How to Play FM: A Twelve Step Guide

[llama3]

Certain. I can't show you documentation. I know the game and tactics well, that's why i moderate this area.

[Ganja Santa]

All right. Thanks for letting me know. I guess I have to tweak my tactics a bit now

[JayKinobi]

I have a question regarding fine tuning PI's for a player. If i have a player whos role is almost perfect for him attribute wise but has one poor attribute could i tweak his PI's to minimize that attribute? For instance if i have an attacker that is poor at taking long shots but is a part of his role, is it as simple as asking him to shoot less?? Or a defender who has very poor tackling should i ask him to stay on feet or tackle less??

Cheers

[RTHerringbone]

I have a question regarding fine tuning PI's for a player. If i have a player whos role is almost perfect for him attribute wise but has one poor attribute could i tweak his PI's to minimize that attribute? For instance if i have an attacker that is poor at taking long shots but is a part of his role, is it as simple as asking him to shoot less?? Or a defender who has very poor tackling should i ask him to stay on feet or tackle less??

Cheers

Yes. It is not a complicated game. Don't assume that single attributes influence things that much though.

[wwfan]

Yes. It is not a complicated game. Don't assume that single attributes influence things that much though.

Although it might be the difference between winning and losing in the occasional tight game (e.g. player makes a simple sideways pass resulting in a goal created by somebody else rather than shooting high and wide, defender doesn't miss the last minute tackle on a player breaking through on goal). Which is why you'd do it.

[landskill]

How important is it to have an attack duty in defence? I am trying to play 442 with a conference north side but find two attacking wide midfielders and two supporting full backs tends to works lot better than having a wide mid support and a full back attack down one side. Would this be because of the quality of players? If I get to the stage that sides decide to park the bus I could see that system coming into its own maybe?

[RTHerringbone]

How important is it to have an attack duty in defence? I am trying to play 442 with a conference north side but find two attacking wide midfielders and two supporting full backs tends to works lot better than having a wide mid support and a full back attack down one side. Would this be because of the quality of players? If I get to the stage that sides decide to park the bus I could see that system coming into its own maybe?

It's not overly important; the Guide is just pitched initially at beginners and by having the suggested mix of Duties on each flank, is the "easiest" way to get balance on the wings. You've observed a better alternative in your set up, so go with what you are seeing, rather than making changes to suit a generic guide.

[Beanyman101]

I'm currently playing as Dartford in the Conference, and the quality of player they have is not great.

I generally play with a counter/fluid style, with minimal instructions of short passing and exploit flanks.

The roles of the team are as follows:

DF (S)

W (A) BBM (S) CM (S) BBM (S) W (A)

FB (A) CB (D) CB (D) FB (A)

I do tweak things a little depending on opposition and I've made a few observations having played this way for just over a season:

- I generate shots, but very few clear cut opportunities.

- Plays well against a 442

- Falters against a 4-2-3-1

- My striker is generally fighting a losing battle with goals and assists coming mainly from my wide men.

- 2 x BBM seem to work well arriving around the box and supporting attacks

- Short passing generally works well, but if I have players in the first XI with poor first touch (for my league, that’s probably players with less than 7), I often get caught out

Despite overperforming based on the quality of players I have at my disposal (I'm 11th in the league but my squad is one of the worst in the league), every game is a won by a tight margin. I've had a few good results against teams perceived as better than me, but struggle to break down teams I should be beating, often drawing or losing badly. This suggests to me that my counter/fluid style matches well against top teams who will press and leave space behind them, but against a more defensive setup, I struggle to support my attacks from midfield, leaving my striker isolated/with too much to do.

After reading the thread, I'd like to know if some of my thoughts are correct regarding next steps:

- I should definitely consider changing my CM(S) to a CM(D) or a DM (D) for games where I face a 4-3-2-1 to counter the space their midfield is finding between my midfield and defence.

