Return of The Tactics Bible......Maybe.....

[Cleon]

54 minutes ago, Razor940 said:

@Cleon what are your quick thoughts on hold shape?

It's my go to. It's my 'default'. 

[Razor940]

31 minutos atrás, Cleon disse:

It's my go to. It's my 'default'. 

I think I kinda got influenced by general consensus amongst FM players, that hold shape is useless and you want to play with nothing ticked or counter, and it's just not true and it's very usefull to manipulate the ball.

[milestobudapest]

I'm looking forward to this, having an alternative way of doings things. I quickly get bored of high-octane styles but I often fall short managing styles that require more observation. Hopefully your insight can give me more things to look out for.

 

p.s you should start streaming

Edited January 5, 2022 by milestobudapest

[Cleon]

15 hours ago, Razor940 said:

I think I kinda got influenced by general consensus amongst FM players, that hold shape is useless and you want to play with nothing ticked or counter, and it's just not true and it's very usefull to manipulate the ball.

I always use it because it adds composure to your side and allows them to reorganise after winning possession back. For me this is important as the roles and shape I use determine how I want to attack already. I don't need to make this more extreme or more risky just for the sake of it. By keeping shape my roles and duties then determine my attacking shape and allows people to attack from the areas that I have set them to play in already.

[milestobudapest]

@Cleon have you previously done a write up on how you expect your 352 to defend, transition and attack? It looks a lot like Conte's Inter too, is there similarities between that and Wilder's? 

Also I recall you saying to me once that you don't feel the need to ever change Team Instructions, since they define the approach of a team and you wouldn't ever want to deviate from that. In FM22, playing moderate to high intensity styles is much more taxing on a player's fitness level so would you ever consider making tempo changes throughout the match to manage that?

[Cleon]

21 hours ago, milestobudapest said:

@Cleon have you previously done a write up on how you expect your 352 to defend, transition and attack? It looks a lot like Conte's Inter too, is there similarities between that and Wilder's? 

Also I recall you saying to me once that you don't feel the need to ever change Team Instructions, since they define the approach of a team and you wouldn't ever want to deviate from that. In FM22, playing moderate to high intensity styles is much more taxing on a player's fitness level so would you ever consider making tempo changes throughout the match to manage that?

I still play the same way as I always did. I still don't really change any team instructions. In fact I can't remember the last time I actually changed one. Maybe 2-3 years ago, real time.

[sparkyunited]

Great to stumble across this thread and that @Cleon is back!  The best in the business of FM guides....

After a couple of years away from FM, I picked up FM22 over the holidays and am slowly working my way back into it.  Just today I built a Brazilian Box Midfield tactic and thought about reading the blog from years back...

Edited January 8, 2022 by sparkyunited

[bere23]

On 07/01/2022 at 08:58, Cleon said:

I still play the same way as I always did. I still don't really change any team instructions. In fact I can't remember the last time I actually changed one. Maybe 2-3 years ago, real time.

hey @Cleon   please let me ask you,then when you want to change something in match,you do it with mentality or duty change or role change?for example if an enemy team attacks you very hard or pinned you to your own half will you make any changes?like more attacking mentality for give a chance to your team to try be more higher on the pitch etc?

[Cleon]

30 minutes ago, bere23 said:

hey @Cleon   please let me ask you,then when you want to change something in match,you do it with mentality or duty change or role change?for example if an enemy team attacks you very hard or pinned you to your own half will you make any changes?like more attacking mentality for give a chance to your team to try be more higher on the pitch etc?

Context is everything. I wrote this in the past.

A few months back I was reading an article titled ‘No Plan B’ and it was a great read, written by Peter Prickett who I interviewed on this blog recently. In the No Plan B article, Peter raises some good questions and gives examples of managers who are deemed to be classed as having no plan b and shows how they actually do have them. It’s just that we don’t always notice the changes as sometimes they are subtle little changes and other times, it might be a total change of shape which then is more noticeable. To give you a better idea of what I’m talking about, here is a link to his article that I’m talking about;

http://www.pger.net/football/2017/06/03/no-plan-b/

 

Then a couple of weeks after reading the above article, I was reading something else, an interview with Jürgen Klopp (it can be found here http://www.eurosport.co.uk/football/premier-league/2017-2018/jurgen-klopp-the-talk-of-a-plan-b-shows-a-lack-of-understanding_sto6267115/story.shtml ) and he was talking about plan b too. This is had to say on the matter;

Quote

 

“We had two major issues in January obviously: not enough confidence as we should have had in ourselves, and too many injuries plus Sadio [Mane] being away at the Africa Cup of Nations while the games didn’t seem to stop,” Klopp said.

“Then in February, we suffered from the intensity of the month before, and we were back in March. We won games again, but then people were saying, ‘it’s not the same football, they are struggling,’ and this again gave the players doubt.

“They listen to these voices, the whole club listens to these voices that go ‘oh, it’s again like this, they don’t have Plan B for deep-defending sides, they can only play one way.'

“We smashed teams at the start of last season by altering our style in different ways to play to our strengths and minimise the opposition’s like against West Brom at Anfield. We limited their set-piece situations, which we know they are really dangerous from.

“The talk of Plan B shows a lack of understanding. In the moment when you are not feeling confident, you cannot change too many things - that’s insecurity.

“It’s not about showing what you can do - like ‘hey, here is Plan D, F, Q!’ My job is not to prove that I can do 1000 different techniques or no-looking coaching or whatever, it is to do what is best for the players I have, with our skills, in the situation we are in.

