How to Play FM: A Twelve Step Guide

[daleuk8]

Hi WWfan: you say you stick with the same philosophy home and away? but you change TI'S. Can you explain a bit more? because surely your philosophy would change?

[landskill]

WWFan I was wondering how you use the 3 saved tactic options, do you have 3 different stratagies and sets of shouts saved? Like in the days of making sets, attacking, defensive and somewhere in the middle for example? Or do you just have a basic set up and adjust to the game you are about to play?

[wwfan]

I don't have an absolutely set way of doing things. I do always save three strategies, but mainly so I can switch mentality without a hit. I only ever use one base tactic and adapt that to the match.

Currently, I play a 4-1-3-2 Balanced Control as my starting tactic.

• GK: GK
  
• DR: CWB/A
  
• DL: FB/S
  
• DCR: CD/C
  
• DCL: CD/X
  
• DMC: DMC/D
  
• MCR: BBM, DLP/S or BWM/S depending on the player
  
• MCC: CM/A
  
• MCL: AP/S
  
• FCR: AF
  
• FCL: TQ
  

I've built a technical, passing side with great tacklers, so employ the following shouts as standard:

• Pass Shorter
  
• Retain Possession
  
• Pass into Space
  
• Roam from Position
  
• Get Stuck In
  
• Be More Expressive
  

For tricky away games, I tend to switch to counter and turn off the last three shouts. If conditions are wild and wet, I often turn off the short passing shouts. If I'm holding onto a slim lead late in the game, I turn off pass into space. My pitch degenerates fast as well, so later in the season I'm far less likely to use the technical passing shouts at home.

Notably, despite the Get Stuck In shout being employed for over 50% of my matches, I have easily the lowest number of yellow and red cards in the league.

[yonko]

I don't have an absolutely set way of doing things. I do always save three strategies, but mainly so I can switch mentality without a hit. I only ever use one base tactic and adapt that to the match.

Currently, I play a 4-1-3-2 Balanced Control as my starting tactic.

• GK: GK
  
• DR: CWB/A
  
• DL: FB/S
  
• DCR: CD/C
  
• DCL: CD/X
  
• DMC: DMC/D
  
• MCR: BBM, DLP/S or BWM/S depending on the player
  
• MCC: CM/A
  
• MCL: AP/S
  
• FCR: AF
  
• FCL: TQ
  

I've built a technical, passing side with great tacklers, so employ the following shouts as standard:

• Pass Shorter
  
• Retain Possession
  
• Pass into Space
  
• Roam from Position
  
• Get Stuck In
  
• Be More Expressive
  

For tricky away games, I tend to switch to counter and turn off the last three shouts. If conditions are wild and wet, I often turn off the short passing shouts. If I'm holding onto a slim lead late in the game, I turn off pass into space. My pitch degenerates fast as well, so later in the season I'm far less likely to use the technical passing shouts at home.

Notably, despite the Get Stuck In shout being employed for over 50% of my matches, I have easily the lowest number of yellow and red cards in the league.

So you have 4 specialists in a Balanced Fluidity? Isn't that against your own recommendation?

[wwfan]

So you have 4 specialists in a Balanced Fluidity? Isn't that against your own recommendation?

I have 3-3.5 and rules are meant to be broken.

[Northernpilgrim]

Sorry if this has been covered here or indeed anywhere else already, but I was wondering what, if any, impact your previous playing experience setting has on how well tactics work? I've followed the advice on here to create a tactic, but can't get consistent results unless I select a big team like Man City and set my past experience to international footballer. I never had to do this on previous FMs, and have always managed to do well previously (always at least matching what the board expected, sometimes far exceeding it).

[THOG]

Sorry if this has been covered here or indeed anywhere else already, but I was wondering what, if any, impact your previous playing experience setting has on how well tactics work? I've followed the advice on here to create a tactic, but can't get consistent results unless I select a big team like Man City and set my past experience to international footballer. I never had to do this on previous FMs, and have always managed to do well previously (always at least matching what the board expected, sometimes far exceeding it).

It does matter quite a bit. The "past experience" option is basically the game's "difficulty setting" as it will control your reputation which affects how easily you motivate your players, so if you control a team with a lot of superstars on a low reputation, it can be difficult to get them to even bother.