- Are my flanks too forward thinking and I would benefit from changing the wingers to a support duty so that they are supplying my striker rather than trying to score themselves? Will this also help with bringing my BBM midfielders into the attack with more regularity?

- How can I break down defensive teams more consistently – changing a BBM to an AP (A) doesn’t seem to work by itself, so should I change to a control mentality? What suggestions do people have regarding different combinations in the centre of the park or team instructions?

[RTHerringbone]

- I should definitely consider changing my CM(S) to a CM(D) or a DM (D) for games where I face a 4-3-2-1 to counter the space their midfield is finding between my midfield and defence.

Agree with this generally, not just against specific AI formations. In my view, you always need a deeper midfielder to "look after" the defence. This is especially true when you have both full backs on Attack Duties.

- Are my flanks too forward thinking and I would benefit from changing the wingers to a support duty so that they are supplying my striker rather than trying to score themselves? Will this also help with bringing my BBM midfielders into the attack with more regularity?

They are attacking, and it can be effective, as long as there is balance elsewhere. I'd suggest that once you resolve the CM balance, you'll have more defensive stability, and you might get away with the balance on the flanks. What I would at least do is mix the Roles up a bit, because at the moment you have symmetrical flanks and so are quite one-dimensional. Keep an eye on whether or not you over-commit men forwards on the flanks when you attack.

- How can I break down defensive teams more consistently – changing a BBM to an AP (A) doesn’t seem to work by itself, so should I change to a control mentality? What suggestions do people have regarding different combinations in the centre of the park or team instructions?

You have a lone striker and wingers banging in crosses towards him. You lack central support - the BBMs will get there, but it may not be soon enough to take the burden off the lone striker.

Overall, I'd propose looking at Jambo98's 4-5-1 thread and looking at the mix of Roles and Duties he uses, and reading why he uses the ones he does.

[THOG]

In addition to shielding your defence, a deep midfielder ensures your attack doesn't become too flat and compressed, providing an outlet ball to your more advanced midfielders and a player who can swap the ball between the flanks without requiring it to be played all the way back to the defence. You can see the benefit of this when a team goes all-out attack against you and pushes their entire midfield right up to the edge of the penalty area: they have no one positioned to actually dictate the play so their attacks become rushed and they just end up taking rushed shots or desperate crosses.

[aminhosseiny]

Hey. I wanna play direct play using 4-4-2 diamond wide with wolfsburg club. Based on pairs and combinations article I decided to have this line up:

P(a) TM(s)

AM(s)

W(a) W(s)

DLP(s)

WB(s) CD(d) cd(d) FB(a)

GK(d)

I alos use these instructions : more direct passing - clear ball to flanks - run at defece - exploit to flanks - push higher up - get stuck in - higher tempp

Finally I have used flexible team shape and attacking mentality to play direct. It seems my team cant handle the midfield and we are mostly giving the midfield to the opponent. Wanna know what is the problem here? is it AM or sth else?

[Beardeye]

Use the team instructions to develop and save a favoured playing style[/i], which should also suit your team strengths / weaknesses. For example, a highly technical team can sit deep and counter at pace, so using retain possession, pass into space, run at defence with a counter strategy may be worthwhile. A less technical but more physical team might want to impose themselves in a different way, so consider using more direct passing, hit early crosses, get stuck in with an attack strategy. There are all kind of possible ways to shape a playing style. At times you'll have a good enough squad to pick a style of your choosing, at times a style might be forced upon you. You might want to change styles on a match by match basis. There's no hard and fast rule. Just try to be logical in your combinations. Examples of different defensive styles can be found here. Examples of different attacking styles can be found here (deep possession and rapier countering a la Barcelona) and here (British fast-paced, direct winger attacks). Both are for earlier versions of FM, but should still be highly relevant to FM14. If you wish to partake in an FM14 thread about developing a playing style, then this thread on Arsenal is a fantastic place to start.

