Tactical Theorems and Frameworks '07

[Greg Beckett]

I was thinking too much and not typing what I meant, so a few corrections:

Divide by the 10 outfield players and this equates to the team mentality if you choose to ignore player instructions. So you have the team playing the style you want, without overidding or conflicting team/player instructions on mentality overall.

This means that instead of your overall mentality being flat, the teams shares the same overall mentality but individually differ. Just in case some people were confused by the ignore player mentalities bit that I posted, I meant that you still get the overall mentality you wished for, but with the above assets. I didn't mean ignore individual mentality

assuming that overall mentality is the 'neutral' amongst your players

In RoT 100 is the 'neutral' mentality. In this one I'm proposing, you're aiming to bo attacking overall as a unit, so the overall mentality would be the new neutral - i.e if it was 13, 130 would be the neutral, to make sure the teams is balanced around this mentality so they do attack.

[gunnerfan]

But when you select individual mentalities (via player instruction sliders), doesn't that merely serve to override a team mentality setting? Put another way, I think that if you select a mentality for all 11 players on the field, it is as if you had no team mentality.

[gunnerfan]

Of course, the easiest way to test this is to establish settings for every player, then play matches with those individual settings, but varying the team setting. Important: there must be an individual setting for the keeper, else he will play at the team setting.

[Greg Beckett]

But when you select individual mentalities (via player instruction sliders), doesn't that merely serve to override a team mentality setting? Put another way, I think that if you select a mentality for all 11 players on the field, it is as if you had no team mentality.

My point was to sum it up:

Say you want your team playing a 15 notch mentality. Then instead of 10 being the neutral, this should become the 'neutral', and the teams outfield players should be balanced around this new 'neutral', so it has an attacking bias overall.

I don't know if you need a team mentality, but if you want a pressing, attacking team overall, that's my point - in total it should represent an attacking mentality.

Same for if you switch it to defensive.

[crazy gra]

interesting theory.

so, for example, you want a team mentality of 14, you apply these individual mentality settings:

DR - 12

DC - 9

DC - 9

DL - 12

MR - 17

MCd - 13

MCa - 15

ML - 17

FCd - 17

FCa - 19

that seem about right?

[Greg Beckett]

Yep. If you also apply Upper and Lower Bounds that means you can get away with having it a little out, i.e 13.5 or 14.4, but the closer to the mentality you want the better.

[crazy gra]

ok, cheers. i never have my defenders or even MCd that attacking, so i'm not sure how it'd affect me defensively. i might get a chance to give this a go tomorrow hopefully.

you mention that when you have your defenders on a high mentality e.g. 9 or 10, this means they're pushed up (which isn't suprising). do you change anything with the d-line in accordance with changing the mentalities? i feel this would be more effective than applying barrows to the DCs.

i usually have a d-line of 8 as anything greater leaves too much space behind the defence IMO. i lower this to 6 for quick/direct teams with a very quick ST (i.e. 'the Bolton' style that i hate to play against), and reading in Cleon's thread, he lowered the d-line to 4 when playing very defensively.

so there's a possibly theory of changing d-line according to mentality, but i was just wondering if/how you alter it for your mentality theory.

[Finknottle]

I am trying to construct a 4-1-3-2 home and away tactic, using the WWfan information. I have these team instructions for the home games.

Mentality = 10

Cre.Free = 10

Passing = 12

Tempo = 15

Width = 15

Cl.Down = 10

T.W. = 05

Def.Line = 10

Tackling = 10

I would like assistance in the tempo and width areas for both home and away. Like a lot of others, I have always thought along the lines of quicker, more attacking play at home, while slower and a little narrower, away.

I have put a lot of time into this, having to write down all the information, as I don't have a printer. A little directing in the right direction would be greatly appreciated.

I intend to use my reserve and youth sides to test my efforts through this, my first season.

