Football Manager 2016 Out Now - Official Feedback Thread

[isignedupfornorealreason]

Examples in a bug report would be great.

Thing is, it could very well be a tactical issue.

For example;

photoupload

This is the usual shouts I put on.

This is the sort of thing I'm seeing:

screen shot on windows

All those passing options circled, and he punts it long to the Deep Lying Forward, where it gets cut out and pressure gets sustained because of it.

free image uploading

This could well be just a case of Joe Hart being a moron, I had to switch his distribution settings there because he just punted it away from any England player.

how do you print screen

Here, Henderson picks up the ball in midfield from a short pass from the right-back. He punts it long down along the red line, but ideally he should be turning to combine with the midfield. I let him off with this one because it was a good pass that caused trouble, though I have no idea why the striker is that far south (as he's a poacher and I want him staying central, but again we'll let him off.)

image post

This one, I can understand, under pressure, hoofs it, intercepted and causes problems. I'd like to see him play it back to the keeper or to Barkley as there's still some room to move around.

free upload pictures

This one, I can understand him not going to his right where the pressure is, but to his left he had two passing options that he ignores in favour of a long ball punt. At this point, I'm seeing a tactical issue, the players are too far apart in terms of what I want them to do (I'm basically doing a bloody Van Gaal in spreading out the positions there...)

One last one...

image upload

Punt ball! There are options for him to pull inside there, but he prefers the long ball route it seems. This is something I'm catching crop up a few times, but as I said, it could very well be an issue with the tactical set up.

[Miravlix]

Anyone else having penalty issues? I've missed 3 of 4 so far. Small sample size I know.

Messi has missed something like 80% of all penalties he has taken for my team. For a season his Free Kicks was a guaranteed goal though.

But at least my coaches suggest training penalties on most of my players, Pique, Jordi Alba and many others, but Messi that keep's missing they want him to train corners, that another player is taking care of. (The good corner taker they want to do free kicks *rolls eyes*)

[vasilli07]

What's everyone shots conversion rate? My shots on target is around 47% and conversion is only 11%. Still win a lot of games but only by a goal or 2 most of the time.

[Cougar2010]

All those passing options circled, and he punts it long to the Deep Lying Forward, where it gets cut out and pressure gets sustained because of it.

You haven't said what his individual role & duty are but I suspect duty will be support or attack. This along with a control team mentality encourages forward balls and a more direct style of play in the transition phase.

You also have his passing range really short which may put some of those circled players outside the range while "Be More Expressive" will encourage him to try things.

Taking it as an isolated example I don't think he has made a particularly bad choice. Eventually one of your defenders/midfielders has to play a forward ball to the front three and in the pic it looks like the ball into the channel potentially giving the ST a run on goal is on. I might even consider it the best passing option given the DM/MCs look like they are being closed down in the middle.

This could well be just a case of Joe Hart being a moron, I had to switch his distribution settings there because he just punted it away from any England player.

None of the four defenders you have circled there are passing options for Hart. His kick could have been directed more towards his teammates though, what were his distribution settings?

Here, Henderson picks up the ball in midfield from a short pass from the right-back. He punts it long down along the red line, but ideally he should be turning to combine with the midfield. I let him off with this one because it was a good pass that caused trouble, though I have no idea why the striker is that far south (as he's a poacher and I want him staying central, but again we'll let him off.)

Again much like the first pic, be more expressive, control team mentality. His back is to the DM/MC while the 1-2 isn't on to the DR, he sees the ball into the channel for the AMR and takes it. Again as an isolated pic it looks like probably the best option.

This one, I can understand, under pressure, hoofs it, intercepted and causes problems. I'd like to see him play it back to the keeper or to Barkley as there's still some room to move around.

Yeah thats a safety first clearance.

Its difficult from an isolated pic but if he feels the need to hoof it then its unlikely he sees Barkley as an option. Pass back to the keeper is a possibility but again I feel the control team mentality is encouraging the forward ball while Hart is possibly outside your short passing range.

This one, I can understand him not going to his right where the pressure is, but to his left he had two passing options that he ignores in favour of a long ball punt. At this point, I'm seeing a tactical issue, the players are too far apart in terms of what I want them to do (I'm basically doing a bloody Van Gaal in spreading out the positions there...)

Much the same as two of the previous ones.

Henderson is static and covered to the right, Baines too far back. Control/expressive he sees the run into the channel and goes to try & create a chance which is really what you want him to do in the setup.

One last one...

Punt ball! There are options for him to pull inside there, but he prefers the long ball route it seems. This is something I'm catching crop up a few times, but as I said, it could very well be an issue with the tactical set up.

A little different and possibly the worst of the pics IMO.

He is looking for the run of the ST behind the defence but he has got an option to his right, the other three you've circled aren't options IMO.

**********

Personally I think the overall tactic/formation is built around attacking the channels with the likes of Barkley & the fullbacks the main providers of those balls. Three of your pics show those players doing exactly that. The decision then has to be are they doing it too often or is this not what you want and you need to adjust the approach.