This has been a really useful guide/ thread for me in creating a tactic using the TC. However I would like to know how important is it to develop and save a favoured playing style (per the above), as opposed to just using the default TC settings? I have experimented with direct and short passing tactics and neither suit my squad or playing conditions that crop up during a season.

I have played a few games using simply the default TC settings and roles/duties in line with this thread and the pairs & combos guide (which I think are coherent). I will make adjustments to mentality depending on the opposition (i.e control at home, counter away etc), and shouts as I see fit (i.e pass into space if the oppo has a high line), but on the whole would be quite happy to use the default TC settings without any favoured playing style at all. Am I missing out on any advantage here, or is "use the defaults" a perfectly sound way to overachieve (assuming squad quality is sufficient)?

I am guessing the answer will be "its fine, this is a guide and not hard and fast rules", but would value a second opinion from those with deeper knowledge on the game.

[Dr. Hook]

This has been a really useful guide/ thread for me in creating a tactic using the TC. However I would like to know how important is it to develop and save a favoured playing style (per the above), as opposed to just using the default TC settings? I have experimented with direct and short passing tactics and neither suit my squad or playing conditions that crop up during a season.

I have played a few games using simply the default TC settings and roles/duties in line with this thread and the pairs & combos guide (which I think are coherent). I will make adjustments to mentality depending on the opposition (i.e control at home, counter away etc), and shouts as I see fit (i.e pass into space if the oppo has a high line), but on the whole would be quite happy to use the default TC settings without any favoured playing style at all. Am I missing out on any advantage here, or is "use the defaults" a perfectly sound way to overachieve (assuming squad quality is sufficient)?

I am guessing the answer will be "its fine, this is a guide and not hard and fast rules", but would value a second opinion from those with deeper knowledge on the game.

It's fine, this is a guide and not hard and fast rules. Seriously, though, I am a minimalist when it comes to team and personal instructions. I accomplish 90%+ of what I want with the basic settings and role allocation. I do sometimes alter team instructions in response to match situations, but I don't do a lot with them in the base starting tactic. Others use many, to create a very specific style of play that they want. Don't rule out their use to address something you notice in a match (or about your team in general) but in general, you don't have to be a big consumer of the instructions to develop a successful tactic.

[Beardeye]

It's fine, this is a guide and not hard and fast rules. Seriously, though, I am a minimalist when it comes to team and personal instructions. I accomplish 90%+ of what I want with the basic settings and role allocation. I do sometimes alter team instructions in response to match situations, but I don't do a lot with them in the base starting tactic. Others use many, to create a very specific style of play that they want. Don't rule out their use to address something you notice in a match (or about your team in general) but in general, you don't have to be a big consumer of the instructions to develop a successful tactic.

Thanks- I have gone on a good run of results since using the "default" approach (with mentality and roles changing depending on the oppo) so its working for me so far.

[Carles Alena]

Can anyone enlighten me please, if a wide playmaker is considered an "extravagant" and a specialist of a role? As i suppose it is cuz of the name, so forgive me because outright it seems a stupid question and a fairly straightforward one, but i dont know.Kinda wanting to play a classic 4-4-2 and i wanna know if i should play it with rigid shape(3-4 specialist roles). Fm 15 is my version

[Dr. Hook]

Can anyone enlighten me please, if a wide playmaker is considered an "extravagant" and a specialist of a role? As i suppose it is cuz of the name, so forgive me because outright it seems a stupid question and a fairly straightforward one, but i dont know.Kinda wanting to play a classic 4-4-2 and i wanna know if i should play it with rigid shape(3-4 specialist roles). Fm 15 is my version

The Wide Playmaker is a specialist, just like an AP or DLP or any primarily creative role as you are asking him to do something very specific role-wise. As for a rigid shape, that is really down to how creative you feel your team is as a whole. If you want them sticking more to their sphere- defenders exclusively defend, attackers attack etc. then rigid is your thing. Use the specialists to perform specific duties within the tactic to give your team some of its particular style. It all depends on what you want out of your side.

