Learning how to play

[Bitner]

Just now, looping said:

They don't run inside off the ball because they have PI stay wide. Am i wrong?

Both have, Support and Attacking.

Cheers,
Bitner 

[looping]

2 minutes ago, Bitner said:

Both have, Support and Attacking.

Cheers,
Bitner 

I want my 2 wide players in the cm strata (whatever role, winger or wide midfielder, whatever the duty) to act like I described. How can I do that?

[Bitner]

Just now, looping said:

I want my 2 wide players in the cm strata (whatever role, winger or wide midfielder, whatever the duty) to act like I described. How can I do that?

You always can use them as WM, because it's a role which you can fully customize.

Cheers,
Bitner 

[NoTekkersRB]

From what I understand, in earlier versions at least, wingers will dribble out wide with the ball but will make forward runs into the box with PI make more forward runs in attacking moves in the last third. If your near sided winger had the ball your far sided winger would attack the ball coming in from the wing.

edit: Defensively, have you tried playing fluid/very fluid to try to keep the team compact vertically, thus lowering the gap between def and mid?

Thinking of what you just said with the wingers, I don't understand how you want to play

[looping]

gk: a normal gk when defending. Try to distribute to specific team mate (the big striker). 

fb-su. Not much to say here. Basically defend.

cd-de. One of them more a bdp who, the same than the gk, sends longs balls to big striker.

double pivot: one defensive the other creative. The defensive it's like an anchorman: hold position, win the ball back and pass it shorter. The other cm must be creative, long shots, set pieces, pass into space, hard working.

Wide men: On the right usual target of the passes into space made by the creative midfielder. This passes go behind the cb, so this guy runs to the middle, not wide, behind the defense. He can also run at the defence and cross. He is also very responsible defensively, teamwork, sacrifice. Technical skills quite low.

On the left, we have a pure left footed winger 

Strikers: The big striker is like a deep lying forward-target man. He comes deep to get the ball, but not with short passing. The idea is: gk sends a long ball, this striker wins the aerial duel, plays back to the goal, passes the ball back to the creative midfielder who sents a pace into space behind defense. 

The other striker is the main goal threat. He is paced and small. Good off the ball and finishing not bad. He stays up front and he doesn't help defending, because if the ball is won back, immedialty a long ball behind the defence will be sent, so he has to stay high up the pitch.

Mentality: Defensive/Counter. Low risk, sitting deep, trying to hit on the counter.

 

@herne79 offered an approach to this vision but I never managed to make it work decently.

[NoTekkersRB]

Was the only issue the defence?

[roykela]

Which team are you, looping?
Not that i would make it work (i highly doubt it) but i'd love to try my interpretation of what you want with the same team you're trying it with.

[looping]

Malaga, but I've made some transfers (I start the first season on April so I can sign some players as free agents). During summer I acquired Stipe Perica after selling my best player (Juanpi) who doesn't fit in my tactic. This is the only relevant change.

Note that at this moment I'm trying a 442 with a target man. The style I just described, so, if you take a look at Juanpi, you will see there is no space for him in my team.

[looping]

9 minutes ago, NoTekkersRB said:

Was the only issue the defence?

I'm trying this now:

Use this11.com for tactics for football

Counter, Structured.

Defensive problems persist. 

[roykela]

Cool. I'll give it a shot.
I'll go from what you described the latest. Might give it a shot in what you've written in your original post as well.
Let's see what we can do. Thanks

[NoTekkersRB]

Tried fluid? So attacking you are fine? 

[looping]

1 minute ago, NoTekkersRB said:

Tried fluid? So attacking you are fine? 

I haven't tried fluid today, but I have tried many times. If I go fluid it's true my team is more compact but I have problems in transitions, specially from defense to attack when players start doing strange things and fb getting forward as soon as posible. 

I still conced a lot with fluid shape.

Fluid shape also hurts my counterattacks because I have nobody on the shoulder of the defenders so a through ball is a lost ball.

On top of that, fluid shape increases through balls so..

What I've also tried is fluid+be more disciplined but then I have the same problems plus no creative freedom so attacking is almost 0.

[NoTekkersRB]

The TI pass to feet should lower through balls? 

 

Creative freedom or lack of will not mean less attacking. As many have stated, there just isn't enough attacking variety. 

