Jump to content

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


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, wixxi said:

I understand that they provide variation in behaviour, but I know for example that the 'curls ball' trait allows the player to curl the ball more successfully than someone without the trait, assuming attributes are the same ('Improves the player’s ability to curl the ball above and beyond his ability as already determined by his attributes.)

So I'm just wondering are there other traits similar in this regard, or is this improving effect specific to this trait

Looking through the manual, it seems to be very much a unique trait.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 16.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

4 hours ago, Jervaj said:

When looking at a player's tactical familiarity for P/R/D, what does it mean when the bar is partially filled brightly and partially with a darker shade? Its usually still partially unfilled in this scenario.

Have a look at the tooltip. It suggests that those with bright green are leading the squad in terms of familiarity with their P/R/D in the tactic. The darker shade indicates those who are trailing the rest of the squad.

4 hours ago, Jervaj said:

Why may be a fast player (15/16  in respective attributes) complaining in the pre match screen that the TI early crosses doesnt suit his speed? In other teams with slower players it never was an issue that was brought up.

Think about what you're asking of the player. If we're talking about a wide midfielder (M or AM strata) then he'll receive the ball (relying on off the ball perhaps) move a little forward and swing early crosses. Not too much chance to utilise their pace. While they're obviously correct, your way could still be the best use of them in the tactic.

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Jervaj said:

Why some players seem to stay completely unfamiliar, or get stuck at a certain level of familiarity for P/R/D whie they are fully familiar with all the other aspects of the tactic and everyone else has been fully familiar with P/R/D for ages?

Looking at my own team, the players who are lacking (or trailing behind the others) in familiarity, are the ones who I don't consistently play in the same positions. It also seems like players are more familiar with their positions they 'started' the season in (perhaps more pre-season matches in it, combined with match practice etc type training sessions) and during the season it's maybe a bit more difficult to adapt quickly in terms of familiarity. Not 100% sure. Do you notice any patterns? That might be a good starting point.

5 hours ago, Jervaj said:

When using strength additional focus, I very often get feedback from the coach mentioning that Jumping Reach cannot be further increased with additional focus training. Does this mean that the focus gets partly wasted, or its the effort redirected fully to strength? Can jumping reach still be increased by individual and general training in this case? Also, why does it happen so often while I have never seen such feedback for any other attribute/focus?

Here, I would assume that both still get an equal focus (as the training session isn't going to change) but that your player just won't benefit (according to the coach) from the JR training.

 

---

For both questions, I'll tag @Seb Wassell, just in case he's in a position to answer them more accurately.

Link to post
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, HUNT3R said:

Have a look at the tooltip. It suggests that those with bright green are leading the squad in terms of familiarity with their P/R/D in the tactic. The darker shade indicates those who are trailing the rest of the squad.

Ah. True. The tooltip wasn't very clear. It just says its affecting the overall team tactical cohesion and that he is behind the overall team level. Didn't make the connectiong, but now that you mention it the darker shade its clearly the team average. So its a comaprison which only appears for those that lag behind. Thanks!

39 minutes ago, HUNT3R said:

Think about what you're asking of the player. If we're talking about a wide midfielder (M or AM strata) then he'll receive the ball (relying on off the ball perhaps) move a little forward and swing early crosses. Not too much chance to utilise their pace. While they're obviously correct, your way could still be the best use of them in the tactic.

The thing is that this is a striker who complains. So he is the one receiving the crosses not doing them (most of the time at least). A good pace in theory would help him been up the pitch in time to receive. At least that was my thinking.

 

18 minutes ago, HUNT3R said:

Looking at my own team, the players who are lacking (or trailing behind the others) in familiarity, are the ones who I don't consistently play in the same positions. It also seems like players are more familiar with their positions they 'started' the season in (perhaps more pre-season matches in it, combined with match practice etc type training sessions) and during the season it's maybe a bit more difficult to adapt quickly in terms of familiarity. Not 100% sure. Do you notice any patterns? That might be a good starting point.