[sneek]

How to Play FM: A Twelve Step Guide. 2016??

[Cleon]

How to Play FM: A Twelve Step Guide. 2016??

It would be the same as this, the principles are the same regardless of what version of the game you play.

[sneek]

It would be the same as this, the principles are the same regardless of what version of the game you play.

From reading this thread i would like to disagree

http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php/442751-Important-FM16-Tactical-Changes

[HUNT3R]

From reading this thread i would like to disagree

http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php/442751-Important-FM16-Tactical-Changes

None of that changes the fundamentals in this guide. The only slight change is the Philosophy, but wwfan's guide is based on the Creative Freedom element of it, so that doesn't change the guide either.

[luka_zg]

So, are specialized roles in effect here or not if team philosophy is not what it was on older versions?

[HUNT3R]

So, are specialized roles in effect here or not if team philosophy is not what it was on older versions?

None of that changes the fundamentals in this guide. The only slight change is the Philosophy, but wwfan's guide is based on the Creative Freedom element of it, so that doesn't change the guide either.

I've already answered this. As your link also said, creative freedom is still what it was, so it doesn't change what wwfan wrote on specialised roles.

[JoaMei]

@wwfan

For FM 16 I see the playerroles as follows, because they might to be linked with "roaming". And for me "roaming" is an indicator for fluidity on player instruction basis (not team shape).

FM16 Roles (duties) Interpretation

Highly Structured Roles (duties):

All roles with "Hold Position" instruction selected by default so they are "Specialists":

Defensive Forward (defend)

Wide Target Man (support)

Central Midfielder (defend)

Anchor Man (Defend)

Defensive Midfielder (defend)

Ballwinning Midfielder (defend)

Deep lying playmaker (defend & support)

Wide Midfielder (defend)

Defensive Winger (defend & support)

Half Back (defend)

Limited Fullback (defend)

Fullback (defend)

Wingback (defend)

Limited Defender (defend)

Central Defender (defend)

Ball-playing Defender (defend)

Sweeper (defend)

Structured Roles (duties)

All roles with "More Roaming" instruction is not available by default and "Hold Position" instruction is available so they can be "Limited Generalists":

Advanced playmaker (support)

Ballwinning Midfielder (support)

Defensive Midfielder (support)

Fullback (support)

Limited Defender (stopper & cover)

Central Defender (stopper & cover)

Ball-playing Defender (stopper & cover)

Libero (support)

Flexible Roles (duties):

All with neither "Hold Position" nor "More Roaming" instruction selected by default so they are "Generalists":

Deep-lying Forward (support)

Target Man (support)

Defensive Forward (support)

Inside Forward (support)

Winger (support)

Wide Target Man (attack)

Wide Midfielder (support, automatic)

Enganche (attack) Exception: Neither "Hold Position" nor "More Roaming" selectable.

Attacking Midfielder (support)

Central Midfielder (support, automatic)

Advanced playmaker (attack)

Fullback (attack, automatic))

Wingback (support, attack, automatic)

Libero (attack)

Fluid Roles (duties)

All roles with "Hold Position" instruction is not available by default and "More Roaming" instruction is available so they can be "Free Generalists":

False Nine (support)

Poacher (attack)

Target Man (attack)

Advanced Forward (attack)

Deep-lying Forward (attack)

Inside Forward (attack)

Winger (attack)

Attacking Midfielder (attack)

Shadow Striker (attack)

Central Midfielder (attack)

Wide Midfielder (attack)

Very Fluid Roles (duties):

All roles with "More Roaming" instruction selected by default so they are "Freestylers":

Complete Foward (support & attack)

Trequatista (attack)

Raumdeuter (attack)

Wide Playmaker (support & attack)

Box – to – Box Midfielder (support)

Roaming Playmaker (support)

Complete Wingback (support & attack)