[crazy gra]

i do the opposite of that in terms of tempo at home. at home i'll usually play slow and with short passing (both at 6). this is because you should be the more attacking of the two teams, which means the opposition will be more defensive. when playing against a more defensive team, they will be harder to break down to you have to play a slower tempo. playing a quick tempo will mean that you rush your attacks and won't always pick out the best option, meaning that the opposition are able to deal with it better.

i also play with a width of 6 at home as i believe shorter passing should have a narrower style to the play. i always play tempo and passing at the same levels, and i had a theory that width should be the same due to what i said in the last sentence. however, i've found that playing a much wider width in away games, even if i haven't raised the tempo and passing from 6 helps, so i now use a width of 15 in away games.

as for away games, for most of them i raise the tempo and passing to 9, with a width of 15 as said above and i also apply the counter attack. for most games, i expect the opposition to attack me, so i make my team more defensive but then play quickly to exploit space that they've left due to attacking me.

you may want to make the tempo and passing a bit higher than 9, maybe around 14, as my games have mainly been when playing with a good team and if your team isn't a good team relative to the opposition then i might advise raising the tempo to that level. you may benefit from increasing it to 14 for a poor(ish) team because if their defenders are better defensively than your forwards are offensively, then you'll need to play quicker to catch them out.

however, don't ever play too quickly because playing too quickly will mean that you have too many speculative efforts and therefore most likely to have less shots on target (SOTs).

reading through cleon's thread a little, i think he makes a lot of sense in changing the style of his play according to the scout report. i.e. he will play quickly and short if the scout report suggests the opposition plays a possession game; and that he'll play a slow tempo/short passing game if the opposition play high tempo. i think he may do that for all games, although i think it may only be an effective strategy in away games, which i'm hoping to try.

why are you using your reserves/youths?

[Finknottle]

I am currently using Uncle Sam's Box 4-4-2 and am lying 3rd in the Championship with Hull City. I do not want to jeopardise anything by trying new systems that I am not sure of.

My theory is to monitor the other teams and make alterations accordingly, where it does not matter. In the past, I have used my own 4-1-3-2, using the in game default player instructions. However, on reading all the new information on tactics, I wonder if they would no longer be of much use in FM'07. Thank you for your time and assistance. I shall alter my tactics accordingly.

I also find myself in a quandary over the L and R centre midfielders. They seem to be neither fish nor foul. I may have to put them out wide and make them as wingers. Currently, I have them as AMC's with diagonal farrows and crossing from the byeline to the centre. My theory is, that using them thus, there will be no congestion when any of my FB's come forward.

[gunnerfan]

Originally posted by oescus:

They seem to be neither fish nor foul.

Fowl.

[crazy gra]

I had a look at the set player instructions a while ago, just to see what they were like. as soon as i saw them i thought they were crap, but that's probably just because they're different to mine.

[filipe_fonseca]

Originally posted by filipe_fonseca:

I'm back to FM, finally, if anyone remembers me. Anyway, this is an excellent discussion, but I can't keep up with the last developments because wwfan's new set of tactics can't be downloaded right now. Apparently, the site has been "hacked".

So, if any kind soul could upload it somewhere else, I'd certainly appreciate it.

I'd still appreciate it, as I really want to see what these tactics look like. Anyone?

[adonis]

filipe_fonseca I'm happy to email to you. I'll send it to your email add in your profile.

[Guest]

I'd be extremely grateful if someone could email them to me as well/ upload them somewhere else.

Email address in profile.

[filipe_fonseca]

Originally posted by adonis:

filipe_fonseca I'm happy to email to you. I'll send it to your email add in your profile.

Thank you very much, I'll check them out when I get home.

[kittipol]

Try this link. It should work 100%.

new set of tactics The TTF RoO 442 (zip)

[alan_green_must_die!]

I know this is probably a stupid question,

but what does FCa & FCd stand for?

[bflaff]

Originally posted by alan_green_must_die!:

I know this is probably a stupid question,

but what does FCa & FCd stand for?

