No tactic* and lots of experimental shouting

[herne79]

I've been having a little experiment and playing around with using Touchline Shouts with no tactical instructions*.

* No tactical instructions here means no TIs, PIs or OIs used and Mentality left on Balanced.

All I've done is pick a team, a formation and thrown together some player roles & duties.  Then during matches I just use touchline shouts, no other changes (apart from subs).  I've never done this before so I wanted to see two things:

1) The effect of using no TIs, PIs or OIs.  I want to leave things as "vanilla" as possible without bogging players down with tactical instructions.  In other words, I give them the framework (Mentality, formation and roles) and then let them get on with things.  I have no tactical style in mind (a primary reason for using TIs etc) and want to remove (as far as possible) any outside influence which may distract my players.  I want to focus on the players as much as possible.

2) What happens when using the shouts?  Does it do anything?  It would be even harder to gauge this if I threw a bunch of TIs at my team or made constant tactical changes during the course of a match.

My Setup

I wanted to use a mid-table predicted team.  So I should expect to see some close matches against similar teams, some (hopefully) easier matches against the relegation candidates and tougher matches against the top teams.  I want a variety of different levels of match, which I wouldn't get if I went with a top or bottom club.  This is also why I chose to go with the Balanced mentality.  So I chose West Ham.  Yes I'm fan, but I'm also pretty familiar with the players which helps me set things up.

That's literally it.  The only slight tactical change I sometimes made was changing the AF for a Poacher, but that was rare.

So my goal was nothing more than achieving my start of season objective (9th place).  With West Ham I can win the Premier league first season if I set up a certain style of play using the tactical creator and mess around with things during matches, but here I'm not doing any of that so all I want to do is finish at worst 9th.  Going forward, the plan is to gradually improve the players at the club - so improvements in league position would come from better players rather than my tactical genius (*ahem*).  Here's how I did at the end of season one:

I finished 3rd, which surprised me no end tbh.  I know a "no  (or few) tactical instructions" approach can still produce good results if the player roles & duties are well defined, but the interesting part here for me is the impact of in-match touchline shouts.  I never use them and to be fair it's hard to decipher just what impact they actually do have - it might be nothing more than a placebo - but having used them all season, seen the player's reactions to them (not always positive btw) and the results, it's hard to discount their effect.

I've just finished the first season and going through some squad building.  Moise Kean and Donny van de Beek for 20m and 15m respectively lol (Juve and Ajax must be mad) along with Jack Butland in goal also for 15m will do nicely.  So once I start playing matches again I'll go through in more detail (with examples) of how I've been using the shouts.

I have to say, season one was pretty interesting and a bit of an eye opener.

[FMunderachiever]

So just to paraphrase:

You finished 3rd in the league as West Ham, beating Liverpool, Arsenal, Spurs and Man Utd, by:

• Using only hard coded player behaviour (of which some positions have none)
• Using no team instructions at all
• Making a few signing
• No "defined" style of play or philosophy
• Shouting at them and doing team talks

And you finished 3rd, 6 places above your predicted finish.

Why is everyone messing about with tactics, training, philosophies, transition styles, if you can just splaff your players onto the field in a 4-2-3-1 and nothing else like you used to do on the old versions of football manager and just win games?

[yonko]

This is interesting and different from before. Looking forward to reading more. @herne79

1 hour ago, FMunderachiever said:

Why is everyone messing about with tactics, training, philosophies, transition styles, if you can just splaff your players onto the field in a 4-2-3-1 and nothing else like you used to do on the old versions of football manager and just win games?

Personally I mess with tactics and training because it's fun for me. And I hope SI further improve the training module to have more impact on tactics as IRL. I will have more fun with that, I guess.

[Snorks]

2 hours ago, FMunderachiever said:

So just to paraphrase:

You finished 3rd in the league as West Ham, beating Liverpool, Arsenal, Spurs and Man Utd, by:

• Using only hard coded player behaviour (of which some positions have none)
• Using no team instructions at all
• Making a few signing
• No "defined" style of play or philosophy
• Shouting at them and doing team talks

And you finished 3rd, 6 places above your predicted finish.

Why is everyone messing about with tactics, training, philosophies, transition styles, if you can just splaff your players onto the field in a 4-2-3-1 and nothing else like you used to do on the old versions of football manager and just win games?

Imagine what he could have achieved if he had?

Touchline shouts have always had an effect, I believe on body language and motivation, two things that can be vastly underrated in my opinion.

I often have my third tactic set up similar to this - completely 'vanilla' it's my "Hey, just go out there and play lads, enjoy yourselves" tactic and can be surprisingly successful.

[FMunderachiever]

3 minutes ago, Snorks said:

Imagine what he could have achieved if he had?

Touchline shouts have always had an effect, I believe on body language and motivation, two things that can be vastly underrated in my opinion.

I often have my third tactic set up similar to this - completely 'vanilla' it's my "Hey, just go out there and play lads, enjoy yourselves" tactic and can be surprisingly successful.

my point is though, surely you shouldnt be able to massively overachieve by basically doing nothing, in the same way you shouldnt be able to massively overachieve JUST by using preset tactics.

Or youre saying 90% of the game has little to no positive effect

[herne79]

2 hours ago, FMunderachiever said:

Why is everyone messing about with tactics, training, philosophies, transition styles

To create certain styles of play?

To take inspiration from real life teams?

To counteract certain opposition tactics?

To target specific instructions and achieve certain effects?

To have fun?

2 hours ago, FMunderachiever said:

if you can just splaff your players onto the field in a 4-2-3-1

You think players are just "splaffed" onto the field with no thought for their roles and duties, and how they combine with and compliment the players?You're missing the point.  How long have we dismissed (or at least underrated) such things as touchline shouts as being ineffectual?  Based on this experiment - which is hardly conclusive btw - they may actually be quite useful after all.  Imagine what might be possible if this were combined with a clearly defined tactic and style of play.

