Tactical Theorems and Frameworks '07

[supersaint]

Originally posted by lameris:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by supersaint:

So for me some things seems clear:

<UL TYPE=SQUARE>

<LI> D-L is definately linked to mentality (as stated in the manual)

<LI> Passing is partially linked to mentality(as stated in the manual)

<LI> Closing down should be set according to the D-L(either by having same value, or mirroring it - depends on how you want your team to play and the ability of your players

If passing is linked with menality (i.e. attacking means short passing), and with width (i.e. short passing means narrower) this means that an attacking style should be narrower.

This contradicts with my opinion, which I try to base on how football is played IRL, that an attacking style should be wider. Has anyone thought about this? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Actually I do agree with you, because like you say IRL I would prefer a wide play when playing short.

According to the manual its a more direct passing game that takes advantage in wide play, and short passing from more narrow play. When I tried out this it seemed to help me get more possession, since the players were closer to each other meaning that the risk of loosing the ball was less than if I played wide.

If you want to play wide but with short passing, I guess you would need good passers in the middle and a bit higher tempo.

[jep]

Originally posted by bean feast:

Hmmm, hide behind a child like manner. Is that actually a noun? Can I physically hide behind this? Please inform me, I am most interested. I think someone forgot his lower school english lessons. Shame on you Jep. You shouldn't have dropped out of school sunshine. Don't you know that you need a degree in this day and age?

Already got one thanks sunshine

Now, these tactics you are struggling with.........

[Guest]

Regarding Tempo.... what tests have you done to prove that this is actually working as for me the pace of the game does not seem to change and there does not seem to be any increase/decrease in my possession/passing accuracy regardless of whether I have tempo at 1 or at 20.

Have any of you actually tried the 2 extremes 1 & 20 to see if there is any difference?

[supersaint]

Originally posted by nonleague:

Regarding Tempo.... what tests have you done to prove that this is actually working as for me the pace of the game does not seem to change and there does not seem to be any increase/decrease in my possession/passing accuracy regardless of whether I have tempo at 1 or at 20.

Have any of you actually tried the 2 extremes 1 & 20 to see if there is any difference?

Yes I have done that, not over only one game but 10-15 games. The thing is that you have to try many things at once, I.E. short passing + fast tempo at one width, short passing + slow tempo at one width, mixed passing and so on, and note the possession and passing for each of these settings before you can make any assumptions at all.

I am not saying that you will notice extreme changes in possession with the rigth settings, but you might see what I did, a slight increase of 3-5% of possession and 5-10% in passing.

The settings I have had most success with are those who includes short passing, slow tempo, narrow width and direct passing, quicker tempo and wider width. These are the ones that have given most possession and highest passing rates for me, which is why I make the assumption that this is how it works

[panomaniac]

Regarding tempo, I also thought that tempo was roughly to do with build up play as well. Therefore, the ball can circulate as the same speed but there can still be differences in tempo. For example, a slow tempo is a patient build up with lots of passes before trying to progress to the stage where you are taking a shot/cross. A fast tempo would be looking to get forward quickly, not necessarily the ball moving at a greater speed but still passing the ball forward EARLIER and creating chances EARLIER.

Anyone else got a view on this? It SEEMS to work that way when I adjust my tempo slider, however, I have done no proper tests to prove this. Also remember vaguely reading a similar theory elsewhere.....please correct me if I'm wrong on this one.....

[Ans Gulrik]

Originally posted by wwfan:

Snipped from Asmo's d-line thread, but now has its place here:

In TT&F there are two concurrent theories on the d-line. One is based on mirroring (d-line + Closing Down = 20), the other on paralleling (d-line = Closing Down). I still think it is a littole more complex than this. You need to take into consideration variables such as passing style (i.e. a deep d-line needs a direct style to counterbalance the distance between the midfield and the defence) and pace (a high d-line is vulnerable to pace so needs quick defenders). I still like the idea of playing a high d-line away and a deep one at home, as one minimises space and the other maximises it. However, the game manual seems to argue against this and suggests a high d-line will pin defensive opposition into their own half. So, no further in terms of definition? Well, yes and no...

I can tell you what it doesn't do!

It doesn't link to midfield mentalities as it did in '06. Asmo's classic 5x5 theory stopped the FCs becoming too isolated from the defenders by matching their mentality with the height of the d-line. RoT copied this by matching the d-line with the MCa/AMC mentality. This no longer works, and the attackers seem to remain isolated no matter where you set the d-line. However, the manual says d-line is partially linked to mentality.

