Formation vs. Formation

[Sebacid]

I played 4-4-2 and the opposition changed from his 4-4-2 to a 4-3-3 with a DM. After this change I conceded 3 goals pretty quickly and the game was over for me. Do you think it is imperative to switch formation to counter opponents formations? The problem is that I play in the lower leagues and don't have the men to play other formations than 4-4-2 properly. How do you guys play out of this?

[Cleon]

Well what changes did you make when the opposition changed shape? Did you alter how you played?

You don't have to change formation but you have to be aware that different formations will cause your own shape different problems. The 433 you mention out numbers your midfield so if you didn't do anything to combat this then you get punished like you did.

[lam]

I don't think I've ever changed formation and to be honest, I don't think I will.

I doubt it was the introduction of a DM that caused you problems. Ideally a 442 will be attacking down the wings.

Regards

LAM

[RTHerringbone]

I'll be interested to see how this thread develops, because I'm very much of the opinion that you do need to respond to changes in shape by your opponent.

I have three tactics available, all based around different formations. I'll always best fit the shape of my opponent at kick-off, and keep a close eye on their formation and strategy as the game unfolds.

[llama3]

i have 2 different formations - but the team instructions and system are pretty similar - it is simply a case of rotating my midfield trio from an AMC to a DMC and covering the space.

[RTHerringbone]

Pretty much same here. I keep my approach as similar as I can, barring the inevitable changes you need to make for new roles (and so duties).

[Sebacid]

Well what changes did you make when the opposition changed shape? Did you alter how you played?

You don't have to change formation but you have to be aware that different formations will cause your own shape different problems. The 433 you mention out numbers your midfield so if you didn't do anything to combat this then you get punished like you did.

What would you suggest? Playing more narrow and through the middle or perhaps wider and instruct to use flanks? If I choose to keep my 4-4-2 then I will always be outnumbered in midfield. What is the best tactical move to counter opponents change of formation in this case?

[lam]

I'll be interested to see how this thread develops, because I'm very much of the opinion that you do need to respond to changes in shape by your opponent.

I have three tactics available, all based around different formations. I'll always best fit the shape of my opponent at kick-off, and keep a close eye on their formation and strategy as the game unfolds.

Well, responding is one thing, changing your own formation is a complete other thing.

If the opposition change formation on me during a match I will absolutely change things around, but I will NOT change my formation.

[Sebacid]

Well, responding is one thing, changing your own formation is a complete other thing.

If the opposition change formation on me during a match I will absolutely change things around, but I will NOT change my formation.

Please give an example of what you do to change things around?

[RTHerringbone]

Well, responding is one thing, changing your own formation is a complete other thing.

If the opposition change formation on me during a match I will absolutely change things around, but I will NOT change my formation.

That's the difference between knowing what you're doing, and learning what you're doing!

I'm confident that I have finally grasped the basics, but I'm not yet in a position where I can easily respond to any change in shape from the opposition whilst retaining the same formation.

I use TC and am competent at effectively switching strategy as a game unfolds, but where a fundamental change in shape is thrown at me by the opposition, I'm unable to fathom anything other than a shape change to respond.

I know a switch up or down the strategy scale will make me play deeper, narrower, slower etc., but I don't feel that this always compensates for the changes they make. I'm either over complicating stuff in my head, or you stray beyond the realms of a simple strategy change. Would be interested to know if you are a TC or Classic tactician, and just what steps you take to handle this sort of scenario.

[Rashidi]

To a large extent I am still a one tactic man at heart, cos i strongly believe that if you understand your own tactic well enough you can play any "system". There is a big difference between tactic and system. A system essentially means that you can adapt to different things on the pitch based on your understanding of your own tactic.

Lets take the 442 for example. Every 442 can morph into another tactic with shouts and roles. You can elect to shut down the flanks by telling ur fullbacks to defend or you can shut down the middle. Its really up to you.

One can also elect to have a system that incorporates various tactics, so you could start with a 433, and if you know your tactic well enough it can change to a 451 or 41221. This is why I started a thread with several tactics, they essentially come from the one tactic but the difference is that I can adapt to anything the AI throws at me. If i find that the AI has parked the bus in midfield, i turn to my 451 to mirror it, for the first 15 mins, while i assess its strengths, if i find that my fullbacks do a pretty decent job of tracking its AMs, I then opt to switch to my 41221 which is a variation of my starting tactic to get behind their defensive line.

You can do the same thing with one tactic but its not always easy especially when you are playing LLM football. You need to be pretty good at understanding the TC and the shouts if you want to go this direction, it can be the most devastating way to play, but it requires a great deal of attention to small detail. And for most people I would suggest avoid that route. If you choose to go down that road, you need to be prepared to do a lot of work. My thread barely deals with all the prep work that I do, and its substantial. I even have a notebook where i draw out how the AI played its last game and where its fulcrums are.