2 minutes ago, FMunderachiever said:

my point is though, surely you shouldnt be able to massively overachieve by basically doing nothing

Cock up your formation, your Mentality and (especially) your player roles and duties and I can assure you no amount of shouting will help you overachieve.  I'm not "doing nothing".

[Snorks]

Nope. I am saying, on average, 11 good players left to their own devices will achieve better than 11 bang average players.

Every player has their own unique set of attributes, personalities, traits - every PI or TI or OI you add impacts their 'natural behaviour' if you simply 'let them play' in a suitable formation they can still perform.

By placing 11 players on the pitch, you have created a tactic whether or not you add any further instructions.

Like I say, to me, it's the difference between "Just go and play lads" and "This is how I want you to play lads".

 

 

[FMunderachiever]

2 minutes ago, herne79 said:

To create certain styles of play?

To take inspiration from real life teams?

To counteract certain opposition tactics?

To target specific instructions and achieve certain effects?

To have fun?

You think players are just "splaffed" onto the field with no thought for their roles and duties, and how they combine with and compliment the players?You're missing the point.  How long have we dismissed (or at least underrated) such things as touchline shouts as being ineffectual?  Based on this experiment - which is hardly conclusive btw - they may actually be quite useful after all.  Imagine what might be possible if this were combined with a clearly defined tactic and style of play.

Cock up your formation, your Mentality and (especially) your player roles and duties and I can assure you no amount of shouting will help you overachieve.  I'm not "doing nothing".

A clearly defined style of play should get you to third (POSSIBLY) as West Ham. You should have to do something massively unbelieveable to finish 3rd.

Not picking generic roles with no instructions at all and finishing 3rd.

Your players should be worse than half the league. So they should be also worse at making decisions, positioning themselves, passing, making space, etc etc etc

 

Yet youre winning

 

Were never going to see eye to eye on this. Its a good achievement but doesnt say much about the game.

[FMunderachiever]

If youre leaving Declan Rice, Mark Noble, Angelo Ogbonna, Winston Reid and Arnautovic just to make up their mind to do whatever they like with no insructions, even though youve spent a little time deciding the roles and who compliments who, then you shouldnt be beating Paul Pogba, Kevin De Bruyne, Mo Salah, David Silva, Sergio Aguero, Mesut Ozil at anything.

Or else why doesnt the AI program them to all think for themselves instead of constricting their behaviour, because in doing so and applying your logic, the AI manager would also shout at their players, and then theyd beat you because theyre better than you.

[crusadertsar]

Great experiment and hopefully will be an eyeopener to many people. Not surprised at all. I've been thinking awhile now that the football manager has become a game of player roles and how those roles interact together within your chosen shape. 

When I see tactics with a gazillion contradictory team instructions, individual instructions and OIs claiming to be best beat all plug in tactics, it makes me sad. Also it worries me that people starting in this game, will get the wrong idea or get discouraged even. Because there's a simpler way to win. Which is why I'm happy to see threads like yours.

 I love simplicity. Ever since the game moved away from sliders and moved to roles, I was ecstatic. Why? I believe that as they are now, roles have all the hardcoded instructions you need to perform what your tactic requires. It doesn't mean you can just "splaff" them randomly on the field. Far from it. By thinking carefully what each one does and how they will interact next to each other, you can really make some killer tactics. You still need to choose a good shape depending on what style of football you are looking for. So for attacking possession play, 4-2-3-1 is perfect. 

As @herne79 shows you don't really need to use team instructions. Roles will know what to do. He also crafted his role selection exquisitely. One of the most balanced tactics I've seen on this forum. So it's definitely not something that one can do from the beginning but after some experimentation and reading in-game role descriptions carefully, it is definitely possible to have good results.

Anyway major kudos to @herne79 for showing us that there is always a better way 👏

Edited June 27, 2019 by crusadertsar

[herne79]

11 minutes ago, FMunderachiever said:

Were never going to see eye to eye on this. Its a good achievement but doesnt say much about the game.

We probably aren't.  But consider this - if you know what you're doing and are prepared to extract every last ounce, it's possible to take the club predicted to finish last and win the league first season.  What does that tell you about the game?  It tells me that we have all the advantages and if using these shouts are another advantage then perhaps it's a valid reason to use them, especially if you struggle with tactics.

4 minutes ago, FMunderachiever said:

Or else why doesnt the AI program them to all think for themselves instead of constricting their behaviour

Because the AI isn't as clever as you think.  You ever see Pep get sacked first season?  Or threads about how AI Pep isn't anything like real life Pep?  By your logic Man City would win the league by miles every season and not even us human managers would stand a chance.

You need to stop and think.  All you've seen is "omg he's done nothing, game crap, shouldn't be possible" when what I'm actually trying to highlight here is "look, there's this other tool in the game which may actually be pretty useful after all and it's being demonstrated by not using tactical elements which could cloud the issue".

5 minutes ago, crusadertsar said:

I love simplicity. Ever since the game moved away from sliders and moved to roles, I was ecstatic. Why? I believe that as they are now, roles have all the hardcoded instructions you need to perform what your tactic requires. It doesn't mean you can just splaff them randomly on the field. Far from it. By thinking carefully what each one does and how they will interact next to each other, you can really make some killer tactics. You still need to choose a good shape depending on what style of football you are looking for. So for attacking possession play, 4-2-3-1 is perfect. 

Sums it up perfectly.  And now FMunderachiever, layer on top of that using shouts in an effective manner.  Hopefully that helps clear the fog for you a little.

[herne79]

9 minutes ago, crusadertsar said:

Great experiment and hopefully will be an eyeopener to many people. Not surprised at all. I've been thinking awhile now that the football manager has become a game of player roles and how those roles interact together within your chosen shape. 

When I see tactics with a gazillion contradictory team instructions, individual instructions and OIs claiming to be best beat all plug in tactics, it makes me sad. Also it worries me that people starting in this game, will get the wrong idea or get discouraged even. Because there's a simpler way to win. Which is why I'm happy to see threads like yours.