It is...and you need to be aware of this when setting up your system. Do not set a deep d-line with a high mentality system, or a high one with low mentalities. Try and match them to an extent whilst bearing in mind defenders' capabilities. However, wherever you set it, it will not stop your FCs becoming isolated. The only way to do that is to stop one of the FCs making forward runs. An FC who stays deep compacts the formation and, if set to hold up ball, gives all the players and the d-line time to get into position. Then the team can move up the pitch as a unit. This stops the AI from exploiting the space behind the d-line as it struggles to catch up with a direct ball to a high FWRs FC just in time for him to lose possession as there is no one to play the ball to. It then gets turned by an attacker breaking in the opposite direction.

In conclusion, d-line needs to match mentality (to an extent), be aware of defensive limitations and relies on players (FCs in fast tempo, direct games, possibly MCd in slower games) holding up the ball so it can catch up with the team once possession is gained. High forward runs for front players stop that from happening, and put the d-line under intensive pressure. The d-line CANNOT function effectively without attackers who give it time to move up the pitch. Tweak FWRs up front, and you should see a huge difference in d-line, and team, performance.

I think that the most important factor to consider when you set your DF is whether the computer has players that try to exploit the space between your defence and and midfield. If your defence drop and the AI use an attacking midfielder, he will get way too much time and space to pass or shoot.

[jorisvanhulst]

I think I've got the overlapping fullbacks to work, in my home formation at least. Like I explained earlier, I haven't been using the rule of two system lately, therefore, I get away with using slow tempo

Anyway, here's what I did. Right now I'm using a 4-3-1-2 formation, because the flat 4-4-2 isn't working for me..

FC FC

^ AM ^

ML MC MR

^ ^

DL DC DC DL

I hope that shows properly, never done it before.. Anyway: like it should show, I've put short farrows on both my DL/DR and my ML/MR, and put them both on forward runs - often. It might seem that the ML/MR are playing too offensive, so the DL/DR aren't getting the chance to overlap, but that's not the case. The overlapping goes really well, and my fullbacks are getting a lot of nice crosses in the box.

I'm not sure why it's working so well on my current formation, but I think the slow tempo might have something to do with it. First I used quick tempo and it just didn't work that well. It still doesn't work on my away formation, whick is identical to the home formation, only with tempo on quick.

One of the other things I changed was the 'hold up ball' thingy. I originally had a FC and my MC set to it, but I unticked both of them, which greatly improved my play. For my formation, 'hold up ball' really limited my options and made my play less creative. I suggest not using it on high quality teams, but that´s just my opinion.

Hope you find this helpful

And by the way: I'm not getting the MC's to work properly. I made the FWR-split, but they still seem to be in each others way very often, that's one of the reasons I switched to my current formation, which isn't doing wonders for me either. I am top of the league, and haven't lost one point after 6 matches, but I'm still not satisfied with my play. My MC's keep getting 6's and 7's, and they really are quality players. I tried a lot of things, messing around with the mentality sliders, changing the focus of my play. (Down both flanks, trough the middle) Nothing really seems to work. The only thing that helped a little was setting passing really short and setting the attacking one to really high creative freedom.

Anyway, I'm getting a bit carried away, I hope this makes for a good read I'll try to experiment with the MC's some more. The thing that really frustrates me is that the AI seems to have it working right, which WWFan had indicated earlier on.

[andre_costa]

MaVeRiXxX : every time you upload a picture to the internet with the BMP format, god kills a kitten AND a dolphin! At the same time! Please, think of the kittens. And the dolphins too!

[jorisvanhulst]

Right now I'm experimenting with long farrowed fullbacks and it seems to be working great! It's too early to make a conclusion, but I used it for three matches at home, and in 2 of them my LB was man of the match!

However, what I noticed was that my fullbacks weren't really overlapping that much. They just went forward a lot, staying right behind my ML/MR to offer a short option. Maybe I'll have to draw the farrow even further towards the AML/AMR position. I'll try this later in the season, when the results won't mather that much anymore.. I'm very happy with this progress. However, the AI still seems to have better overlapping fullbacks, so I'll get back to experimenting now..

[jorisvanhulst]

Sorry for the massive amount of posts from my side, I just keep finding out interesting stuff

I don´t know if this is already common knowledge, but I found out that the farrows and barraws are taken very literal by your players. In other words: if you drag an arrow from your DL to the AMR position, your DL will actually be standing in the position of the AMR when your goalkeeper is about to take a goalkick.

On the other hand, the barrows work the other way around. If you would have an AML barrowed to the DR position, he would be in the DL position when the opponent takes a goalkick.