[Northernpilgrim]

It does matter quite a bit. The "past experience" option is basically the game's "difficulty setting" as it will control your reputation which affects how easily you motivate your players, so if you control a team with a lot of superstars on a low reputation, it can be difficult to get them to even bother.

I usually try Plymouth Argyle, as they are my team, and have the past experience to 'Automatic', which, according to the tool tip on FM14 means my reputation is set to the same as the lowest manager in the same division. If you're saying it matters a lot, this is not the same as it was in previous FM's, as I've always managed to do reasonably well from the off on previous versions, whereas I'm yet to survive a season on FM14. I'm now playing as Man City with an international footballer setting, and surprise surprise, doing quite well, with exactly the same strategies as I always use. Putting such blind faith in past experience isn't entirely realistic, otherwise all international footballers would go on to be managerial geniuses, and those with little or no experience would always struggle. Arsene Wenger and Jose Mourinho didn't exactly have glittering playing careers, yet have gone on to be successful as managers. Perhaps the impact this setting has needs to be limited to team talks and whether players are motivated, and this effect should only be short term until they know how good a manager you are?

[THOG]

Sorry, I misread your question a bit, it has no direct effect on tactics, only on player motivation. Of course, player motivation will affect what kind of tactics will work for you.

[Northernpilgrim]

Sorry, I misread your question a bit, it has no direct effect on tactics, only on player motivation. Of course, player motivation will affect what kind of tactics will work for you.

I would expect player motivation to have an impact on performance, of course, but players will make up their mind about a manager based on their own experience, and not write someone off before the first match because they didn't play the game at the same level. Indeed, Jose Mourinho once said that he was able to develop more as a manager precisely because he HADN'T had an extensive career in the game. My point is that it doesn't matter what tactics I use, or what team selection (I've even tried downloading tactics that people have had massive success with), but because I always set my reputation to the lowest possible, nothing works. That has never been the case on FM before, I've always done reasonably well, albeit not spectacularly. I'm not enjoying this year's FM nearly as much, not helped by the fact that despite numerous patches, there are still many bugs (which I've reported).

[Sussex Hammer]

Quick question as I am not sure which thread to put this on.

I have seen a lot of tactics with say a left back attack, right back support with a left midfielder support and right midfielder attack, ie one attack and one support on each side. However would it not be better to have attacking duties and support duties on the same sides eg LB A, LM A, RB S, RM S? The reasoning behind this is that the players would be closer together? Just a thought?

[llama3]

I don't have an absolutely set way of doing things. I do always save three strategies, but mainly so I can switch mentality without a hit. I only ever use one base tactic and adapt that to the match.

Currently, I play a 4-1-3-2 Balanced Control as my starting tactic.

• GK: GK
  
• DR: CWB/A
  
• DL: FB/S
  
• DCR: CD/C
  
• DCL: CD/X
  
• DMC: DMC/D
  
• MCR: BBM, DLP/S or BWM/S depending on the player
  
• MCC: CM/A
  
• MCL: AP/S
  
• FCR: AF
  
• FCL: TQ
  

I've built a technical, passing side with great tacklers, so employ the following shouts as standard:

• Pass Shorter
  
• Retain Possession
  
• Pass into Space
  
• Roam from Position
  
• Get Stuck In
  
• Be More Expressive
  

For tricky away games, I tend to switch to counter and turn off the last three shouts. If conditions are wild and wet, I often turn off the short passing shouts. If I'm holding onto a slim lead late in the game, I turn off pass into space. My pitch degenerates fast as well, so later in the season I'm far less likely to use the technical passing shouts at home.

Notably, despite the Get Stuck In shout being employed for over 50% of my matches, I have easily the lowest number of yellow and red cards in the league.

You do know this is going to be the most copied tactic on the forums don't you?

[okd]

Quick question as I am not sure which thread to put this on.

I have seen a lot of tactics with say a left back attack, right back support with a left midfielder support and right midfielder attack, ie one attack and one support on each side. However would it not be better to have attacking duties and support duties on the same sides eg LB A, LM A, RB S, RM S? The reasoning behind this is that the players would be closer together? Just a thought?