Other factors that I don't think are helping:

A) If you want a more keep ball tactic control is not the right team mentality.

B) Having really short passing is reducing the player's options and hindering the passing style.

C) The formation is not really aiding a passing style, it looks more like a quick counter attacking formation.

EDIT

and after all that I've just noticed that the formation in the corner is Slovenia's and not England's

So I'm guessing from the pics that you are playing a narrow diamond with England which puts a slightly different slant on the pics. I would expect in that formation that the fullbacks would be quite attacking so its still no surprise that they are looking to play balls forward and get forward themselves. You have a problem in that your AMC is expected to be heavily involved but with two DMs in Slovenia's formation he is going to have an issue getting into the match. Its effectively taking him out of being a passing option when he could well be the pivot that the formation works around depending on his role.

Overall I think Slovenia's tactical approach counters yours quite well and almost forces the passes into the channel as the main way forwards in that particular match. In that situation I would have been looking to maybe drop the AMC back to MC to control possession more and make the fullbacks very attacking as that is where the space is. Combine that with a lower team mentality to keep possession more & extend the passing range and you would then give the fullbacks time to get forward.

[Loversleaper]

Punt ball! There are options for him to pull inside there, but he prefers the long ball route it seems. This is something I'm catching crop up a few times, but as I said, it could very well be an issue with the tactical set up.

I have some of the same experiences and mentioned it in a post a few pages back in the thread. In the more attacking strategies and/or giving players attack duty (attacking mentalities) results in the player making more the type of passes you show in your screen shots. And that is with short passing, retain possession, play out of defense and work ball into box instructions. Of course, it happens more frequent when your team have the ball on your own half, but it results in low possession stats as your team seems to just give the ball away constantly and I haven't figured out (tactically) how to avoid those instances. Well, unless you switch mentality to a more defensive mentality, of course, but that wouldn't be the correct approach to break down the stubborn AI defense and would render the strategy ladder basically obsolete...

[HUNT3R]

I have some of the same experiences and mentioned it in a post a few pages back in the thread. In the more attacking strategies and/or giving players attack duty (attacking mentalities) results in the player making more the type of passes you show in your screen shots. And that is with short passing, retain possession, play out of defense and work ball into box instructions. Of course, it happens more frequent when your team have the ball on your own half, but it results in low possession stats as your team seems to just give the ball away constantly and I haven't figured out (tactically) how to avoid those instances. Well, unless you switch mentality to a more defensive mentality, of course, but that wouldn't be the correct approach to break down the stubborn AI defense and would render the strategy ladder basically obsolete...

It is more than likely because people overdo it with the shortening of passing range and it then having the opposite effect.

It wouldn't be the duties, but more likely an attacking mentality which sees them wanting to pass forward/take more risks. I still don't think people 'get' what mentality is.

Users then go and plant shorter passing, retain possession (which also reduces passes into space and therefore passing options) and play out of defence on there, which shortens passing quite a bit. This leaves very few (if any) players inside the passing range, so you see more punts. In the "punt ball!" example, there is one realistic passing option, I agree. It may be to do with him having Risky Passes often and given the freedom to be "more expressive" as a TI, combined with an attacking mentality in Control.

[Cougar2010]

I have some of the same experiences and mentioned it in a post a few pages back in the thread. In the more attacking strategies and/or giving players attack duty (attacking mentalities) results in the player making more the type of passes you show in your screen shots. And that is with short passing, retain possession, play out of defense and work ball into box instructions. Of course, it happens more frequent when your team have the ball on your own half, but it results in low possession stats as your team seems to just give the ball away constantly and I haven't figured out (tactically) how to avoid those instances. Well, unless you switch mentality to a more defensive mentality, of course, but that wouldn't be the correct approach to break down the stubborn AI defense and would render the strategy ladder basically obsolete...

That would be the totally right approach to take.

In that situation you want to lower mentality to keep possession more, play safer square/backwards passes and work the ball until an opportunity appears.

[Loversleaper]

It is more than likely because people overdo it with the shortening of passing range and it then having the opposite effect.

It wouldn't be the duties, but more likely an attacking mentality which sees them wanting to pass forward/take more risks. I still don't think people 'get' what mentality is.

Users then go and plant shorter passing, retain possession (which also reduces passes into space and therefore passing options) and play out of defence on there, which shortens passing quite a bit. This leaves very few (if any) players inside the passing range, so you see more punts. In the "punt ball!" example, there is one realistic passing option, I agree. It may be to do with him having Risky Passes often and given the freedom to be "more expressive" as a TI, combined with an attacking mentality in Control.

My friend, some of us have been around long enough to 'get' what mentality is, we have seen it work in all of the previous MEs - and I can tell you that now something does not seem to be right. First of all, the D-Line looks inverted most of the time in contrast to one's setting in the Attacking Strategies. Second, stats in the more Attacking strategies seem to fail.