 

Both of the things above are tied into something i’ve wanted to do for quite some time now. I’ve wanted to explain my approach to tactics on the Football Manager Series and focus on my Plan A and Plan B and explain how they can be the same thing but I just never had the time until now.

Now if you’re active on the SI forums or on the FM social media side of things you’ll often see people sharing their own plan b’s and the things they tend to do to nullify the opponent's specific threats or to change the course of a game. The majority that I see that do this always tend to have a different shape as a plan b option and tend to change the shape based on expectations for the upcoming match, regardless of whether it's the correct decision or not. It involves a lot of guesswork. I’m not saying these people aren’t right in playing this way I’m purely talking about my own preferences and play style here. That’s why for me, this blind faith approach doesn’t work.

I like to make any changes based on what I see happening in the game and react accordingly. Now if I made any decisions based on pre match odds, expectations or current form then how would I know if it's the correct decision for what is happening in the game and how it's unfolding. I possibly can’t, that’s why I do changes as I watch the game unfold. On top of this I like to create a specific brand of football and while this could work within many different tactical shapes, I don’t see the point of making the game even more complicated than it really has to be. That’s why I always play the same shape, I don’t have a need to have different formations.

This doesn’t mean I don’t adapt on a game by game basis because often I do, other times not so much because I feel it doesn’t need it. However some of the changes I make, many of you wouldn’t class them as being a plan b because the changes are minimalistic and very subtle at times. This actually brings it back to real life football for a second, just because you don’t notice something drastic doesn’t mean that the manager isn’t adapting constantly. It might just be a case of not seeing what he actually did. 

Personally speaking, what I do I wouldn’t class as a plan b even though it is. Instead I call it a match plan or game plan. It equates to the same thing though. So what is a game/match plan?!

Game Strategies

Before I start with my own plan b’s let's have a look at some of the game plans that other people might or could use.

Before a game

A second formation is something people often use when they feel a team will play a certain way based on the pre-match odds, scouts reports and the analyst's reports. Others might just take a stab in the dark and decide they need to change shape based on how they believe the team will play irrespective of what the reports or odds are.

The use of team instructions is also another popular one, people might add more of them or remove some if they already use various ones. One of the reasons for adding or removing them is to either counter or nullify a possible threat.

The use of player instructions also ties in with the above and people might want specific players to do something slightly different from normal for the reasons highlighted above.

Changing player roles seems to be one that I see people talk about frequently. They’ll change the role to get the player to change the way the team usually plays. Again it comes back to trying to take advantage of a possible opposition weakness or to cover the weakness of the users tactics.

Match plans are not something I see people talk about but they can be used to create a specific set of rules for certain points or circumstances in a game. You can use them for certain scenarios you anticipate might happen.

Using different players is one I see from the odd time. Someone might use a slightly more defensive/attacking player for a particular game because of a certain type of danger or to take advantage of a weakness in the opposition's line up. Player selection can also be used to target certain individuals in the opposing team.

Those are some of the ways people do and can utilise certain tools available, as well as showing a variety of ways to play before a game has even started. Some users even do more than one of the above before games.

During a game

Some of the changes you can make during a game follow a similar pattern to the above.

Changing the shape during a game I class is a drastic change. Nonetheless a lot of users still seem to do this. They change shape to either protect a lead and see out the game or because they are chasing a result. A change of shape can see them be more aggressive or passive.

You can use team instructions to change the style of play and to either try and win the game, protect a lead or even to take advantage of a weakness in the opposition. They can also be used to cover up your own weaknesses.

If you want something just as effective but less drastic than affecting all your players like team instructions though, you could attempt to use player instructions instead. These allow you to tailor players and select different instructions which are available depending on which role and duty someone has to give you something different that you might currently lack.

Swapping player roles is also another good one to use as it allows you to make players more or less aggressive depending which you need. If you want to hang on to that 2-0 lead but your midfield is very aggressive and leaving lots of space to be exploited, then a quick role or even duty change can make all the difference.

One of the other things people do is make tactical substitutions and swap out those players who might be underperforming, tired or just because you feel someone else might do a better job.

There are other ways to change games too but these seem to be the most common ways that get discussed. None of them are better than the other and they all can be viable options to utilise at some stage. Which, though, tends to be based on the user's playstyle and which fits best with that. Some of the above are what I class as really extreme though, especially changing shape during a game. I understand why people do it but it’s not something I’d ever contemplate doing but that doesn’t mean those who do, are wrong. It just doesn’t suit my own playstyle.

My Own Playstyle and Strategies

So how do I play the game? I don’t micromanage half as much as people believe I do. I’m more of a subtle change kind of game. In reality, my plan A is my plan B, C and everything after. Obviously if I’m creating a tactic then I take a slightly more hands on approach until I believe it’s balanced enough and offers me the style of play I was aiming for. After that point it’s all about keeping it as simple as possible in order to fly through the seasons in the quickest possible time.

What this means for me is that, if I make changes it’s purely based on what my own players are or aren’t doing. I totally ignore the opposition and just focus on my own side, some might think this is strange because the AI is a big part of the game and they’d be correct. However you don’t always have to set out to play the perfect game and adapt constantly for the AI. You can make subtle changes to achieve this and you don’t always need to be drastic. Also by focusing on your own side, you can stick to the style or brand of football you are creating without constantly trying to adapt and match the opposition.

This allows me to stick to my own game plan. Giving up space to the opposition is fine, in fact, giving up space in general doesn’t have to be a bad thing as long as your side is doing everything you want them to do. This is what I focus on. If my sides do what I want and expect of them, then in 90% of situations I will get a result. Let’s break it down and give a few examples of how I adapt in game for certain situations.