Imo, it's down to your overall aproach.The fullback attack/winger support is best used in a "proactive" team.If u're a reactive team, wingers must attack the space early, not waiting for overlapping moves. It's not a rule, but it applies most cases

[Supernal]

This is all very interesting particularly where I feel I've been making mistakes with my strategy for my stronger more aggressive side. I tend to just play defensive all the time when playing better teams but I rarely had success.

One thing I just can't understand at the moment is the whole philosophy connection to specialist roles. I have always understood it to be that if you have well-rounded players like defenders who can pass and attackers that can defend well etc then you could play more fluid, whereas if you have terrible players with low creativity you wouldn't want them coming forward and trying to involve themselves in creating chances. You would want them to stick to defending only but now this seems to disregard that and simply base philosophy on how much extra freedom you have given specific players with specialist roles. Can anyone help me out with this?

[difran8]

This is all very interesting particularly where I feel I've been making mistakes with my strategy for my stronger more aggressive side. I tend to just play defensive all the time when playing better teams but I rarely had success.

Yes, it works in funny ways sometimes. You play "defensive" to draw weaker opponents out and "attacking" to utilize the space better teams leave behind. A point for not taking the wording of strategies literally, i guess

One thing I just can't understand at the moment is the whole philosophy connection to specialist roles. I have always understood it to be that if you have well-rounded players like defenders who can pass and attackers that can defend well etc then you could play more fluid, whereas if you have terrible players with low creativity you wouldn't want them coming forward and trying to involve themselves in creating chances. You would want them to stick to defending only but now this seems to disregard that and simply base philosophy on how much extra freedom you have given specific players with specialist roles. Can anyone help me out with this?

I think you have understood it correctly. It is a question of how creative freedom will be distributed. Evenly across the board (fluid) or unevenly with some players allowed to create and others not (rigid)

[Finknottle]

wwfan. In view of people stating that they need to alter their tactics since the latest update in order for them to work, am I correct in assuming that the twelve steps will no longer work in the new update?

[Cleon]

The 12 steps will always work because its based on common sense and simplicity. Those who have had to alter tactics between updates its more than likely that their approach was always floored.

[Finknottle]

The 12 steps will always work because its based on common sense and simplicity. Those who have had to alter tactics between updates its more than likely that their approach was always floored.

Muchly thankings, as always Cleon.

[wwfan]

As Cleon said. Remember that the TC is underpinned by the concepts I explain here, although not quite to the same level of sophistication.

[zizunola]

will you say that a balanced / control formation will do well if one wants to dominate and control a game than when he uses a fluid / control mentality? and lets assume he has 3-3.5 specialist roles. i was thinking a balanced / attacking approach wont also be bad.

2. in a 4-2-4 with CMs being a dlp(s) and bbm with an IF(s) on the left n side of the dlp. with a winger(a) on the side of the bbm. as well as a poacher on the side of the inside forward n a target man on th right ahead of the bbm. what do you think is flawed in there? WB(a) on the left with fb(s) on the right. do you reckon the strikers will get loads of balls played to them? and what approach do you suggest? balanced/attacking or balanced/control. for dominance and winning

[daleuk8]

As Cleon said. Remember that the TC is underpinned by the concepts I explain here, although not quite to the same level of sophistication.

How do you add that level of sophistication?

[Northernpilgrim]

[video=youtube_share;lroI8RCV_wo]

Was just wondering what people thought about how you'd go about creating a tactic to play in this way (hopefully with equally dramatic results). The basic formation is definitely 4-4-2, and the attacking threat comes from getting the ball wide, and getting people in the box. David Friio was a MC in terms of his position, but not sure what role and duty you'd give him to replicate the fact he used to arrive late in the box (to make it difficult to mark him). The wide players also need to tuck in when the ball is on the opposite flank, and make an extra man in the middle, and the full backs push high up the pitch in possession, so I'm guessing Wing back (support) for both of them? What would you use in terms of fluidity and mentality to achieve this? I am currently managing Plymouth Argyle, but want to play with the same attacking gusto that this team did, as it was incredible to watch. I was one of the lucky ones to be at this match.