 I love simplicity. Ever since the game moved away from sliders and moved to roles, I was ecstatic. Why? I believe that as they are now, roles have all the hardcoded instructions you need to perform what your tactic requires. It doesn't mean you can just splaff them randomly on the field. Far from it. By thinking carefully what each one does and how they will interact next to each other, you can really make some killer tactics. You still need to choose a good shape depending on what style of football you are looking for. So for attacking possession play, 4-2-3-1 is perfect. 

As @herne79 shows you don't really need to use team instructions. Roles will know what to do. He also crafted his role selection exquisitely. A very balanced tactic. So it's definitely not something that one can do from the beginning but after some experimentation and if you read one role descriptions carefully, it is definitely possible to have good results.

Anyway major kudos to @herne79 for showing us that there is always a better way 👏

A shame I can only up vote this once .

[Snorks]

Well balanced,  suitable tactics don't need extra instructions. I am as guilty as the next player who tends to fiddle and tweak a little too much, just because I can.

'Splaffing' players on the pitch is so far removed from what @herne79 has done here.

[FMunderachiever]

4 minutes ago, herne79 said:

We probably aren't.  But consider this - if you know what you're doing and are prepared to extract every last ounce, it's possible to take the club predicted to finish last and win the league first season.  What does that tell you about the game?  It tells me that we have all the advantages and if using these shouts are another advantage then perhaps it's a valid reason to use them, especially if you struggle with tactics.

Because the AI isn't as clever as you think.  You ever see Pep get sacked first season?  Or threads about how AI Pep isn't anything like real life Pep?  By your logic Man City would win the league by miles every season and not even us human managers would stand a chance.

You need to stop and think.  All you've seen is "omg he's done nothing, game crap, shouldn't be possible" when what I'm actually trying to highlight here is "look, there's this other tool in the game which may actually be pretty useful after all and it's being demonstrated by not using tactical elements which could cloud the issue".

Sums it up perfectly.  And now FMunderachiever, layer on top of that using shouts in an effective manner.  Hopefully that helps clear the fog for you a little.

Ok, good points. But answer this:

If a new player chooses a pre set tactic. Or any player for that matter. He should AT LEAST be able to achieve the success you achieved by letting players do their own thing while you picked their roles.

Otherwise, all these added in instructions are pointless and the player is deliberately being led down a blind alley when all they needed to do was pick a formation and roles, which 99.9% of people playing the game could have done.

 

And just make the AI more clever then. Make Guardiolas tactics more effective. That would reflect real life

[FMunderachiever]

Just now, Snorks said:

Well balanced,  suitable tactics don't need extra instructions. I am as guilty as the next player who tends to fiddle and tweak a little too much, just because I can.

'Splaffing' players on the pitch is so far removed from what @herne79 has done here.

I regret the choice of the word "splaffing" but come on, if you play this game, that would suggest you are highly interested in football.

Almost everyone picking the game up can choose 11 players in a sensible formation with sensible roles ESPECIALLY if they are just picking "central midfielder" without having to know what any of the other "specialist" roles do.

And by doing so, they shouldnt be able to massively overachieve UNLESS the default tactical system that suits your team best (ie tiki taka with Barcelona under pep etc) cant be better than that

Or else all the tactical presets are nonsensical

[crusadertsar]

4 minutes ago, FMunderachiever said:

Ok, good points. But answer this:

If a new player chooses a pre set tactic. Or any player for that matter. He should AT LEAST be able to achieve the success you achieved by letting players do their own thing while you picked their roles.

Otherwise, all these added in instructions are pointless and the player is deliberately being led down a blind alley when all they needed to do was pick a formation and roles, which 99.9% of people playing the game could have done.

 

And just make the AI more clever then. Make Guardiolas tactics more effective. That would reflect real life

Sorry to break it you mate, but unfortunately the preset tactics are not very good. Some of them are actually pretty bad. You usually need to change several roles that make no sense and remove a bunch of redundant instructions. The actual shapes of formations give the right idea though

Edited June 27, 2019 by crusadertsar

[FMunderachiever]

Just now, crusadertsar said:

Sorry to break it you mate, but unfortunately the preset tactics are not very good. Some of them are actually pretty bad

So as i said, theyre nonsensical. Get rid of them.

Why bother with them? 99% of players can pick a logical formation and logical roles without instructions.

If you can do better at the game using no instructions than you can with a tactical preset being your basis then presets are a complete waste of time. bin them

[crusadertsar]

2 minutes ago, FMunderachiever said:

So as i said, theyre nonsensical. Get rid of them.

Why bother with them? 99% of players can pick a logical formation and logical roles without instructions.

If you can do better at the game using no instructions than you can with a tactical preset being your basis then presets are a complete waste of time. bin them

I think they are mostly unnecessary. But for beginners they give an idea of most popular shapes depending on style like 4-4-2 for direct counterattack or 3-5-2 for cattenaccio

Edited June 27, 2019 by crusadertsar

[FMunderachiever]

1 minute ago, crusadertsar said:

I think they are mostly unnecessary. But for beginners they give an idea of most popular shapes depending on style like 4-4-2 for direct counterattack or 3-5-2 for cattenaccio

For a beginner, they are worse than doing what Herne did.

Beginners could have easily picked Herne's formation and shouted at the players. Just needs a little though but that would be easy.

Instead, theyre given a load of tactical ideas, instructions and specialist roles, that now seem completely pointless.

[crusadertsar]

8 minutes ago, FMunderachiever said:

For a beginner, they are worse than doing what Herne did.

Beginners could have easily picked Herne's formation and shouted at the players. Just needs a little though but that would be easy.

Instead, theyre given a load of tactical ideas, instructions and specialist roles, that now seem completely pointless.