Inverted Winback (support)

Regista (support)

For a deeper fundamented answer by me see this .pdf file: http://www.mediafire.com/view/oubb48t0byxyyy8/FM_16_Team_Shape%2C_Roles_%26_PPM.pdf

I have added an example: http://www.mediafire.com/view/n800i6w70r4onud/Basing_player_roles_on_their_PPMs.pdf

[woland]

Hello JoaMei,

I'm tactical noob, but i have noticed strange things in your schema. From your point of view, Trequatista is very fluid player, but according in game description he doing much less defensive job. Therefore he can not be considered as Very FLuid player. Or I'm wrong?

[JoaMei]

Hi woland,

you are not wrong in case of defensive play of the Trequatista, you are damn right with it. But I didn't analysed the defensive play aspect of a player but the the positional play aspect. Secondly I don't mean with "Very Fluid" etc. the team shape instruction but I was using theese terms to try to sperate the roles by their default player instruction in case of their preferred postional play.

If you and I would analyse the defensive play aspect of each role, then it might will end in another schema.

PS: In my post above I linked two .pdf files for a deeper answer. If you are interested you can read and discuss them with me. This schema and I won't tell that it is the whole truth but ust a part of it .

[GPaton68]

What about the Structured and Flexible styles. You haven't included the specialist role number?

[HUNT3R]

What about the Structured and Flexible styles. You haven't included the specialist role number?

It's in the OP, the names have just changed. Flexible is the same as Balanced and Rigid was renamed Structured.

[LEEMOD]

This is in no way a bump but I didn't think it would be worthwhile starting a thread to ask a basic question but, do these principles still hold true for FM16 would you say?

[LEEMOD]

Apologies, just seen Cleons answer above - it is!

[Arel]

Hi wwfan! Is this post updated to FM2017?

[Connor]

I wondered what peoples opinions/experiences are, does this general rule, apply at lower levels - Conference South for  example?

I have heard advice for that lower level, to be keep a structured/highly structured approach, but if not using specialist roles, that would mean a more fluid approach if you follow wwfan's advice?

Thanks for any input

[Bitner]

I don't think theres any obligation, but as they're less smart, i'll advise you to play simples, less instructions, less complicated roles (like Raumdeuter or Wide playmaker), and stick to the simple roles, like Wide Man, Central Midfielder, but certainly i don't know nothing about having to play on structured, i had resonable sucess playing in a Flexible structure...

Cheers,
Bitner 

[Arel]

2 hours ago, Connor said:

I wondered what peoples opinions/experiences are, does this general rule, apply at lower levels - Conference South for  example?

I have heard advice for that lower level, to be keep a structured/highly structured approach, but if not using specialist roles, that would mean a more fluid approach if you follow wwfan's advice?

Thanks for any input

Just like bitner said.
wwfan twelve steps are good to any team from any tier in my opinion. I'm training a 3rd tier club and i started with a structured formation and it was awful. Since they're not genious to play in too complex positions it's good to stay simple with them. I changed to very fluid with 0 special roles and my team started to improve

[HUNT3R]

11 hours ago, Connor said:

I wondered what peoples opinions/experiences are, does this general rule, apply at lower levels - Conference South for  example?

I have heard advice for that lower level, to be keep a structured/highly structured approach, but if not using specialist roles, that would mean a more fluid approach if you follow wwfan's advice?

Thanks for any input

It applies to any club in any league.

Just because it is a lower level, doesn't mean that players need to be structured or general roles. As with any club in any league, evaluate it based on their attribute spread/what they're capable of.

[phnompenhandy]

In my current save I assessed that my lower league squad had better mentals than our league rivals, but inferior technicals. Therefore, I've set up to be fluid.

[zemaniano85]

On 21/10/2013 at 23:53, wwfan said:

I generally suggest the following as a good rule of thumb (consider the either/or roles as 0.5):

what does exacty mean, please?