Before I game I never change anything. I stick with whatever my base formation is and choose the best starting eleven I can field. This means I don’t look at the match odds, I don’t pay much attention to the scouts or analyst reports and. There is no adding or removing of team instructions, player instructions and I don’t even change player roles.

In game changes

During a game I don’t tend to tweak much truth. I try my best to stick to the things my team does well, even if I go behind in a game. If I go behind in a game then the context and the manner in which I am currently playing is the most important thing. Even if I go 2-0 down, the context of why is everything. You can be playing extremely well and go behind due to bad luck, or just for the fact the opposition did a great move. It happens and at times no matter how well you are playing, you have to accept you’ll concede goals against the run of play. The key here is to not panic. I wrote about this before, the article can be found here;
 

If a game isn’t going well though or I am chasing a result then I do have an hierarchy of sorts that I try to follow;

 

• Substitutions.
• Player instructions.
• Role change
• Mentality change
• Team Instructions.

That’s the order I tend to follow. If I get to 3, 4 or 5 on the list then **** has really hit the fan. I’ve not used any of those in any of my saves so far on FM18 though and I’ve played about 16 seasons so far in total across different saves. I tend to stick to the first two mainly as it’s simpler for the style and the way I play the game.

Substitutions

90% of the changes I do in games are based around substitutions. For me this is my playstyle and allows me to influence or change games by doing substitutions. The way I squad build and develop players allows me to use this as a tool because I don’t buy/develop players who play the same position and are similar to what I already have. What I like to do is either find or develop players who will play the role differently to what the others who I have in the squad play. I recently wrote something that fall into this category which can be found here to give you an example of what I am talking about;
 

Rather than getting hung up about someone not having role suitability or that the attributes determine a player can’t play a role, I focus on the opposite. Football Manager isn’t restricted just because someone can’t play a role based on the suitability on their profile screen. Any player can play anywhere, you’ll just find his decision making may take a hit and it’s not upto the standard of someone more familiar in the role. However that doesn’t mean he can’t play it and cannot be successful or good at it. If someone has the attributes to play a role he doesn’t have listed in his profile, still play him there. It’s the attributes that make up the skillset of a player so he will be fine.

If we take the striker example above, David Brooks is a creative advanced forward. On this save I also have two other types of players who can play as my advanced forward too and each one of them brings a different skill set. The other two players I utilise in that role, one of them offers me a more physical presence and is more akin to a target man above all else. He’s like a battering ram. The other one is your more stereotypical advanced forward.

Now if I was chasing a result and needed to change things around and I knew the advanced forward position wasn’t doing what I wanted, I’d make a change. The player I brought on though would depend on what I felt was the right move. If David Brooks was being bullied then obviously I’d bring on the target man type of player so he didn’t get bullied as much and could hold his own. But if I felt I just needed a simpler method and nothing too fancy and flash, in other words nothing too specific then I’d revert to the good old fashioned type of advanced forward instead.

That’s just one example and I don’t restrict myself, it could be any player I changed really. It all depends on the context of the game and which players I felt were struggling to do what I expect. This is why I build to bring in and develop different kinds of players, so I can have a lot of variety in the side with players I can bring on in any position and they’ll offer me a different take on that role.

Another example might be that of my defensive midfielders. I have the usual type of player for the role but I also have a very creative player who lacks the usual defensive skills for the role. But more than makes up for it with his creativity. I tend to bring him on if I feel my defensive midfield is doing okay but getting caught in possession time and time again and slowing our play down. I might also use him if I feel that the defensive midfielder is struggling for time on the ball. I’d sacrifice the defensive side of things for someone who can distribute the ball better and might be a calmer head under pressure while having the ball at his feet.

Now I could simply do a role change but that would usually impact how my tactic functions and would have massive knock on effects elsewhere. So changes like that are usually a last resort and why do I change the player instead. It’s all about finding what works and fits in for the way you play the game to simplify things for yourself.

If you were watching me play the game and I made a substitution you’d likely just think I was changing a player and don’t realise it would be a tactical tool that I was using. And switching things up to get a different outlook. It would be very subtle but in most cases, would make a huge change to how the role was functioning before.

That’s my number one method. For my second way we look at;

Player instructions

There is nothing fancy or complicated here but rather than impact the entire team and use team instructions, I might focus on an individual from time to time if I see them doing things I don’t like. An example would be if my midfielder was getting pressed heavily and didn’t really have time on the ball but he had short passing. I might decide that going more direct might help him better and release him from the pressure he is currently under. So depending on the situation or scenario, this would impact what I change. 

This isn’t something I do frequently though and in my current save is something I’ve only done four times in six seasons.None the less it’s still an option.

Role/Duty changes

Now we are treading squeaky bum territory and things are starting to go very wrong. Things aren’t that bad yet but they’re well on the way to being disastrous at this point. So if my usual methods highlighted above had not worked then I’d look at changing player roles to give me whatever I was currently lacking but this has drawbacks too. In most cases my tactics are set up to play a specific way and what might seem like a simple role change would mean somewhere else, another role was likely to be changed.

An example would be if my roaming playmaker was having a rough time and he usually is the one supplying the ball from midfield to the front players. Not necessarily being a creator as such but more that he was the link and the one bridging the gap from midfield to attack. If I changed his role to lets say, a central midfielder on a support duty then the whole dynamic of what the player offers the team changes. It’s clear that what usually works wasn’t either and a change has to be made so now he’s a CM support.

What I then have to look at is how does this impact the forward players? If they struggled to get a ball from the roaming playmaker but were seeing it the odd time, how are they now going to get the ball from the CM support? He’ll not link in the same way, which was one of the reasons I initially changed him from a RPM. But exactly how does the CM fit into the current play and now where does the supply come from, to the front players.I need to identify this and see if it’s going to be a major issue and then begin addressing it.