Thats the thing. I looked for patterns and I find none. In this case I have been playing everyone in the same positions barring very notable exceptions due to injuries or very high match congestion. In fact, the guy that has actually played more often or his main intended role (one of the strikers) is actually full in this department. CDs have never changed their role or position, and I have a couple role at about 50%, 2 others that at around 80-90% and the 2 remianing at 100%. Then 2 of my first choice midfielders have 0 (one has never changed its role, one started the preseason on another role but was changed to the current one already before the season start). The 3rd one is 100%. Of the second choice, 1 is 100%, 1 is 70% and 1 is like 10-15%. Of strikers, all are 100% except one. Roles have been consistent all season and the one that lags (around 40%) has always played on the same one.

So as you can see is really confusing as similar situations yield different results, and in other cases when the results differ its even counterintuitive as the ones suffering seem to be the ones that shouldn't as others that don't had to adapt to changes.

18 minutes ago, HUNT3R said:

Here, I would assume that both still get an equal focus (as the training session isn't going to change) but that your player just won't benefit (according to the coach) from the JR training.

 

---

For both questions, I'll tag @Seb Wassell, just in case he's in a position to answer them more accurately.

Thats a shame then. Makes the focus less worth it when this pops up, and it does pop up a lot. Its not clear why even. Any idea about the follow up questions? Maybe Seb can help.

 

Thanks for your help!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I had a reasonable set pieces set up which netted me a decent amount of goals, however this season, its very lackluster (even conceding on setpieces often). Does the AI grow wise to it and do you need to mix it up more?

Link to post
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, eXistenZ said:

I had a reasonable set pieces set up which netted me a decent amount of goals, however this season, its very lackluster (even conceding on setpieces often). Does the AI grow wise to it and do you need to mix it up more?

No it doesn't. Maybe your squad regressed a bit or you got promoted and facing tougher defenses?

Try to train "Set Piece Delivery" during the week. That helps.

Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Sharkn20 said:

No it doesn't. Maybe your squad regressed a bit or you got promoted and facing tougher defenses?

Try to train "Set Piece Delivery" during the week. That helps.

No on the contrary I'm in the same league and I evengot a better corner taker.

 

I've been mainly training on chance conversion as finishing is really poor but i'll put in a few sessions

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, eXistenZ said:

No on the contrary I'm in the same league and I evengot a better corner taker.

 

I've been mainly training on chance conversion as finishing is really poor but i'll put in a few sessions

Chance conversion only trains the attributes, but doesn't give you a Bonus during match days.

To find that bonus in match day, you want to train whatever is that you want to focus that game on "Match Preparation" or "Set Pieces" Sections, those do give you a small bonus come match day.

Link to post
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Sharkn20 said:

Chance conversion only trains the attributes, but doesn't give you a Bonus during match days.

To find that bonus in match day, you want to train whatever is that you want to focus that game on "Match Preparation" or "Set Pieces" Sections, those do give you a small bonus come match day.

oh yes, i know, i always do defensive shape and attacking movement before a match. But the finishing of my team is problematic in general, hence the focus on chance conversion.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Nick_CB @MiguelSanchez The questions you asked here are not supposed to be asked in this Quickfire thread, because this thread is exclusively about simple questions that can be dealt with equally simple answers.

Therefore, please start your own respective separate topics and you'll get proper feedback there. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

A new question meanwhile we wait given soemthing just came up.

In my current save two new links just formed showing a partnership, but, for the first time in my experience, the second part of the tooltip reads: "However, the roles assigned to both players are far from suitable and do not work well together"

Why is the game saying that? Should I worry or try to fix it somehow? Until now, all the partenership tooltips I had seen always said "The roles assigned to both players are also well suited to each individual"

In this case the roles are an AF and a CF. It appeared almost at the same time for the main pair and backup pair of strikers. Given the text of the positive tooltipe I wonder if it means more in a way that in this case the roles don't suite the players, but in both cases the AF is considered the best role for the players in that position. For the CFs they are the second best role for the player, tied in "stars" with the first one. not like is likely for CF to be your best role given how complete it is.

Does the game think its a bad idea to pair an AF and a CF for some reason?

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Experienced Defender said:

@Nick_CB @MiguelSanchez The questions you asked here are not supposed to be asked in this Quickfire thread, because this thread is exclusively about simple questions that can be dealt with equally simple answers.