I don't know if this was already known, and if it has always been like that in previous editions of FM. Anyway, I think this system is not good, because it makes it very difficult to do overlapping. If you drag a DL to the WBL position, that's simply where he will stand when a goalkick is taken, which makes your play very static. At least, that's my opinion. Maybe it works better when you win posession, with the fullbacks quickly running forward.

A good thing about this system seems to be that it doesn't make your players tired. I played 3 matches against lesser teams with my fullbacks farrowed all the way to the AML/AMR position, and they both ended the match with 90+ condition, which seems fine to me.

[wwfan]

Tempo, Passing Focus & Target Man

A minor discovery. Just finished my first full season on '07 (wife was at an evening function so I had some non-guilt playing time). I started like a train, when I was ranked badly, but results fell off. After constant tweaking and a return to form and promotion, I came up with the following conclusion:

When playing a high tempo game to a target man (to head & at LLM) you MUST Focus Pass Through the Middle. The wingers cannot get into position quickly enough to receive any decent service if you Focus Down Flanks or Mixed. Thus, even though the TM is winning 80% of his headers, 75% of them are headed straight to the retreating FBS who regain possession instantly.

I would think this may well be the case with quick tempo direct passing at all levels unless you play FR/Ls. The ball is shifted at pace to the wings before the wingers can get there, even when they are long farrowed. You can't play Focus Down the Flanks unless you play at a slower tempo or have lethally quick wingers.

Comments, please?

[jorisvanhulst]

From watching a full match with passing trough middle, I'm not really convinced..

I think the play was concentrated trough the middle a little TOO much. There were some really nice combinations by my MC's, which created a lot of space for my ML/MR. But even when they had created that space, they just didn't pass the ball to them.. I can't find the screenshot back, but it showed how little passes my ML and MR had received in that match. It was about 20% of the balls they usually receive, which is simply not enough, since chances are mostly created from crosses in this edition of FM..

[wwfan]

Originally posted by jorisvanhulst:

From watching a full match with passing trough middle, I'm not really convinced..

I think the play was concentrated trough the middle a little TOO much. There were some really nice combinations by my MC's, which created a lot of space for my ML/MR. But even when they had created that space, they just didn't pass the ball to them.. I can't find the screenshot back, but it showed how little passes my ML and MR had received in that match. It was about 20% of the balls they usually receive, which is simply not enough, since chances are mostly created from crosses in this edition of FM..

Interesting. What level and tempo are you playing at?

[jorisvanhulst]

I tried it with a lot of settings really. Really slwo tempo, or quick, it didn't really seem to make a difference. However, when I gave my defensive MC hold up ball and direct passing, things went a little better. I didn't really test it though, so I guess this example isn't really representive.

[wwfan]

I played at home with mid to low direct passing and a high d-line and away with very direct passing and a lower d-line. My TM wins 80%+ of his headers. The difference in Pass Focus Through the Middle was huge in terms of quality moves. I played narrow away, wide at home, and they both worked.

[jorisvanhulst]

So I take it you have a big man up front, playing balls to his head? If that's the case, that might be the difference, since I have a quick, agile striker with high passing and dribbling. I pass him to feet, that might be it. Anyway, what do you think about me previous posts about the fullback overlapping?

[wwfan]

Originally posted by jorisvanhulst:

So I take it you have a big man up front, playing balls to his head? If that's the case, that might be the difference, since I have a quick, agile striker with high passing and dribbling. I pass him to feet, that might be it. Anyway, what do you think about me previous posts about the fullback overlapping?

Aye, 6'7" (201cm) TM, balls to head. To feet will mean he will hold the ball up for the wingers to get into position, so other options may work better.

FBS overlapping needs a wide formation and for them to have high FWRs. Not sure about the need for the farrows. I have managed to get them to do it, by setting their FWRs high and having the wingers HUB, but it compromised my defensive stability too much. That was because my FBs were my weakest players though. Try those settings and see if they help.

[jorisvanhulst]

I've actually tried that before, and it worked quite well

I'm a bit dissapointed with the farrows and barrows to be honost. I would've hoped that they would tell a player to RUN in a specific direction. However, right now they're just standing there, waiting for the ball.

[MaVeRiXxX]

Originally posted by andre_costa:

MaVeRiXxX : every time you upload a picture to the internet with the BMP format, god kills a kitten AND a dolphin! At the same time! Please, think of the kittens. And the dolphins too!

And I don't give a *****, really, çause .bmp are just better quality...period.

[MaVeRiXxX]

Does having more than one PM or TM actually work, or does the Team only use the first one? And do they get confused if a listed player isn't playing?

