moment of kick off or another random element that shouldn't influence things so much but apparently does.

-3 degrees

she wears pink 8O)

Saturn

and this seems to be working

she wears pink? you looked?

Very good post again SFraser.

Man Utd top of the league, gameplay? pace, forward runs, fast, direct, attacking

Barcelona top of la liga, gameplay? quick 1 2s, very attacking mentalities

Hell even liverpool are all about attacking with pace from the get go.

Arsenal played the kind of football you described in first post at the start of the season and they turned out poor. We then buy arshavin start picking out forward runners and attacking moree and you get the real arsenal again

If you could back this theory up with some empirical evidence and guidelines for implementation, it would probably be a lot more enlightening and informative. However, as it stands, it sounds plausible but, simultaneously, potentially fallacious.

I am having good success with this theory. The passing is great to watch. I am unbeaten in 7 games now, having just held Arsenal to a draw away.

Needless to say, its tight defensively but attacking does have problems. What amazes me still though is the amount of offsides I still get. Which actualy makes you think its nothing about settings and perhaps more about your players abilities!!

For the last 7 games I have set up with global mentality of lowest normal and passing of highest short. I adjust the DLine dependant upon opposition.

I have FWR mixed on all players except DC's and MCD. Most other instructions are also mixed too.

I am being to experiment with mentalities alittle. I now have my DC's on highest Defence, Supporting players on lowest Normal (one click higher) and then attacking players on another 1 click higher.

I am also experiencing better attacking play if you utilise a more attacking formation. For instance, I play a flat 442 normaly and during my current game I have moved the M L/R to AML/R roles and am finding that the attacking play is much strong without sacrificing to much defensively.

Unless I am misreading this post, I dont think its about BEING defensive, its more about playing a slow and calculated game with low risk. Hence the reason that I did NOT take a defensive mentality.

If anyone is interested, ill post back next few results.

LAM

Unless I am misreading this post, I dont think its about BEING defensive, its more about playing a slow and calculated game with low risk. Hence the reason that I did NOT take a defensive mentality.

Yes that is correct. By "Less is More" what I mean is that you are in essence allowing your players to play with more or less complete freedom of decision making where your emphasis is on general mentality, tempo and the style of pressing game you wish to employ. It is not necessarilly an offensive or defensive system, it is ultimately a system of giving trust and responsibility to your players rather than taking it from them, while controlling the general framework of their playstyle.

This system is unarguably premised upon having the players that can be trusted to make better decisions in an event by event basis than your instructions would produce, but it is one of my principles in FM that quality players can and will do this if left to their own devices in terms of instructions and influenced through mentality and tempo.

It is without a doubt a team system of individual player decision making and capability, and that makes mentality the key instruction. FWR Mixed does not halt Forward Runs, it produces Forward Runs dependant upon player determined risk/reward which is influenced by mentality, rather than demanding FWR at regular stages of play irrespective of risk/reward. It is the same with all instructions. When set to mixed then mentality and player decision making will determine when and if a player runs forward, looks for a through ball, dribbles past a defender etc. It is very much a team system that is influenced by mentality. If you have superior players you can afford much higher mentalities, and my Manchester United squad takes to the field in 8 games out of 10 with a midfield four and fullback mentality of the first notch of attacking.

What I mean by low mentalities in my first post is not mentalities <10 but an absence of extremes so that at all times the manager is an influence, the tactics are an influence, but neither are over-riding requirements for a player to depart from his own capabilities and consideration of the choices at hand. With quality players and mentalities of first notch of attacking you will produce an extremely direct system for the kind of football you are playing. Fast, attacking favoured options with plenty of aggressive but considered runners looking to favour attack ahead of possession.

Above all though this "Less is More" idea is a starting position for the understanding of a team as a team, and the baseline for letting your team play to their own abilities and decision making. I myself have deviated from it to a degree by increasing the preference of attacking options over possession options even further than mentality, by setting the majority of my team to TTB Often and RWB Often. I completely stick to my premise of unenforced, player determined attacking movement because with my mentalities I have no shortage of forward options, but now each player in my midfield and at fullback looks for an attacking pass or an attacking run with the ball each time he receives possession. It is an immeasurably more direct system of action that is reigned in by high but not excessive mentalities and a neutral passing and FWR system, and this increased direct approach works because my players have an abundance of quality movement, passing, pace and dribbling ability. I found that my previous system produced alot of passing and movement when my players had the capability to make aggressive dribbles and passes, whereas the length and target of passes and the quantity and timing of runs was ideal.