Therefore, please start your own respective separate topics and you'll get proper feedback there. 

Sorry!! Thanks for the help!

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Jervaj said:

A new question meanwhile we wait given soemthing just came up.

In my current save two new links just formed showing a partnership, but, for the first time in my experience, the second part of the tooltip reads: "However, the roles assigned to both players are far from suitable and do not work well together"

Why is the game saying that? Should I worry or try to fix it somehow? Until now, all the partenership tooltips I had seen always said "The roles assigned to both players are also well suited to each individual"

In this case the roles are an AF and a CF. It appeared almost at the same time for the main pair and backup pair of strikers. Given the text of the positive tooltipe I wonder if it means more in a way that in this case the roles don't suite the players, but in both cases the AF is considered the best role for the players in that position. For the CFs they are the second best role for the player, tied in "stars" with the first one. not like is likely for CF to be your best role given how complete it is.

Does the game think its a bad idea to pair an AF and a CF for some reason?

Honestly, I would ignore that tooltip (in the same way I ignore the assistant's advice, for example). 

Btw, there is absolutely nothing wrong in a partnership of roles such as CF and AF per se.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, bielsadidnothingwrong said:

If you're playing attacking football and opt to waste time, does this lead to higher possession?

I don't know if it would lead to more possession - I guess it would in purely statistical terms - but I do know that attacking football and time-wasting absolutely do not go hand in hand. 

 

4 minutes ago, bielsadidnothingwrong said:

will this impact anything other than literally wasting time off the clock, such as frustrating the opposition or stifling their rhythm? 

Time-wasting is essentially a defensive-minded instruction (even though it's among in-possession TIs). Its only purpose is to help you preserve a result you are pleased with toward the end of a match (usually the last 5-10 minutes).

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Kcinnay said:

Does playing with a higer mentality make players defend more agressively in duels? Or hasn't mentality no impact on that?

It does shift pressing urgency, LoE and LoD upwards. So they would more like to close down opponents. I dont know if thats what you meant by more agressive in duels though.

 

@oakesypvfc Without further info it would be hard to tell. You will need to showsituations where you believe they are udnerrated to weigh then and maybe SI take a look.

From my general post patch experience, they get pretty good ratings relativelly often if they are creating well. The only "issue" I noticed is that when they contribute mainly defensively they do struggle a bit to get good ones.

 

 

Will take the opportunity to add a question of my own:

Is there any way to have conditional man marking?

I hardly ever use it, but I have noticed sometimes it can be very useful. For example man marking with a tall and stronger CD a wide attacker that happens to be very good in the air (sepcially if he loos to penetrate the area like an IF), and I notice that my fullback (despite been quite good physically for a wide player) keeps getting beaten by him.

However, while this works well in more static defensive situations, this makes the given player follow his marked man anywhere in transitions, even beyond the teams pressing line, which breaks all the defensive discipline and tires him out for no gain.

Is there a way to have this man marking be more conditional by limiting it to an area of the pitch like your own half or the final third? And maybe on set peices on top of that? Because set peices you can set people to man mark, but you don't seem to be able to set who marks who unless you use this.

Edited by Jervaj
Link to post
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Jervaj said:

It does shift pressing urgency, LoE and LoD upwards. So they would more like to close down opponents. I dont know if thats what you meant by more agressive in duels though.

 

@oakesypvfc Without further info it would be hard to tell. You will need to showsituations where you believe they are udnerrated to weigh then and maybe SI take a look.

From my general post patch experience, they get pretty good ratings relativelly often if they are creating well. The only "issue" I noticed is that when they contribute mainly defensively they do struggle a bit to get good ones.

 

 

Will take the opportunity to add a question of my own:

Is there any way to have conditional man marking?

I hardly ever use it, but I have noticed sometimes it can be very useful. For example man marking with a tall and stronger CD a wide attacker that happens to be very good in the air (sepcially if he loos to penetrate the area like an IF), and I notice that my fullback (despite been quite good physically for a wide player) keeps getting beaten by him.

However, while this works well in more static defensive situations, this makes the given player follow his marked man anywhere in transitions, even beyond the teams pressing line, which breaks all the defensive discipline and tires him out for no gain.