Cheers, R.

[panomaniac]

Originally posted by MaVeRiXxX:

Does having more than one PM or TM actually work, or does the Team only use the first one? And do they get confused if a listed player isn't playing?

Cheers, R.

Only uses the first player on the list.

If a player first on the list is not playing then the next player on the list is chosen.

If you only have one player on the list and he isn't playing then I think the team just defaults to using who they think is a suitable player. This is the one situation I am NOT 100% certain about though.

[DBecks7ManU]

@ wwfan - Being an admirer of your ideas and theories, just wondering if you'll be releasing a tactic for '07 anytime soon?

[thenamesfang]

Originally posted by MaVeRiXxX:

And I don't give a *****, really, çause .bmp are just better quality...period.

That's just plain nonsense. The .bmp file is one of the most inflated formats (your file is as big as a mp3!), and it's not meant for use over the Internet. I suggest you use .png if you insist on having the highest quality.

I think the reason why you use .bmp is because you can only use Paint? I suggest then if you don't have a proper graphic program to use Gadwin PrintScreen, (http://www.gadwin.com/printscreen/) which allows you to take screenshots in a variety of formats, such as .png.

[Guest]

jorisvanhulst,

I noticed this too about the Farrow/Barrow. At least in my case it was the Farrow of my DR/L. The were always holding hands with my MR/L. Taking Farrows off, and using forward runs at mixed got better results for what I wanted:

My DR/L on occassion being past of the attack.

[Smac]

Originally posted by panomaniac:

Regarding tempo, I also thought that tempo was roughly to do with build up play as well. Therefore, the ball can circulate as the same speed but there can still be differences in tempo. For example, a slow tempo is a patient build up with lots of passes before trying to progress to the stage where you are taking a shot/cross. A fast tempo would be looking to get forward quickly, not necessarily the ball moving at a greater speed but still passing the ball forward EARLIER and creating chances EARLIER.

This is exactly what I was going to say. Tempo, in my experience, is the speed of buildup, nothing more, nothing less.

This fits wwfans subsequent observation that 'quick' has no good relationship with 'wings', unless you greatly outpace your opponent. Personally, I save quick for lower leagues or obvious mismatches when the opposition is playing too wide........

[wwfan]

It was about this time last year that I changed my perspective away from 'Deeply Flawed Game Engine' and towards the original TT&F thread. I'd just like to say I'm beginning to get that same feeling. I think, thanks to the wealth of quality discussion in this thread and others, that I have a handle on the engine and it is yet another large step towards sophisticated realism. Another steep learning curve, yes, but another step towards the ideal of a simulation of reality.

If the 7.0.1 patch fixes those few issues that bug me (man-marking!!, players not tracking back when the ball is deflected towards their goal, the ball bouncing 40 yards off the wall on an attacking free kick to gift the opposition a goal on the break) then I think we'll have another big winner on our hands.

[FMTacticus]

edit

[Cleon]

No advertising or linking to other sites please.

[Guest]

Would it be fair to say that Tempo relates to how quickly your team moves the ball around the park and does not come into effect when your team does not have possession?

[FMTacticus]

Originally posted by nonleague:

Would it be fair to say that Tempo relates to how quickly your team moves the ball around the park and does not come into effect when your team does not have possession?

Well that would be true, as if you do not have the ball you will not be setting the tempo of the play.

The speed at which your defense acts would be determined by your closing down and tackling.

[Smac]

Originally posted by nonleague:

Would it be fair to say that Tempo relates to how quickly your team moves the ball around the park and does not come into effect when your team does not have possession?

Er, as Tacticus said, its when you have the ball. However, there seems to be some debate as to whether it's:

1. "How quickly your team moves the ball around the park".

or

2. "How quickly your team tries to get into shooting position; IE, the speed of buildup play".

I'm in the second camp here. Look at short passing with slow tempo vs. a team playing defensively and deep. Your team will ping the ball around quite quickly but won't force the ball up the field until you find an opening. Turn the tempo up to 'quick' and watch how your team will attempt to make as few passes as possible to get into shooting position. At least, that's my experience.

[FMTacticus]

Originally posted by Smac:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by nonleague:

Would it be fair to say that Tempo relates to how quickly your team moves the ball around the park and does not come into effect when your team does not have possession?

I'm in the second camp here. Look at short passing with slow tempo vs. a team playing defensively and deep. Your team will ping the ball around quite quickly but won't force the ball up the field until you find an opening. Turn the tempo up to 'quick' and watch how your team will attempt to make as few passes as possible to get into shooting position. At least, that's my experience. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Agreed, this is what I have seen in my games also.