My options would be seeing if any of the other midfielders could possibly supply them the ball and if they can, how does this impact on how we usually play and how do we make it work. Another option may be asking a striker to come deeper for the ball but then again I have to ask who is then scoring the goals? Sure, a deep striker can score goals but now the way we attack has totally changed which will impact how we score.

While you can make this work, for me, this is one of the most complicated changes I’d make. It’s probably one of the most drastic things to do that is on my list. But it’s not at the bottom of the list for one very simple reason, sometimes, just a simple duty change can be enough. You can make the player more/less aggressive with a quick duty change.

To give you a quick example, if we go back to the striker coming deep. Let’s say we started out that way and I felt the defensive unit of the oppositions were having an easy time because my striker was dropping off, so they didn’t really have any defensive duties to do. I’d maybe give the striker an attack duty if possible and instantly he would be higher up the pitch and suddenly the opposition's defenders would now be occupied.

A duty change is a lot more subtle than a full role change and in most cases has less drastic consequences elsewhere because the role is still essentially the same, it’ll just be starting higher up the pitch or lower down depending on the duty.

Mentality

Changing mentality is relatively simple and you can change the way you are playing in an instant. However you need to remember that it changes it for everyone in the side and will impact your defensive line and tempo as well. The higher the mentality the more risks you’ll take and the lower the mentality the less risks you’ll take. But this is far down my list due to me normally creating a specific style of play and changing mentality would change everything in the side yet again and mean I’ve possibly strayed away from my style. Now I know what you’re thinking, stop being a stubborn ***** and change if it's needed and you’d be correct. However I am trying to keep things simple and change as little as possible. So this doesn’t really fit that due to how it changes every player's behavior.

Team instructions

Team instructions are a great tool to use but again this falls in line with the above, I’m not keen on using things that change the entire team's behavior unless I really have to. This for me is the last option I’d use and is my ‘out of ideas’ approach. Now I understand how the team instructions work and I understand what they actually change under the hood but for me, it’s still a farce using them. I’ve normally got team instructions selected more than likely anyway based on the style I was creating. Adding more or removing them would take me away from that style or add another layer of complexity to things which I can do without.

So this is how I approach games and think and view the game. It’s probably a lot less micromanaging during games than you were expecting though right? I guess that stems from the guides I normally do but you have to remember, those are normally targeting those who struggle with certain aspects, want to learn more about how the game works or discuss certain footballing philosophies and concepts. So they go into more details than your usual stuff.

 

What’s your plans for changing games around and getting results?

 

[bere23]

7 hours ago, Cleon said:

Context is everything. I wrote this in the past.

A few months back I was reading an article titled ‘No Plan B’ and it was a great read, written by Peter Prickett who I interviewed on this blog recently. In the No Plan B article, Peter raises some good questions and gives examples of managers who are deemed to be classed as having no plan b and shows how they actually do have them. It’s just that we don’t always notice the changes as sometimes they are subtle little changes and other times, it might be a total change of shape which then is more noticeable. To give you a better idea of what I’m talking about, here is a link to his article that I’m talking about;

http://www.pger.net/football/2017/06/03/no-plan-b/

 

Then a couple of weeks after reading the above article, I was reading something else, an interview with Jürgen Klopp (it can be found here http://www.eurosport.co.uk/football/premier-league/2017-2018/jurgen-klopp-the-talk-of-a-plan-b-shows-a-lack-of-understanding_sto6267115/story.shtml ) and he was talking about plan b too. This is had to say on the matter;

Both of the things above are tied into something i’ve wanted to do for quite some time now. I’ve wanted to explain my approach to tactics on the Football Manager Series and focus on my Plan A and Plan B and explain how they can be the same thing but I just never had the time until now.

Now if you’re active on the SI forums or on the FM social media side of things you’ll often see people sharing their own plan b’s and the things they tend to do to nullify the opponent's specific threats or to change the course of a game. The majority that I see that do this always tend to have a different shape as a plan b option and tend to change the shape based on expectations for the upcoming match, regardless of whether it's the correct decision or not. It involves a lot of guesswork. I’m not saying these people aren’t right in playing this way I’m purely talking about my own preferences and play style here. That’s why for me, this blind faith approach doesn’t work.

I like to make any changes based on what I see happening in the game and react accordingly. Now if I made any decisions based on pre match odds, expectations or current form then how would I know if it's the correct decision for what is happening in the game and how it's unfolding. I possibly can’t, that’s why I do changes as I watch the game unfold. On top of this I like to create a specific brand of football and while this could work within many different tactical shapes, I don’t see the point of making the game even more complicated than it really has to be. That’s why I always play the same shape, I don’t have a need to have different formations.

This doesn’t mean I don’t adapt on a game by game basis because often I do, other times not so much because I feel it doesn’t need it. However some of the changes I make, many of you wouldn’t class them as being a plan b because the changes are minimalistic and very subtle at times. This actually brings it back to real life football for a second, just because you don’t notice something drastic doesn’t mean that the manager isn’t adapting constantly. It might just be a case of not seeing what he actually did. 

Personally speaking, what I do I wouldn’t class as a plan b even though it is. Instead I call it a match plan or game plan. It equates to the same thing though. So what is a game/match plan?!

Game Strategies

Before I start with my own plan b’s let's have a look at some of the game plans that other people might or could use.

Before a game

A second formation is something people often use when they feel a team will play a certain way based on the pre-match odds, scouts reports and the analyst's reports. Others might just take a stab in the dark and decide they need to change shape based on how they believe the team will play irrespective of what the reports or odds are.