That's the beauty of the game. Sometimes everything you try seems completely pointless. Sometimes it works. It's like that for all real-life managers too

[FMunderachiever]

1 minute ago, crusadertsar said:

That's the beauty of the game. Sometimes everything you try seems completely pointless. Sometimes it works. It's like that for all real-life managers too

So if this experiment was run again, and again, and again, for the game to be credible, you should not be able to over achieve again, and again, and again either.

You should fail a lot more times than succeeding with this approach

[herne79]

1 minute ago, FMunderachiever said:

If a new player chooses a pre set tactic. Or any player for that matter. He should AT LEAST be able to achieve the success you achieved by letting players do their own thing while you picked their roles.

Why?  Those preset tactics are nothing more than a basic framework which may or may not be suitable for your chosen team.  They're designed as nothing more than a starting point for you to adapt as you see fit.  Some of them are actually pretty iffy.

Take my right back role above - Wingback (defend) - as an example.  That's done specifically for two reasons:  1)  The player is Zabaleta.  Great tehcnicals and mentals but his legs have gone.  Asking him to do too much more than defend will end in tears, he simply wouldn't be able to cope with a support duty, let alone an attack duty.  2)  He has a Trequartista ahead of him and (more to the point) Yarmolenko who isn't exactly known for his work ethic and tracking back, so having an aggressive wingback behind that would be suicidal.

And I chose wingback instead of fullback because despite his legs Zaba does have those great technical and mentals, and so is still capable of doing a little more than just sitting back forever.

And that's just one example.  All chosen roles are carefully considered, even if it's nothing more than just "central midfielder" - which is chosen specifically to compliment the rest of the system, not just because it's some neutral or non-specialist role.

5 minutes ago, FMunderachiever said:

99% of players can pick a logical formation and logical roles without instructions.

If that was true, this forum would be an awfully quiet place .

4 minutes ago, FMunderachiever said:

For a beginner, they are worse than doing what Herne did.

I've done a bad thing?

5 minutes ago, FMunderachiever said:

Beginners could have easily picked Herne's formation and shouted at the players. Just needs a little though but that would be easy.

Go on then, show us if it's that easy .  Pick any club you like, splaff in some roles and away you go.

1 minute ago, FMunderachiever said:

You should fail a lot more times than succeeding with this approach

Perhaps you would, but you're still missing the point of the thread .

[FMunderachiever]

1 minute ago, herne79 said:

Why?  Those preset tactics are nothing more than a basic framework which may or may not be suitable for your chosen team.  They're designed as nothing more than a starting point for you to adapt as you see fit.  Some of them are actually pretty iffy.

Take my right back role above - Wingback (defend) - as an example.  That's done specifically for two reasons:  1)  The player is Zabaleta.  Great tehcnicals and mentals but his legs have gone.  Asking him to do too much more than defend will end in tears, he simply wouldn't be able to cope with a support duty, let alone an attack duty.  2)  He has a Trequartista ahead of him and (more to the point) Yarmolenko who isn't exactly known for his work ethic and tracking back, so having an aggressive wingback behind that would be suicidal.

And I chose wingback instead of fullback because despite his legs Zaba does have those great technical and mentals, and so is still capable of doing a little more than just sitting back forever.

And that's just one example.  All chosen roles are carefully considered, even if it's nothing more than just "central midfielder" - which is chosen specifically to compliment the rest of the system, not just because it's some neutral or non-specialist role.

If that was true, this forum would be an awfully quiet place .

I've done a bad thing?

Go on then, show us if it's that easy .  Pick any club you like, splaff in some roles and away you go.

Perhaps you would, but you're still missing the point of the thread .

Why?  Those preset tactics are nothing more than a basic framework which may or may not be suitable for your chosen team.  They're designed as nothing more than a starting point for you to adapt as you see fit.  Some of them are actually pretty iffy.

If the basic frameworks are worse as a starting point, than a totally blank canvas, then having tactical presets are a total waste of time, because it would be much easier to use the blank canvas and no instructions.

Take my right back role above - Wingback (defend) - as an example.  That's done specifically for two reasons:  1)  The player is Zabaleta.  Great tehcnicals and mentals but his legs have gone.  Asking him to do too much more than defend will end in tears, he simply wouldn't be able to cope with a support duty, let alone an attack duty.  2)  He has a Trequartista ahead of him and (more to the point) Yarmolenko who isn't exactly known for his work ethic and tracking back, so having an aggressive wingback behind that would be suicidal.

Thats an example of a suitable combination of roles. Loads of people choose suitable combinations of roles, and then because the game implies you need to take this further, they then wreck it all by choosing seemingly suitable instructions that are irrelevant.

If that was true, this forum would be an awfully quiet place .

The reason the forum isnt a quiet place, is because loads of people cant make sense of the jumbled up nonsense that this game is, when apparently all they could have done was do what you did. And im sure many of them could have

I've done a bad thing?

No, youve done a good thing. Youve shown in all its glory that people are wasting their time on stuff thats absolutely irrelevant

Go on then, show us if it's that easy .  Pick any club you like, splaff in some roles and away you go.

If i was to do this, i should certainly not expect to overachieve every time. Maybe your sample size of 1 cant be conclusive. If you overachieved constantly, then the last 15 years of football manager have moved the game no further forward than what we could have done years ago.

Youre right, i might not achieve the success you did. But that would be the game though. What would be stopping me doing exactly what you did and picking those roles and that formation? its as basic as it gets.

Perhaps you would, but you're still missing the point of the thread .

What exactly is the point of the thread?

You manage West Ham. Your players are guff.

When Leicester City won the league, do you think they had a defined style of play to create that over achievement? When Burnley over achieved last season, do you think they had a style of play too? How did Klopp and Gegenpress end up going hand in hand?

Youve made no adjustments at all for different formations, different specific threats from other teams, different specific threats from individual players, or done anything to target specific weaknesses in the oppositon (unless you did and havent written about it), all you did was choose a 4-2-3-1 of roles that, yes, compliment each other, and you shouted at the players.

If that finishes 3rd, the game has some issues. Thats why i said if this test was done over and over, if you could keep overachieving over and over again, why would anyone bother with 90% of the game?