I would be interested in hearing results from this definitely. I also feel i have a good grasp of how the tactics work but on fm09 i can not seem to get anything with good results and decent football so am therefore very interetsed in how this works out prior to having a test myself.

Strangely enough, this is more or less also my approach these days...

I only ever use one tactic now, its a role theory 4411 with the 'balanced' framework, I.E defensive is 8, etc. this is used both home AND away with simply the tempo, width and DL tweaked to go either more or less attacking. I never use the atttacking framework of mentalities even playing at home.

Why? I don't have a problem scoring goals with the standard settup, my home record is something like 28 for and 4 against in 11 unbeaten home games. Thats without attacking mentalities. It might not seem like a lot to some people but I'm happy with it. I'd rather have a watertight defence.

There is one difference I make playing away however, after reading some old posts of Rahidi's from 08, I remove forward runs from fullbacks altogether (default is 'mixed'). After having a poor record away I'm not conceding half the away goals I did before while still scoring my share. I'd never have my FB's on often FWR anymore, its just asking for trouble.

I'm convinced the FB position is the key to keeping a clean sheet.

another brilliant post by SFraser, I will comment in more depth later,

and now is later:

I think one of the underlying causes of this is slider-ambiguity. Here is what I believe to be the definitions used in FM.

Mentality - The player's willingness to try something which might not come-off

Creative Freedom - The player's willingness to ignore your instructions

Tempo - The pace at which players are asked to play the ball

Your instructions such that come under rarely-mixed-often, are what you want the player to try first. His first thought should be to try what you've set as often, he will try these even if they aren't neccessarily the right thing to do. Mixed, he will do these things when he thinks it's a good idea and will support the play. Rarely means he should avoid doing these things. As said above, the chance of him ignoring your choices in these sliders is governed by his creative freedom (and PPMs). Mentality then governs the risk/reward ratio he'll use when applying the mixed instructions. Ie, if the option is dangerous, but has a slight chance of being beneficial, he'll try it only when his mentality is high enough. If the option is almost definitely going to bring about a the required result, he'll do this even if his mentality is low.

I hope this makes sense, and I hope it has added to SFraser's (very useful and interesting) thread, and not taken it off track, as this is not a rant against sliders, but merely an educational "off-topic" my brain went on when reading the above.

I have continued with this style of play. I did however, take a very low normal mentality and have even lowered it to defenisve now across the board. I wanted to create a counter attacking game without the counter attack ticked. In order to acheive this I have had to set FWR's to often.

I am testing it now and it seems to work well. I get possession of 60%+ and passing of around 80%+ and i do score goals....admititadly, not many, but I have not lost with it yet.

I really like the pricipal and I think in some ways, my thread (link in my name) and your work together. Mine was all about going back to basics, back to a system that works and building from there.

It is amazing how much one adjustment can make. For example: I am playing with a flat 442. I have an MCS with FRW rare. All his other PI's are on rare, apart from RWB, which is on mixed. Now, bear in mind he has a high defesnive mentality, he is still constantly in the opposition box because if there is not a pass on he will RWB..... my point is...... he does it alot.

I posted earlier in this thread about how many times my forwards are offside despite FWR mixed with very low mentalities, which I also think goes a long way to proving your comments. I think is alot about the players abilities and I think all to often we kill them. Even in my 'use the defaults post', the first thing I did was to remove the extreams of making players do which they can not. I beleive you have taken it one step further and have given then some freedom.

I particularly liked the free roles idea. In my 442 I have 4/5 of them.

LAM

Maybe lam and SFraser should combine and make a KISS Guide to FM Management.

You both have some real good ideas that have come in handy for a guy like me who's in over his head.