You'll often see this notation in this thread for players set next to each other where one has a defensive mindset and the other is more offense minded. Usually with an MCa and MCd, but in this case, center forward a and d.

[FourThreeThree]

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 Seagulls Forever:

Oh and btw the sendings off seem not to be related to high defensive line, it's not last minute lunges to stop a striker, more random acts of violence in the middle of the park when in no real danger. And yes I'm on the latest version of the patch.

I have been seeing that too in my second full season implementing these tactics. I had my top three keepers out injured and was forced to play a greyed out player for 80 minutes, then a kid in the next match, before drafting in an out of practice veteran for cover. Two of my first three choice strikers were out at the same time so I only had one striker playing who was up to divisional level (I have a very small squad). </div></BLOCKQUOTE> I have two left wingers, one the up and coming talent and the other is first choice. Both got injured so I brought in a reserve. He got injured as well. Loaned a player...he got injured as well. Same traing regime with right wingers who have no problems. n the end I brought in another loan player...by that time some of my left wingers/forward were a weeek or two away from recovery. Incredible. Playing a 4-3-2(wingers)-with the central MC having forward arrows, it certainly crippled my attacks as the players going into the penalty box would be a striker and the two wingers.

[wwfan]

Originally posted by Greg Beckett:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">But when you select individual mentalities (via player instruction sliders), doesn't that merely serve to override a team mentality setting? Put another way, I think that if you select a mentality for all 11 players on the field, it is as if you had no team mentality.

It's a good theory. I have been experimenting with a more extreme version of this set-up for the last three weeks or so and it works exceptionally well. I make sure there is only 6 click difference between the deepest defender and the most attacking attacker and set the d-line between the two. I am as defensively sound this way with a d-line of 17 or a d-line of 3. Again, further onformation to come soon.

My point was to sum it up:

Say you want your team playing a 15 notch mentality. Then instead of 10 being the neutral, this should become the 'neutral', and the teams outfield players should be balanced around this new 'neutral', so it has an attacking bias overall.

I don't know if you need a team mentality, but if you want a pressing, attacking team overall, that's my point - in total it should represent an attacking mentality.

Same for if you switch it to defensive. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

[wwfan]

OOps..What I meant to say was....

It's a good theory. I have been experimenting with a more extreme version of this set-up for the last three weeks or so and it works exceptionally well. I make sure there is only 6 click difference between the deepest defender and the most attacking attacker and set the d-line between the two. I am as defensively sound this way with a d-line of 17 or a d-line of 3. Again, further onformation to come soon.

[Greg Beckett]

I've used it for a while, and haven't lost as England with it, and in my current season let in two goals in about 9 games with an average Stuttgart. I'm facing a few tougher teams now though, so it'll be put to the test more.

Problem is, because I don't set it a concrete tactics system and tweak every match, with just the individual mentality = team mentality rule, it's tough to conclude if it's that or the other tactical aspects that is helping me.

Crazy_Gra - Just read your post, I'll respond tomorrow. Tis nearly 12 now.

[crazy gra]

nearly 12?! that's not late, wwfan's sometimes on here posting at 3am

i was just about to ask if you'd read my post about your d-line, as i only just saw the last line of you post.

as for wwfan's 3 or 17 d-line, this sounds very intruiging, i'm looking forward to reading about this. check the OT thread if you have minute, please, wwfan

[wwfan]

Originally posted by crazy gra:

nearly 12?! that's not late, wwfan's sometimes on here posting at 3am

i was just about to ask if you'd read my post about your d-line, as i only just saw the last line of you post.

as for wwfan's 3 or 17 d-line, this sounds very intruiging, i'm looking forward to reading about this. check the OT thread if you have minute, please, wwfan

gra, I live in Australia. 3 a.m. is 2 p.m. here!!!