Slow tempo is for teams that have the space/time/ability to play the ball around looking for an opening, a faster tempo is for teams either looking to smash and grab a result or do not have enough skill/time on the ball to wait for an opening.

[MaVeRiXxX]

It's Tempo, not Speed, and also Passing Attributes etc. decide how fast the ball will go when leaving the players foot. so higher Tempo will only make them try to score faster. But it does connect with Mentality, CF, and maybe more.

Cheers, R.

[supersaint]

Trying to find a way to success

Ok, Ive just finished two seasons with Forest now, using a combination of settings based on what the manual says about the different things.

I have spent most of my savegame testing out different theories and and settings, to see if I could find something that was common for each of the tactics Ive been using. So far Ive tested out variations of 4-1-3-2, 4-4-1-1 and 4-4-2.

What Im writing here is not by any means the only way to success, its merely observations I have made during my tests. If something works for you, Im happy - if it doesnt, well then well just have to keep on working

One tactic for each of the AIs variations of tactics during matches

wwfan suggested that success might be able to achieve through adjusting the tactics to what the AI did, by using mainly 6 tactics. This was the first time Ive tried to use this. In previous FMs Ive always managed somehow to create one tactic that has been good enough whatever the AI throwed at me.

This time around I had serious problems with this, and I felt that wwfan was on the right track of something. After testing this for a long time, I found that if you manage to create tactics that could counter the AI, you would have no problem over-achievieving.

So this is a great way to build success IMO, but its extremely time-consuming, because you have to keep track of what the AI does during the whole match.

Using home/away or attacking/defensive tactics

From what I have experienced this is vital, if you dont want to use too much time setting up and keeping track of tactics. Strong teams will throw their attacks at you, even when playing at your ground. Weaker teams might even go out in a defensive tactic at home. So you need at least two tactics that suits most tactics, where you can do minor changes if the AI is outpowering you in certain areas.

Mentality

From what I have seen, and this is also mentioned in the manual, the different units should have mentalities within the same range to stay as one unit.

For me I have had most success by having the mentality around 8-10 for defenders(attacking), 10-14 for midfielders(attacking) and 16-18 for attackers(attacking). In my defensive tactics I have most success with 2-4 for defenders, 6-10 for midfielders and 12-14 for attackers.

With this settings my team looks like a unit most of the time. When playing a flat midfield, with these settings they actually look like a "1st defense unit", and is very hard to get passed.

Passing

The biggest problem I had in the start of this game was that my passing rate was way too low, below 70% at average. Whatever I did, they just didnt pass the ball the right way, or they were closed down too quick.

Then I started to look in the manual, which states that a "short passing game benefits most from narrow width, direct passing from wider." I know it is possible to play short passing with wider tactics too, but since it didnt work for me(down to player qualities I guess), I decided to give it a go.

I kept my passing instructions, which I mirror with the mentality settings of the player.Only exception is for my DC, since I want them to play the ball short to my FB. Then I narrowed my attacking tactic, and did my defensive tactic more wide. The passing rate changed instantly, and went up by 5%.

So, at least for me, the solution to problems with the passing rate was to change the width.

Creative Freedom

The manual says that you shouldnt have too many players with high creative freedoms, because this could lead to players trying to win the game on their own.

This has been true for my teams and tactics. I like creative players that can do something with the ball, but in FM this has to be balanced. Adjusting the CF didnt do anything regarding possession or passing, but it lead to more quality finishing, especially from my attackers, who before adjusting it tried to shoot from all angles. I still have relative high CF for the SCs but at least now they dont try to shoot from the goal-line.

What I have done is to set the CF for Defenders and central midfielders a little lower than their mentality, wingers and strikers a little above.

This seems to do the trick for my flat 442.

Defensive Line / Closing Down

The hardest part for me, except scoring goals, have been to spot the differences to the different DL settings. It was quite easy before, but in FM07 this is much harder.

After trying out many different combinations, there are two approaches that seems to work against most teams. Either you play a high line at home and deep away, or just the opposite. This depends on what you feel is best for your own tactic.

The manual says that the Defensive Line is somewhat tied to mentality. If you want an attacking approach you would like to press the AI high and get the ball higher up the pitch. If you want a defensive tactic with counter-attacks a deeper line is better.

In my last test I followed this, setting the DL to the average mentality of my team. This worked wonders with my team. The unit was even tighter now than it was before. So it seems like what the manual says is true - there is some sort of connection between these two settings.