[Exius]

1 hour ago, herne79 said:

How long have we dismissed (or at least underrated) such things as touchline shouts as being ineffectual?  Based on this experiment - which is hardly conclusive btw - they may actually be quite useful after all.

Even though I personally think shouts may have a great effect in certain situations, the experiment is incomplete to make such a statement. You need to compare 2 cases - the same tactic, the same players, in the first save you use touchline shouts, in the second you don't. And then go through a full season in both saves - only then we can compare an effect of these shouts.

Current experiment shows only that you are skilled enough to make a balanced tactic and roles combination to be successfull even without TI and PI (which is a great result). I believe even without touchline shouts you'd have achieved a similar result. On the contrary, if less experienced player made less balanced tactic and inapropriate roles/duties combination, even touchline shouts wouldn't helped him to succeed.

[FMunderachiever]

2 minutes ago, Exius said:

Even though I personally think shouts may have a great effect in certain situations, the experiment is incomplete to make such a statement. You need to compare 2 cases - the same tactic, the same players, in the first save you use touchline shouts, in the second you don't. And then go through a full season in both saves - only then we can compare an effect of these shouts.

Current experiment shows only that you are skilled enough to make a balanced tactic and roles combination to be successfull even without TI and PI (which is a great result). I believe even without touchline shouts you'd have achieved a similar result. On the contrary, if less experienced player made less balanced tactic and inapropriate roles/duties combination, even touchline shouts wouldn't helped him to succeed.

So you think a beginner could not have chosen that formation, with those roles?

[Exius]

1 minute ago, FMunderachiever said:

So you think a beginner could not have chosen that formation, with those roles?

Well, maybe 1 from 1000... Randomly

Even though I don't consider myself a beginner, I still don't understand completely all the roles combinations in this tactic, so I wouldn't have chosen it. I just realize how much I still have to learn about this game to make such simple (from first look) but yet effective and balanced tactic.

[herne79]

2 minutes ago, FMunderachiever said:

What exactly is the point of the thread?

1) To show that there is an often overlooked and frequently dismissed option which some people may find useful, especially if they are struggling or need an extra edge.

2) To show that over bloated tactical instructions are not necessarily needed.  I ran a challenge last year for people to use a minimal amount of TIs - this just goes one step further.  Keeping things "simple" can still produce good results, especially if you're not trying to achieve a certain style of football or recreate a real life system.

The misconception here I think is that tactical instructions have always been needed in order to be successful at FM.  They never have been.  They're optional unless you are trying to do something specific, such as play a heavy possession based game or a gegenpress or make your team play like Atletico Madrid for example.  Can you use them if you want to?  Of course.  Are there situations where you actually should use them?  Absolutely.  Do you always need to?  No.

6 minutes ago, Exius said:

the experiment is incomplete to make such a statement

I know and you're right, that's why I said it's hardly conclusive .

[jc577]

Personally I think this thread demonstrates 1. A balanced and intelligent selection of roles and duties, which enabled the team to function greater than the sum of its parts and 2. Accounting for player attributes when thinking of what role to pick for a player. @Rashidi has always said, attributes are king in this game, and this is a perfect example of it. A great balancing act. 

On the other hand, I’m not quite sure how much light it sheds on the effectiveness of team shouts, but it’s definitely something to think about. I am sure that goals were scored when they wouldn’t have been had the team not been ‘shouted at’, as sometimes all that is needed is a good kick up the a**. 

Interesting thread Herne 

[Snorks]

I think part of the misunderstandings here are through the language used.

'Splaffing' is a lovely word, I am going to start using it far more often now, but maybe insinuated more than was intended.

'Massively over-achieved' I think also overstates things. Finishing third with West Ham, in the game, I don't see as a massive over-achievement, I think it is highly achievable in the game that is Football Manager'.

I have only ever had one save that started at West Ham, way back (I play journeyman career saves and let the 'game pick a team for me' to start) and I achieved similar results. My tactical start-point is a similar 'vanilla' tactic, based on the players I have and how I expect they will behave on the pitch, Any further instructions are added gradually through the pre-season and first season as I see fit.

That's what I enjoy about the game, I am randomly assigned a team, I usually have no pre-determined knowledge or prejudice and begin with a completely blank pitch. 

As a newbie, I would have used the pre-sets without a doubt had they been available.

 

[Exius]

@herne79 Am I correct - if you don't set any TI and PI, and player role don't have neither PI (as CM, for example), player tends to do only what his personal traits tell him?

[Snorks]

6 minutes ago, jc577 said:

Personally I think this thread demonstrates 1. A balanced and intelligent selection of roles and duties, which enabled the team to function greater than the sum of its parts

Summed the thing up in one!

 

6 minutes ago, jc577 said:

Personally I think this thread demonstrates 1. A balanced and intelligent selection of roles and duties, which enabled the team to function greater than the sum of its parts and 2. Accounting for player attributes when thinking of what role to pick for a player. @Rashidi has always said, attributes are king in this game, and this is a perfect example of it. A great balancing act. 

and again in 2!

7 minutes ago, jc577 said:

 

On the other hand, I’m not quite sure how much light it sheds on the effectiveness of team shouts, but it’s definitely something to think about. I am sure that goals were scored when they wouldn’t have been had the team not been ‘shouted at’, as sometimes all that is needed is a good kick up the a**. 

 

It only shows the effectiveness if we are willing to accept a few assumptions. That A) If, without shouts used, this set-up would finish as predicted. B) Running it twice, one with one without shouts would need the assumption that each fixture plays out from the exact same start point in terms of player fitness, mentality, morale etc - and we all know it doesn't.

9 minutes ago, jc577 said:

 

Interesting thread Herne 

Yup very interesting. 

[Snorks]

3 minutes ago, Exius said:

@herne79 Am I correct - if you don't set any TI and PI, and player role don't have neither PI (as CM, for example), player tends to do only what his personal traits tell him?