SFraser - Just out of interest, as I'm actually having a closer look at this myself with Man Utd (started a new save), do you have your central defenders set to "mixed" forward runs, rather than "rarely"? Also, with regards to global passing and tempo, am I correct in assuming that you're also using "mixed" as a starting point?

Previously and as I've always been comfortable tinkering with multiple individual settings, overall what you have suggested has intreagued me. Usually with every version of the game, I've had at least one Man Utd save on the go at some point. I've always enjoyed more the challenge of trying to emulate the current real-life style of Man Utd, perhaps moreso than the actuall game challenge, because in all fairness you can pretty easily win most competitions with any decent tactical approach and the quality of players they have available. So it's not just a matter of what I win with Man Utd, but how I win and how the team plays.

Finally with regards to the "mixed" global mentalities and the additional impact you can have as manager during matches, I must say I agree with this. With most teams I like to adopt a "mixed" passing and tempo approach because I feel I can more easily and more directly influence things based upon my own observations and since FM09, those of the assistant manager when he makes comments regarding passing and tempo.

A personal preference of mine though, that's quite often overlooked when I take a peek at what other tacticians on the forums are doing is settings for the goalkeeper. Although I'll often keep most of the settings in line with the rest of the team globally, I do tend to prefer the "Defender Collect" instruction aimed at the best of my full-backs, along with the lowest notch of passing. Basically it's my instruction to reflect my preference for him not to punt the ball up the field and help instigate the building of moves from the back. I find this especially useful at avoiding head-tennis in the middle of the pitch from those long punts upfield, especially if the aerial ability of my midfield isn't very good compared to my opponents.

A personal preference of mine though, that's quite often overlooked when I take a peek at what other tacticians on the forums are doing is settings for the goalkeeper. Although I'll often keep most of the settings in line with the rest of the team globally, I do tend to prefer the "Defender Collect" instruction aimed at the best of my full-backs, along with the lowest notch of passing. Basically it's my instruction to reflect my preference for him not to punt the ball up the field and help instigate the building of moves from the back. I find this especially useful at avoiding head-tennis in the middle of the pitch from those long punts upfield, especially if the aerial ability of my midfield isn't very good compared to my opponents.

Agree entirely with this. I find that no matter how good their throwing or kicking they are nearly always the worst player in my team for giving possession away.

I generally go for defender collect and distribute to my WBL or WBR depending on who is playing.

One thing that I do find and perhaps others have opinions on it...... the keeper is the most sensative player on the pitch to timewasting. With a low setting he is passing it out before the box has been clear, this coupled with my distribution style makes for dangerous play. I have made amendments ..... obviously 8o)

Dawson - Once I get settled with this new style it will invariably end up using my other guide to..... it lends itself very well to it as its globaly set. Having said that though. I have been playing a short passing game on large pitches and doing very well with it.

LAM

LAM

One thing that I do find and perhaps others have opinions on it...... the keeper is the most sensative player on the pitch to timewasting. With a low setting he is passing it out before the box has been clear, this coupled with my distribution style makes for dangerous play. I have made amendments ..... obviously 8o)

That's actually a very good observation and one I've possibly overlooked, but have yet to be punished for. I've made a mental note to keep a closer eye on it. As my own timewasting setting is very low (only 2 clicks from the left), out of interest, what "standard" timewasting setting do you use yourself?

I normaly go for middle low..... so 5/6 clicks. I am currently running with 3/4 as I am trying to create a counter attacking tactic without the box ticked.

Its interesting as they do break quick and if the break dries up they then tend to revert to my tempo/passing play which is slow and short. So..... technicaly its starting to work, but it needs alot of work and also.... as i mentioned in my other post.... the team is still gelling so its kind of hard to judge results to much.

LAM

*EDIT* by the way, when I said it makes for dangerous play, I meant for myself not against the opposition. He is passing to the WB before the WB or the opposition have left the box. Which results in immediate closeure of the WB and then a pass back and then a hoof upfield or a goal for them!!!!