[wwfan]

How do you add that level of sophistication?

By thinking

[wwfan]

[video=youtube_share;lroI8RCV_wo]

Was just wondering what people thought about how you'd go about creating a tactic to play in this way (hopefully with equally dramatic results). The basic formation is definitely 4-4-2, and the attacking threat comes from getting the ball wide, and getting people in the box. David Friio was a MC in terms of his position, but not sure what role and duty you'd give him to replicate the fact he used to arrive late in the box (to make it difficult to mark him). The wide players also need to tuck in when the ball is on the opposite flank, and make an extra man in the middle, and the full backs push high up the pitch in possession, so I'm guessing Wing back (support) for both of them? What would you use in terms of fluidity and mentality to achieve this? I am currently managing Plymouth Argyle, but want to play with the same attacking gusto that this team did, as it was incredible to watch. I was one of the lucky ones to be at this match.

Click here: Post 13 onwards

[jere_d]

I just want to play direct footbal to my fast wingers for them to SMASH the ball from the bloody by line but all that happens against the better teams is slow crappy football where the passes are underhit, the wingers slowly jog down the wing and hold onto the ball instead of running and let themself get tackled.

I play 4-2-3-1

2fbs in D

2CDs one x one c

2DP in S

1 T and 2 Wingers all in attack

And 1 AF

I play attacking fluid football

direct passing

exploit flanks

pass into space

drill crosses

hassle op

high back line

off side trap

stick to possisions

more disciplined

play wider

run at deffence

get stuck in

cant understand why they cant play well?

[HUNT3R]

Suddenly, it all makes sense...

[Dr. Hook]

I just want to play direct footbal to my fast wingers for them to SMASH the ball from the bloody by line but all that happens against the better teams is slow crappy football where the passes are underhit, the wingers slowly jog down the wing and hold onto the ball instead of running and let themself get tackled.

I play 4-2-3-1

2fbs in D

2CDs one x one c

2DP in S

1 T and 2 Wingers all in attack

And 1 AF

I play attacking fluid football

direct passing

exploit flanks

pass into space

drill crosses

hassle op

high back line

off side trap

stick to possisions

more disciplined

play wider

run at deffence

get stuck in

cant understand why they cant play well?

Good Lord, Man. What a mess. Start a separate thread as I advised in the Stupid questions thread if you are really interested in uncovering what your problems are.

[jere_d]

Suddenly, it all makes sense...

So youre complaining about my posts but then make snide snooty comments...

I got another tactic which is more possessing based at low tempo But against better teams i want to play fast direct football like dourtmond

[HUNT3R]

Take Dr.Hook's advice. It's what we've been saying to you over and over.

[aderow]

I'm surprised, and slightly concerned, by the number of people who use the 'hassle opponents' instruction from the off.

[Dr. Hook]

I'm surprised, and slightly concerned, by the number of people who use the 'hassle opponents' instruction from the off.

As am I. The majority of tactics posted up here for anaylsis/help seem to have the high pressing active. I think people do it for the right reasons- win the ball back high on the pitch is always a good thing. If you can pull it off. I use it very rarely because it causes a lot of problems if you don't get it right.

[aderow]

As am I. The majority of tactics posted up here for anaylsis/help seem to have the high pressing active. I think people do it for the right reasons- win the ball back high on the pitch is always a good thing. If you can pull it off. I use it very rarely because it causes a lot of problems if you don't get it right.

My concern is that a lot people are trying to use it with players who aren't capable of doing it effectively. Or worse; using it alongside the 'drop deeper' instruction.

[Codename47]

My concern is that a lot people are trying to use it with players who aren't capable of doing it effectively. Or worse; using it alongside the 'drop deeper' instruction.

Yep, I understand this of course.

But being devils advocate, surely it is relative. For example, if a manager plays Attacking which is a high line already, then dropping a bit deeper with the Hassling instruction activated may not be too bad perhaps...

[llama3]

Yeah a high line with a good shape and decent press can still do an effective job at winning the ball without having to hassle opponents and lose shape.

[THOG]

Yep, I understand this of course.