Have you attempted to watch a full match? Like Cleon suggests, watching a full match is when you can really see if your players are ding what you are asking of them. 

[PonjaConRulos]

2 hours ago, looping said:

If my midfielders are not on attack duty, they don't bomb forward. On support duty,midfielders are more "creators" and with attack duty "runners". Am I wrong?

I used WM in Support with Get Further Forward. That's because I don't want them to run too early.  But if you want this:

2 hours ago, looping said:

How can I tell my wide midfielders to run to the middle off the ball on the back of the defenders? Is that possible? They only look for through balls running wide. One of the most important movements, in my opinion, are wingers running past diagonal to central defenders.

Use this11.com for drawing your football tactics

Here you can see my "runners" (wingers) and my passer (midfielder). Arrows for runners are forward runs and for passer are long passes. Cb are opponents. I hope you understand.

May I use more risky passes PI for my midfielder? How can I make my wingers act like this? May I use a Ramdeuter? In de the cm strata? I give my wm the pi of a ramdeuter? I'm not sure because I want my wingers to run wide with the ball and run to the middle off the ball

then, you want them to cut inside. I know you said you didn't want that, but the graphics says so. Wingers that run off the ball behind centerbacks? That is cutting inside. To achieve that, I'd play Inside Forwards and 1 or 2 strikers to drop deeper. 

2 hours ago, looping said:

THe main defensive problem is the space between central defenders and central midfielders. Even if I push higher or I drop my cm to dm strata, players operating between the lines are very dangerous.

I don't recommend to push higher, because that makes the team pressure higher in the pitch, so you don't sit back. Maybe the midfield pair should close down less, so they don't get caught out of position. Or maybe you could make the centerbacks mark tighter. I used to play with one DM, but I didn't like the gap between the DM and the CM. They were too far from each other.

[looping]

10 minutes ago, NoTekkersRB said:

The TI pass to feet should lower through balls? 

 

Creative freedom or lack of will not mean less attacking. As many have stated, there just isn't enough attacking variety. 

Have you attempted to watch a full match? Like Cleon suggests, watching a full match is when you can really see if your players are ding what you are asking of them. 

I've been watching full matches during the last year. Hundreds of them.

I can identify some patterns and I can say if my players are doing what I want. The problem, it seems, is that what I like is not what the ME likes.

 For instance, when I win the ball back, I like to see a long pass to my striker. Most of the times he loses the ball because he is alone. For me, this is not bad, because 9 of 10 times you will lose the ball but the other you may create a good chance. It seems to me that the ME thinks this is bad because you are hoofing the ball. I don't know how to explain it better. 

[looping]

8 minutes ago, PonjaConRulos said:

I used WM in Support with Get Further Forward. That's because I don't want them to run too early.  But if you want this:

then, you want them to cut inside. I know you said you didn't want that, but the graphics says so. Wingers that run off the ball behind centerbacks? That is cutting inside. To achieve that, I'd play Inside Forwards and 1 or 2 strikers to drop deeper. 

I don't recommend to push higher, because that makes the team pressure higher in the pitch, so you don't sit back. Maybe the midfield pair should close down less, so they don't get caught out of position. Or maybe you could make the centerbacks mark tighter. I used to play with one DM, but I didn't like the gap between the DM and the CM. They were too far from each other.

If you go to PI window you will see "when the player has the ball" where you can choose between cut inside or run wide. I don't want them to cut inside with the ball. I want the opposite: I want them to run wide with the ball but run to the middle off the ball.

I miss a Pi "When the team has the ball" that makes my player to act like I want. Maybe sit narrower+roam from position. Still trying.

[NoTekkersRB]

8 minutes ago, looping said:

I've been watching full matches during the last year. Hundreds of them.

I can identify some patterns and I can say if my players are doing what I want. The problem, it seems, is that what I like is not what the ME likes.

 For instance, when I win the ball back, I like to see a long pass to my striker. Most of the times he loses the ball because he is alone. For me, this is not bad, because 9 of 10 times you will lose the ball but the other you may create a good chance. It seems to me that the ME thinks this is bad because you are hoofing the ball. I don't know how to explain it better. 

Using that example you want to making that 9 out of 10 time you win the ball no? I'm not sure I understand the mentality

[looping]

1 minute ago, NoTekkersRB said:

Using that example you want to making that 9 out of 10 time you win the ball no? I'm not sure I understand the mentality

No, no.