Did anyone notice that the stat that shows up for mentality when you are adjusting invidual settings is DECISIONS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I am sure Fraser spotted it ;o)

*EDIT* by the way, when I said it makes for dangerous play, I meant for myself not against the opposition. He is passing to the WB before the WB or the opposition have left the box. Which results in immediate closeure of the WB and then a pass back and then a hoof upfield or a goal for them!!!!

Yup, I gathered that. Could potentially be dangerous, but where's the fun in life if you don't take a few risks eh

lam, can you post your filters please...?!?!

thanks alot.......

My GK is set to the same passing to my CBs, but with a quick throw distribution, no specific target, then that way he's sensible about it.

Experimented with low mentalities last night (my usual team average is 10-12) and didn't have much success, was scraping wins, and only after I adjusted back to my original ones. Also experimented with lots of free roles, which didn't seem to produce as good looking football as I am used to with my tactic. Although I did notice that I could, as you said, afford to have a more daring formation without being weak defensively.

lam, can you post your filters please...?!?!

thanks alot.......

Filters? wrong post? If you mean the player attribute filters, I think I am still waiting for someone to recomend a non subscrition file sharing site.

Ill check the other post.

If its not the player filters then can I ask which ones you mean then?

Cheers

#

LAM

Filters? wrong post? If you mean the player attribute filters, I think I am still waiting for someone to recomend a non subscrition file sharing site.

Ill check the other post.

If its not the player filters then can I ask which ones you mean then?

Cheers

#

LAM

try this: http://www.filefactory.com

or this: http://myfreefilehosting.com

Cheers, I found one, but i think it has limited downloads. I have put it in the relevant post. Its somewhere near the top now as I jst posted it.

LAM

Your instructions such that come under rarely-mixed-often, are what you want the player to try first. His first thought should be to try what you've set as often, he will try these even if they aren't neccessarily the right thing to do. Mixed, he will do these things when he thinks it's a good idea and will support the play. Rarely means he should avoid doing these things. As said above, the chance of him ignoring your choices in these sliders is governed by his creative freedom (and PPMs). Mentality then governs the risk/reward ratio he'll use when applying the mixed instructions. Ie, if the option is dangerous, but has a slight chance of being beneficial, he'll try it only when his mentality is high enough. If the option is almost definitely going to bring about a the required result, he'll do this even if his mentality is low.

It is amazing how much one adjustment can make. For example: I am playing with a flat 442. I have an MCS with FRW rare. All his other PI's are on rare, apart from RWB, which is on mixed. Now, bear in mind he has a high defesnive mentality, he is still constantly in the opposition box because if there is not a pass on he will RWB..... my point is...... he does it alot.

Spot on guys. Neutral PI's mean precisely a balanced style of play where all attacking move options are equal in terms of tactical enforcement, and I believe are weighed against possession options via mentality and the players own ability to read the game around him. Neutral mentality will take this a stage further and leave the emphasis on attacking or defensive options nil. By making subtle changes to instructions or mentality you influence the entire approach to the game by an individual player or team, artificially favouring decisions and actions that the player may not choose himself if left to his own devices.

Did anyone notice that the stat that shows up for mentality when you are adjusting invidual settings is DECISIONS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I am sure Fraser spotted it ;o)

Exactly. That is pretty much what all tactical options influence, a players own decision making. Or rather tactical options start to remove certain decisions from the players own means of choosing, and artificially reinforce certain choices at certain stages of the game. High and low decision making is one of the most vital attributes to consider when deciding to alter player instructions, and clearly "Less is More" works best with good decision makers.

I really like the pricipal and I think in some ways, my thread (link in my name) and your work together. Mine was all about going back to basics, back to a system that works and building from there.

I posted earlier in this thread about how many times my forwards are offside despite FWR mixed with very low mentalities, which I also think goes a long way to proving your comments. I think is alot about the players abilities and I think all to often we kill them. Even in my 'use the defaults post', the first thing I did was to remove the extreams of making players do which they can not. I beleive you have taken it one step further and have given then some freedom.

I particularly liked the free roles idea. In my 442 I have 4/5 of them.