But being devils advocate, surely it is relative. For example, if a manager plays Attacking which is a high line already, then dropping a bit deeper with the Hassling instruction activated may not be too bad perhaps...

Right, hassle on attacking with drop deeper is basically just hassle on control, and wwfan's Barca tactic uses hassle combined with d-line/closing down approximately around the control default.

Issues with hassle come from using it indiscriminately against every kind of opponent in every situation when it needs to be applied very carefully. IRL, no team does a full press nonstop at all times. Even Bayern and Barca will put on the brakes when it's sensible. And Hassle isn't even just a full press but a full press combined with a tight marking system.

[Boden]

Well how do you achieve that kind of high press? I've tried so many combinations, but I feel like the pressing is very poorly implemented in this game.

[wakey24]

I am trying to get a settled tactic and thinking about this;

wb (s)

Dc (stopper)

Dc (cover)

fb (a)

Dm (d)

DLP (s) in MC postion

wide midfielder left (a)

wide midfielder right (s)

Complete Forward (a)

False 9

Standard

Balanced

Work ball into box

retain possession

pass into space

run at defence

push higher up.

In principle does this sound ok? I would have wide midfielders sat narrower.

[Luizinho]

wwfan, I recently started a thread (http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php/388138-How-To-Adapt-To-Your-Opponent) about trying to exploit weakness in the opposition via the use of Scout Reports. Is this something you do? I'n my last game the report showed a lot of assists from wide areas and I could tell during the match that they were concentrating on getting the ball out wide. How do you counteract this generally speaking?

[wwfan]

wwfan, I recently started a thread (http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php/388138-How-To-Adapt-To-Your-Opponent) about trying to exploit weakness in the opposition via the use of Scout Reports. Is this something you do? I'n my last game the report showed a lot of assists from wide areas and I could tell during the match that they were concentrating on getting the ball out wide. How do you counteract this generally speaking?

Generally, I focus on my own team's style and don't worry too much about the opposition. I do sometimes target a weakness, though.

For example, I recently played Man City away in the League Cup as Brighton (2013-14 season). I noticed that they had a very poor DL, who was reserving from the youth team. I targeted that flank throughout. Although i went down in the fist half, an inspiring team talk saw my team revitalised and I equalised early in the second as my AMR outpaced the DL onto a TB and slotted it home. With 15 minutes remaining, I took the AMR off and subbed in my quickest player, a very raw AMR. Although he almost won it for me by skinning the DL with a few minutes to go, he scuffed the chance. However, his extra conditioning (having come on as a 100% fitness sub) paid off in extra time as he repeatedly took on the DL. We scored three without reply. The first was a penalty after he was brought down by the DL after screaming past him, the second from a cross after he went round the outside and beat him for pace and the third (against a now demoralised City) from a corner he won by drawing a tackle from the same player.

[bababooey]

Here's something interesting that I've recently picked up on..

Less is more, in regards to team instructions.

I see so many people struggling with tactics and then asking "what am I doing wrong" (as I have done before) and then you see that they've got like 10 different team instructions selected, and who knows what else for player instructions.

But this is really not a wise way to do things. Here is why..

1. If you set up too many instructions, how can you determine what the problems on the pitch are?

2. If you set up too many instructions, you're probably contradicting yourself in one way or another. For instance, if you want to play a short passing game (think like Barca) but then you have something like "higher tempo" or "pass into space", then what sense does that make in this context? Both of those instructions would contradict the tiki-taka style, IMO. We see these kinds of contradictions quite often. ALSO taking team mentality into account is critical. There is no need to use "more direct passing" when playing on "attacking", save for some special circumstances.

3. When selecting instructions it may feel like you need to choose a bunch of them to create a style, but you really don't. The mentality and fluidity of your team should already dictate your style from the very beginning.

4. If you are playing on FMC you should absolutely consider using as few instructions as possible (depending on what you're trying to do obviously). Why? Because in the full game you have to deal with tactical familiarity. So naturally on the full mode you'll need to include those instructions that you plan to use, so the players get comfortable with them. But to me, that is incredibly frustrating (I like to tinker!) and I cannot imagine a footballer at a professional level not being able to "drop deeper" or "play narrower" without losing his familiarity... So, FMC is the answer to that. You can do whatever you want with your tactics and not worry about familiarity.