For example, if you are at home and are much better than your opponent, then you would expect to be able to press your opponent far up the pitch, you should be able to out-pass your opponent with short passing and being more expressive with your creativity --- otherwise what is the point?

[Cougar2010]

My friend, some of us have been around long enough to 'get' what mentality is, we have seen it work in all of the previous MEs - and I can tell you that now something does not seem to be right. First of all, the D-Line looks inverted most of the time in contrast to one's setting in the Attacking Strategies. Second, stats in the more Attacking strategies seem to fail.

For example, if you are at home and are much better than your opponent, then you would expect to be able to press your opponent far up the pitch, you should be able to out-pass your opponent with short passing and being more expressive with your creativity --- otherwise what is the point?

With all due respect you might have played FM for a long time but your posts clearly indicate that you don't understand mentality as well as you think you do.

Your posts suggest that you have an issue in translating how you want your team to play into the TC which leads to you making wrong decisions and therefore frustration because your team on the pitch aren't playing the way you envisage them in your mind.

[Loversleaper]

That would be the totally right approach to take.

In that situation you want to lower mentality to keep possession more, play safer square/backwards passes and work the ball until an opportunity appears.

Cougar, there is a reason the SI have implemented a strategy ladder. You have been around long enough that you should be able to determine how it works, but what you are saying in regards to breaking down a very defensive AI mentality structure is simply not correct and never has been. If you think otherwise, then that is simply a matter of opinion...

[Cougar2010]

Cougar, there is a reason the SI have implemented a strategy ladder. You have been around long enough that you should be able to determine how it works, but what you are saying in regards to breaking down a very defensive AI mentality structure is simply not correct and never has been. If you think otherwise, then that is simply a matter of opinion...

I've argued for years that having team mentalities called "defend" & "attack" confuses users.

You aren't the first & you won't be the last. You need to stop thinking about mentality like that.

A few years ago a general rule of thumb would be the higher up the league you are the lower your mentality should be and the lower down the league you are the higher the mentality should be. In more recent versions tactics have become more refined and much more match dependant with teams at all levels of the league capable of using different styles to varying levels of success depending on the opposition.

I'm not looking to argue with you but I am looking to help you understand the game better.

[HUNT3R]

My friend, some of us have been around long enough to 'get' what mentality is, we have seen it work in all of the previous MEs - and I can tell you that now something does not seem to be right. First of all, the D-Line looks inverted most of the time in contrast to one's setting in the Attacking Strategies. Second, stats in the more Attacking strategies seem to fail.

What "stats" fail? I don't understand what you mean.

If the D-Line drops deep too early or pushes up too late, that's something for the bugs forum. They'll be very interested in that.

For example, if you are at home and are much better than your opponent, then you would expect to be able to press your opponent far up the pitch, you should be able to out-pass your opponent with short passing and being more expressive with your creativity --- otherwise what is the point?

You can do all of that. The left winger in that example was trying to express HIS freedom of creativity by trying to pick out the forward with an ambitious ball.

[Loversleaper]

I've argued for years that having team mentalities called "defend" & "attack" confuses users.

You aren't the first & you won't be the last. You need to stop thinking about mentality like that.

A few years ago a general rule of thumb would be the higher up the league you are the lower your mentality should be and the lower down the league you are the higher the mentality should be. In more recent versions tactics have become more refined and much more match dependant with teams at all levels of the league capable of using different styles to varying levels of success depending on the opposition.

I'm not looking to argue with you but I am looking to help you understand the game better.

You're kidding right? The higher up the league the lower your mentality and the lower down the league the higher your mentality...

I have a feeling that you have never seen Barcelona play football before...

Mindboggling statement from someone who wants to help me understand the game better...

[HUNT3R]

You're kidding right? The higher up the league the lower your mentality and the lower down the league the higher your mentality...

I have a feeling that you have never seen Barcelona play football before...

Mindboggling statement from someone who wants to help me understand the game better...

It's not necessarily the case. It's risk taking, to put it simply. You seem to imply that Barcelona employ in FM terms an attacking mentality? The reality is, it is closer to Defend or Counter with a lot of closing down, obviously.

[MBarbaric]

My friend, some of us have been around long enough to 'get' what mentality is, we have seen it work in all of the previous MEs - and I can tell you that now something does not seem to be right. First of all, the D-Line looks inverted most of the time in contrast to one's setting in the Attacking Strategies. Second, stats in the more Attacking strategies seem to fail.