Closing down. I like a hard working midfield that closes down the AI before they reach my defenders, breaking down attacks as quick as possible. My main problem(as I have mentioned before) was that I just couldnt get this to work the way I wanted, since the DCs were being dragged all over the pitch, especially when the AI launched counter attacks, or the the DMC was closing down some midfielder. These settings left huge gaps in the middle that the AI exploited.

The only time I really managed to get them to play the way I wanted to without being exploited all the time, was when I mirrored/paired the DCs CD with the DL of my team.

Another theory that others have great success with is to have equal settings of DL and CD for defenders. I guess both of these theories works well, depending on team/tactic.

Just now my defenders have a mirrored/paired CD, the midfielders have DL+4 and the SC DL+6, which works just the way I want it to.

Timewasting

This is one of the few things I havent tested out too much. I leave it mostly at 10, so that the players can decide for themselves. Works good for me.

Width/tempo

As mentioned earlier, the manual says that width is somewhat tied to passing and passing is tied to what kind of football you want to play. It also mentions that that slow tempo is best for building up attacks slowly and that quick tempo best for counter-attacking football. Quite logical really, but it can be hard to spot within the game.

What I have noticed, is like others have said here, that when playing with quick tempo, the players tend to release the ball faster trying to get to the AI penalty box as soon as possible.

With these things in mind I decided to try something new. I decided to set the tempo and width based on the average passing instructions in my team. This means that I play sligthly more narrow and slower at home, than away.

Lack of goals

In all of my tactics I have created I have had big problems scoring more than one goal per game. Even if I manage to only conceive 0.5 per game, this is too low.

After changing to 442, I did try to follow wwfans settings(FWR runs) for striker partnerships, since it fits how I want strikers to play. Allthough it did help, it still wasnt satisfying for my team.

My problem was that I couldnt get my TM to drop deep enough, no matter what settings I used. Then I remembered two things: Barrows=player drops back when defending, and Sarrows makes player move between two positions. So I experimented with barrow on my TM and sarrow on the pacey striker(to the middle).

Finally they started to work the way I wanted to, creating more quality chances than before - getting my scoring rates up a little bit, taking 3 points in more games than before. But I still struggle winning by large numbers, I usually win 1-0 or something like that.

Oh well, that was my worthless thoughts on the road to success in FM07.

Now to the tactic Ive used for the two last seasons with Forest:

The tactic is a straight 4-4-2, with TM barrowed and the FC sarrowed. No other arrows.

Tactical Instructions

<pre class="ip-ubbcode-code-pre">

ATTACKING FORMATION

Defensive Line: 13

Width: 6

Tempo: 6

Time-wasting: 10

Passing: Mixed

Men CF Pass CD FWR RWB LS TTB CB TM HUB

=====================================================================================

Fullbacks 10 7 10 7 MIX OFT RAR RAR MIX NO

Central Defenders 8 5 7 7 RAR RAR RAR RAR RAR NO

Midfielder(d) 10 7 10 11 RAR RAR RAR OFT RAR NO

Midfielder(a) 16 13 4 11 MIX RAR RAR OFT RAR NO

Wingers 14 16 6 11 MIX OFT RAR MIX MIX NO

Attacker 16 17 6 11 MIX MIX MIX OFT MIX NO YES

Attacker(FC) 18 15 2 13 OFT OFT MIX MIX OFT NO

DEFENDING FORMATION

Defensive Line: 8

Width: 11

Tempo: 11

Time-wasting: 10

Passing: Mixed

Men CF Pass CD FWR RWB LS TTB CB TM HUB

=====================================================================================

Fullbacks 4 2 16 12 RAR MIX RAR OFT MIX NO

Central Defenders 2 1 12 12 RAR RAR RAR MIX RAR NO

Midfielder(d) 6 3 14 16 OFT MIX RAR OFT RAR NO

Midfielder(a) 10 9 10 16 OFT MIX RAR OFT RAR NO

Wingers 8 10 12 16 OFT MIX RAR MIX OFT NO

Attacker 12 14 8 16 MIX MIX MIX OFT MIX NO

Attacker(FC) 14 13 6 18 MIX OFT MIX MIX OFT NO

</pre>

As you can see, the formations and instructions aint very different, but its enough to make a difference. I have used these two formations now for two seasons(the arrows were added after season 1), and have done quite well.