I am a huge fan of Free Roles as well as trying to allow talented players to play their natural game and setting up a slight and subtle system to get them working together without too much interference. Free Roles in conjuction with a high free role rating and superb off-the-ball movement ratings etc. result in some particularly appealing and destructive flowing football. I find that the more you artificially favour certain moves and choices for quality players, the more you reduce their options, and if there is one principle underlying this thread it is allowing quality players to do what they wish so long as they have the mental capabilities to make the right decisions.

Take for example Wayne Rooney. It is not possible for the manager to improve his offensive movement and teamplay by telling Rooney to make lots of FWR or less FWR or RWB or HUB, but you can give him a Free Role, reduce his creative freedom and his mentality to neutral and tell him not to shoot from range.

SFraser - Just out of interest, as I'm actually having a closer look at this myself with Man Utd (started a new save), do you have your central defenders set to "mixed" forward runs, rather than "rarely"? Also, with regards to global passing and tempo, am I correct in assuming that you're also using "mixed" as a starting point?

My Centre Backs are a completely different story and indeed the defensive system of my team is entireally contrary in principle to my offensive system. Whereas my possession and attacking system is all about freedom of decision making, plenty of movement and subtle emphasis on attacking or possession, my defensive system is all about strict but staggered denial of space and time for the opponent in conjuction with a D-Line leader that operates as both sweeper and off-side trap controller. I find that the game is extremely rewarding in replicating the apparent dichotomy of creative offence and highly organised defence within the same tactical system.

With passing I choose mixed for the majority of my team, leaving the goalkeeper in my most inferior ball users to specific instructions on a game by game basis. Tempo is almost always high, as I expect to outplay the opposition and try not to deny options to my players. The more options a player has, the more likely he is to maintain possession in a high tempo game. I find that tempo is one of the key instructions for defeating an opponent, and in games against high quality opposition I use a tempo strategy of playing slightly slower football with an emphasis on possession to begin with in order to conserve condition while making the opposition chase the ball, and I then switch to an extremely high tempo for the last 30 minutes of the game to attempt to destroy their perhaps tiring defence.

Previously and as I've always been comfortable tinkering with multiple individual settings, overall what you have suggested has intreagued me. Usually with every version of the game, I've had at least one Man Utd save on the go at some point. I've always enjoyed more the challenge of trying to emulate the current real-life style of Man Utd, perhaps moreso than the actuall game challenge, because in all fairness you can pretty easily win most competitions with any decent tactical approach and the quality of players they have available. So it's not just a matter of what I win with Man Utd, but how I win and how the team plays.

I completely understand this approach. I enjoy watching the football my team plays in full match replays, and perhaps the most enjoyment I derive from FM09 is not so much the trophies and titles but watching my players play, observing youngsters like John Fleck slotting into my team and playing awsome creative football of amazing movement, passing and technical ability. John Fleck and Wayne Rooney playing in the same side is a recipe for awsome football.

A personal preference of mine though, that's quite often overlooked when I take a peek at what other tacticians on the forums are doing is settings for the goalkeeper. Although I'll often keep most of the settings in line with the rest of the team globally, I do tend to prefer the "Defender Collect" instruction aimed at the best of my full-backs, along with the lowest notch of passing. Basically it's my instruction to reflect my preference for him not to punt the ball up the field and help instigate the building of moves from the back. I find this especially useful at avoiding head-tennis in the middle of the pitch from those long punts upfield, especially if the aerial ability of my midfield isn't very good compared to my opponents.

Yeah that is definately a must in this game for a team trying to keep and use the ball.

My Centre Backs are a completely different story and indeed the defensive system of my team is entireally contrary in principle to my offensive system. Whereas my possession and attacking system is all about freedom of decision making, plenty of movement and subtle emphasis on attacking or possession, my defensive system is all about strict but staggered denial of space and time for the opponent in conjuction with a D-Line leader that operates as both sweeper and off-side trap controller. I find that the game is extremely rewarding in replicating the apparent dichotomy of creative offence and highly organised defence within the same tactical system.

Again, some very interesting points. I have played a couple of games now with a defence, normal and attacking setup. To keep it simple, I had globals mentalities set at - Defensive, normal and attack (oddly enough). The normal one is working the best.