[crazy gra]

i know it is, i was only joking.

so how come you're posting at noon GMT time now?! you must been having a late one

[Greg Beckett]

Originally posted by crazy gra:

ok, cheers. i never have my defenders or even MCd that attacking, so i'm not sure how it'd affect me defensively. i might get a chance to give this a go tomorrow hopefully.

you mention that when you have your defenders on a high mentality e.g. 9 or 10, this means they're pushed up (which isn't suprising). do you change anything with the d-line in accordance with changing the mentalities? i feel this would be more effective than applying barrows to the DCs.

i usually have a d-line of 8 as anything greater leaves too much space behind the defence IMO. i lower this to 6 for quick/direct teams with a very quick ST (i.e. 'the Bolton' style that i hate to play against), and reading in Cleon's thread, he lowered the d-line to 4 when playing very defensively.

so there's a possibly theory of changing d-line according to mentality, but i was just wondering if/how you alter it for your mentality theory.

When I play, my D-line depends on the opposition. So when I play normally, I leave my D-Line about two notches back from my mentality (so if playing to a 6 mentality I'll have 4 defensive line).

Against faster teams who'll counter me though, that sit back, I'll set it a little deeper to compensate. I mentioned about the barrows incase people are finding that there is too much space behind the d-line, and if it happens in a match that's a way of dealing with it.

So when you're attacking you're more spread out with the D-Line to stop counters, and defensivly if it's about two notches below the mentality this sets them deep whilst not leaving much space between the midfield, making the team compact. Then you do the usual defensive tactics - limit closing down overall so your team doesn't lose shape, but close down those with good long shots etc...

I'll be interested in wwfan's theory on D-Line's though. Mine's just how I play, I'm not saying it's what you have to do.

[crazy gra]

tried your mentality thoery, greg, although i had to have the sum of player's mentalities a little lower than what you say.

i don't like having my DCs on too high a mentality, so i had them at 8. i still increased most from what i have in my usual tactic but 18 was the highest that i had (which was for the FCa) as i don't like having anyone's settings too high.

i'll try your d-line idea too. i increased mine a lot from 8, but i think it was too high.

i'm really not sure about the d-line just yet, although i am sure that it's paired with mentality in that the more attacking you are, the higher the d-line should be. what i'm not sure about is how high to have it when on a mentality of 16 for example. i've always used 8, but perhaps it would help if i increased it.

i don't like having it too high as defenders are then often chasing back to a ball over the top, which means they're prone to an error, usually in the form of a weak back header that puts an opposition ST through one on one.

[Goncharenko]

A fantastic thread. Spent the last two days at work reading over it and I'm only on page 3.

Can someone guide me to supersaints theory on the defensive side of the game? I've seen it mentioned a few times on this thread and elsewhere.

Cheers guys, and again...great read.

[crazy gra]

don't know where it is, but basically you mirror the d-line with the CD of your DCs.

e.g. if you have a d-line of 8 then CD for your DCs should be 12.

the full backs' CD should be 2 notches higher than the DCs.

[Goncharenko]

Originally posted by crazy gra:

don't know where it is, but basically you mirror the d-line with the CD of your DCs.

e.g. if you have a d-line of 8 then CD for your DCs should be 12.

the full backs' CD should be 2 notches higher than the DCs.

Thanks crazy gra, all I was looking for! Appreciate the help the likes of you and FuSS have given me with your current tactics sets, looking to develop my own now.

[Greg Beckett]

Originally posted by crazy gra:

tried your mentality thoery, greg, although i had to have the sum of player's mentalities a little lower than what you say.

i don't like having my DCs on too high a mentality, so i had them at 8. i still increased most from what i have in my usual tactic but 18 was the highest that i had (which was for the FCa) as i don't like having anyone's settings too high.

i'll try your d-line idea too. i increased mine a lot from 8, but i think it was too high.

i'm really not sure about the d-line just yet, although i am sure that it's paired with mentality in that the more attacking you are, the higher the d-line should be. what i'm not sure about is how high to have it when on a mentality of 16 for example. i've always used 8, but perhaps it would help if i increased it.

i don't like having it too high as defenders are then often chasing back to a ball over the top, which means they're prone to an error, usually in the form of a weak back header that puts an opposition ST through one on one.