I know I am not he, but yes.

[Rashidi]

14 minutes ago, Exius said:

@herne79 Am I correct - if you don't set any TI and PI, and player role don't have neither PI (as CM, for example), player tends to do only what his personal traits tell him?

No, he plays to the role, how his attributes will influence the role, what his specific duty is and how this works with other players around him within the overall mentality framework of the team. His personal traits will influence how he plays, but won't be the only thing that influences his performance.

[herne79]

23 minutes ago, jc577 said:

I’m not quite sure how much light it sheds on the effectiveness of team shouts, but it’s definitely something to think about

Exactly .

[westy8chimp]

I understand what @Experienced Defender  @FMunderachiever (sorry exper Def... Got the tag wrong and can't delete it on android!) is getting at. The game shouldn't be that easy.

But it isn't... @herne79 is no mug. He's picked a good formation roles and duty.

Something I've done lately, albeit with some preset instructions.

Is it any different to use 5 instructions for every opposition than none? I've stuck with a core set of instructions but match to.. match changed formation roles and duty. 

This is similar... Letting the roles and dutys do their thing with added layer of shouts. 

What will be interesting is seeing how a particular shout may have changed a game... Presumably we will get examples?! And that is what the thread is about... Whether he finished 3rd or 17th is to see if a shout can turn a game around and inspire victory

For my own part I've not used them in years. Partly I forget they are there...partly cos I dismiss their importance.

Edited June 27, 2019 by westy8chimp

[zlatanera]

I only really use 3 shouts - Demand More (I press this on 55 and 70 minutes unless I'm 4-0 up, once I have a squad with the right personalities its a great way of getting a little extra out of them), Concentrate which I find works better than altering my tactic significantly to shut up shop, and Show Some Passion when Demand More doesn't work. A real 50/50 whether or not that last one has the desired effect. 

Once thing that actually frustrates me on FM19 is not being able to see players' body language on the main screen between highlights as I think its so important. So I'm really interested to follow this, see someone go a bit more in-depth on the why and how of it all than I can be bothered to do. 

Also whoever criticised good ol' CM-Su...its one of my favourite roles! Ever since I saw it used in Ö-zil's Sacchi tactic I've appreciated it much more, it was at the heart of my most successful FM18 tactic. I've generally grown to appreciate the "bog standard" roles more in the past year since joining this forum, using DM-De more often than previously and utilising WB-Au to great affect in a Giampaolo recreation. 

Edited June 27, 2019 by zlatanera

[HUNT3R]

7 hours ago, FMunderachiever said:

Youve made no adjustments at all for different formations, different specific threats from other teams, different specific threats from individual players, or done anything to target specific weaknesses in the oppositon (unless you did and havent written about it), all you did was choose a 4-2-3-1 of roles that, yes, compliment each other, and you shouted at the players.

Keep in mind that this is also a very balanced (and I didn't pick that word because of the Mentality ) tactic. It's not overly defensive, it's not overly attacking/aggressive and it's going to create variety in terms of chance creation. The Mentality is "Balanced" and that comes with its own framework. The Roles and Duties would have been chosen for a reason, as Herne demonstrated with the Zabaleta role and duty. Whether it took 1 minute or 10 or 100 and whether there are no instructions or 100, thought was put into the tactic. Players still have the Mentality as framework and roles and duties that give them instructions on what they need to do.

It's a refreshing thread that shows what a decent setup can do. I'm jealous, because I probably would have over achieved as well, but not nearly by that much!

Wwfan was (I only use past tense because I'm referring to older threads) a fan of users adopting a balanced approach. In general, an approach like this that creates chances in a variety of ways, should in theory require less tweaking (imo). Imagine me setting up a very direct, attacking tactic that relies on a pacy Poacher. Let's say it's a very good tactic and terms of roles and instructions. What happens when I meet Huddersfield (sorry to pick on you)? Defensive and no immediate space in their half/third. Suddenly, my tactic is toothless.

A balanced approach (again, in theory) can create different chances. You'll create crossing chances from the wingback to Arnautovic up front. Felipe Anderson with his dribbling and pace could cause defensive issues. The movement from the AF going wider could open up space for either the AM or AMR (maybe even AML). Yarmolenko at AMR should receive the ball fairly often and he can hurt you in a variety of ways (taking into account the attributes and his role) so he could drift around and depending on who he drags out of possession, he could open space for the ST or AM (or possibly AML).

That's the beauty of it. If a team is strong on the flanks (good, fast fullbacks who can tackle well), dribbling could be an issue for that match. There's still the possible overload on the left, creating chance for a cross. There's still Noble and Lanzini in the middle. There's still the unpredictability of the AMR's off the ball movement/drifting.

In another match, if their central defenders are strong, crosses might be an issue, so chances will come from elsewhere. Like the dribbling from the AML and AMR players. Or the ST's movement out wide. etc.

--------------------------

The presets aren't that bad. There are problems in general though.

- Users assume these are 'perfect' or plug and play tactics. They aren't. They set a base for a particular style. Every team is different and has a different squad. If I try to play tiki taka with Man City, we should be okay, but it's quite likely that I still need to make a couple of adjustments to suit the players, keeping in mind their attributes and traits.

- "I like tiki taka, so I'm going to choose that for my Huddersfield team". There's a recipe for disaster. I'm up against 19 other teams who are all better (according to last season's league table) than Huddersfield, so you're trying to play a technical game against teams who are, for most of them certainly, technically better than you are. 

-- I like the presets, but there aren't enough of them (yet?) to give users enough variety. Most of the tactics I see are Control Possession or Tiki Taka types, whether still the standard preset or slightly modified. There aren't enough other styles and it may be difficult to introduce a "standard" tactic like Herne has set up here because it's hard to define its style. But, the issue I have is that there's a tendency to focus on a style (instead of a Clean Slate tactic) and that tends to be the possession types, like Control Possession or a Tiki Taka. That leads me to this -

--------------------------

The problem seems to be a player base thing. Maybe it's even a problem in general, not necessarily just with FM. I don't know where or how it started and it may well have been real life football, but there's a huge obsession with possession. The obsession is with the % of it, rather than the point of that possession and how it's getting used. Possession without a purpose.