What I mean is:

1. I win the ball back.

2. My cb makes a long pass to my striker

3. My striker loses the ball because he is isolated.

This what will normally happen because my striker is up the pitch and has no support. This is bad according to the ME opinion because I lost the ball very quickly but according to my opinion is not bad, because 1 of 10 times I may create a chance from this situation. I don't care if I lose the ball quickly, I don't want the ball. I we lose it, no problem, just sit back and defend. 

[NoTekkersRB]

Ok I understand that but of course you're going to be inviting pressure and concede goals if you're happy to lose the ball. Surely you want

1. Win the ball back

2. cb makes a long pass to striker

3. Striker holds up ball because he is isolated

4, Striker is joined in attack

5. You create a chance with supporting players?

I know you don't want to concede but if you still need to increase your threat and chances you create. I am confused. Is not just bad for ME but any footballing scenario no?

 

 

[looping]

2 minutes ago, NoTekkersRB said:

Ok I understand that but of course you're going to be inviting pressure and concede goals if you're happy to lose the ball. Surely you want

1. Win the ball back

2. cb makes a long pass to striker

3. Striker holds up ball because he is isolated

4, Striker is joined in attack

5. You create a chance with supporting players?

I know you don't want to concede but if you still need to increase your threat and chances you create. I am confused. Is not just bad for ME but any footballing scenario no?

 

 

Not in my opinion. 80-20 possession situations are good for me. I'm happy with that. I don't need the ball. I don't want possession.

I want a stubborn defense. I we manage to score 1 goal, great. If we don't score, 0-0.

I know this is imposible to do in every match but I think you can get the idea.

I play a 442 so I have 2 striker upfront. In addition, my two wide midfielders bomb forward with attack duty. Even my dlp-su can help. So there are players supporting. The problem comes when my players start short passing, having the possession. I don't want that. But if I don't have the possession, the ME "thinks" I'm under too much pressure and finally the opponent scores.

[herne79]

16 minutes ago, looping said:

No, no.

What I mean is:

1. I win the ball back.

2. My cb makes a long pass to my striker

3. My striker loses the ball because he is isolated.

This what will normally happen because my striker is up the pitch and has no support. This is bad according to the ME opinion because I lost the ball very quickly but according to my opinion is not bad, because 1 of 10 times I may create a chance from this situation. I don't care if I lose the ball quickly, I don't want the ball. I we lose it, no problem, just sit back and defend. 

Have you tried giving the defender the PI for direct passing and making the striker a Target Man (support)?  This should encourage long balls from the back directed towards the striker (players will actively look to pass to a Target Man).  A Poacher with great acceleration and anticipation will work well next to a TM.

Also, in terms of the wide player movement you are looking for, you won't really get that but setting the wide player to move into channels (PI or PPM) along with run wide with ball may give you an approximation.

[NoTekkersRB]

5 minutes ago, looping said:

Not in my opinion. 80-20 possession situations are good for me. I'm happy with that. I don't need the ball. I don't want possession.

I want a stubborn defense. I we manage to score 1 goal, great. If we don't score, 0-0.

I know this is imposible to do in every match but I think you can get the idea.

I play a 442 so I have 2 striker upfront. In addition, my two wide midfielders bomb forward with attack duty. Even my dlp-su can help. So there are players supporting. The problem comes when my players start short passing, having the possession. I don't want that. But if I don't have the possession, the ME "thinks" I'm under too much pressure and finally the opponent scores.

No, I understand that but i'm just confused why you wouldn't want to maximise your chances? You want to make every opportunity count and if not you want the opposition to be wary of your counterattacks and to be more cautious with their approach, in turn causing them to be less risky in their play?

 

If you don't want possession, seriously consider ditching the counter mentality and go attacking. It sounds counter intuitive but attacking means your players play risky passing and want to get the ball forward quicker. Counter causes players to likely pass between themselves and keep possession, attacking employs direct passing I think.  You can still drop back to defensive positioning by having your team stand off more

[looping]

11 hours ago, herne79 said:

Have you tried giving the defender the PI for direct passing and making the striker a Target Man (support)?  This should encourage long balls from the back directed towards the striker (players will actively look to pass to a Target Man).  A Poacher with great acceleration and anticipation will work well next to a TM.

