Jump to content

how to set the 3 tactics in the slots? FM21


Recommended Posts

Good evening guys,

I am in my 3rd year in Serie A TIM with SPAL, taken at the start of the save when he was in Serie B and hours between the top 10-12 of the championship.

I'm happy with what I see on the pitch, atalanta style, high pressure, defenders who mark and play high, speed on transitions and domination of the game.

But I wanted to evolve my game.

I have always used only one tactical slot, where I use a 5-2-1-2 WB Offensive; I wanted to create 2 more tactics to insert into the slots and already have different tactics schedules so that I could be ready to change during the match.

I wanted to ask you, is it more useful to always use the same tactical style by changing only the formation or to keep the same formation but with a modified tactical style?

Example: in a slot keep the tactical style but use a 4-1-2-2-1 or a 4-4-2 (for example); or maintain a set-up with 3 central defenders and modify only the team and individual instructions, for example one tactic with a high LOE and another with a low LOE.

What solutions do you recommend me to adopt?

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

great question!

maybe it definitely helps me in the final choice!

If, as in my case, I have structured a team with high physical and mental values, at the expense of technical values, it comes to think that you have to use the same tactical style, or I should find other 4/5 players who would be used for the other styles tactics possibly to be added ... correct?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I always set up each of the three slots.

Normally I have a high pressure tactic, a mid block and then a low block, and switch between them depending on the game situation / ability between myself and the opponent. For example, the high pressure tactic could be a 4231, the midblock a 4411 and the low block a 4231DM. This way I can transition pretty easily without having to make any substitutions. I also keep my number of in possession TI's to a minimum as well, so that if I do find that I need to change what we are doing, the familiarity won't take too much of a hit, because I'd only be adding/removing one or two TI's rather than ten.

I think this approach works best for a team that isn't perfectly moulded to any particular style, and is perhaps a mid table side that will play a mix of opposition that can be both better and worse than your team.

Another way of doing it would be to keep pretty much the same instructions and style across all tactics, but just change the formation. This could make you more adaptable to exploit opposition weaknesses and also be better prepared in case you get an injury crisis in one particular position. For example, if one or two of your centrebacks get injured for the same period of time, you could switch to a back 4 instead.

In short, if you have a squad suited to one style of play, you should probably just train different formations with the same style, but if you want to be a bit more pragmatic, try create attacking / defending versions of the same shape.

 

Edited by Jack722
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Mik_Fe said:

great question!

maybe it definitely helps me in the final choice!

If, as in my case, I have structured a team with high physical and mental values, at the expense of technical values, it comes to think that you have to use the same tactical style, or I should find other 4/5 players who would be used for the other styles tactics possibly to be added ... correct?

If thats the case, wouldnt you have a bloated squad?

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no right answer! (As @Jack722 has rightly pointed out)

I just wanted to give one example of: "same style, different formation" would be Nagelsmann at RB Leipzig. He has used 343, 4222, 352 (and more I am sure, but I am not an expert in RB Leipzig). But the RB Leipzig tactical identity stays the same throughout (although obviously occasionally they will sit back and defend or slow the pace down etc, like all teams do). 

This might make sense if you play an offensive/intense style and think that the main reason of switching tactics from your 5212 would be because maybe a player is injured and you only have 2 fit centre backs, or 1 striker who can play. Or maybe it is tactically reactive (e.g. they play with high and wide wingers so I will play a back 4 so there isn't space to run in behind my wingbacks).

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minuti fa, skyline72 ha detto:

Se è così, non avresti una squadra gonfiabile?

 
è possibile ...
dici che crea un rischio di giocatori infelici allora?
 
4 minuti fa, Jack722 ha detto:

Ho sempre impostato ciascuno dei tre slot.

Normalmente ho una tattica ad alta pressione, un blocco medio e poi un blocco basso, e cambio tra loro a seconda della situazione / abilità del gioco tra me e l'avversario. Ad esempio, la tattica ad alta pressione potrebbe essere un 4231, il blocco medio un 4411 e il blocco basso un 4231DM. In questo modo posso passare abbastanza facilmente senza dover fare alcuna sostituzione. Tengo anche il mio numero di TI in possesso al minimo, in modo che se trovo che ho bisogno di cambiare quello che stiamo facendo, la familiarità non prenderà un colpo troppo, perché aggiungerei solo / rimuovere uno o due TI invece di dieci.

Penso che questo approccio funzioni meglio per una squadra che non è perfettamente modellato su uno stile particolare, ed è forse una squadra a metà tavolo che giocherà un mix di avversari che può essere sia migliore che peggiore della tua squadra.

Un altro modo per farlo sarebbe mantenere più o meno le stesse istruzioni e lo stesso stile in tutte le tattiche, ma solo cambiare la formazione. Questo potrebbe renderti più adattabile allo sfruttare le debolezze dell'opposizione e anche essere meglio preparato nel caso in cui dovessi avere una crisi di infortunio in una particolare posizione. Ad esempio, se uno o due dei tuoi centreback si infortunano per lo stesso periodo di tempo, potresti invece passare a un back 4.