Is there a way to have this man marking be more conditional by limiting it to an area of the pitch like your own half or the final third? And maybe on set peices on top of that? Because set peices you can set people to man mark, but you don't seem to be able to set who marks who unless you use this.

Unfortunately it is not possible, if you man mark someone they will follow that man from the transition phase, breaking all the defensive structure.

You can always add tight marking as OI, but it will be marked by the closest man on your team's defensive phase.

Edited by Sharkn20
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Sharkn20 said:

Unfortunately it is not possible, if you man mark someone they will follow that man from the transition phase, breaking all the defensive structure.

You can always add tight marking as OI, but it will be marked by the closest man on your team's defensive phase.

In this case I had the TI OI due to this particular threat. And it "worked". In the sense that yeah, the defender was breathing on his neck.

The thing its that it was the fullback doing the tight mark, and he was getting beaten in the air every time despite its decent stats, due to the IF been top class and very good in that department.

It's a shame because it feels like a very valid and sensible tactical option. Will maybe open a suggestion  for it.

 

Thanks!

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Jervaj said:

In this case I had the TI OI due to this particular threat. And it "worked". In the sense that yeah, the defender was breathing on his neck.

The thing its that it was the fullback doing the tight mark, and he was getting beaten in the air every time despite its decent stats, due to the IF been top class and very good in that department.

It's a shame because it feels like a very valid and sensible tactical option. Will maybe open a suggestion  for it.

 

Thanks!

You can always put your CD in as a FB - Def and cover that IF man mark all day.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Sharkn20 said:

You can always put your CD in as a FB - Def and cover that IF man mark all day.

The out of position malus would affect a lot several attributes that mattter for marking though, no? 

Aside of not been able to play the attacking part of the role properly.

Edited by Jervaj
Link to post
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Jervaj said:

The out of position malus would affect a lot several attributes that mattter for marking though, no? 

Aside of not been able to play the attacking part of the role properly.

As long as the player has the attributes to play in a certain position - role, it doesn't really matter if he doesn't play the position.

Obviously you will not get the attacking benefits of a FB and you will want that CD to stay back. Buy that's a sacrifice that you will have to make.

IRL CD don't cover wing guys either, as they are too slow for them, they support the FBs or alternatively the Winger has a more defensive approach to again support the FB.

It's about pros and cons, like a short blanket, you rather cover your feet or your head? Is your choice as a Coach.

Link to post
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Sharkn20 said:

As long as the player has the attributes to play in a certain position - role, it doesn't really matter if he doesn't play the position.

But does not playing out of position hurt a lot things like decisions, positioning and other mentals? Which could make the point of making him mark that player moot as he will lose that extra effectiveness that motivated the change.

And would also hurt the FB that has to play in the center out of position now too. 

Quote

Obviously you will not get the attacking benefits of a FB and you will want that CD to stay back. Buy that's a sacrifice that you will have to make.

But does not playing out of position hurt things like decisions, positioning and other mentals? Which could make the point of making him mark that player moot as he will lose that effectiveness.

For the attacking part, yeah I could always just change the role and make him stay back and focus on making that sacrifice. But that wouldn't adress the first point.

Quote

IRL CD don't cover wing guys either, as they are too slow for them, they support the FBs or alternatively the Winger has a more defensive approach to again support the FB.

Well, thats why I asked what I asked. Indeed covering a wide player in the whole pitch with a CD its a bad idea. But if you were able to just tell the player to mark him in the final third/the box that point would be moot.

Quote

It's about pros and cons, like a short blanket, you rather cover your feet or your head? Is your choice as a Coach.

Yeah, of course. The thing is that the options available feel unnecesarilly limited. What I wanted to do was sacrifice some central coverage to get this stronger and more adept at marking player mark this other one. It does seem like a sensible option to have, given it actually in practice it would be far easier and more realistic to implement thatn suddenly asking your CD "Guess what, you are fullback now"

The only options been, play two players out of position (with both the attribute and tactical implications that has), or follow the player all throughout the pitch seem too extreme to be the only options, even if its not bad they are there.
 