Also, in terms of the wide player movement you are looking for, you won't really get that but setting the wide player to move into channels (PI or PPM) along with run wide with ball may give you an approximation.

In the cm strata can't tell my wide players to move into channels.

So, one of the most common and important instructions in football history can't be replicated?

[herne79]

11 hours ago, looping said:

I want them to run wide with the ball but run to the middle off the ball.

Perhaps we are talking at cross purposes then and I didn't understand.  You want them to run towards the middle off the ball (around the penalty area) when the ball is on the other flank?  If yes, then any wide player will do that.  Running wide when they have the ball will be a winger or wide midfielder (with PIs) role.

[Bitner]

7 minutes ago, looping said:

In the cm strata can't tell my wide players to move into channels.

So, one of the most common and important instructions in football history can't be replicated?

You can sign players with this PPM.Don't see another solution, and i hadn't the opportunity to start helping you

Cheers,
Bitner 

[Deep-Lying Goalkeeper]

I have been using 

12 hours ago, looping said:

Not in my opinion. 80-20 possession situations are good for me. I'm happy with that. I don't need the ball. I don't want possession.

I want a stubborn defense. I we manage to score 1 goal, great. If we don't score, 0-0.

I know this is imposible to do in every match but I think you can get the idea.

I play a 442 so I have 2 striker upfront. In addition, my two wide midfielders bomb forward with attack duty. Even my dlp-su can help. So there are players supporting. The problem comes when my players start short passing, having the possession. I don't want that. But if I don't have the possession, the ME "thinks" I'm under too much pressure and finally the opponent scores.

I've been using the following 4-4-2 in my LLM save with Stockport. My idea is to play a bit like Pulis-style long ball football: defend deep, get the ball quickly to forwards and avoid any unnecessary finessess such as possession.

Counter, flexible. TI:s drop deeper, more direct passing, play narrower (sometimes also pass into space)

TMs Pa

WMa CMd CMs Wa

FBs CDd DCBd FBd

GKd

WMa cuts inside (Wa works also if he is right footed and especially if he has the PPM cuts inside). Sometimes I edit the Wa on the right to WMa to restrict dribbling if the winger keeps losing the ball too often.

Goalkeeper distributes to target man.

Depending on the opposition setup I usually try to place the TMs on the same side as the opposition's non-holding central midfielder to give the target man more space to operate. If the TMs struggles badly and loses too many hoofballs, I switch him into a DLFs.

 

OI:s I set to close down all wide players except Fullbacks (if the fullbacks are their only wide players, then I close them down), mark the lone forward or if the opposition uses two central forwards i mark the more advanced one. If they use three central forwards I mark none of them.

That's it. At least works for me extremely well.  

[PonjaConRulos]

14 hours ago, looping said:

If you go to PI window you will see "when the player has the ball" where you can choose between cut inside or run wide. I don't want them to cut inside with the ball. I want the opposite: I want them to run wide with the ball but run to the middle off the ball.

I miss a Pi "When the team has the ball" that makes my player to act like I want. Maybe sit narrower+roam from position. Still trying.

Well, this is a goal from my WM but he runs behind the fullback, not the centerback. https://gyazo.com/b09f5bd13d7f0d51621e63a41c60cf0b 

This guy has Likes to beat offside trap, so maybe that's why he moves like that. 

[Bitner]

2 minutes ago, PonjaConRulos said:

Well, this is a goal from my WM but he runs behind the fullback, not the centerback. https://gyazo.com/b09f5bd13d7f0d51621e63a41c60cf0b 

This guy has Likes to beat offside trap, so maybe that's why he moves like that. 

This football manager seems to be more dependent on PPMs than ever. Which isn't bad, at all...

Cheers,
Bitner 

[looping]

28 minutes ago, Bitner said:

This football manager seems to be more dependent on PPMs than ever. Which isn't bad, at all...

Cheers,
Bitner 

Agree.

But PPM are too rigid. Most of the times you can't tell a player to try a PPM if he hasn't it. For instance, if a player doesn't have "tries killer balls" ppm, you can still give him "more risky passes" PI, but you can't tell a player to move into channels (in the cm strata)or you can't tell your player to try to beat the offside trap or play with his back on the goal.