In breve, se hai una squadra adatta a uno stile di gioco, dovresti probabilmente allenare formazioni diverse con lo stesso stile, ma se vuoi essere un po 'più pragmatico, prova a creare versioni offensive / difensive della stessa forma.

 

excellent intervention!
Thanks Jack!

In these 3 years I have built the team with certain player values and based on this style of play (atalanta: high pressing, intense, playing wide, etc.)
So the best solution would be to adopt 3 different formations ...

What do you say if I do this:

Tactic 1: the basic tactic used for 3 years (5-2-1-2 high pressure and high LOE and the basic team instructions of the positive / offensive minded style)

tactic 2: 5-3 (midfield in line) -2 (high blood pressure, standard LOE and standard DL and the basic team instructions of the balanced or prudent minded style)

tactics 3: 5 - 1M - 2 (3 midfielders) - 2 (always high pressing, low defensive line, low LOE and offensive mentality to restart, always with the team instructions to play on the flanks etc etc which are the core of the style tactical)

Could it be a right solution to "play" ONLY on the LOE and DL lines?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Same style different formation....

Bielsa anyone?

3 at the back vs 2 strikers

2 at the back vs 1 striker

But his plan stays the same throughout irregardless of the formation. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Mik_Fe said:
 
è possibile ...
dici che crea un rischio di giocatori infelici allora?
 

Im not sure why it doesnt come out in english, had to google translate it. 

Anyway, yea thats what i meant. 

How often do you play contrasting styles of tactics? Im sure not often.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Flußkrebs said:

Non c'è una risposta corretta! (Come@ Jack722 ha giustamente sottolineato)

Volevo solo fare un esempio: "stesso stile, formazione diversa" sarebbe Nagelsmann all'RB Lipsia. Ha usato 343, 4222, 352 (e altri ne sono sicuro, ma non sono un esperto in RB Leipzig). Ma l'identità tattica del RB Lipsia rimane la stessa per tutto il tempo (anche se ovviamente occasionalmente si siedono e difendono o rallentano il ritmo, ecc., Come fanno tutte le squadre). 

Questo potrebbe avere senso se giochi uno stile offensivo / intenso e pensi che il motivo principale per cambiare tattica dal tuo 5212 sarebbe perché forse un giocatore è infortunato e hai solo 2 difensori centrali in forma o 1 attaccante che può giocare. O forse è tatticamente reattivo (ad es. Giocano con ali alte e larghe quindi giocherò un difensore 4 quindi non c'è spazio per correre dietro le mie ali).

 

Thanks for the reply...

I am exactly undecided whether to maintain the tactical core (it is very similar to LIpsia now that you make me think about the style I use: offensive and intense pressing) and modify only LOE and DL or whether to model, keeping the tactical style as mentioned before but change formation and also LOE and DL ...

Example:
If I created a 4-2M-2-2 it could be used with low LOE and DL for counterattacks and play on the flanks with cross

Or

A 4-2-3-1 with very high LOE and DL but with a balanced or prudent mentality so as not to blanch too much and try to play in the opponent's half ...

I am very undecided and aware that there is no correct answer but it only depends on how I want to set up the team ...

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, skyline72 said:

Non sono sicuro del motivo per cui non viene pubblicato in inglese, ho dovuto tradurlo su Google. 

Comunque, sì, questo è quello che volevo dire. 

Con che frequenza giochi con stili tattici contrastanti? Sono sicuro che non spesso.

Sorry  :lol::lol:

you're right, even Bielsa has a well-defined tactical style but uses different formations ...

I think I orient myself towards this choice:

tactic 1: ok the usual one

tactic 2: with 4 defenders, so as to face formations against only 1 attacker

tactic 3: sit lower to restart quickly

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Mik_Fe said:

Sorry  :lol::lol:

you're right, even Bielsa has a well-defined tactical style but uses different formations ...

I think I orient myself towards this choice:

tactic 1: ok the usual one

tactic 2: with 4 defenders, so as to face formations against only 1 attacker

tactic 3: sit lower to restart quickly

 

If this is the case, you got your answer already. :)

I like Atalanta style! One of the most exciting sides I have ever witness in my life!

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, skyline72 said:

Same style different formation....

Bielsa anyone?

3 at the back vs 2 strikers

2 at the back vs 1 striker

But his plan stays the same throughout irregardless of the formation. 

Absolutely- Bielsa has his whole -1 in attack, 1 extra in defence, so it's usually very easy to predict what formation he'll use against a certain opponent. He always matches them in midfield in theory but in practice it's often a 1 DM 1 CM/AM combo instead of a double pivot e.g. 3313 vs 343. 

It would be an interesting FM challenge to always follow this formula for a campaign!

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Flußkrebs said:

Absolutely- Bielsa has his whole -1 in attack, 1 extra in defence, so it's usually very easy to predict what formation he'll use against a certain opponent. He always matches them in midfield in theory but in practice it's often a 1 DM 1 CM/AM combo instead of a double pivot e.g. 3313 vs 343. 

It would be an interesting FM challenge to always follow this formula for a campaign!

@Ö-zil to the Arsenal!did it years back. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...