For example, if you are at home and are much better than your opponent, then you would expect to be able to press your opponent far up the pitch, you should be able to out-pass your opponent with short passing and being more expressive with your creativity --- otherwise what is the point?

playing fm since 90's isn't guarantee for anything. i play it for 18 years but i have no shame saying that concepts as fluidity, mentality were never clear to me. especially as they all change in interaction (or do they?). shorter passing on attacking mentality and fluid philosphy is completely different to the same instruction (or any other as closing down....) on rigid and defensive mentality.

it is bunch of extrapolations that need to be done so si can somewhat translate the game of football into piece of software. frankly, i never got hang of it and can't surely tell what means what. to do so, one would need to experiment heavily and as football is a game of million influences you'd still have to guess.

that being said, i do enjoy the game all these years. i like to tell what i want from my players so i always use rigid philosophy and mentalities i completely ignore. i leave them on standard and never change to defensive or attacking, controll (what does that even mean?) or whatever. instead i just change my team instructions.

if i want to go more defensive i just drop deeper, press less, stay on feet and that is it. if i want to be attacking i go opposite or i just leave it on bog standard and take it from there.

most of other team instructions deal with how i want to score goals so they are connected with the mentality but they aren't always the same as basicaly type of players i have dictate that part.

in general though, people often overcomplicate. they want to go attacking, they set attacking menatlity (then game sets all the input to do taht), and on top of that people again mostly activate the same instructions that game already set with attacking mentality (press more, push higher...) making the team play extreme versions of what user actually intends.

this in turn leads to lot of frustration and players making strange decisions you don't expect. when i think of it, it is really the way si designed the instructions that confuse the people. of course, i believe si should leave mentalities out and just let the player put his instructions in to remove the ambiguity the way i do it is obviously right way

[Loversleaper]

Look people, the more Attacking the strategy the higher your D-Line is, okay? To suggest that SI designed Attacking strategies for weaker teams is simply not correct.

[Cougar2010]

You're kidding right? The higher up the league the lower your mentality and the lower down the league the higher your mentality...

I have a feeling that you have never seen Barcelona play football before...

Mindboggling statement from someone who wants to help me understand the game better...

and I presume you think that Barcelona play with an "Attacking" mentality in FM speak?

There are threads in the tactics forum dating back at least five years to when Barcelona were at their peak explaining from really top tacticans that Barcelona's team mentality when converted to FM is much closer to defend/counter with TI adjustments.

As it stands there is little point in continuing the discussion as you've got your fingers in your ears and haven't reached the point where you are willing to consider that you might be wrong

When you do reach that point I recommend a visit to the tactics forum and at the very least read some of the sticky threads.

[HUNT3R]

Look people, the more Attacking the strategy the higher your D-Line is, okay? To suggest that SI designed Attacking strategies for weaker teams is simply not correct.

Agreed on both points. It wasn't designed with that in mind. I'm still not a fan of the descriptions for the various mentalities as it nudges people into the thinking of Man Utd/Man City = Attack and Crystal Palace = Defend, which isn't as black and white as that.

[Loversleaper]

It's not necessarily the case. It's risk taking, to put it simply. You seem to imply that Barcelona employ in FM terms an attacking mentality? The reality is, it is closer to Defend or Counter with a lot of closing down, obviously.

There is no way what you are saying is correct - Italian football in the 90's, that was defensive football. What Barcelona are doing today is basically an all out Attack form of football with very high pressure and a very high Defensive-Line...

[HUNT3R]

There is no way what you are saying is correct - Italian football in the 90's, that was defensive football. What Barcelona are doing today is basically an all out Attack form of football with very high pressure and a very high Defensive-Line...

You're focusing on the D-Line and Pressing only.

In a perfect world, you'd have a Defend mentality for Barcelona in possession and an Attack/Overload mentality out of possession. Unfortunately, that isn't possible.

If you give Barcelona an Attack mentality, they're going to take risks. Yes, their closing down and D-line will be "correct" but they'll take unnecessary risks with the ball, risky passes that has a high chance of a turnover, attempt low percentage shots and make risky runs forward etc and that isn't the Barcelona we all know. That's why I said a Defend mentality, but Counter can work too.

Edit: and then the closest you'll get is to add Much Higher D-Line, Press Much More and closing down OIs on top of that.

[Cougar2010]

There is no way what you are saying is correct - Italian football in the 90's, that was defensive football. What Barcelona are doing today is basically an all out Attack form of football with very high pressure and a very high Defensive-Line...

and we've come full circle back to your initial problem.

You watch Barcelona play IRL and in your mind label their style of play.

Then you move onto FM see team mentality labelled "Attack" and link that to whats in your mind. You aren't converting the ideas & style in your head correctly into the FM ME and the TC.

[Cougar2010]

You're focusing on the D-Line and Pressing only.

In a perfect world, you'd have a Defend mentality for Barcelona in possession and an Attack/Overload mentality out of possession. Unfortunately, that isn't possible.

If you give Barcelona an Attack mentality, they're going to take risks. Yes, their closing down and D-line will be "correct" but they'll take unnecessary risks with the ball, risky passes that has a high chance of a turnover, attempt low percentage shots and make risky runs forward etc and that isn't the Barcelona we all know. That's why I said a Defend mentality, but Counter can work too.

Edit: and then the closest you'll get is to add Much Higher D-Line, Press Much More and closing down OIs on top of that.

Barcelona also only press for a short space of time after losing possession 5 secs ish? If they don't win the ball back in that time they then drop off and sit back. FM simply isn't advanced enough to use a duel defensive system like that.

[Loversleaper]

and we've come full circle back to your initial problem.