I am interested to learn more about your defensive setup. I take it with the above comments you do not play a 442 as it does not have a sweeper. Can you tell us how you set up, but more importantly, why?

Also... in reference to my own thread, can I ask, do you adjust your passing style, width and tempo based on pitch sizes or on what the assistant managers feedback is?

Cheers

LAM

I must say I'm very ingrigued by your mention of your defensive set-up,

I am pleased that people are advocating global or nearly global systems, I have always refused to believe that you need to stick to a rule when assigning mentalities, as I quite often have an assymetric set-up, with one more defensive fullback than the other, and one more creative winger than the other. I mean what are the chances of you having identical players on each flank?

Another quandry I've had recently his the interaction between width and passing. I want to play a low-medium passing game, as it encourages (not restrains them to) a short passing game, but allows them the freedom to hit a long pass when they feel it would work. However, when I increased my width setting recently, I found too often a my players on the other flank to where the play was at the time, were left standing still, unmarked, but unconsidered by the players on the ball. It obviously isn't a creativity issue, as the players were often some of my most creativ players. However when trying to counter this by increasing passing, I found short passes being ignored too often. It seems difficult to get a balance. I do tend to have my wide players with slightly longer passing than all but my "playmaking" players. Should I have my width lower, but with my wide players on free-rolls to utilise the space?

EDIT: seems a similar question to LAM

I read somewhere. Cant recall where though. That you should set up narrow on a wide pitch and wide on a narrow pitch.

The narrow on a wide keeps you tight and allows your wingers to move into space.

Wide on a narrow keeps your players further apart and allows them to run down the wing,

Though.... not sure if either of those things help you.

LAM

I read somewhere. Cant recall where though. That you should set up narrow on a wide pitch and wide on a narrow pitch.

The narrow on a wide keeps you tight and allows your wingers to move into space.

Wide on a narrow keeps your players further apart and allows them to run down the wing,

Though.... not sure if either of those things help you.

LAM

may be worth a try, theory fits, so i'll give it a go, thanks

Your instructions such that come under rarely-mixed-often, are what you want the player to try first. His first thought should be to try what you've set as often, he will try these even if they aren't neccessarily the right thing to do. Mixed, he will do these things when he thinks it's a good idea and will support the play. Rarely means he should avoid doing these things. As said above, the chance of him ignoring your choices in these sliders is governed by his creative freedom (and PPMs). Mentality then governs the risk/reward ratio he'll use when applying the mixed instructions. Ie, if the option is dangerous, but has a slight chance of being beneficial, he'll try it only when his mentality is high enough. If the option is almost definitely going to bring about a the required result, he'll do this even if his mentality is low.

Ham,

Can I ask how you came about this information? Its very interesting. I am wondering if you are basing it on fact or assumption or testing?

It certainly makes sense, its just that I had never really view it this way........ ah the power of forums.

With your permission I will paste this into my own thread as I have already linked to this thread- permission?

LAM

Guys, here's what I'm thinking. Tell me if I'm wrong here.

I have closely followed the WM thread and have implemented it in a few short trials with varying success. I am so intrigued by this formation, I just can't let it go until I can make it work for me, but I was getting worried it was all a bit too complicated for a newbie struggler like me.

Now, in case you're not familiar, what the WM gives me is basically a squad for attack and defense with five men each. The two squads link through the midfield box (Magic Square). After reading this and LAM's back to basics thread I want to see if I can plug these ideas into the WM framework.

My thoughts at this stage are to employ the global simplicity SFraser advocates in the W (the attack). I would give the defensive unit more tailored and strict instructions to both maintain defensive integrity and ensure the midfield link is intact. The goalie would have his own set of instructions in accordance with his unique needs.

This would give me a base tactic that can be tailored based on individuals' strengths and weaknesses relative to each other and for the team's overall talent level vs. its competition. I wouldn't need a defensive set, attacking, etc, as the WM's inherent balance and SFRaser's so-called "dichotomy" structure allow for the team to be effective in attack or defense based on what the game situation dictates.

Am I at least on the right track here? Could it work?