<pre class="ip-ubbcode-code-pre">

| 1st | C | Nottm Forest | | 46 | 30 | 13 | 3 | 56 | 21 | +35 | 103 | **LEAGUE ONE 2013/2014**

| 2nd | P | Nottm Forest | | 46 | 26 | 14 | 6 | 59 | 25 | +34 | 92 | **CHAMPIONSHIP 2014/2015**

</pre>

Even though that I still have problems scoring goals, the tactic is so defensively strong that I have no problems doing well. So basing a tactic on what the manual says about mentality, defensive line, width and tempo - combined with my own CD theory seems to work quite well

Hope this can be helpful for someone out there

[jorisvanhulst]

Quality post there Supersaint. Looks like reading the manual makes this entire thread unrelevant

[supersaint]

Originally posted by jorisvanhulst:

Quality post there Supersaint. Looks like reading the manual makes this entire thread unrelevant

haha.. not really, but it helps reading it to understand this thread

Thanks btw

[Dimster]

What a great thread!!

What i cant work out is how to set the Target Man receiving the ball to head or to feet?

I cantg seem to find the setting on the team instructions page, and i havent found an answer on the forums.

Sorry if such a dumb query

[FMTacticus]

Cracking post gromit!... err I mean Supersaint

Btw please check your profile mail, I sent you something regarding that post.

[Ans Gulrik]

Originally posted by wwfan:

It was about this time last year that I changed my perspective away from 'Deeply Flawed Game Engine' and towards the original TT&F thread. I'd just like to say I'm beginning to get that same feeling. I think, thanks to the wealth of quality discussion in this thread and others, that I have a handle on the engine and it is yet another large step towards sophisticated realism. Another steep learning curve, yes, but another step towards the ideal of a simulation of reality.

If the 7.0.1 patch fixes those few issues that bug me (man-marking!!, players not tracking back when the ball is deflected towards their goal, the ball bouncing 40 yards off the wall on an attacking free kick to gift the opposition a goal on the break) then I think we'll have another big winner on our hands.

I think there are more flaws in the match engine. No show stoppers but some annoying issues.

Most importantly: You have less control. Players basic position, determines much more than in FM2006 - you can't tell strikers to drop deep enough and you can't tell players in the attacking midfield positions not to drop so deep. Even with Farrow, Fruns and 20 mentality a winger will still hold hands with your full back when your not in possesion. If anyone has a solution for this I would be a lot happier, but this very good thread, seems to suggest that everyone struggle with this part of the engine.

[ergün]

hi i am new

what is "AI" ?

[supersaint]

Originally posted by ergün:

hi i am new

what is "AI" ?

AI means Artificial Intelligence.

In FM often used as a label for non-human controlled teams(or the manager of those teams)

[Ans Gulrik]

Hi Supersaint. I'm currently using your tactic as described above.

Defensively it is topdraw. Attacking wise I find it really frustrating. But that seems to be your own impression as well?

I hardly conceed any goals. All stats are fine, but... I usually play much more direct. In your tactic, I end up with possesion, nice passing percentage, 20 chances with 50% on target, but I don't score much. Strikers miss 10 one on ones per game.

This is the reason I have always played more direct. In your oppinion - will a more direct style, with better goal to shot ratio, harm the defensive record (not changing the defensive unit)?

[supersaint]

Originally posted by Ans Gulrik:

Hi Supersaint. I'm currently using your tactic as described above.

Defensively it is topdraw. Attacking wise I find it really frustrating. But that seems to be your own impression as well?

I hardly conceed any goals. All stats are fine, but... I usually play much more direct. In your tactic, I end up with possesion, nice passing percentage, 20 chances with 50% on target, but I don't score much. Strikers miss 10 one on ones per game.

This is the reason I have always played more direct. In your oppinion - will a more direct style, with better goal to shot ratio, harm the defensive record (not changing the defensive unit)?

Exactly my impression too - the main problem for me is to get the goals that I need.

Playing more direct(without changing mentality) could be worth trying, because this could open up the ai-defence a bit more. I dont think it should harm the defence, but it might lead to slightly less possession, since the team will rush a bit more for the goals.

[Ans Gulrik]

supersaint - I adjusted your tactic. Haven't tested much yet and my current team might be too strong to fully trust the results, but...

I did not adjusted the defensive formation, which is pretty direct as it is. I did however change the passing to Through the Middle.

The attacking formation I altered. +6 in Passing and through the middle. I also raised the tempo by 6.

Result is so far 1.6 goals per game and conceed 0.6 goals. Seems good. Only conceed sligthly more (most likely due to loss of possesion), but score considerably more, from slightly fewer chances (the typical result of a more direct style).

I'm gonna test this with a weaker team.

[ntfc]

Hey Noel

How did your approach to mentality turn out?