The use of team instructions is also another popular one, people might add more of them or remove some if they already use various ones. One of the reasons for adding or removing them is to either counter or nullify a possible threat.

The use of player instructions also ties in with the above and people might want specific players to do something slightly different from normal for the reasons highlighted above.

Changing player roles seems to be one that I see people talk about frequently. They’ll change the role to get the player to change the way the team usually plays. Again it comes back to trying to take advantage of a possible opposition weakness or to cover the weakness of the users tactics.

Match plans are not something I see people talk about but they can be used to create a specific set of rules for certain points or circumstances in a game. You can use them for certain scenarios you anticipate might happen.

Using different players is one I see from the odd time. Someone might use a slightly more defensive/attacking player for a particular game because of a certain type of danger or to take advantage of a weakness in the opposition's line up. Player selection can also be used to target certain individuals in the opposing team.

Those are some of the ways people do and can utilise certain tools available, as well as showing a variety of ways to play before a game has even started. Some users even do more than one of the above before games.

During a game

Some of the changes you can make during a game follow a similar pattern to the above.

Changing the shape during a game I class is a drastic change. Nonetheless a lot of users still seem to do this. They change shape to either protect a lead and see out the game or because they are chasing a result. A change of shape can see them be more aggressive or passive.

You can use team instructions to change the style of play and to either try and win the game, protect a lead or even to take advantage of a weakness in the opposition. They can also be used to cover up your own weaknesses.

If you want something just as effective but less drastic than affecting all your players like team instructions though, you could attempt to use player instructions instead. These allow you to tailor players and select different instructions which are available depending on which role and duty someone has to give you something different that you might currently lack.

Swapping player roles is also another good one to use as it allows you to make players more or less aggressive depending which you need. If you want to hang on to that 2-0 lead but your midfield is very aggressive and leaving lots of space to be exploited, then a quick role or even duty change can make all the difference.

One of the other things people do is make tactical substitutions and swap out those players who might be underperforming, tired or just because you feel someone else might do a better job.

There are other ways to change games too but these seem to be the most common ways that get discussed. None of them are better than the other and they all can be viable options to utilise at some stage. Which, though, tends to be based on the user's playstyle and which fits best with that. Some of the above are what I class as really extreme though, especially changing shape during a game. I understand why people do it but it’s not something I’d ever contemplate doing but that doesn’t mean those who do, are wrong. It just doesn’t suit my own playstyle.

My Own Playstyle and Strategies

So how do I play the game? I don’t micromanage half as much as people believe I do. I’m more of a subtle change kind of game. In reality, my plan A is my plan B, C and everything after. Obviously if I’m creating a tactic then I take a slightly more hands on approach until I believe it’s balanced enough and offers me the style of play I was aiming for. After that point it’s all about keeping it as simple as possible in order to fly through the seasons in the quickest possible time.

What this means for me is that, if I make changes it’s purely based on what my own players are or aren’t doing. I totally ignore the opposition and just focus on my own side, some might think this is strange because the AI is a big part of the game and they’d be correct. However you don’t always have to set out to play the perfect game and adapt constantly for the AI. You can make subtle changes to achieve this and you don’t always need to be drastic. Also by focusing on your own side, you can stick to the style or brand of football you are creating without constantly trying to adapt and match the opposition.

This allows me to stick to my own game plan. Giving up space to the opposition is fine, in fact, giving up space in general doesn’t have to be a bad thing as long as your side is doing everything you want them to do. This is what I focus on. If my sides do what I want and expect of them, then in 90% of situations I will get a result. Let’s break it down and give a few examples of how I adapt in game for certain situations.

Before I game I never change anything. I stick with whatever my base formation is and choose the best starting eleven I can field. This means I don’t look at the match odds, I don’t pay much attention to the scouts or analyst reports and. There is no adding or removing of team instructions, player instructions and I don’t even change player roles.

In game changes

During a game I don’t tend to tweak much truth. I try my best to stick to the things my team does well, even if I go behind in a game. If I go behind in a game then the context and the manner in which I am currently playing is the most important thing. Even if I go 2-0 down, the context of why is everything. You can be playing extremely well and go behind due to bad luck, or just for the fact the opposition did a great move. It happens and at times no matter how well you are playing, you have to accept you’ll concede goals against the run of play. The key here is to not panic. I wrote about this before, the article can be found here;
 

If a game isn’t going well though or I am chasing a result then I do have an hierarchy of sorts that I try to follow;

 

• Substitutions.
• Player instructions.
• Role change
• Mentality change
• Team Instructions.

That’s the order I tend to follow. If I get to 3, 4 or 5 on the list then **** has really hit the fan. I’ve not used any of those in any of my saves so far on FM18 though and I’ve played about 16 seasons so far in total across different saves. I tend to stick to the first two mainly as it’s simpler for the style and the way I play the game.

Substitutions

90% of the changes I do in games are based around substitutions. For me this is my playstyle and allows me to influence or change games by doing substitutions. The way I squad build and develop players allows me to use this as a tool because I don’t buy/develop players who play the same position and are similar to what I already have. What I like to do is either find or develop players who will play the role differently to what the others who I have in the squad play. I recently wrote something that fall into this category which can be found here to give you an example of what I am talking about;
 

Rather than getting hung up about someone not having role suitability or that the attributes determine a player can’t play a role, I focus on the opposite. Football Manager isn’t restricted just because someone can’t play a role based on the suitability on their profile screen. Any player can play anywhere, you’ll just find his decision making may take a hit and it’s not upto the standard of someone more familiar in the role. However that doesn’t mean he can’t play it and cannot be successful or good at it. If someone has the attributes to play a role he doesn’t have listed in his profile, still play him there. It’s the attributes that make up the skillset of a player so he will be fine.