Also, SFraser, I would be very interested to read more specifics about how you have your defense set up.

Ham,

Can I ask how you came about this information? Its very interesting. I am wondering if you are basing it on fact or assumption or testing?

It certainly makes sense, its just that I had never really view it this way........ ah the power of forums.

With your permission I will paste this into my own thread as I have already linked to this thread- permission?

LAM

I don't think there are any facts where fm is concerned! It's partly come from practice, but mostly what I have read in a thread in which both wwfan and paulc were posting about the sliders and how no-one understands what they mean, combined with the clarity of thought provided by SFraser in here!. I re-interpreted what they said and explained it in a way that makes sense in my head (the strange place that it is), and that works from my own experience (I wouldn't call it testing as such, as I am just playing the game and trying things out). Obviously it may not be correct, but as I say, it seems to work, and it fits with what SFraser proposes in the "less is more" philosophy.

Permission granted by all means, just add a disclaimer that covers me if I'm found to be spouting rubbish, I cannot be held responsible... etc

Seriously though, it's simply a method of thinking about the sliders which I have recently put together to aid my own understanding, if it helps others then I'm chuffed

Again, some very interesting points. I have played a couple of games now with a defence, normal and attacking setup. To keep it simple, I had globals mentalities set at - Defensive, normal and attack (oddly enough). The normal one is working the best.

I am pleased that people are advocating global or nearly global systems, I have always refused to believe that you need to stick to a rule when assigning mentalities, as I quite often have an assymetric set-up, with one more defensive fullback than the other, and one more creative winger than the other. I mean what are the chances of you having identical players on each flank?

I don't particularly advocate a completely global mentality system, and don't use a completely global system myself. Infact mentality is the setting that I myself tweak most often, alongside closing down and the D-Line position. I find that in particular the mentality of my strikers and playmaker are crucial to the wider performance of my team, or perhaps most easiest to derive large scale improvements from through changes. I use a global system for 5 of my 11 players, my two fullbacks, two wingers and more defensively minded CM. My Centreback mentalities follow their own system but stick within 3-4 notches of my global system. For my strikers I adapt their mentalities according to their success in keeping involved in teamplay as well as creating chances. They either play equal to my global system or I reduce their mentalities to encourage greater link up play. What I don't change is their instructions, like RWB etc.

My CM playmaker, who is Wayne Rooney, is by far the most aggressively setup mentality in my side and plays 9 out of 10 matches on the first notch of attacking or higher. Other than mentality and CD his instructions do not vary either. What I have then is ultimately a Central Defensive partnership operating on its own level but within a certain range of the team. I then have a relatively global system for fullbacks, CM, and wingers so that half my outfield side operates on the same wavelength. I then have my striker partnership that is either equal to my global system and playing as an Apex, or I reduce their mentalities as play them as twin link up forwards. Finally I have my Free Role playmaker with the highest mentality in the team in CM, ensuring he plays central and is looked for whenever we have the ball, and plays aggressively (but not outrageously) whenever he gets the ball.

I am interested to learn more about your defensive setup. I take it with the above comments you do not play a 442 as it does not have a sweeper. Can you tell us how you set up, but more importantly, why?

I do play with a 4-4-2 system with a flat back four on the formation screen but it operates far more like a diamond system in terms of closing down. I am sure you have seen examples of a midfield four where one guy closes down like mad while the other holds a central position infront of the defence. It is exactly the same with my back four with one centreback closing down quickly and the other moving to a central position to cover space, while controlling the off-side trap. With my fullbacks involved they close down slightly less aggressively and essentially provide a three man screen infront of my sweeper, or a 3 man screen behind my aggressive ball winner. The sweepers job is to keep a central position, deny angles and cover space while the rest of my defence does the job of winning the ball and getting into position. You need a pacey and intelligent sweeper for this, but the system allows you to push up high on the pitch and use 3 defenders in support of the midfield to close down space and win the ball, or alternatively you can sit deep and have a back 3 covering the flanks and the centre with a sweeper behind them sweeping up through balls. Add to this an off-side trap, a clever sweeper and two central midfielders with 18+ teamwork working as a pair in front of the defence, and it is a potent defensive system.