You watch Barcelona play IRL and in your mind label their style of play.

Then you move onto FM see team mentality labelled "Attack" and link that to whats in your mind. You aren't converting the ideas & style in your head correctly into the FM ME and the TC.

Look Cougar, let's look at a few things in FM football strategies:

1: the higher the mentality the higher the defensive line automatically becomes.

2: the higher the mentality the more risky passes your team will attempt.

3: the higher the mentality the more your players will be getting into attacking positions.

These are all traits of teams that are going to be better than the opponent. To suggest SI designed a strategy ladder to be completely without purpose is... well... what can I say?

[macca72]

The balance in the ME is fundamentally flawed at the moment in my opinion.

Attacking has been nullified by overpowered counter attacks, regardless of team or player ability, narrow play is annihilated by over powered crossing.

Defending I can't fathom, some of the shapes you see are unexplainable, in almost all mentality and fluidity combinations.

High mentalities lead to gifting away possession or no shots on target, while low mentalities often lead to 90 minutes of absolutely nothing, or leaving you like a sitting duck to be overpowered.

I know many will disagree and are doing just great, but at the moment I'm stumped.

I uninstalled the game this morning for the first time i can remember.

I hope the game gets rebalanced quickly, personally I thought the beta ME was far better, but that's just an opinion.

[HUNT3R]

I hope the game gets rebalanced quickly, personally I thought the beta ME was far better, but that's just an opinion.

The beta didn't have the improved counter attacking, so weaker teams were just permanent sitting ducks.

[Cougar2010]

Look Cougar, let's look at a few things in FM football strategies:

1: the higher the mentality the higher the defensive line automatically becomes.

2: the higher the mentality the more risky passes your team will attempt.

3: the higher the mentality the more your players will be getting into attacking positions.

These are all traits of teams that are going to be better than the opponent. To suggest SI designed a strategy ladder to be completely without purpose is... well... what can I say?

1. Yes

2. Yes

3. Its not that simple

and there is far more too it that you don't seem to be considering.

Higher mentality also means: more forward passes, more direct passing, earlier runs forward, less time taken on the ball, shots hit earlier in the phase from less ideal positions etc etc.

None of these traits fit in with teams like Barcelona who keep possession and work the ball to drag the defence out of shape to create space with their movement.

In essence when faced with a team who keeps 10 men behind the ball what you are doing is akin to hitting a barn door with a shovel when you really need a needle & thread.

I can't comment on SIs thinking behind the team mentality when it was created but its been in CM/FM for a long time now and its something that isn't ideal but works to some extent.

[macca72]

The beta didn't have the improved counter attacking, so weaker teams were just permanent sitting ducks.

There must be more to it than that though, I had a decent cup run knocking out a couple of higher division teams, so it can't have been that extreme.

You know more of the detail than I do, but the fact that weaker teams seem now to be able to achieve insanely high goals to shots ratios as a result of attribute defying counters is surely equally an issue?

[HUNT3R]

There must be more to it than that though, I had a decent cup run knocking out a couple of higher division teams, so it can't have been that extreme.

You know more of the detail than I do, but the fact that weaker teams seem now to be able to achieve insanely high goals to shots ratios as a result of attribute defying counters is surely equally an issue?

All we constantly see are these insanely high goals to shots ratio against users, not AI v AI. That leads me to believe it's more of a user issue.

I said it elsewhere, but I think we (generally speaking) became too used to be too attacking in FM15 especially, because the AI was, quite frankly, poor tactically and counter attacking weak. We could take risks and be as open as we wanted, without much fear of losing.

By all means though, if you do have PKMs/Save games backing up your claim, SI will definitely have a look.

[macca72]

The beta didn't have the improved counter attacking, so weaker teams were just permanent sitting ducks.

All we constantly see are these insanely high goals to shots ratio against users, not AI v AI. That leads me to believe it's more of a user issue.

By all means though, if you do have PKMs/Save games backing up your claim, SI will definitely have a look.

There is no doubt in my mind I am at least partially responsible.

The issue is I have no idea what to do to stop it (or the crossing which is equally as bad) and nothing I do seems to be able to.

I see no difference in defensive shape or effectiveness whether I play attack / defend, or a CWB or FB(d), I still concede the same goals.

That doesn't feel right to me

[Cougar2010]

There must be more to it than that though, I had a decent cup run knocking out a couple of higher division teams, so it can't have been that extreme.

You know more of the detail than I do, but the fact that weaker teams seem now to be able to achieve insanely high goals to shots ratios as a result of attribute defying counters is surely equally an issue?

If you have a very attacking formation style that leaves acres of space at the back its no surprise that counter attacking teams make use of it.

Its a regular issue amongst FM users that they seem to focus heavily on attack and simply don't know or haven't given any thought as to how to defend.