If we take the striker example above, David Brooks is a creative advanced forward. On this save I also have two other types of players who can play as my advanced forward too and each one of them brings a different skill set. The other two players I utilise in that role, one of them offers me a more physical presence and is more akin to a target man above all else. He’s like a battering ram. The other one is your more stereotypical advanced forward.

Now if I was chasing a result and needed to change things around and I knew the advanced forward position wasn’t doing what I wanted, I’d make a change. The player I brought on though would depend on what I felt was the right move. If David Brooks was being bullied then obviously I’d bring on the target man type of player so he didn’t get bullied as much and could hold his own. But if I felt I just needed a simpler method and nothing too fancy and flash, in other words nothing too specific then I’d revert to the good old fashioned type of advanced forward instead.

That’s just one example and I don’t restrict myself, it could be any player I changed really. It all depends on the context of the game and which players I felt were struggling to do what I expect. This is why I build to bring in and develop different kinds of players, so I can have a lot of variety in the side with players I can bring on in any position and they’ll offer me a different take on that role.

Another example might be that of my defensive midfielders. I have the usual type of player for the role but I also have a very creative player who lacks the usual defensive skills for the role. But more than makes up for it with his creativity. I tend to bring him on if I feel my defensive midfield is doing okay but getting caught in possession time and time again and slowing our play down. I might also use him if I feel that the defensive midfielder is struggling for time on the ball. I’d sacrifice the defensive side of things for someone who can distribute the ball better and might be a calmer head under pressure while having the ball at his feet.

Now I could simply do a role change but that would usually impact how my tactic functions and would have massive knock on effects elsewhere. So changes like that are usually a last resort and why do I change the player instead. It’s all about finding what works and fits in for the way you play the game to simplify things for yourself.

If you were watching me play the game and I made a substitution you’d likely just think I was changing a player and don’t realise it would be a tactical tool that I was using. And switching things up to get a different outlook. It would be very subtle but in most cases, would make a huge change to how the role was functioning before.

That’s my number one method. For my second way we look at;

Player instructions

There is nothing fancy or complicated here but rather than impact the entire team and use team instructions, I might focus on an individual from time to time if I see them doing things I don’t like. An example would be if my midfielder was getting pressed heavily and didn’t really have time on the ball but he had short passing. I might decide that going more direct might help him better and release him from the pressure he is currently under. So depending on the situation or scenario, this would impact what I change. 

This isn’t something I do frequently though and in my current save is something I’ve only done four times in six seasons.None the less it’s still an option.

Role/Duty changes

Now we are treading squeaky bum territory and things are starting to go very wrong. Things aren’t that bad yet but they’re well on the way to being disastrous at this point. So if my usual methods highlighted above had not worked then I’d look at changing player roles to give me whatever I was currently lacking but this has drawbacks too. In most cases my tactics are set up to play a specific way and what might seem like a simple role change would mean somewhere else, another role was likely to be changed.

An example would be if my roaming playmaker was having a rough time and he usually is the one supplying the ball from midfield to the front players. Not necessarily being a creator as such but more that he was the link and the one bridging the gap from midfield to attack. If I changed his role to lets say, a central midfielder on a support duty then the whole dynamic of what the player offers the team changes. It’s clear that what usually works wasn’t either and a change has to be made so now he’s a CM support.

What I then have to look at is how does this impact the forward players? If they struggled to get a ball from the roaming playmaker but were seeing it the odd time, how are they now going to get the ball from the CM support? He’ll not link in the same way, which was one of the reasons I initially changed him from a RPM. But exactly how does the CM fit into the current play and now where does the supply come from, to the front players.I need to identify this and see if it’s going to be a major issue and then begin addressing it.

My options would be seeing if any of the other midfielders could possibly supply them the ball and if they can, how does this impact on how we usually play and how do we make it work. Another option may be asking a striker to come deeper for the ball but then again I have to ask who is then scoring the goals? Sure, a deep striker can score goals but now the way we attack has totally changed which will impact how we score.

While you can make this work, for me, this is one of the most complicated changes I’d make. It’s probably one of the most drastic things to do that is on my list. But it’s not at the bottom of the list for one very simple reason, sometimes, just a simple duty change can be enough. You can make the player more/less aggressive with a quick duty change.

To give you a quick example, if we go back to the striker coming deep. Let’s say we started out that way and I felt the defensive unit of the oppositions were having an easy time because my striker was dropping off, so they didn’t really have any defensive duties to do. I’d maybe give the striker an attack duty if possible and instantly he would be higher up the pitch and suddenly the opposition's defenders would now be occupied.

A duty change is a lot more subtle than a full role change and in most cases has less drastic consequences elsewhere because the role is still essentially the same, it’ll just be starting higher up the pitch or lower down depending on the duty.

Mentality

Changing mentality is relatively simple and you can change the way you are playing in an instant. However you need to remember that it changes it for everyone in the side and will impact your defensive line and tempo as well. The higher the mentality the more risks you’ll take and the lower the mentality the less risks you’ll take. But this is far down my list due to me normally creating a specific style of play and changing mentality would change everything in the side yet again and mean I’ve possibly strayed away from my style. Now I know what you’re thinking, stop being a stubborn ***** and change if it's needed and you’d be correct. However I am trying to keep things simple and change as little as possible. So this doesn’t really fit that due to how it changes every player's behavior.