You need to custom design the mentalities and closing down of both centre-backs and tie them into the rest of the team for it to work effectively, and it is unlikely to work if you don't have the right sweeper. In my case Ferdinand.

One other point is that I have long struggled to find a central midfield partnership where one would close down and the other would deny angles, and then they would swap as the ball shifted position. It would appear that the fundamental attribute for this kind of behaviour is a very high teamwork rating. I put a CM with 19 Teamwork next to Rooney in CM with them both at the same mentality and same CD and they operated exactly like a single two man unit, moving up and down the pitch in complete unison with almost the exact same distance between them the entire time. As one closed down the ball the other would get between ball carrier and central attacking options. It was the first time I had seen this functioning in 3 seasons.

so what are people saying - that in a lot of instances it is better for say a winger or a playmaker (free role behind the striker) to be set to mixed RWB and forward runs? So that they can decide when an attacking opportunity is clear?

Fieldsy - subject to their decision making capabilities. If its low, you may infact be better off telling them what to do or more importantly, what NOT to do.

SFraser - Your use of the sweeper in a 442 is very interesting. I play with SPurs and I beleive Woodgate could play that role, so I think I'll give it a test.

I shall see for myself shortly, but would I be right in saying that essentially you are creating a defence of 3-2 ie 1 DC, 2 WBs then the advanced DC and 1 DM. If this is the case it would be usefull for the WB's to have decent jumping and heading.

It sounds like you play with DL/R rather than WB's.

When I play an attacking 442 I re-create this although slightly differently. My WB's rampage forward and my MCD or DM (depends on flat or diamon) will be on FWR rare and will often create a flat 3xDC back three.

So.... just to clafiy you play a global mentality for WBx2, Wingx2 and MCD? and the remainder are individual.

Out of interest, doesnt this make your Wings a little defensive or maybe not enough attacking or is this where you DO override your mixed PI's thoughts and give them forward runs?

Last note before I head off to the pub for the big'un (early, yes).

my most recent mentality has three tiers

12 ST, ST, ML, MR, CM

9 DL, DR, CM

6 CB, CB, GK

Closing down is global besides any player with low stamina and fitness (berbatov/laurito) who get two less than the global

Creative freedom is entirely individualised

I am not happy with my defensive play yet, but i am scoring loads of beautiful goals from all over the place at the moment, so it's not a major concern.

one thing I wanted to ask was this..

In FM08 I created a 4-2-3-1 tactic that produced wonderful football and good defence (I was spurs). It centred around the following

GK on mentality of 5

CD on mentality of 6

Full backs, both CM on team mentality (depending on who I was playing this would go between attack, balanced or defend)

Wingers on mentality of 14/15

AMC on 18

Striker on 18

My question is this - I have read that the match engine for FM09 has changed and there is a need for mentality settings to be linked with each player. Does this mean that this system of above would not generally work with Spurs in FM09 and there is a need to have each mentality linked or to use global settings for everyone?

Fielsdy,

In response to both your points as I missed your earlier one.

I think you might struggle if you want to play with just one tactic. In my opinion, you will need to tweak that when judging your opposition. What FM09 has done is eleminate the bugged tactics, ie the ones that you can play against anyone and anywhere. Now, you could argue that with the best team in the world you can do that..... and I would agree..... but lets be fair, we all wouldnt be on here if we had the best team in the world playing the way we wanted.

You might get away with not changing PI's (as indicated here by SFraser), but you will almost certainly need to change Defenece Line, Width, passing as there are so many factors that force these isses.

Take my earlier comment to Ham re width. Can you imagine the gaps in your team you would create by playing a really wide setting on a short and wide pitch?

In relation to your second post. I am NO expert on this game, but I beleive you would have problems with those mentality settings as they are just to far apart. If you are also trying to implement this (SFraser's) thread then you can see how gungho your strikers would be. Simply put your AMC and striker would play without the rest of the team. Its those sort of settings that produce the relentless complaints of 'I have to many long shots', 'My strikers cant score'. If you check, almost all the advice given to these people is to ease back on mentality.

LAM