Just yesterday IRL I was talking FM tactics with someone and he thought his was great when in effect he had two defenders & eight attackers. I don't think a 2/8 split has ever been seen IRL anywhere outside of maybe the school playground. Most professional teams work on a 5/5 split between more defensive & more attacking players adjusting to either a 4/6 or 6/4 if they are want to defend or attack. Even something like a 3/7 split is reserved for the likes of the last five minutes of cup matches when a DC gets pushed forward.

[HUNT3R]

There is no doubt in my mind I am at least partially responsible.

The issue is I have no idea what to do to stop it (or the crossing which is equally as bad) and nothing I do seems to be able to.

I see no difference in defensive shape or effectiveness whether I play attack / defend, or a CWB or FB(d), I still concede the same goals.

All of this leaves me wondering why you don't ask for advice in the Tactics forum? That's your best bet for now, to gain some understanding about what is happening and why.

[macca72]

Cougar, genuine question.

Picking up on your comment about facing defensive teams and requiring a lower mentality.

What is then the point of attacking at all, I don't see a use for it.

Essentially teams will either be attacking you, defending you or trying to work you out.

I see no need to use any other mentality than counter or occasionally standard.

If I've misunderstood, please explain.

[jc1]

Barcelona also only press for a short space of time after losing possession 5 secs ish? If they don't win the ball back in that time they then drop off and sit back. FM simply isn't advanced enough to use a duel defensive system like that.

One of the hardest things to do with the limited shout outs is to get any FM team playing exactly the way any of the top teams play. Teams don't just play high tempo/attack/fluid, they'll slow the game down when needed, hit on the counter, play narrow, play wide, drop off, hassle more, all dependant on what is happening on the pitch, the ME isn't advanced enough to do all those things yet and probably never will. The only thing we can do as players is watch what's happening during a game and alter things when needed, too many lock and load a tactic and on they go. A good few who are people to listen too will tell you to watch as much of the game as possible to get the full picture, the season does take longer but you see so much more.

The beta didn't have the improved counter attacking, so weaker teams were just permanent sitting ducks.

Always a problem when the ME is tweaked a little the majority of players don't adjust their tactics accordingly. I'm still playing attacking/fluid but have changed to a normal defensive line and made my wingbacks support instead of attack, it seems to work, I'll still get hit on the counter but seem to have it covered ok so far.

[Cougar2010]

Cougar, genuine question.

Picking up on your comment about facing defensive teams and requiring a lower mentality.

What is then the point of attacking at all, I don't see a use for it.

Essentially teams will either be attacking you, defending you or trying to work you out.

I see no need to use any other mentality than counter or occasionally standard.

If I've misunderstood, please explain.

If you are unsure about mentality the best way to play is probably the same as MBarbaric describes in post #1226. Leave team mentality on standard and just adjust the TIs to suit the match. Its actually the way I used to play a lot and still do although I do tinker more with mentality than I used to a few years ago.

I'll start probably 90% of matches with standard mentality adjusting if I feel the need during a match.

Personally I very rarely used attacking in FM15 mainly because my tactics were based more around possession & defence. I did use it a little in FM14 with varying degrees of success.

As to when to use it you need advanced players in your formation to receive the ball early so ideally two/three in the AM/ST strata and you then want opposition that is leaving space at the back for you to exploit. So in FM terms you really need the opposition to be the stronger team as then they'll leave more space at the back while on the same train of thought its more likely to work best during away matches for the same reason.

To a lesser extent it could be useful against teams who pack the midfield as your players will play more direct bypassing the opposition players in the middle.

EDIT

You can also select an attack mentality and then temper it down with TIs but the FM ME seems to work better for me if I take a lower mentality and temper it up but then that might just be the way I think.

EDIT 2

Actually forgot another situation you see described a lot on the forums. Users start with an attacking style and one of two things occurs - The opposition score and sit back even more leading to the barn door/shovel scenario or the attacking team scores forcing the defensive team to chase the game leaving space at the back and they score another 3/4/5 goals.

So yes when you are ahead and the opposition are chasing the game although this can sometimes lead to an end to end scenario.

[s1111]

The labels and descriptions for mentalities are not helpful. Mentalities are really levels of risk, so Contain is least risky and Overload most. So a team IRL like Bayer Leverkusen or to an extent Klopp's Dortmund play with a high level of risk with an Attacking mentality in FM terms (very high line, very intense pressing, very high tempo, constant forward runs, always looking to pass forward rather than sideways or backwards).

Then Guardiola's Barca played with a more medium/low level of risk, so Standard or Counter, with the modification of a higher defensive line, more pressing and short passing. They played at a low, patient tempo with lots of backwards or sideways passes and fewer forward runs from midfield. One or both full backs and wide forwards had attack duties to push them forwards, the rest of the team concentrated on keeping control through possession.

The reverse would maybe be a team like Leicester, who play with a high level of risk, Attacking or Control in FM terms, but a lower defensive line. Still lots of forward passes, high tempo, lots of forwards runs etc.

These are the more extreme examples and IRL most teams would be more balanced, shifting between Counter, Standard and Control (or low-medium, medium, medium-high risk) based on opposition and match situation.