[Dr. Hook]

22 hours ago, zemaniano85 said:

what does exacty mean, please?

It has to do with calculating how many specialist roles you have- so when WWFan lists a DLF, for example, as a sort-of specialist role, then you would count it as half, so two DLFs would equal one specialist rule for the purposes of following his system. Make sense?

[zemaniano85]

8 minutes ago, Dr. Hook said:

It has to do with calculating how many specialist roles you have- so when WWFan lists a DLF, for example, as a sort-of specialist role, then you would count it as half, so two DLFs would equal one specialist rule for the purposes of following his system. Make sense?

I was getting mad with it, not really having a balanced tactic, I`m still not really sure.... so when he says flexible 2-3 specialists, its 4-6 roles?

 

[Dr. Hook]

18 minutes ago, zemaniano85 said:

I was getting mad with it, not really having a balanced tactic, I`m still not really sure.... so when he says flexible 2-3 specialists, its 4-6 roles?

 

No, in flexible 2-3 specialist roles. If you read again, he lists a few roles that are possibly specialist roles depending on how you interpret them. Those roles he recommends counting as a half a specialist.

 

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<Quote:

These four roles can fit in either camp, depending on your interpretation.

Complete Forward

Defensive Forward

Shadow Striker

Defensive Winger

Box to Box Midfielder

Complete Wing Back

Ball Playing Defender>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

 

Any of these he would class as half a specialist. So in a flexible system, with say 3 specialist  roles, you might have an Enganche (1), Anchorman (1), B2B midfielder (.5) and Defensive Winger (.5). This would be your three specialist roles.

[zemaniano85]

18 hours ago, Dr. Hook said:

No, in flexible 2-3 specialist roles. If you read again, he lists a few roles that are possibly specialist roles depending on how you interpret them. Those roles he recommends counting as a half a specialist.

 

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<Quote:

These four roles can fit in either camp, depending on your interpretation.

Complete Forward

Defensive Forward

Shadow Striker

Defensive Winger

Box to Box Midfielder

Complete Wing Back

Ball Playing Defender>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

 

Any of these he would class as half a specialist. So in a flexible system, with say 3 specialist  roles, you might have an Enganche (1), Anchorman (1), B2B midfielder (.5) and Defensive Winger (.5). This would be your three specialist roles.

Thanks, now it's clear... 

[zemaniano85]

is there any specific way to use specialist roles? I mean if in a fluid system 1 specialist is convenient to have in a specific strata?

[herne79]

With regards to Team Shape, the following quote made by Rashidi in a different thread is very important and deals with why that section of the guide is now out of date.

"I am inclined to shut this thread up, because it deals with a subject "Generalists/Specialists", that has neither been accepted nor has it been verified by any SI developer. Furthermore, when Richard first brought this up it was way back in 2012 when Creative Freedom was delinked from Shape. Today Shape and CF are intrinsically linked. His attempts were merely to simplify role selection within some larger framework. Even then, it wasn't universally accepted since it couldn't be empirically verified. In 2012 there were also fewer unique roles. And to make this even more redundant, a generic role can easily morph into one of the "specialist" roles with some PI changes. When I spoke to some of the devs, they confirmed that there is no co-relation within the game that supports such a distinction.

However in all fairness to the OP, I will leave this thread open, no matter no much I dislike the initial observations, which seem to be sweeping in nature. 8 matches does not even qualify as a pattern. When we did mentality and shape tests we used to run seasons of tests which would number in the 100s of games before any one of us dared even making an observation that came close to a pattern that could be predicted in the game. So while my personal opinions remain the same I want to caution anyone who seeks to raise the whole generalist/specialist discussion again: there is nothing in the game that makes the distinction. In fact roles that are "generalists and specialists" are also open to debate. And these were once again the opinion of one person that is out-dated, and even when it was initially mooted, it couldn't be verified. So if this thread heads into aimless territory, the mods will close it."