[wwfan]

Originally posted by Ans Gulrik:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by wwfan:

It was about this time last year that I changed my perspective away from 'Deeply Flawed Game Engine' and towards the original TT&F thread. I'd just like to say I'm beginning to get that same feeling. I think, thanks to the wealth of quality discussion in this thread and others, that I have a handle on the engine and it is yet another large step towards sophisticated realism. Another steep learning curve, yes, but another step towards the ideal of a simulation of reality.

If the 7.0.1 patch fixes those few issues that bug me (man-marking!!, players not tracking back when the ball is deflected towards their goal, the ball bouncing 40 yards off the wall on an attacking free kick to gift the opposition a goal on the break) then I think we'll have another big winner on our hands.

I think there are more flaws in the match engine. No show stoppers but some annoying issues.

Most importantly: You have less control. Players basic position, determines much more than in FM2006 - you can't tell strikers to drop deep enough and you can't tell players in the attacking midfield positions not to drop so deep. Even with Farrow, Fruns and 20 mentality a winger will still hold hands with your full back when your not in possesion. If anyone has a solution for this I would be a lot happier, but this very good thread, seems to suggest that everyone struggle with this part of the engine. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Unfortunately, I don't have time to write a thoughtful reply on this right now. As I stated, and supersaint seems to be leaning the same way, I think I have most major issues sussed. I'd like to experiment with a few of the things he mentioned before posting a major update of my own, but I certainly had (as bean feast would love) a Eureka! moment, although not whilst sitting in the bath. Once I had that moment of inspiration, everything sort of fell into place and my team began to do what I wanted them to. From this, I revaluated the engine, and, minor flaws aside, think it is a step up from '06.

[MaVeRiXxX]

Originally posted by wwfan:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Ans Gulrik:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by wwfan:

It was about this time last year that I changed my perspective away from 'Deeply Flawed Game Engine' and towards the original TT&F thread. I'd just like to say I'm beginning to get that same feeling. I think, thanks to the wealth of quality discussion in this thread and others, that I have a handle on the engine and it is yet another large step towards sophisticated realism. Another steep learning curve, yes, but another step towards the ideal of a simulation of reality.

If the 7.0.1 patch fixes those few issues that bug me (man-marking!!, players not tracking back when the ball is deflected towards their goal, the ball bouncing 40 yards off the wall on an attacking free kick to gift the opposition a goal on the break) then I think we'll have another big winner on our hands.

I think there are more flaws in the match engine. No show stoppers but some annoying issues.

Most importantly: You have less control. Players basic position, determines much more than in FM2006 - you can't tell strikers to drop deep enough and you can't tell players in the attacking midfield positions not to drop so deep. Even with Farrow, Fruns and 20 mentality a winger will still hold hands with your full back when your not in possesion. If anyone has a solution for this I would be a lot happier, but this very good thread, seems to suggest that everyone struggle with this part of the engine. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Unfortunately, I don't have time to write a thoughtful reply on this right now. As I stated, and supersaint seems to be leaning the same way, I think I have most major issues sussed. I'd like to experiment with a few of the things he mentioned before posting a major update of my own, but I certainly had (as bean feast would love) a Eureka! moment, although not whilst sitting in the bath. Once I had that moment of inspiration, everything sort of fell into place and my team began to do what I wanted them to. From this, I revaluated the engine, and, minor flaws aside, think it is a step up from '06. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Totally agreed, when I started out with 07 it just looked bigger and better, and after a hwile I started to think it really was a game full of flaws. I started from scratch, looking at and testing everything with no prior knowledge in mind, and it's starting to make sense now.

Looking forward to WW's new version of TT&F.

Cheers, R.

[Ans Gulrik]

I'm not saying that the engine isn't better than FM06. What I am saying is that you control less. There are certain ways of playing, that you simply can not instruct your players to play.

For all the good things that has happened, surely this is not one of them. You can not play with out and out wingers. You can't tell a winger: "Listen - you don't have any defensive duties. You just wait for your team mates to win the ball, and then you can concentrate on attacking." The only way for this to work is to make the winger play as a forward - and that seems a bit odd - doesn't it?

Anyway - this is a bit off topic...

[Guest Rafalution]

Originally posted by Ans Gulrik:

For all the good things that has happened, surely this is not one of them. You can not play with out and out wingers. You can't tell a winger: "Listen - you don't have any defensive duties. You just wait for your team mates to win the ball, and then you can concentrate on attacking."

Sorry if this is off the point, by way in the name of far out fishing would you tell a player that he doesn't have any defensive duties? In my book, every player needs to perform some defensive duties for the team.

[Guest Rafalution]

Haha.. that fell on it's behind..

by way should be but why