[iAlwaysWin]

1. Yes

2. Yes

3. Its not that simple

and there is far more too it that you don't seem to be considering.

Higher mentality also means: more forward passes, more direct passing, earlier runs forward, less time taken on the ball, shots hit earlier in the phase from less ideal positions etc etc.

None of these traits fit in with teams like Barcelona who keep possession and work the ball to drag the defence out of shape to create space with their movement.

In essence when faced with a team who keeps 10 men behind the ball what you are doing is akin to hitting a barn door with a shovel when you really need a needle & thread.

I can't comment on SIs thinking behind the team mentality when it was created but its been in CM/FM for a long time now and its something that isn't ideal but works to some extent.

Have you been watching barcelona lately? they are more direct now than ever, yes they still pass it around but only untill the right foward pass becomes avaliable, that could be 5 passes or 22 passes, luis enrique style is more direct than guardiolas thats for sure.

[edgar555]

I'm Spurs and in 2017 we've just moved to Wembley. I'm sure it had a future move to New White Hart Lane listed before. Whats going on?

[Cougar2010]

Have you been watching barcelona lately? they are more direct now than ever, yes they still pass it around but only untill the right foward pass becomes avaliable, that could be 5 passes or 22 passes, luis enrique style is more direct than guardiolas thats for sure.

TBH I haven't seen them at all recently aside from a few clips/highlights.

I do know that they are more incisive/direct then under Guardiola but they still aim to work possession and not go overboard with shots. Their last three games have been:

vs Sociedad 56% possession, 11 shots

vs Real 59% & 18 shots

vs Villarreal 64% & 20 shots

Whilst their style has changed its still nothing like an attacking mentality in FM, its perhaps a bit more like standard now.

[isignedupfornorealreason]

A) If you want a more keep ball tactic control is not the right team mentality.

B) Having really short passing is reducing the player's options and hindering the passing style.

C) The formation is not really aiding a passing style, it looks more like a quick counter attacking formation.

EDIT

and after all that I've just noticed that the formation in the corner is Slovenia's and not England's

So I'm guessing from the pics that you are playing a narrow diamond with England which puts a slightly different slant on the pics. I would expect in that formation that the fullbacks would be quite attacking so its still no surprise that they are looking to play balls forward and get forward themselves. You have a problem in that your AMC is expected to be heavily involved but with two DMs in Slovenia's formation he is going to have an issue getting into the match. Its effectively taking him out of being a passing option when he could well be the pivot that the formation works around depending on his role.

Overall I think Slovenia's tactical approach counters yours quite well and almost forces the passes into the channel as the main way forwards in that particular match. In that situation I would have been looking to maybe drop the AMC back to MC to control possession more and make the fullbacks very attacking as that is where the space is. Combine that with a lower team mentality to keep possession more & extend the passing range and you would then give the fullbacks time to get forward.

While I disagree with some of your analysis - for example in the first screen he isn't the ideal pass as he's facing away from the area the ball is about to be played into, and for the others I expect the player to at least turn on the ball and assess his options rather than hoof it, I do appreciate the discussion.

It is more than likely because people overdo it with the shortening of passing range and it then having the opposite effect.

It wouldn't be the duties, but more likely an attacking mentality which sees them wanting to pass forward/take more risks. I still don't think people 'get' what mentality is.

Users then go and plant shorter passing, retain possession (which also reduces passes into space and therefore passing options) and play out of defence on there, which shortens passing quite a bit. This leaves very few (if any) players inside the passing range, so you see more punts. In the "punt ball!" example, there is one realistic passing option, I agree. It may be to do with him having Risky Passes often and given the freedom to be "more expressive" as a TI, combined with an attacking mentality in Control.

That's the thing though Hunter, I -normally- only ever play on a counter mentality, or the more defensive mentalities, usually based around a mixed passing game.

The game I screen-grabbed things from was set up on the fly, as I expect most people would set up - Control, shorter passing set ups, in order to grab those screenies. When I was actually going through the creation process in a more serious save, I was playing it without touching the passing range - because I absolutely don't see the point in short passing based games in the first place (I'm a huge fan of the sterotypical Deep lying playmaker pinging the ball long distances when he is free to do so), and yet I was seeing similar things, long searching balls forward, even where there was no right to be pulling those passes off, and even where there was some support available by various people in various positions. There's also the cross-field box pass (around the penalty area), something I rarely saw in previous versions but seems very frequent in 16 - not that it is strictly a bad thing but it does happen.

Ah well, it is good to see it provoking discussion anyhow, though it is the same documentation point being brought up again. I will forever be reading the tactics forum, though how much of that gold mine of information actually gets through my (relatively thick) skull is a different matter!

[isignedupfornorealreason]

If you are unsure about mentality the best way to play is probably the same as MBarbaric describes in post #1226. Leave team mentality on standard and just adjust the TIs to suit the match. Its actually the way I used to play a lot and still do although I do tinker more with mentality than I used to a few years ago.

I'll start probably 90% of matches with standard mentality adjusting if I feel the need during a match.

