Jump to content

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


Recommended Posts

13 minutes ago, mikcheck said:

If you want a player to cut inside sometimes and he has "cuts inside from both wings" traits, would you still use cut inside PI?

I don’t think you need the PI because he’s going to do it anyway unless you notice he’s not doing it as much as you’d like to

 

15 minutes ago, mikcheck said:

What relation do you have with your DL/LOE? Do you always keep it the same to define your playing style or you change it based on the opposition

I always keep it the same unless the opposition keeps getting behind and I’ve tried every other thing to stop then I’ll drop the DL but I never touch my LOE once I’ve settled with a particular style 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 16.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted (edited)
1 hora atrás, DarJ disse:

I don’t think you need the PI because he’s going to do it anyway unless you notice he’s not doing it as much as you’d like to

 

I always keep it the same unless the opposition keeps getting behind and I’ve tried every other thing to stop then I’ll drop the DL but I never touch my LOE once I’ve settled with a particular style 

Thanks.

Do you think this still is a mid block, consider the mentality and how bottom heavy this formation is, with a higher LOE? Or how would you do it to be a mid block?

 

hhhhh.jpg.4f846233cd7e158f3e008c6fead0e4cc.jpg

 

Edited by mikcheck
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, mikcheck said:

Thanks.

Do you think this still is a mid block, consider the mentality and how bottom heavy this formation is, with a higher LOE? Or how would you do it to be a mid block?

 

hhhhh.jpg.4f846233cd7e158f3e008c6fead0e4cc.jpg

 

I think it’s somewhere in between a high block and a mid block. Team mentality has nothing to do with with the block in my opinion 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I can't find this in a general search.

On the tactics screen, does a dashed line between players indicate a "bad" partnership (players at odds with each other) or does it indicate a partnership that is just forming?

Is there a documented hierarchy anywhere?

I always assumed a solid line is a well formed partnership and the color indicated the strength of that partnership. I assumed a dashed line was a shaky partnership. The partnership was new, but needed more time together to solidify.

Is that incorrect? Does a dashed line indicate that players shouldn't play together?

Edited by Harper
Link to post
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Harper said:

Is that incorrect? Does a dashed line indicate that players shouldn't play together?

It's fine to play them together, it can just be both players are on a patch of bad form, they don't hate each other or anything :D But yeah, it means they're not playing the best together, you can hover your mouse cursor over the lines 

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Harper said:

I can't find this in a general search.

On the tactics screen, does a dashed line between players indicate a "bad" partnership (players at odds with each other) or does it indicate a partnership that is just forming?

Is there a documented hierarchy anywhere?

I always assumed a solid line is a well formed partnership and the color indicated the strength of that partnership. I assumed a dashed line was a shaky partnership. The partnership was new, but needed more time together to solidify.

Is that incorrect? Does a dashed line indicate that players shouldn't play together?

 

2 hours ago, Johnny Ace said:

It's fine to play them together, it can just be both players are on a patch of bad form, they don't hate each other or anything :D But yeah, it means they're not playing the best together, you can hover your mouse cursor over the lines 

It doesn't really mean anything and descriptions lack any meaningful context.  For example if you play with a Ball Playing Defender / Central Defender partnership and the game looks at your BPD's attributes and goes "nope, in my opinion you're not an ideal BPD" it'll take some points away from their partnership line even if your players are actually performing really well in their assigned roles.

Use as a guide if you like but always check how your players are actually performing before you decide they're not playing the best together and make changes.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Hi,

I think it's a known issue that later in the game, most of newgens who play as fullbacks have poor dribling/crossing. Finding one with good values there it's like finding a coke in the desert.

My question is, if your tactic deploys an attacking fullback, would you still use that kind of a player there? With poor dribling/crossing? Or lets say you'd use him as a WB(s) and have him to learn "get forward" trait?

Edited by mikcheck
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, mikcheck said:

I think it's a known issue that later in the game, most of newgens who play as fullbacks have poor dribling/crossing.

Re-training players to be attacking fullbacks is the option I choose.

Link to post
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Johnny Ace said:

It's fine to play them together, it can just be both players are on a patch of bad form, they don't hate each other or anything :D But yeah, it means they're not playing the best together, you can hover your mouse cursor over the lines 

 

7 hours ago, herne79 said:

 

It doesn't really mean anything and descriptions lack any meaningful context.  For example if you play with a Ball Playing Defender / Central Defender partnership and the game looks at your BPD's attributes and goes "nope, in my opinion you're not an ideal BPD" it'll take some points away from their partnership line even if your players are actually performing really well in their assigned roles.