As I play more attacking I have my D-Line further back, as teams play direct and quicker as you said. The more attacking the mentality of the defender though, means their play should be focused more on playing attacking balls, which is why in mine they don't tend to make misjudged back passes. It depends on your DC's decisions and concentration really.

Setting the D-Line too far back though might leave a massive gap between the midfield and the defence. I don't know if the mentality would level it out. So if you're doing that, I'd suggest setting Defender's passing to more direct so they don't lose the ball in this area.

Also of course, the higher mentality of your ST's the less forward runs they should do incase they go offside. So you could have someone on 20, but if you set their forward runs to rarely, and through balls to mixed/often (depending on their passing ability) they'll be playing more effectively. However all out-attack is not always the solution for breaking down a team, but if you want to play a team mentality of 15/16 with this theory, that's how you'd have to try and make it work. That's why with this theory 5 and 15 are the new extreme's, opposed to 1 and 20, as you have to try and balance your team around the team mentality.

[crazy gra]

You've just contradicted yourself there, greg:

When I play, my D-line depends on the opposition. So when I play normally, I leave my D-Line about two notches back from my mentality (so if playing to a 6 mentality I'll have 4 defensive line).

As I play more attacking I have my D-Line further back

I think it's better to have the d-line further forward when attacking and having it further back when defending, therefore having pairing between it and mentality.

[Ans Gulrik]

Originally posted by crazy gra:

You've just contradicted yourself there, greg:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> When I play, my D-line depends on the opposition. So when I play normally, I leave my D-Line about two notches back from my mentality (so if playing to a 6 mentality I'll have 4 defensive line).

As I play more attacking I have my D-Line further back

I think it's better to have the d-line further forward when attacking and having it further back when defending, therefore having pairing between it and mentality. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I always have the D-Line on 5, both for Attacking and Defensive formations. Sometimes I lower it one or two notches, if the AI gets chances. Unfortunately this is so effective for any kind of game plan, that the slider is not nearly as relevant as it ought to be - IMO.

I used to play pushing up with attacking formations, but there is no benefit doing so. You often win the ball back quickly, but infact it is better not to win it back to early, but rather when the AI starts to go forward.

[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 crazy gra:

You've just contradicted yourself there, greg:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> When I play, my D-line depends on the opposition. So when I play normally, I leave my D-Line about two notches back from my mentality (so if playing to a 6 mentality I'll have 4 defensive line).

As I play more attacking I have my D-Line further back

I think it's better to have the d-line further forward when attacking and having it further back when defending, therefore having pairing between it and mentality. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I always have the D-Line on 5, both for Attacking and Defensive formations. Sometimes I lower it one or two notches, if the AI gets chances. Unfortunately this is so effective for any kind of game plan, that the slider is not nearly as relevant as it ought to be - IMO.

I used to play pushing up with attacking formations, but there is no benefit doing so. You often win the ball back quickly, but infact it is better not to win it back to early, but rather when the AI starts to go forward. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Even with ultra-attacking mentalities (range 15 upwards across the board)?

[crazy gra]

had to post that last one in a fit of haste, but going back to what you said:

As I play more attacking I have my D-Line further back, as teams play direct and quicker as you said

on that matter, i think a low d-line does work better against direct and quick opponents, whereas a higher d-line may be more suited to teams who play a possession game. i'm basing this on my games against bolton, who i struggled to beat quite a few times.

they were managing to exploit the space behind my defence even though i had a d-line of 8. tried pushing it up to 15 but that didn't work either, even though i put my keeper's mentality up a little i think.

then i tried lowering it to 6. this worked an absolute treat as i was so much more solid in defence.

like i said earlier, d-line could be sort of paired with mentality but only when the opposition are playing a possession game i.e. short and slow.