Edited by Jervaj
Link to post
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Jervaj said:

But does not playing out of position hurt a lot things like decisions, positioning and other mentals? Which could make the point of making him mark that player moot as he will lose that extra effectiveness that motivated the change.

And would also hurt the FB that has to play in the center out of position now too. 

But does not playing out of position hurt things like decisions, positioning and other mentals? Which could make the point of making him mark that player moot as he will lose that effectiveness.

For the attacking part, yeah I could always just change the role and make him stay back and focus on making that sacrifice. But that wouldn't adress the first point.

Well, thats why I asked what I asked. Indeed covering a wide player in the whole pitch with a CD its a bad idea. But if you were able to just tell the player to mark him in the final third/the box that point would be moot.

Yeah, of course. The thing is that the options available feel unnecesarilly limited. What I wanted to do was sacrifice some central coverage to get this stronger and more adept at marking player mark this other one. It does seem like a sensible option to have, given it actually in practice it would be far easier and more realistic to implement thatn suddenly asking your CD "Guess what, you are fullback now"

The only options been, play two players out of position (with both the attribute and tactical implications that has), or follow the player all throughout the pitch seem too extreme to be the only options, even if its not bad they are there.
 

You can get your 3rd CD in the pitch instead of putting the FB as CD...

You would not be asking your CD to play AP-Su role, you are just telling him to stay back and defend that area of the pitch, don't pay attention to the green circles, that's just cosmetics.

For that particular thing that you want that CD to do, playing FB-De is more than enough. You can always highlight the attributes required to play that position / role and you will notice is not much different from CD-De. Just being a bit more athletic, that's all.

Is not ideal, but you can do that in FM21, any other suggestions, you can post in the suggestions forum for future editions.

Link to post
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, oakesypvfc said:

Is low ratings for central midfielders a bug?

 

4 hours ago, Jervaj said:

@oakesypvfc Without further info it would be hard to tell. You will need to show situations where you believe they are udnerrated to weigh then and maybe SI take a look

Yes, but in the relevant Bugs forum (not here).

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Sharkn20 said:

You can get your 3rd CD in the pitch instead of putting the FB as CD...

Oh, in general circumstances yeah, yeah, but the case that brought this up was an ongoing match and I needed the subs in other places.

1 minute ago, Sharkn20 said:

You would not be asking your CD to play AP-Su role, you are just telling him to stay back and defend that area of the pitch, don't pay attention to the green circles, that's just cosmetics.

For that particular thing that you want that CD to do, playing FB-De is more than enough. You can always highlight the attributes required to play that position / role and you will notice is not much different from CD-De. Just being a bit more athletic, that's all.

Oh I know. It would be the role I would use and the attribtues would mostly fit. The problem is not about the attributes. The problem is positionay training, which will make him behave as if he had lower mental attributes because he has no training (or just the minimal red one, Im not sure speaking from memory). 

I haven't mentioned the circles, inf act I do forget they exist often.

1 minute ago, Sharkn20 said:

Is not ideal, but you can do that in FM21, any other suggestions, you can post in the suggestions forum for future editions.

Yeah, thanks I basically wanted to know the options, I see basically what I wanted doesn't exist. Thats why I asked. I already opened the suggestion for future installments of the game as I find it would be a cool yet sensible tactical nuance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What is the effect of increasing a players mentality such as increasing a wing back on support from balanced to positive? Does it affect starting position, pressing intensity, risky passes etc?

Also is there any guides on player mentalities anywhere because I've had a look but couldn't find any?

Link to post
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, GShrieves said:

What is the effect of increasing a players mentality such as increasing a wing back on support from balanced to positive? Does it affect starting position, pressing intensity, risky passes etc?

Yes, it affects all of them. 

 

43 minutes ago, GShrieves said:

Also is there any guides on player mentalities anywhere because I've had a look but couldn't find any?

Really don't know. Although the player's individual mentality is primarily a result of the team mentality and his duty.

Link to post
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

Yes, it affects all of them. 

 

Really don't know. Although the player's individual mentality is primarily a result of the team mentality and his duty.

The main reason why I asked was because I noticed look for overlap increases my wing backs mentality. I take it this would have the same effect as increasing the team mentality from balanced to positive but only for my wingback rather than the whole team?