Team instructions

Team instructions are a great tool to use but again this falls in line with the above, I’m not keen on using things that change the entire team's behavior unless I really have to. This for me is the last option I’d use and is my ‘out of ideas’ approach. Now I understand how the team instructions work and I understand what they actually change under the hood but for me, it’s still a farce using them. I’ve normally got team instructions selected more than likely anyway based on the style I was creating. Adding more or removing them would take me away from that style or add another layer of complexity to things which I can do without.

So this is how I approach games and think and view the game. It’s probably a lot less micromanaging during games than you were expecting though right? I guess that stems from the guides I normally do but you have to remember, those are normally targeting those who struggle with certain aspects, want to learn more about how the game works or discuss certain footballing philosophies and concepts. So they go into more details than your usual stuff.

 

What’s your plans for changing games around and getting results?

 

wow @Cleon you've nailed it!!what a post,thank you!!!actually im catching myself lot of times to re-read your topics,especially older topics.But every time i find myself do same mistakes..i dont stick all the time on my plan and thinking that my tactic doesnt work..so in result i make constantly changes in game.I never change my shape,but most of the times i do TIs and sometimes mentalinty change when im trying to win the game or the opponent has a lead 1-0 or 2-0.Sometimes i feel my tactic isnt working or i dont have the right players.the hardest part for me is to understand the effect of attributes on players so i have to search for right players for every position.maybe i dont have any patience for my team to be stronger because every time i play LLM and when im joining the highest league i struggle a lot.well i know obviously will tell me dont expect to overachieve etc which is true,but in some games i feel that i could win the game.

Sorry for my long post  

[Cleon]

33 minutes ago, bere23 said:

wow @Cleon you've nailed it!!what a post,thank you!!!actually im catching myself lot of times to re-read your topics,especially older topics.But every time i find myself do same mistakes..i dont stick all the time on my plan and thinking that my tactic doesnt work..so in result i make constantly changes in game.I never change my shape,but most of the times i do TIs and sometimes mentalinty change when im trying to win the game or the opponent has a lead 1-0 or 2-0.Sometimes i feel my tactic isnt working or i dont have the right players.the hardest part for me is to understand the effect of attributes on players so i have to search for right players for every position.maybe i dont have any patience for my team to be stronger because every time i play LLM and when im joining the highest league i struggle a lot.well i know obviously will tell me dont expect to overachieve etc which is true,but in some games i feel that i could win the game.

Sorry for my long post  

Never apologise for asking questions or saying how you play and the mistakes challenges you face. I have another post that I’ll post tomorrow for you that might help. As it covers whether to react or not to what is happening on the pitch.

[bere23]

10 minutes ago, Cleon said:

Never apologise for asking questions or saying how you play and the mistakes challenges you face. I have another post that I’ll post tomorrow for you that might help. As it covers whether to react or not to what is happening on the pitch.

thank you!!really thank you for your kindness,you are helping us so much and wish we had you here more soon.Every post of you is school and catalyst!I cant  wait for tomorrow  and i hope to learn finally to read the game!

[blackrussian]

8 hours ago, Cleon said:

Context is everything. I wrote this in the past.

A few months back I was reading an article titled ‘No Plan B’ and it was a great read, written by Peter Prickett who I interviewed on this blog recently. In the No Plan B article, Peter raises some good questions and gives examples of managers who are deemed to be classed as having no plan b and shows how they actually do have them. It’s just that we don’t always notice the changes as sometimes they are subtle little changes and other times, it might be a total change of shape which then is more noticeable. To give you a better idea of what I’m talking about, here is a link to his article that I’m talking about;

http://www.pger.net/football/2017/06/03/no-plan-b/

 

Then a couple of weeks after reading the above article, I was reading something else, an interview with Jürgen Klopp (it can be found here http://www.eurosport.co.uk/football/premier-league/2017-2018/jurgen-klopp-the-talk-of-a-plan-b-shows-a-lack-of-understanding_sto6267115/story.shtml ) and he was talking about plan b too. This is had to say on the matter;

Both of the things above are tied into something i’ve wanted to do for quite some time now. I’ve wanted to explain my approach to tactics on the Football Manager Series and focus on my Plan A and Plan B and explain how they can be the same thing but I just never had the time until now.

Now if you’re active on the SI forums or on the FM social media side of things you’ll often see people sharing their own plan b’s and the things they tend to do to nullify the opponent's specific threats or to change the course of a game. The majority that I see that do this always tend to have a different shape as a plan b option and tend to change the shape based on expectations for the upcoming match, regardless of whether it's the correct decision or not. It involves a lot of guesswork. I’m not saying these people aren’t right in playing this way I’m purely talking about my own preferences and play style here. That’s why for me, this blind faith approach doesn’t work.

I like to make any changes based on what I see happening in the game and react accordingly. Now if I made any decisions based on pre match odds, expectations or current form then how would I know if it's the correct decision for what is happening in the game and how it's unfolding. I possibly can’t, that’s why I do changes as I watch the game unfold. On top of this I like to create a specific brand of football and while this could work within many different tactical shapes, I don’t see the point of making the game even more complicated than it really has to be. That’s why I always play the same shape, I don’t have a need to have different formations.

This doesn’t mean I don’t adapt on a game by game basis because often I do, other times not so much because I feel it doesn’t need it. However some of the changes I make, many of you wouldn’t class them as being a plan b because the changes are minimalistic and very subtle at times. This actually brings it back to real life football for a second, just because you don’t notice something drastic doesn’t mean that the manager isn’t adapting constantly. It might just be a case of not seeing what he actually did. 

Personally speaking, what I do I wouldn’t class as a plan b even though it is. Instead I call it a match plan or game plan. It equates to the same thing though. So what is a game/match plan?!