I think PPM should be translated into PI. If a player has the PPM, you wouldn't need to instruct that and, perhaps, he would do it better.

I hope you understand what I mean.

[NoTekkersRB]

Looping, you try a higher mentality? Even that, have your read the Simeone Tactics thread? I think it has great pointers as to what you want even if you don't think he plays similar to what you want

[looping]

15 hours ago, NoTekkersRB said:

Looping, you try a higher mentality? Even that, have your read the Simeone Tactics thread? I think it has great pointers as to what you want even if you don't think he plays similar to what you want

Yes I have, and it's a total disaster. The conceding machine is unstoppable.

In fact, whatever I do I lose. Extremely leaky defense, not creating chances. It's almost imposible for me.

[NoTekkersRB]

Apart from seeing your teamtalks, there's not much more I can help with. My knowledge is limited. I seriously suggest you read the Simeone tactics thread. There's a video on the last page which shows footage of exactly what you are after... good luck.

[looping]

This is desperating.

I'm not using my style any more. I surrender. Ok. Let's follow "the rules".

My players are quite good. I expect to end between 4 and 8. My best players are defensive players and, if I had enough money, I would sign a striker. I expect problems scoring.

Find your football tactics app at this11.com

No Ti, no PI. Standard, flexible.

I try to play with mentality and shape.

No idea what to do with shape so I only change mentality.

 

 

- Eibar Malaga
I started with standard mentality. I think I can beat them but I'm playing away. I score the first goal, they go more attacking and I switch to counter. Great.

- Malaga Levante
I start with standard mentality. I think I can beat them but I don't want to take too much risks. I can't score so I go to control. I can't score so I go attacking. Nothing.

- Valencia Malaga
I expect them to be attacking so I start with counter mentality. They score 3 goals. I don't want a rugby score so I switch to defensive. I score 1 goal and that's all.

- Malaga Barcelona
I start with defensive. They destroy me, despite I score a lucky goal.

- Malaga Athletic
I start with counter mentality. They are very attacking. I score and stay on counter. They score. I stay on counter. I score and now I go defensive. They score and end of the game.

- Espanyol Malaga
I start with counter mentality. They create a lot of chances so I go defensive. They still create chances so I try to be more attacking with standard mentality. Extremely lucky they didn't score.

- Alaves Malaga
I can beat them so I start with standard mentality (the same than against Eibar). They create many chances and score. I switch to control. I score. I stay on control because I want to attack and with the match. They score. End of the game.

- Vigo Malaga
I start with counter mentality. I miss 2 ccc. They score 2 goals from set pieces. I go to standard mentality. More or less the same: my players missing chances and they scoring.

Is what I'm doing so absolutely terrible?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[NoTekkersRB]

For each match, what are the match odds, what are your expectations, what are your team talks? What are your half time team talks? Post match team talks?

[looping]

1 hour ago, NoTekkersRB said:

For each match, what are the match odds, what are your expectations, what are your team talks? What are your half time team talks? Post match team talks?

I've been sacked, as expected.

I'm going to play the same matches again and I will post odds and team talks, but before that, am I doing anything  terribly wrong in the tactical side and changes of mentality? Is there anything terribly wrong in my tactic?

[NoTekkersRB]

I don't know really. I'd question having a DLF if you are using a AMC behind him. You want the AMC to link the midfield and attack but that is the role of the DLF who will drop back to midfield to pick up the ball and start off moves. If you don't have the strikers for it, maybe a poacher who can sit on the shoulder of defenders or a target man to high up the field to receive your long balls to knock it down for the AMC and to occupy the opposition defenders. And if you want to have just you FBs on Support, I'd maybe have a Box to box midfield to get into the area to create and score. Maybe even switch to flexible to get the transitions faster. I don't know, I haven't used a 442 in years and I'm no tactical genius.

[kandersson]

You should try playing FM Touch to eliminate the tactic familiarity thing so you can concentrate exclusively on tactics and ME. I think it's the best for what you're trying to do here.

[looping]

19 minutes ago, kandersson said:

You should try playing FM Touch to eliminate the tactic familiarity thing so you can concentrate exclusively on tactics and ME. I think it's the best for what you're trying to do here.

I just want one thing: play the game because now I can't. I'm sacked in the first season in every save.