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, GShrieves said:

The main reason why I asked was because I noticed look for overlap increases my wing backs mentality

Yes, both overlaps and underlaps slightly increase the mentality of the related fullback (or wing-back, depending on the formation you use), but also slightly decrease the mentality of his wide partner (if there is one within the formation). 

 

1 hour ago, GShrieves said:

I take it this would have the same effect as increasing the team mentality from balanced to positive but only for my wingback rather than the whole team?

But if you increase the team mentality, then it automatically increases the mentality of all players, not only FB/WB. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

What better way to cancel the opposing midfielders? I notice that some teams, even weaker than mine, always have 2 midfielders(2 DM or 2 MC) with many complete passes (in certain situations with more than 100 passes)

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Nick_CB said:

What better way to cancel the opposing midfielders? I notice that some teams, even weaker than mine, always have 2 midfielders(2 DM or 2 MC) with many complete passes (in certain situations with more than 100 passes)

Try opposition instruction "always mark tighter" on those midfielders.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I seem to recall there being an overview of the types of central midfield roles and duties, categorized as 'runners', 'covering' and 'holding' midfielders + what separates the varius runners/covering/holding roles from each other. However, I can't seem to find it. Am I imagining this?

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Christopher S said:

I seem to recall there being an overview of the types of central midfield roles and duties, categorized as 'runners', 'covering' and 'holding' midfielders + what separates the varius runners/covering/holding roles from each other. However, I can't seem to find it. Am I imagining this?

I guess you are looking for this one?

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, brookie1402 said:

What is the difference between 'injury risk' and 'injury susceptibility'?

Injury susceptibility is a player's tendency to get injured in general. So a player with high susceptibility is likely to get injured more often than one with low.

Injury risk is the current risk of an injury and is affected by factors such as match fatigue and training intensity. So if a player has played a lot of matches in a short period of time or/and his individual training intensity is high, there is a greater risk than he may get injured.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Quick question re: pressing intensity. I've rarely, if ever, seen anyone use "less urgent" pressing intensity amongst the community. Would it ever have a use or is it something to preserve player fitness? I've been noodling with it for a few games and it is very passive, but could be somewhat effective. I just don't know if I'm barking up the wrong tree seeing it as anything other than a late game fatigue reducer. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

Injury susceptibility is a player's tendency to get injured in general. So a player with high susceptibility is likely to get injured more often than one with low.

Injury risk is the current risk of an injury and is affected by factors such as match fatigue and training intensity. So if a player has played a lot of matches in a short period of time or/and his individual training intensity is high, there is a greater risk than he may get injured.

I'm confused with injury susceptibility in that case. Is it not the same as injury proneness? Because I have a player with 'average' injury susceptibility where his coach report says he will have a problem with injuries. Yet I have someone in my squad with 'very high' susceptibility whose injury proneness is not mentioned on his coach report.

Edited by brookie1402
Link to post
Share on other sites

So I'm back wiith kinda the same question, because in a new career I kinda have the same issue:tons of blocked crosses that end up in corners because the winger/fullback just decides the best course of action is to kick it against the defender. This time I'm using a 4231 instead of 433, so there should be more people up front by default.

 

The weird thing is that I find very little online of this being an isue, cause for me it defenitly is. I end matches with 15+corners usually because this, and I'm not sure what you need to do to get better crosses.  Early crosses don't mater, they still wait ages.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hopefully a quick question. If I wanted play to mostly go be built up down the flanks, with players looking for wide players, then gravitating towards them to form overloads. Would wide + exploit both flanks be the right approach. generally speaking of course. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, eXistenZ said:

So I'm back wiith kinda the same question, because in a new career I kinda have the same issue:tons of blocked crosses that end up in corners because the winger/fullback just decides the best course of action is to kick it against the defender. This time I'm using a 4231 instead of 433, so there should be more people up front by default.

 

The weird thing is that I find very little online of this being an isue, cause for me it defenitly is. I end matches with 15+corners usually because this, and I'm not sure what you need to do to get better crosses.  Early crosses don't mater, they still wait ages.