In FM, the problem we face often, is that we are quite successful against sides when it comes to keeping possession. Then play gets compressed, the ball is worked forward slowly, the defensive team gets compressed into their defensive half/third and then there's no space. No space because we've compressed it all and no way of creating space with clever movement in the final third. Either things were left too late (kept knocking the ball around while the trigger should have been pulled) so the space disappears or with the space gone, the movement isn't good enough to create space. Users often either do not recognise this or they don't know how to go about addressing the issue.

That's where threads like this is helpful and thank you to @herne79 for doing it. It shows there are other ways of playing and opens the mind to other possibilities, other than just boring possession. I'm sure the football in this system wasn't even dreadful. What this thread has done is to remind us again that we don't have to overcomplicate things.

I'm looking forward to what happens next, Herne. I'm not expecting the touchline shouts to make a big difference, but they can help and it'll be interesting to see your experiences, good and bad, with it. 

[Hovis Dexter]

Great experiment by @herne79 . Coincidentally, a couple of hours before the OP was posted I was saying in the To PnP or not to PnP thread that before FM19 with its numerous complicated presets @Cleon always preached the benefits of playing with minimal TIs and PIs. So thanks to this thread it’s back to simplicity!

[HUNT3R]

14 minutes ago, Hovis Dexter said:

Great experiment by @herne79 . Coincidentally, a couple of hours before the OP was posted I was saying in the To PnP or not to PnP thread that before FM19 with its numerous complicated presets @Cleon always preached the benefits of playing with minimal TIs and PIs. So thanks to this thread it’s back to simplicity!

I won't speak for Cleon, but what I always tried to preach was to start simple, with minimal or no additional instructions. Then, based on what you see when you watch the tactic in action, you can add instructions (PI or TI) as you go along. Eventually, you might end up with a tactic with 2 additional instructions. Or you might end up with 12. Either way, you end up with instructions you know you need/want and they improve the tactic and you know why it was added.

Speaking from a personal point of view, from creating my own tactics and also observing the various help threads over the years, is that we can add a lot of instructions from the start. Chances are good that the newly created tactic isn't perfect. Knowing what to change or remove is more difficult then because there's so much going on in terms of instructions that we don't always know where to start.

[Ö-zil to the Arsenal!]

 love it.

[herne79]

52 minutes ago, HUNT3R said:

what I always tried to preach was to start simple, with minimal or no additional instructions. Then, based on what you see when you watch the tactic in action, you can add instructions (PI or TI) as you go along. Eventually, you might end up with a tactic with 2 additional instructions. Or you might end up with 12. Either way, you end up with instructions you know you need/want and they improve the tactic and you know why it was added.

I can't up vote this enough and should pin it somewhere .

[robot_skeleton]

16 hours ago, herne79 said:

once I start playing matches again I'll go through in more detail (with examples) of how I've been using the shouts.

Please do, this thread is gold!

[MadOnion]

Amazing thread @herne79

I tend to micromanage a lot and at times I should really go back to basics, so I've decided to give the "clean slate" a go.
The 4231 was already the formation the team had been playing for some time, but I had other roles in mind I wanted to try, particularly the Shadow Striker and the Regista, so this is what I came up with.

The clean slate. No TIs, PIs, OIs.

The only changes I might make is to turn the RG into a more conservative role (DM Support).
If the SS is being isolate, I might turn him into a AM-S/A. I might tweak the striker too, but very rarely. Other than that,  all roles remain the same.
The IWB overload the midfield, but they also run down their flanks (PPM) to stretch play, if needed.

One might say the tactic is too one-dimensional, but since my squad is quite intelligent and have diversity in terms of PPM's, we tend to become unpredictable. This is a Youth development save, so they will only get better.

Squad DNA

Spoiler

 

We've enjoyed a fairly good run, the results inside the red box are from when the team started using the clean slate system (highlight is the 4-0 win against Liverpool)

In terms of shouts, well things vary really:

• Regardless of what happens, if after 20min we haven't scored, I will ask them to get more creative.
• After 40min, still 0-0? Show some passion/Demand more.
• 2 goal advantage against tough opposition or 4 goals against easy opposition? Praise them.
• Calm down if we're committing too many fouls or get early yellow cards.
• Obviously there's context in everything we do... it's not all black and white.

Having this clean slate has allowed me to understand more how each role plays a part in the system and I'm definitely having more fun playing the game.
Overcomplicating has definitely been an issue for me, so by using the shouts, I'm putting all my trust on the players to go out there and enjoy it (however don't you dare losing the game).
I've also changed my approach with regards to training, so depending on what happens in the last game, I change the schedule, eg: if I struggled to score, the first 2 days after the game are spent on improving chance creation/conversion. Likewise if we're struggling with possession, I ask the lads to spend more time doing ball retention, press resistance, etc. The other days are spent on attribute development (particularly footballing intelligence).

A truly inspiring thread 

[herne79]

@MadOnion Awesome stuff and as you say, your players will only get better .

[herne79]

A Live Example

My first match of the new season is against Liverpool which is great as it gives me an immediate sense of where we are (my Board want Europa League qualification).  I have 4 new faces at the club - as well as Moise Kean, van de Beek and Butland I added Maxi Gomez.  I wasn't going to add Maxi, however I sold Arnautovic which left me with Kean and Chicharito as my striker options, neither of whom are a physical presence and I like to have a variety of options if something isn't working.  No point subbing on a pacey player with good off the ball and anticipation if that's the type of player I'm taking off.  A bit of  mistake on my part.  So Chich went off to China and I brought in Maxi.

One other thing to mention - I turned down a low bid from Monaco on deadline day for Felipe Anderson, which he's unhappy about.  Tough luck sunshine, you're going nowhere, cry more.