[kandersson]

1 minute ago, looping said:

I just want one thing: play the game because now I can't. I'm sacked in the first season in every save.

You know, there are many things that can go wrong in full version other than tactics especially in first season. Tactical familiarity (and the new individual familiarity), team talks, media handling. FMT will remove those 'obstacles' and will let you focus on tactics and the impact of your tactical decisions, which seems to be your main interest at this stage.

Give it a try, might help you getting out of the slump

[Dr. Hook]

Yep and a nice thing also is to take a really good team to experiment with so you can mostly toss out the problem being the players ability to pull things off. Set up what you want to try in FMT with a top class team and see how your idea plays out over a few games against different formations. That is a great way to see if your tactical ideas are sound.

[looping]

2 hours ago, kandersson said:

You know, there are many things that can go wrong in full version other than tactics especially in first season. Tactical familiarity (and the new individual familiarity), team talks, media handling. FMT will remove those 'obstacles' and will let you focus on tactics and the impact of your tactical decisions, which seems to be your main interest at this stage.

Give it a try, might help you getting out of the slump

 

2 hours ago, Dr. Hook said:

Yep and a nice thing also is to take a really good team to experiment with so you can mostly toss out the problem being the players ability to pull things off. Set up what you want to try in FMT with a top class team and see how your idea plays out over a few games against different formations. That is a great way to see if your tactical ideas are sound.

I ceased to try to apply my ideas to fm because I can't. What I'm trying now is to completely stick to what guides say. I don't care about my vision anymore. I just want to play the game. If I have to play with attacking fullbacks I will. If I need a supporting striker I will. Forget about my ideas, I just want to have fun

[kandersson]

2 minutes ago, looping said:

 

I ceased to try to apply my ideas to fm because I can't. What I'm trying now is to completely stick to what guides say. I don't care about my vision anymore. I just want to play the game. If I have to play with attacking fullbacks I will. If I need a supporting striker I will. Forget about my ideas, I just want to have fun

From a quick glance to your screenshots it seems that at first match of the season the tactical familiarity of your team is always quite low (well below 50%). I think I saw pics dated november (in game date) where your tactics aren't fully fluid yet. These things have a big impact on how your team perform, maybe too big but that's the way it is. Low tactical familiarity could lead to a slow start, which could lead to bad form, which could lead to low morale so with this combination probably every tactic is going to fail for you. And at that point it's hard to tell if you're failing for bad tactical choices, wrong personnel or simply that combo of bad form, low morale and low tactical familiarity. Or maybe a bit of all of the above!

FMT will at least remove that doubt, give it a try mate, I mean it can't get more frustrating than this, can it!?

[looping]

2 hours ago, kandersson said:

From a quick glance to your screenshots it seems that at first match of the season the tactical familiarity of your team is always quite low (well below 50%). I think I saw pics dated november (in game date) where your tactics aren't fully fluid yet. These things have a big impact on how your team perform, maybe too big but that's the way it is. Low tactical familiarity could lead to a slow start, which could lead to bad form, which could lead to low morale so with this combination probably every tactic is going to fail for you. And at that point it's hard to tell if you're failing for bad tactical choices, wrong personnel or simply that combo of bad form, low morale and low tactical familiarity. Or maybe a bit of all of the above!

FMT will at least remove that doubt, give it a try mate, I mean it can't get more frustrating than this, can it!?

To be honest, I have already tried in FMT and it's a total waste of time. I will play, I will lose and I will have no idea why and other people neither. I know because this has already happened. You can check it on any of my threads. I've tried on FMT and results are the same, nothing is going to change and I'm fed up of this.

I give up.  And I do it because I'm not having fun anymore. I've played cm/fm since I was a child, I've played many other sports games. I am an average person. I have my studies, my job, my family and friends. I'm a normal person.

In fm16 I couldn't play a single real save. All time testing, trying to learn. The same is happening with fm17. It's more than a year.

If a normal person can't play fm it's not me who is doing things wrong.

 

[Deep-Lying Goalkeeper]

A few thoughts on 4-4-2 defensively:

-CMd - CMs pair could be quite aggressive when defending even with lower mentalities. Often they both start running towards the ball which in turn leaves space open in front of the central defenders. So instructing both the CMd and the CMs to close down much less MIGHT help. 