5. If you are looking closely you'll find that these instructions are really geared towards adapting to what is going on during a match. Again, this is what bothers me about tactical familiarity. For instance, I hardly ever touch any of the "penetration" instructions because A. I don't know where to exploit until I know my opposition, and B. If my team is good enough I don't need to over-emphasize one part of the pitch.

Another thing to add here, take a look at some of the shape instructions. Play wider, push up, etc. etc. etc. To me, these are adaptive instructions. I see almost no need anymore to include them into my tactical plan BEFORE a match. Again, save for any sort of special circumstance. If I'm playing as a team that likes to sit back, rather than adding "drop deeper" why not just play on "counter" ? I've found that combining instructions that contradict the overall mentality can actually have a negative effect, in some cases. You have to know what you're doing in that case, I believe. I could not get "attack" to work well with "drop deeper" for example. I'm sure it can, but, I couldn't do it.

What do you all think about this?

[llama3]

Here's something interesting that I've recently picked up on..

Less is more, in regards to team instructions.

I see so many people struggling with tactics and then asking "what am I doing wrong" (as I have done before) and then you see that they've got like 10 different team instructions selected, and who knows what else for player instructions.

But this is really not a wise way to do things. Here is why..

1. If you set up too many instructions, how can you determine what the problems on the pitch are?

2. If you set up too many instructions, you're probably contradicting yourself in one way or another. For instance, if you want to play a short passing game (think like Barca) but then you have something like "higher tempo" or "pass into space", then what sense does that make in this context? Both of those instructions would contradict the tiki-taka style, IMO. We see these kinds of contradictions quite often. ALSO taking team mentality into account is critical. There is no need to use "more direct passing" when playing on "attacking", save for some special circumstances.

3. When selecting instructions it may feel like you need to choose a bunch of them to create a style, but you really don't. The mentality and fluidity of your team should already dictate your style from the very beginning.

4. If you are playing on FMC you should absolutely consider using as few instructions as possible (depending on what you're trying to do obviously). Why? Because in the full game you have to deal with tactical familiarity. So naturally on the full mode you'll need to include those instructions that you plan to use, so the players get comfortable with them. But to me, that is incredibly frustrating (I like to tinker!) and I cannot imagine a footballer at a professional level not being able to "drop deeper" or "play narrower" without losing his familiarity... So, FMC is the answer to that. You can do whatever you want with your tactics and not worry about familiarity.

5. If you are looking closely you'll find that these instructions are really geared towards adapting to what is going on during a match. Again, this is what bothers me about tactical familiarity. For instance, I hardly ever touch any of the "penetration" instructions because A. I don't know where to exploit until I know my opposition, and B. If my team is good enough I don't need to over-emphasize one part of the pitch.

Another thing to add here, take a look at some of the shape instructions. Play wider, push up, etc. etc. etc. To me, these are adaptive instructions. I see almost no need anymore to include them into my tactical plan BEFORE a match. Again, save for any sort of special circumstance. If I'm playing as a team that likes to sit back, rather than adding "drop deeper" why not just play on "counter" ? I've found that combining instructions that contradict the overall mentality can actually have a negative effect, in some cases. You have to know what you're doing in that case, I believe. I could not get "attack" to work well with "drop deeper" for example. I'm sure it can, but, I couldn't do it.

What do you all think about this?

Spot on. The chronic overuse of Hassle Opponents is particularly notable too.

[yonko]

I've been thinking and doing the same thing lately - less instructions. At the moment I'm using a tactic with just "work ball into the box", "play out of defense" and "drill crosses". I also don't have too many PIs and if I use any they vary game to game and player to player.

[Codename47]

I believe that FM14 has by default made or impressed upon the customer to use or need to use shouts due to no sliders. Sliders are still there, they're just invisible, they haven't gone away. I am certain that most of these managers never actually used shouts or used them very little in previous versions i.e in FM13. Now, Im not saying this is a bad thing and I'm not criticising this, them or the game in anyway, but speaking personally, I was not one for shouts, I just changed match strategy.