Anyway, Liverpool.  We're the underdogs so in the pre-match team talk I tell everyone that we may be the underdog but go out there and give the fans something to cheer (forgot to screenshot).  I get a positive "motivated" reaction from a couple of players (not Anderson ofc lol).

11 minutes in and Yarmolenko scores, I make my first touchline shout:

Everyone is already looking composed or professional (have that widget open) and as soon as we score I pause the game and "Demand More".  I thought about 2 options here - Praise or Demand More.  Praise could have been a good one I think as we're playing Liverpool, we're the underdogs and we've taken the lead.  With hindsight I should perhaps have used this shout because of the match context (we're underdogs and we're ahead) but I chose Demand More instead.  Forgetting that we were playing Liverpool I thought that if I praised the players it might go to their heads, so I decided to say "well done but I want more" to perhaps keep them focussed.  That was my twisted logic anyway.  This is the reaction:

A couple of good reactions, Maxi felt pressured and Felipe (who doesn't like me anyway) got nervous.  Hey ho.

After 30mins we're doing well and I notice the Liverpool manager is getting a good reaction from his shouts:

So I decide to give my players some Praise this time:

A decent enough reaction as I don't want Liverpool's players getting the body language higher ground.

We go in at half time 1-0 up where I tell my players that they're doing well but I know they're capable of even more, which is hopefully praise, reassurance and motivation all in one.  Seems to do the trick (Felipe still ignoring me ofc):

Straight after the break I decide (for no reason other than I'm experimenting) to tell them all to Get Creative.  My little Brazilian friend is still nervous, but at least my defensive midfielder gets the message:

60 mins in and Felipe is still looking Nervous.  I tell him (in isolation) there is no pressure in the hope of calming his nerves.  Which went well...

A few minutes later and Lanzini isn't having his best game.  I move Felipe across to AMC and bring on Antonio at AML in place of Lanzini for his greater physicality up and down the wing.  Liverpool have started threatening a bit more, so extra work ethic down that flank could help (ref. variety of players I mentioned above).  They're getting more shots away which I don't like, although they're not troubling Jack in goal.  With Antonio on, I Demand More of my players - we're into the closing stages of the match, we've done really well and I want to maintain that effort.  And the reaction...

Could better, but could be worse too.

With the clock running down I make a late sub to waste time (Maxi off, Moise on), plus Maxi had been booked so didn't want a late red card.  I tell my players to tighten up as we're 5 mins away from beating Liverpool so don't do anything dumb.  Which apparently made 3 of them frustrated:

But we saw the match out for a very good 1-0 win, calmly telling them in dressing room that it was really special as nobody had given us a chance and they'd played magnificently.  Great reactions all round.

As you can see, it ended up a pretty even match.  So the million dollar question - did the shouts make a difference?  Impossible to say tbh.  I'd like to think that in such an even match the shouts did give me that little extra edge, especially as the AI was using shouts as well.  But of course it could be nothing more than a placebo .

But one thing is for certain though - it was good fun trying it out.

[yolixeya]

1 hour ago, MadOnion said:

The IWB overload the midfield, but they also run down their flanks (PPM) to stretch play, if needed.

IWB will not act as IWB when there is a player on dmc side he is playing. And you have both on DMCL and DMCR so your IWBs will act more like the regular WB.

I'm looking closely on this thread as I'm someone who never uses shouts, mostly because I don't know what they do exactly. So looking forward to seeing some examples and explanations.

Edited June 28, 2019 by yolixeya

[FMunderachiever]

Great experiment and good to read.

The shouts HAVE to do something. Same way match briefings HAVE to do something.

Surely has to be the case? If they dont, take them out of the game

[herne79]

6 minutes ago, FMunderachiever said:

Great experiment and good to read.

The shouts HAVE to do something. Same way match briefings HAVE to do something.

Surely has to be the case? If they dont, take them out of the game

Of course the shouts do something, it's just very difficult to assess exactly what and to what magnitude.  All I (or anyone else) can pass on is how we go about things and our thought processes.

btw there's no need to quote in full such long posts as it blocks threads, so I edited it out for you .

[westy8chimp]

Out of interest... As you are more focused on the body language... Are you still watching the games? 2D/3D? Extended/key? 

Are you looking out for behaviour changes.. I. E. "tighten up" do you see any narrowing or dropping deep of the team? 

[herne79]

6 minutes ago, westy8chimp said:

Out of interest... As you are more focused on the body language... Are you still watching the games? 2D/3D? Extended/key? 

I always watch in 3D but using key highlights only.  I'll usually watch the first 10 mins in full before switching to highlights in case I need to make tactical changes, but I'm not making tactical changes here so it's straight into key highlights.

8 minutes ago, westy8chimp said:

Are you looking out for behaviour changes.. I. E. "tighten up" do you see any narrowing or dropping deep of the team? 

None of the touchline shouts have any tactical impact.  So I wouldn't expect to see the team narrowing or dropping deeper (for example), but I might expect them to gain some focus, err their decisions more on the side of caution, that kind of thing.

I'll also add here that where players seemed to get frustrated at being told to tighten up at the end of the match, I'm taking that as a positive, not a negative reaction.  It's all about the context, so for example:

Players - "Yessss goal, we just scored!!!  Woohoo COYI";  Me - "come on we can win this (encouragement)";  Players - "How about a well done?"

Would be negative frustration, whereas:

Me - "5 mins to go lads, focus and don't be so adventurous.  Tighten up, see the match out";  Players "aww boss we're having fun but ok we see what you mean"

Would be much more positive frustration.

Now whether the game actually is that smart or not is another matter, so perhaps you just role play it out.  But either way I'm not looking for the always do such and such scenario - just talk to your players and roll with the reactions.  And as we can see, not all players give the same reaction anyway.  But it's all good because it gives you something else to gain experience with and manage - it would be pretty boring if the same shout always produced the same reaction from everyone all the time.