-Having only 3 defend duties makes you vulnerable to counters and even more so if your holding midfielder is the one who loses the ball. Having one fullback on defend helps a bit. And besides a FBd in a way still supports your attacks by placing himself in a more advanced position than CDd:s - he just wont make any off the ball runs forward like the FBs would sometimes do (and by doing so, taking a risk). So, do you absolutely need both your fullbacks to participate in attack?

-I have conceded a lot of goals basically because my 173cm fullback just can't win headers against 195cm strikers. While my short and fast fullback has his merits when attacking, I often choose to play a less technical but bigger and more defensively capable guy instead, sort of a CD converted into a FB.

[jorgvandervloed]

21 hours ago, looping said:

 

On the right side of your tactic; DLF dropping deep, CMs pushing forward a little bit, WMa wont necessary just stay on the flanks, so three players close to each other which makes it hard to create space

[looping]

42 minutes ago, jorgvandervloed said:

On the right side of your tactic; DLF dropping deep, CMs pushing forward a little bit, WMa wont necessary just stay on the flanks, so three players close to each other which makes it hard to create space

 

1 hour ago, Deep-Lying Goalkeeper said:

A few thoughts on 4-4-2 defensively:

-CMd - CMs pair could be quite aggressive when defending even with lower mentalities. Often they both start running towards the ball which in turn leaves space open in front of the central defenders. So instructing both the CMd and the CMs to close down much less MIGHT help. 

-Having only 3 defend duties makes you vulnerable to counters and even more so if your holding midfielder is the one who loses the ball. Having one fullback on defend helps a bit. And besides a FBd in a way still supports your attacks by placing himself in a more advanced position than CDd:s - he just wont make any off the ball runs forward like the FBs would sometimes do (and by doing so, taking a risk). So, do you absolutely need both your fullbacks to participate in attack?

-I have conceded a lot of goals basically because my 173cm fullback just can't win headers against 195cm strikers. While my short and fast fullback has his merits when attacking, I often choose to play a less technical but bigger and more defensively capable guy instead, sort of a CD converted into a FB.

Thanks for your answers but there is nothing left to do. This game is not for me. I can't play it.

[Bitner]

1 hour ago, looping said:

 

Thanks for your answers but there is nothing left to do. This game is not for me. I can't play it.

I'm kinda sad to read that. I really tried to help you. 

Cheers,
Bitner 

[roggiotis]

which team you manage now ?

[MHovel]

1 hour ago, looping said:

 

Thanks for your answers but there is nothing left to do. This game is not for me. I can't play it.

I'm also struggeling in FM17.

in FM16 i was struggeling at the start, i was asking here some help and i mananged to understand what's wrong thankfully to nice people that helped me out here because also my English ain't that great so that another reason why im struggeling to understand some things in game.

i have no problems with FM16 in terms of creating my own style of play or tactic in general.

in general, I'm playing with a different tactic than you, but i still didn't manage to create a tactic with normal results on FM17.

I feel you when you shared your results in 1 of your latest comment because i'm suffering the same issue.

when im switching to a defensive or counter mentality i always conceed, no matter what, I don't know, maybe the issue for me is that my players ain't good enough, which i can accept that, but if they are not good enough, i cannot also go more attacking mentality because my player ability (attributes) cannot allow me to do so, control which is also attacking mentality is the most stable result i get with, but it also feels like when i win it's more luck than really good performance.

so which mentality i never used till now? standart.

the reason im not playing right now is because i'm being turned off with some annoying bugs to watch in highlights which i mentioned in other section in the forum.

I will probably gonna wait till the patches release to see what's going on after the changes.

and after, if i won't manage to create some tactic for myself i would probably giving up in this game aswell, because i really tried a lot, reallly alot.

for me switching to FMT isn't an option, one of the reasons is that the full versions contain a tactical familliarity feature, which feels more realistic for me.

i care less about the interactions and social media and such stuff that the full FM offers, maybe if the FMT would have a tactical familliarity i would probably already moved to FMT because i also read here in the forums, that it's much faster phase game.

I would recommand to wait, take a break from the game maybe few weeks and come back after the patch to the ME.

[NoTekkersRB]

7 hours ago, looping said:

 

Thanks for your answers but there is nothing left to do. This game is not for me. I can't play it.

It's not an option to give up, people are still trying to help and there are ideas that you have yet to try