In FM13 when you had the standard default Team settings, I just used 'short passing' and 'drill crosses', everything else was default setting i.e. roaming, closing down etc. I never over-rided the player instructions because quite simply, if I set a player as W/A, that is what he did, there was no actual need, all things being equal to change his settings. Therefore, why is there now a need in FM14 to change the player settings under PI. I'm just being devils advocate here. I am not saying you can or can't by the way, but by choosing player roles and duties, you are already setting/defining the player. They're just invisible sliders, they have not disappeared.

I only use TI of 'short passing' and 'drill crosses' now and no PIs at all. Just like in FM13. No shouts anymore although I have dabbled. I simply change match strategy, from Control, Standard, Counter and sometimes Attacking in no particular order when and if needed and I get on just fine.

[bababooey]

I think people use "hassle opponents" a lot because, quite honestly, it SOUNDS really good. LOL.

But really, think about it. People see the massive possession of Barca / Bayern / etc and they know that those teams love to press, so they're more likely to choose this shout. But it is an extreme instruction to give your team, and should be used carefully..

[TitouCythe]

I plead guilty. And testify.

I use hassle opponent because sadly on some games i saw my defense drop deep and invite for some pressure instead of pressing their opponent.

This prevents long shots (or doest it?), but has several drawback, but you know, sometimes the mind is weak

[tmc269]

I confess that I use hassle opponent from the first minute to last in conjunction with 12 other shouts. The confusing thing for me is that it's working really well for my team I'm joint top and doing well in both cups, but I don't know why my tactic is successful.

[m83]

Jus wanted to ask if theres in any type of thread in the forum that helps undertanding the "Team Comparision Tab", i mean how to adapt to one team strenghts and develop further.

Ty,

M83

[lam]

Jus wanted to ask if theres in any type of thread in the forum that helps undertanding the "Team Comparision Tab", i mean how to adapt to one team strenghts and develop further.

Ty,

M83

Hi M83,

I don't think there is a specific thread anywhere however I can offer a few tips below (and a few 'be aware...' warnings).

• I believe the comparison tab measures players in the first team, so if you have brought in lots of youngsters to give them an outing, it will be including them in your measures.
  
• Be aware of the position your team has relative the to the measure. For instance, you might be top for passing only to realise that the lowest team is only 1.5 points on average lower than you.
  
• Position isn't everything, use the measure (see above).
  
• What I occasionally do is to select my first 11-14 or so and then move everyone out of the team. This'll tell you how your ideal team measure up, however remember what you're comparing them too.
  

Based on all of the above, I tend to use it now to determine what not to do rather than what I should do. Ie. I want to play and aggressive high pressing game and realize my team lack stamina, aggression and bravery.

Regards

LAM

[lam]

Hi all,

I'm curious how people would approach a strikerless formation might working into the philosophy framework.

Would you simply stick with the specialist roles vs philosophy or assume that as it is different it needs a more fluid approach?

I'm using the formation from Cleons old thread (Understanding your tactic) and currently it isn't working well at all..... which I am in turn working on but it's raising many questions which I'm determine to find the answers too.

[m83]

Hi M83,

I don't think there is a specific thread anywhere however I can offer a few tips below (and a few 'be aware...' warnings).

• I believe the comparison tab measures players in the first team, so if you have brought in lots of youngsters to give them an outing, it will be including them in your measures.
  
• Be aware of the position your team has relative the to the measure. For instance, you might be top for passing only to realise that the lowest team is only 1.5 points on average lower than you.
  
• Position isn't everything, use the measure (see above).
  
• What I occasionally do is to select my first 11-14 or so and then move everyone out of the team. This'll tell you how your ideal team measure up, however remember what you're comparing them too.
  

Based on all of the above, I tend to use it now to determine what not to do rather than what I should do. Ie. I want to play and aggressive high pressing game and realize my team lack stamina, aggression and bravery.

Regards

LAM

Hi Lam,

thanks for the reply,

thats the sort of thing that i also wanted to know, ege, what are the attributes that one neds to take in acount for setting the TI´s.

I dont know if i am making myself clear, but thats what i wanted to know, what to look and what information his relevant.

Ty,

M83