While I will agree that FM ME tends to produce too many blocked crosses that end up as corners there is no such thing as better crosses even in FM where crosses are more effective than they are in real life. Crosses create low quality chances that you should not depend on.

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, zyfon5 said:

While I will agree that FM ME tends to produce too many blocked crosses that end up as corners there is no such thing as better crosses even in FM where crosses are more effective than they are in real life. Crosses create low quality chances that you should not depend on.

Oh thats definitly true, but then it becomes an issue of making your players take less crosses, and that is where I struggle. even with focus play through the middle and work ball into box the ball ends up on the wing somehow. Which roles/instructions in a 4231 should I use then?

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, eXistenZ said:

Oh thats definitly true, but then it becomes an issue of making your players take less crosses, and that is where I struggle. even with focus play through the middle and work ball into box the ball ends up on the wing somehow. Which roles/instructions in a 4231 should I use then?

The short answer will be you have to make sure there are a lot of passing options in the middle. The width created by the wingers or wingbacks is for you to lure the opposition to break their defensive shape. Sure you will still need to put in crosses from time to time if the opponents do not concede space in the middle but that is not something to rely upon primarily. If you want more detailed explanation you will need to make a separate thread.

Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, beverage1982 said:

Hopefully a quick question. If I wanted play to mostly go be built up down the flanks, with players looking for wide players, then gravitating towards them to form overloads. Would wide + exploit both flanks be the right approach. generally speaking of course. 

Generally speaking - yes.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a question about the 'Team Cohesion' panel within the dynamics screen.

I have just taken over a club and my team cohesion is rated as very poor. What influences this? I assumed it was related to how many new signings there had been at the club, however one of the bullet points offered says that the team's collective mental state is disappointing at the moment. Where does it pull this information from? I was thinking it was the squad morale but no-one in my first team squad has more below fairly good, and that is just one member. The rest are quite good or higher, with no-one above good. If my morale is above average then what determines that the mental state is disappointing. I'm particularly interested as it obviously affects my players decisions, positioning, and anticipation as stated in the bullet points.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 30/01/2021 at 15:10, beverage1982 said:

Quick question re: pressing intensity. I've rarely, if ever, seen anyone use "less urgent" pressing intensity amongst the community. Would it ever have a use or is it something to preserve player fitness? I've been noodling with it for a few games and it is very passive, but could be somewhat effective. I just don't know if I'm barking up the wrong tree seeing it as anything other than a late game fatigue reducer. 

I'd guess it'd be a more specialised instruction if you're wanting to form a compact defence and not have your players pulled out of their lines. Deny the opposition space to play into. Passive defence is always risky though.

On 31/01/2021 at 15:07, beverage1982 said:

Hopefully a quick question. If I wanted play to mostly go be built up down the flanks, with players looking for wide players, then gravitating towards them to form overloads. Would wide + exploit both flanks be the right approach. generally speaking of course. 

Exploit the flanks is mostly what you're looking for. Wide attacking width will help in that your players will spread the play to create more space for teammates but may hinder overlaps if you are too wide and your player is already on the line and can only play it back inside. Roles will also help. A wide playmaker will attract the ball and a Mezalla will also drift out wide to help overload as well. And having the wide player on support is more likely to build up play on the wing and bring others in than someone on attack who might want to get in behind. You could also have the Keeper distribute out wide from the start. So a few different ways to achieve it depending on the rest of your tactics and formation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, brookie1402 said:

I have a question about the 'Team Cohesion' panel within the dynamics screen.

I have just taken over a club and my team cohesion is rated as very poor. What influences this? I assumed it was related to how many new signings there had been at the club, however one of the bullet points offered says that the team's collective mental state is disappointing at the moment. Where does it pull this information from? I was thinking it was the squad morale but no-one in my first team squad has more below fairly good, and that is just one member. The rest are quite good or higher, with no-one above good. If my morale is above average then what determines that the mental state is disappointing. I'm particularly interested as it obviously affects my players decisions, positioning, and anticipation as stated in the bullet points.

Thought about this more and maybe the teams mental state being disappointing is an effect rather than the cause. So because of the amount of new players, this settling in period where they are unfamiliar with each other contributes to lower morale, just as it does with positioning, decisions, and anticipation?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...