Use as a guide if you like but always check how your players are actually performing before you decide they're not playing the best together and make changes.

I don’t have the dashed line on my tactics, I just saw a question on reddit and realized I didn’t really know. Figured I’d come here and ask.

Hovering over the line wasn’t working for me, but if I click on a player from the formation panel then view the partnership panel, I can see a list and description of partnerships (although doesn’t always match the lines on the screen 🤷‍♂️).

Main point though is that the line and color has more to do with form rather than dynamics and tactical familiarity?

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Harper said:

Main point though is that the line and color has more to do with form rather than dynamics and tactical familiarity?

Form never was included or, if it was, was swamped by so much other nonsense it was masked.  It’s like when a player tells you before a match he is uncomfortable playing the assigned role, even though he’s done it all year and he’s consistently one of your best performers.

Personally I think these “features” are some of the worst things recently added to the game to the point of being misleading.

 If you want to know a player’s form, look at their form :thup:.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What will happen if I set team width to narrow, select two IWs on a 4-1-4-1 DM Wide and add on both the PIs "Stay Wider"?

I know that all things are relative in tactical terms, I would just like to understand what would be the effects of this combination.

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Tsuru said:

What will happen if I set team width to narrow, select two IWs on a 4-1-4-1 DM Wide and add on both the PIs "Stay Wider"?

I know that all things are relative in tactical terms, I would just like to understand what would be the effects of this combination.

I guess they will sit slightly wider than your FBs, give it a try out 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Agora, Johnny Ace disse:

I guess they will sit slightly wider than your FBs, give it a try out 

The original possession tactic does not reduce width but my strategy does, and having them sitting slightly wider than my FB´s is exactly what I want. So thank you!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wondering if someone can help me, I'm doing an academy save so i can't sign anyone and it means i have to tailor my tactics to the players available. The tactic i've been using for the past season or so has generally been excellent but i can't finish chances to save my life. I have lots of technically good players who can play central midfield or the number 10 role but barely any wide players and any i have are crap and ineffective. I also only have 1 decent striker who is very good at scoring headers but is appalling when he gets chances at his feet. I also have full backs who are very good going forward and get a good amount of assists.

The tactic i've been using is 433 which like i said has been brilliant up until the chance needs scoring but no one can. So i guess what i'm asking is is there any other formation you can recommend with the players i have. No good wingers, loads of creative central players, good full backs and a striker who can only score with his head. Since my creative players can't score goals it has to be centered around providing chances for the striker on his head, he's also pretty crap in the build up play so i need players around him. Any help would be appreciated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Captain Blackadder said:

Wondering if someone can help me, I'm doing an academy save so i can't sign anyone and it means i have to tailor my tactics to the players available. The tactic i've been using for the past season or so has generally been excellent but i can't finish chances to save my life. I have lots of technically good players who can play central midfield or the number 10 role but barely any wide players and any i have are crap and ineffective. I also only have 1 decent striker who is very good at scoring headers but is appalling when he gets chances at his feet. I also have full backs who are very good going forward and get a good amount of assists.

The tactic i've been using is 433 which like i said has been brilliant up until the chance needs scoring but no one can. So i guess what i'm asking is is there any other formation you can recommend with the players i have. No good wingers, loads of creative central players, good full backs and a striker who can only score with his head. Since my creative players can't score goals it has to be centered around providing chances for the striker on his head, he's also pretty crap in the build up play so i need players around him. Any help would be appreciated.

A 4-4-2 Diamond, 4-1-3-2 or 4-3-1-2? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Johnny Ace said:

A 4-4-2 Diamond, 4-1-3-2 or 4-3-1-2? 

I was thinking something along those lines but typically when i play narrow formations the opposition overload me on the wing when they have the ball. I tend to concede a fair amount of chances that way, is there something i can do to stop that? Because if it's possible to shore up the wide areas defensively in narrow formations then i'd love to play a 4312 since i love that formation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, Captain Blackadder said:

I was thinking something along those lines but typically when i play narrow formations the opposition overload me on the wing when they have the ball. I tend to concede a fair amount of chances that way, is there something i can do to stop that? Because if it's possible to shore up the wide areas defensively in narrow formations then i'd love to play a 4312 since i love that formation.