My first choice is always to stick to one tactic, I have one tactic for my home matches, I have one for my away matches. I also have another for the tough matches.

What happens then is I divide my system out to handle these from the AI:

Tactics that come down the flanks

Tactics that come down the middle

Tactics that are too attacking

Once i have it worked out, I then analyze a game before i take to the pitch, choose the right players, and my insurance is to go to my alternative tactic. So far in one season of 26 games I have only changed tactics twice. Knowing how to shut down the AI using shouts and opposition instructions must always be your first choice.

[MartinGregory84]

Cracking thread this because sometimes this is the balance of losing a game badly or scraping a win.

My views on the OP's question are do what I did, I am no way good with tactics but I set out with a simple 4-4-2 and if for instance they played 5 in midfield id playget ball forward and clear to the flanks with a wider setting.

Its all about playing about at first until you understand something just clicks.

But I am keen to learn more myself.

[lam]

Please give an example of what you do to change things around?

What happens then is I divide my system out to handle these from the AI:

Tactics that come down the flanks

Tactics that come down the middle

Tactics that are too attacking

^ This is a key part of it. Once you have identidied where the new threat is coming from (assuming we are still discussing their change and not the original formation), then you can try and focus in on a player/s.

There are two reasons they might change.

1. They see a weakness in you and want to exploit it
   
2. They want to counter a particular threat or to stop you smashing in more goals.
   

If they are changing to attack you, then the key thing is to understand what they have changed and where they will attack from. A fairly easy example would be movign from a 442 to a 424.... clearly the attack is going to come from the flanks and the MC's are likely going to sit deep(ish) and take potshots.

As I play with a DM, is he going to be wasted? Who is he going to close down? no one right??? Well, whilst he might not close anyone down, what he will do is offer defensive support, therefore I KNOW I can now ask my FB's to really pressure the two opposition AML/R's and when doing this, I will get my DM to sit even deeper.... ie along side my DC's.

I play a 451 (41221) and when a team lines up against me, if there is no AMC in their team, then I will generally put Huddlestone in the DM position and just raise TTB's to mixed/often. However, if someone who didn't have an AMC playing changes formation to attack me, then I'd move Huddleston forwards to one of the MC roles and bring Sandro or Parker (one of these chaps is ALWAYS playing) back into the DM roles who's only duty at that point is to annoy the AMC.

I may also choose to play narrower to tighten up in the middle and also use my, already, superior numbers even more, though if I do this, I then tend to play down the flanks as there is likely to be space down there now.

There are so many permutations that it is impossible to list them. If you want to give me some examples I'll try and explain how I'd do it.

Though, it is exactly like Rashidi said.... you have to understand your tactic and what it is capable of..... and on that basis the 451 (41221) is incredible flexible...........

LAM

*EDIT*

To be honest, I find opposition changing players more threatening than them changing formations. The switches from slow to fast or fast to creative can often undo you before you even notice..... and they are often the hardest to spot.

[Rashidi]

^

To be honest, I find opposition changing players more threatening than them changing formations. The switches from slow to fast or fast to creative can often undo you before you even notice..... and they are often the hardest to spot.

Agreed. I worry more when they swap in midfield, it can lay the best laid plans to waste....so many people are focused on custom tactics that it annoys me. If everyone just used the tactical creator and understood it first..and by this I mean shouts, OI, roles they will find that its so encompassing that only unique passing systems or unique formations might be missing. In moments of doubt, and believe me I've had a lot using custom tactics, I tend to veer towards presets.

At the end of the day, you want to be good at this game, start using the tactical creator. You want to be great at this game, then understand how each shout, each OI affects your tactic. Once you do all this, its unbelievable how much you can vary your tactic. My 41221 is so prolific it can morph into a 4312, all i do is move the players around and readjust their roles. I stil use my system, but you cant do that if you dont understand how to use the TC. And if you think using the custom creator can make you world beating tactics, think again. If you came from the old school fm game, the amount of work you do on studying the interaction of mentality, closing down and creative freedom will drive you bonkers. The Tactical Creator is the best way going forward; if you learn the system of shouts and using the OI, you are gonna be top.

Edit-----

I know the game is hard now..the 1312 match engine should be considered as playing FM on hardmode, its that hard. Its really difficult to keep clean sheets because there are bugs in the way the defenses are shut up, this forces us to adapt our playstyle. Beating the AI isnt impossible, its hard and you need to pay a lot of attention to details. Whats even more interesting is that if you do spend the effort understanding OI and shouts, by the time the new patch rolls out...lol the game will be back on easy mode