another thing i have been thinking about is width. again, this is based on the bolton game but that's because i seemed to hit the nail on the head, so to speak, after i tweaked somethings. i was getting results like 2-2 and losing 2-1 against them until i changed the 'right' things.

as well as putting the d-line at 6, i played with my normal passing and tempo of 6. before this i had been playing quicker and more direct. for those who haven't read cleon's thread, he plays the opposite way to what the scout report says. playing a possession game against bolton really seemed to help me, even though i hadn't (before then) usually played this way in away games before. something figured that i needed to try to keep the ball more than before and this style worked much better.

although i started the passing-tempo-width theory, i decided pushing width up to 15 in this game despite having tempo and passing at 6. going forward, the moves seemed a lot better and i think i had slightly better chances because of this. i think width of 15 worked well, because i now remember that i focussed passing down the wings due to bolton having 3 cental midfielders.

In summary:

1. The higher the mentality, the higher the d-line should be when playing against possession-minded teams.

2. When playing against high tempo and direct passing teams, the d-line should be quite low.

3. Playing an opposite style to the opposition may be more effective. i.e. They play short/slow, then you play direct/quick and vice versa. I'm only going to apply this to away games though, as I like to keep the same system for home games.

4. Width should be wider when focusing passing down the flanks. I'm going to try passing down the flanks in most games now, not just when the opposition have three central midfielders.

[Ans Gulrik]

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 crazy gra:

You've just contradicted yourself there, greg:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> When I play, my D-line depends on the opposition. So when I play normally, I leave my D-Line about two notches back from my mentality (so if playing to a 6 mentality I'll have 4 defensive line).

As I play more attacking I have my D-Line further back

I think it's better to have the d-line further forward when attacking and having it further back when defending, therefore having pairing between it and mentality. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I always have the D-Line on 5, both for Attacking and Defensive formations. Sometimes I lower it one or two notches, if the AI gets chances. Unfortunately this is so effective for any kind of game plan, that the slider is not nearly as relevant as it ought to be - IMO.

I used to play pushing up with attacking formations, but there is no benefit doing so. You often win the ball back quickly, but infact it is better not to win it back to early, but rather when the AI starts to go forward. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Even with ultra-attacking mentalities (range 15 upwards across the board)? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

No - I can not say that I know if it will work with very high mentality (With this game general statements are usually wrong, cause there are simply too many factors), cause I never use high mentality.

What are high mentality really good for? Aesthetic purposes? My aMC has the highest mentality in my team and that is 12. My team mentality is max. 14 and that is for games against teams that wants to sit back. I do not even raise it vs. 10 men. I rather fiddle with Width and Focus Passing for this.

I think it is a mistake to try and dominate to much in FM07. I realized because I found it sligthly easier to win PL with the weaker sides, than with the stronger ones. Even after a couple of seasons when my team is getting stronger I try to avoid it, though it obviously become harder (Next experiment is not to sign players with to much potential, but rather good consistency, to see if it will make the AI more positive playing against me).

By the way wwfan: Thanks for the very low closing down for DC advice. I do use a very high closing down (16) for one of my DC's when the AI use a single striker and no players on the AM level, though.

[Greg Beckett]

Originally posted by crazy gra:

You've just contradicted yourself there, greg:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> When I play, my D-line depends on the opposition. So when I play normally, I leave my D-Line about two notches back from my mentality (so if playing to a 6 mentality I'll have 4 defensive line).

As I play more attacking I have my D-Line further back

I think it's better to have the d-line further forward when attacking and having it further back when defending, therefore having pairing between it and mentality. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I didn't . This was in my first post on D-Line's:

Against faster teams who'll counter me though, that sit back, I'll set it a little deeper to compensate. I mentioned about the barrows incase people are finding that there is too much space behind the d-line, and if it happens in a match that's a way of dealing with it.

So when you're attacking you're more spread out with the D-Line to stop counters, and defensivly if it's about two notches below the mentality this sets them deep whilst not leaving much space between the midfield, making the team compact. Then you do the usual defensive tactics - limit closing down overall so your team doesn't lose shape, but close down those with good long shots etc...