Yeah, it's the weak point of a narrow formation, fortunately, you've got good full backs which helps :thup:. The 4-3-1-2 is perfect for Carrileros, they will move out a little wide and help cover the flanks to some degree  so they could be an option 

Link to post
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Johnny Ace said:

Yeah, it's the weak point of a narrow formation, fortunately, you've got good full backs which helps :thup:. The 4-3-1-2 is perfect for Carrileros, they will move out a little wide and help cover the flanks to some degree  so they could be an option 

In my 433 both my center mids were mezzala's and were awesome in that role, would mezzala work just as well as carrilero?

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Captain Blackadder said:

In my 433 both my center mids were mezzala's and were awesome in that role, would mezzala work just as well as carrilero?

They're a lot more offensive than a Carrilero but absolutely, you could use a Carr/Mezz mix just be wary of the fullback role you use on the Mezzala's side of the pitch  

Link to post
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Johnny Ace said:

They're a lot more offensive than a Carrilero but absolutely, you could use a Carr/Mezz mix just be wary of the fullback role you use on the Mezzala's side of the pitch  

Thanks for the advice and i'll give it a go. I might still have the problem of all the chances falling to my striker's feet rather than his head though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Captain Blackadder said:

Thanks for the advice and i'll give it a go. I might still have the problem of all the chances falling to my striker's feet rather than his head though.

Ask the team to hit early crosses :thup: If either wide player is on attack, it will help negate them crossing from the byline 

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Johnny Ace said:

Ask the team to hit early crosses :thup: If either wide player is on attack, it will help negate them crossing from the byline 

I've played a couple of matches and still having problems scoring goals. My job is getting precarious so i need goals otherwise i'm going to get sacked at some point if this continues. It's easy to go and find a cheat tactic that will solve all my problems but i'd not feel right cheating but at the same time i've got no idea how to fix this as my teams finishing ability is woeful.

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Captain Blackadder said:

I've played a couple of matches and still having problems scoring goals. My job is getting precarious so i need goals otherwise i'm going to get sacked at some point if this continues. It's easy to go and find a cheat tactic that will solve all my problems but i'd not feel right cheating but at the same time i've got no idea how to fix this as my teams finishing ability is woeful.

Start a thread if you want advice. Show what you're doing, share your thinking behind it and what the issues are. The more info you can provide, the better.

Link to post
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, mikcheck said:

What does "hold position" really do? Can we say that is a mentality modifier? 

In what circumstances do you use it? If you do, of course. 

For an example where it seems to be working - I've currently stumbled on to using a BWM on support duty with a hold position instruction alongside a Box-to-Box midfielder in a 442.

I was previously having my defensive mentality BWM only start closing down quite deep which meant my opponents were having a lot of the ball in midfield with only one player at a time interested in doing closing down. I wanted my two central midfielders to defend in a less staggered line and put a bit more coherent pressure on opponents in the middle of the pitch. This was done more out of frustration and to solve a specific in-match issue rather than actually expecting it to work as a day-to-day tactic. However, I liked what I was seeing enough that I ended up integrating it into my tactic permanently. With a bit of tweaking (dropped the line of engagement to stop them both going too early and leaving a hole, and put defensive width down and added tighter marking, hard tackling) it seems to be working well. As I'm using a balanced mentality, nobody seems to be running around like a headless chicken, the midfield two seem to be working together in maintaining defensive pressure against the opposition midfield quite well in defensive transitions, and because of the tighter marking and harder tackling when a little gap does open up, a defender tends to push up to deny the attacking midfielder or support striker too much having space. Having won the ball back, the BWM holds back and protects in front of my centre backs when I'm attacking. When we lose the ball some way up the pitch, he sometimes goes out to engage an opposition player trying to hold up the ball to start their counter-attack while my two defenders "sit" and provide cover the players attempting to run-off should the opposition manage to evade the press of my BWM.

So what I am seeing is that this instruction seems to be purely about what happens when your team has the ball. It limits the amount of forward runs and roaming the player does. In the defensive phase this "support-with-a-hold-position-instruction" acts with his higher mentality in terms of being inclined to close down a bit higher than the defensive duty would.

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...