Personally I very rarely used attacking in FM15 mainly because my tactics were based more around possession & defence. I did use it a little in FM14 with varying degrees of success.

As to when to use it you need advanced players in your formation to receive the ball early so ideally two/three in the AM/ST strata and you then want opposition that is leaving space at the back for you to exploit. So in FM terms you really need the opposition to be the stronger team as then they'll leave more space at the back while on the same train of thought its more likely to work best during away matches for the same reason.

To a lesser extent it could be useful against teams who pack the midfield as your players will play more direct bypassing the opposition players in the middle.

EDIT

You can also select an attack mentality and then temper it down with TIs but the FM ME seems to work better for me if I take a lower mentality and temper it up but then that might just be the way I think.

EDIT 2

Actually forgot another situation you see described a lot on the forums. Users start with an attacking style and one of two things occurs - The opposition score and sit back even more leading to the barn door/shovel scenario or the attacking team scores forcing the defensive team to chase the game leaving space at the back and they score another 3/4/5 goals.

So yes when you are ahead and the opposition are chasing the game although this can sometimes lead to an end to end scenario.

I agree on that, I tend to do the same thing usually.

[Sir James Lancaster]

Has the match engine out-grown the simplistic mentality names/descriptions or were they always obtuse? Who cares... What I think would be useful is for the game to have a more accurate, perhaps even more expansive, description of the mentalities. Failing that is there some post in the tactics forum that explains the repercussions, and hence applicability, of each of the mentalities? It looks to me like some user education would go a long way to resolving issues people might have. You can only bash people for so long with the "its your tactics" before you are obligated to help.

[RTHerringbone]

Failing that is there some post in the tactics forum that explains the repercussions, and hence applicability, of each of the mentalities?

This is excellent: http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php/423054-Lines-and-Diamonds-The-Tactician-s-Handbook-for-Football-Manager-2015?p=10256030&viewfull=1#post10256030

[Fox]

The defenders position especially the full back is so awful,except that the ME is good.

I agree, I can't play it because of the full backs though

[jujigatame]

Anyone else seeing Everton drastically outperform expectations? I'm halfway through my first EPL season and Everton are at the top of the table.

[rooneyviet]

there is no Black Friday sale for FM16, huh ?

[Siven]

DLF is a playmaker role, which attracts the ball.

As far as i know, theres no mention of this in game related to the role.

Same with playmakers actually. Theres no actual ingame info that says players will look to pass to these players if they can, other than the role, and some of us just like the role settings and dont want them to be playmakers/targetmen.

Now in previous versions we COULD set who was a playmaker or targetman regardless of role . It is unfortunately another tactical option that has been removed.

[Cougar2010]

As far as i know, theres no mention of this in game related to the role.

Same with playmakers actually. Theres no actual ingame info that says players will look to pass to these players if they can, other than the role, and some of us just like the role settings and dont want them to be playmakers/targetmen.

Now in previous versions we COULD set who was a playmaker or targetman regardless of role . It is unfortunately another tactical option that has been removed.

The clue is in the name - "Playmaker" & "Target Man"

The role description also explains the roles fairly clearly.

The role description for a DLF also explains that his role is to link play and whilst not a true playmaker its obvious he is going to be heavily involved in attacks.

Removing the options to set PMs or TMs was perfectly fine and are now linked directly to the role you select which makes much more sense.

[iAlwaysWin]

The clue is in the name - "Playmaker" & "Target Man"

The role description also explains the roles fairly clearly.

The role description for a DLF also explains that his role is to link play and whilst not a true playmaker its obvious he is going to be heavily involved in attacks.

Removing the options to set PMs or TMs was perfectly fine and are now linked directly to the role you select which makes much more sense.

Those exact roles where in fm13 with the added function of designated playmaker and targetman roles, the bottom line here is a tactical function has been removed for whatever reason, i would suspect it broke the match engine in some way, or it was percieved to be to overpowered.

[Cougar2010]

Those exact roles where in fm13 with the added function of designated playmaker and targetman roles, the bottom line here is a tactical function has been removed for whatever reason, i would suspect it broke the match engine in some way, or it was percieved to be to overpowered.

I imagine it was removed because its function was taken over by the roles.

Leaving it in made little sense and left potential for it to be abused and used as an exploit.

Claiming it to be a negative change by SI is ridiculous as anyone with an ounce of common sense should be able to see it was the correct decision.

[iAlwaysWin]

I imagine it was removed because its function was taken over by the roles.

Leaving it in made little sense and left potential for it to be abused and used as an exploit.

Claiming it to be a negative change by SI is ridiculous as anyone with an ounce of common sense should be able to see it was the correct decision.

You say the function has been over taken by the specific roles, but i have not seen any information from solid sources suggesting that is the case, yes we would all like to believe the function wasnt completely removed, but its not the first time Si removed a playmaker designated fuction, they done is back in the champ days, cant mind the editions, think it was 01-02 had playmaker role then the next edition didnt.