[Greg Beckett]

Though I think you're right in identifying two types of defensive teams. I assumed that if I play the more attacking, they'll just revert to countering, but you do get them 'possession battle' games where the play & possession itself is pretty even, but you're just set to an attacking mentality and them a little more defensive.

[crazy gra]

The easiest ways to determine the mentality of the opposition is from the match odds and the manager's playing mentality. For example, I just played Wigan and although I was 1-4 favourites to win, Jewell's mentality is adventurous.

They did attack quite a bit (and they were at home too), but they also played quite direct and quick so they were likely to create a few chances. They didn't create any great chances though.

I've also raised tackling for my STs from rarely to mixed. I have them closing down often, but they don't get the ball off the defenders or keeper much, although after changing tackling to mixed, they were better at punishing mistakes.

[Stella_Fella]

Is anyone else really struggling second season? At home I cannot seem to score. I have played 28 and scored 40. Only getting 1.4 per game.

Is this common?

[Stella_Fella]

Originally posted by Stella_Fella:

Is anyone else really struggling second season? At home I cannot seem to score. I have played 28 and scored 40. Only getting 1.4 per game.

Is this common?

I forgot to add, I always seem to concede last minute/late goals. I have been 2-0 up with 10 mins to play 6 times, and drawn 2-2.

[crazy gra]

Originally posted by Stella_Fella:

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

Is anyone else really struggling second season? At home I cannot seem to score. I have played 28 and scored 40. Only getting 1.4 per game.

Is this common?

I forgot to add, I always seem to concede last minute/late goals. I have been 2-0 up with 10 mins to play 6 times, and drawn 2-2. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

how did you do in your first season? if you did better than expected, especially if you've got promoted, then you'll have to change the way you play. if you tell us how you did in the first season, it'll be easier to explain why your second season is as it is.

as for late goals, teams will often change to the 4-2-4 formation, so you need to play very defensive so stop them scoring. also playing counter attack will help you get another on the break.

[Stella_Fella]

Originally posted by crazy gra:

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

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

Is anyone else really struggling second season? At home I cannot seem to score. I have played 28 and scored 40. Only getting 1.4 per game.

Is this common?

I forgot to add, I always seem to concede last minute/late goals. I have been 2-0 up with 10 mins to play 6 times, and drawn 2-2. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

how did you do in your first season? if you did better than expected, especially if you've got promoted, then you'll have to change the way you play. if you tell us how you did in the first season, it'll be easier to explain why your second season is as it is.

as for late goals, teams will often change to the 4-2-4 formation, so you need to play very defensive so stop them scoring. also playing counter attack will help you get another on the break. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

OK, I am playing as Rosenborg. First season, I came second (lost on final day). I am favourites for most games now, but last year I was 6th favourite for the title.

In UEFA Cup I am dominating my games, and scoring well, but in the league, I cannot buy a win.

[kevtrev]

Originally posted by crazy gra:

I think it's better to have the d-line further forward when attacking and having it further back when defending, therefore having pairing between it and mentality.

though certainly no expert, i concur. my most successful run to date (and sadly it's still nothing to boast about) has come about through playing deep/direct/quick/c-attacking when defensive and progressively higher/slower/shorter as i become more attacking.

but what of the ai's quick counter? i found it helpful to compare the pace of my deepest defender with that of their fastest striker, and adjust the defensive line accordingly

eg normally with team mentality 13 i'd have my dline at 11. now i look at their sc, with pace 19. sturgis, my deepest dc, has pace 17. so the dline goes down 2 clicks.

how does this sound to all you geniuses out there?

[wwfan]

I finally managed to complete my current ideas on playing FM07. As there is so much information (as usual I have been overly verbose) I have started TT&F IV: New Strategies and Theories for '07 to support them. For those still wanting to build Rule of Two tactics I will happily continue giving advice in this thread. If the thread falls out of use then I will happily concentrate all my efforts on the newer version.

Good luck and play well.

wwfan

[Guest]

Hi all.

I have a question for wwfan, the greatest tactician in this forum! I'm still playing fm '06 because i've not bought the new one yet, and I'm trying to implement your ideas. i'm playing italian serie A with Chievo and i'm having great success: I'm 2nd behind Juventus, I've lost only 2 games of 30, so I can say I'm quite satisfied. So what is my problem? I have lost the match against Juventus and I got very angry: the game was Juve-Chievo, so I decided to use the most defensive tactic, 4-4-2 diamond with sarrowed FCs and barrowed AMC according to your ideas(narrow formation, time wasting 15,...) and it was great! After some minutes I scored and I felt very happy. But the problem is now!Juve reacted with ( I think ) an even more offensive formation and I didn't know how to tweak my formation because it was already the most defensive i could build with your teaches! So they scored two goals and I lose the match! The same thing happend against Inter in the Italian Cup semi -final so I got very frustrated. How could I behave in this case? Thanks for your patience and sorry for my poor english.

[wwfan]

Originally posted by omega3rx:

Hi all.

I have a question for wwfan, the greatest tactician in this forum! I'm still playing fm '06 because i've not bought the new one yet, and I'm trying to implement your ideas. i'm playing italian serie A with Chievo and i'm having great success: I'm 2nd behind Juventus, I've lost only 2 games of 30, so I can say I'm quite satisfied. So what is my problem? I have lost the match against Juventus and I got very angry: the game was Juve-Chievo, so I decided to use the most defensive tactic, 4-4-2 diamond with sarrowed FCs and barrowed AMC according to your ideas(narrow formation, time wasting 15,...) and it was great! After some minutes I scored and I felt very happy. But the problem is now!Juve reacted with ( I think ) an even more offensive formation and I didn't know how to tweak my formation because it was already the most defensive i could build with your teaches! So they scored two goals and I lose the match! The same thing happend against Inter in the Italian Cup semi -final so I got very frustrated. How could I behave in this case? Thanks for your patience and sorry for my poor english.

I'm assuming you had un-farrowed (forward arrowed) your wingers and side-arrowed your attackers with foucs passing down both flanks? That is what I would have done. You do have to remember the tactic is not unbeatable, just very, very solid. I would also have encouraged at half-time if it was 1-0 to you or 1-1.

[Guest]

Yes,of course, wingers un-farrowed, s-arrowed attackers with focus passing down the flanks and also a b-arrowed AMC because I use a 4-4-2 diamond formation.

I know the tactic is beatable, but what I think is that against such quality teams I should change something in the tactic when I score the first goal because the AI change something in its one,too! I thought to split the mentality down (2 notches) for all players. What do you think about that? If I can play better than Juve when we are 0-0, why I couldn't when I'm winning 1-0? Even if I'll lose, I mean, it doesn't matter. I would only like to continue playing a nice football.

[wwfan]

Originally posted by omega3rx:

Yes,of course, wingers un-farrowed, s-arrowed attackers with focus passing down the flanks and also a b-arrowed AMC because I use a 4-4-2 diamond formation.

I know the tactic is beatable, but what I think is that against such quality teams I should change something in the tactic when I score the first goal because the AI change something in its one,too! I thought to split the mentality down (2 notches) for all players. What do you think about that? If I can play better than Juve when we are 0-0, why I couldn't when I'm winning 1-0? Even if I'll lose, I mean, it doesn't matter. I would only like to continue playing a nice football.

I never used to barrow my AMC. I would probably have started against Juve with my alternate tactic, which was a 4-2-3-1, incorporating two DMCs and an AMC. As I got stronger player for player I started using the defensive Diamond less and less and began to use the alternate as the standard away tactic against good sides, as it attacked with four players (wingers, AMC, FC) rather than the Diamonds three (FCs and AMC). Barrowing your AMC may well have compromised any attacking potency the Away Diamond had.