Game Strategies

Before I start with my own plan b’s let's have a look at some of the game plans that other people might or could use.

Before a game

A second formation is something people often use when they feel a team will play a certain way based on the pre-match odds, scouts reports and the analyst's reports. Others might just take a stab in the dark and decide they need to change shape based on how they believe the team will play irrespective of what the reports or odds are.

The use of team instructions is also another popular one, people might add more of them or remove some if they already use various ones. One of the reasons for adding or removing them is to either counter or nullify a possible threat.

The use of player instructions also ties in with the above and people might want specific players to do something slightly different from normal for the reasons highlighted above.

Changing player roles seems to be one that I see people talk about frequently. They’ll change the role to get the player to change the way the team usually plays. Again it comes back to trying to take advantage of a possible opposition weakness or to cover the weakness of the users tactics.

Match plans are not something I see people talk about but they can be used to create a specific set of rules for certain points or circumstances in a game. You can use them for certain scenarios you anticipate might happen.

Using different players is one I see from the odd time. Someone might use a slightly more defensive/attacking player for a particular game because of a certain type of danger or to take advantage of a weakness in the opposition's line up. Player selection can also be used to target certain individuals in the opposing team.

Those are some of the ways people do and can utilise certain tools available, as well as showing a variety of ways to play before a game has even started. Some users even do more than one of the above before games.

During a game

Some of the changes you can make during a game follow a similar pattern to the above.

Changing the shape during a game I class is a drastic change. Nonetheless a lot of users still seem to do this. They change shape to either protect a lead and see out the game or because they are chasing a result. A change of shape can see them be more aggressive or passive.

You can use team instructions to change the style of play and to either try and win the game, protect a lead or even to take advantage of a weakness in the opposition. They can also be used to cover up your own weaknesses.

If you want something just as effective but less drastic than affecting all your players like team instructions though, you could attempt to use player instructions instead. These allow you to tailor players and select different instructions which are available depending on which role and duty someone has to give you something different that you might currently lack.

Swapping player roles is also another good one to use as it allows you to make players more or less aggressive depending which you need. If you want to hang on to that 2-0 lead but your midfield is very aggressive and leaving lots of space to be exploited, then a quick role or even duty change can make all the difference.

One of the other things people do is make tactical substitutions and swap out those players who might be underperforming, tired or just because you feel someone else might do a better job.

There are other ways to change games too but these seem to be the most common ways that get discussed. None of them are better than the other and they all can be viable options to utilise at some stage. Which, though, tends to be based on the user's playstyle and which fits best with that. Some of the above are what I class as really extreme though, especially changing shape during a game. I understand why people do it but it’s not something I’d ever contemplate doing but that doesn’t mean those who do, are wrong. It just doesn’t suit my own playstyle.

My Own Playstyle and Strategies

So how do I play the game? I don’t micromanage half as much as people believe I do. I’m more of a subtle change kind of game. In reality, my plan A is my plan B, C and everything after. Obviously if I’m creating a tactic then I take a slightly more hands on approach until I believe it’s balanced enough and offers me the style of play I was aiming for. After that point it’s all about keeping it as simple as possible in order to fly through the seasons in the quickest possible time.

What this means for me is that, if I make changes it’s purely based on what my own players are or aren’t doing. I totally ignore the opposition and just focus on my own side, some might think this is strange because the AI is a big part of the game and they’d be correct. However you don’t always have to set out to play the perfect game and adapt constantly for the AI. You can make subtle changes to achieve this and you don’t always need to be drastic. Also by focusing on your own side, you can stick to the style or brand of football you are creating without constantly trying to adapt and match the opposition.

This allows me to stick to my own game plan. Giving up space to the opposition is fine, in fact, giving up space in general doesn’t have to be a bad thing as long as your side is doing everything you want them to do. This is what I focus on. If my sides do what I want and expect of them, then in 90% of situations I will get a result. Let’s break it down and give a few examples of how I adapt in game for certain situations.

Before I game I never change anything. I stick with whatever my base formation is and choose the best starting eleven I can field. This means I don’t look at the match odds, I don’t pay much attention to the scouts or analyst reports and. There is no adding or removing of team instructions, player instructions and I don’t even change player roles.

In game changes

During a game I don’t tend to tweak much truth. I try my best to stick to the things my team does well, even if I go behind in a game. If I go behind in a game then the context and the manner in which I am currently playing is the most important thing. Even if I go 2-0 down, the context of why is everything. You can be playing extremely well and go behind due to bad luck, or just for the fact the opposition did a great move. It happens and at times no matter how well you are playing, you have to accept you’ll concede goals against the run of play. The key here is to not panic. I wrote about this before, the article can be found here;
 

If a game isn’t going well though or I am chasing a result then I do have an hierarchy of sorts that I try to follow;

 

• Substitutions.
• Player instructions.
• Role change
• Mentality change
• Team Instructions.

That’s the order I tend to follow. If I get to 3, 4 or 5 on the list then **** has really hit the fan. I’ve not used any of those in any of my saves so far on FM18 though and I’ve played about 16 seasons so far in total across different saves. I tend to stick to the first two mainly as it’s simpler for the style and the way I play the game.

Substitutions

90% of the changes I do in games are based around substitutions. For me this is my playstyle and allows me to influence or change games by doing substitutions. The way I squad build and develop players allows me to use this as a tool because I don’t buy/develop players who play the same position and are similar to what I already have. What I like to do is either find or develop players who will play the role differently to what the others who I have in the squad play. I recently wrote something that fall into this category which can be found here to give you an example of what I am talking about;
 

Rather than getting hung up about someone not having role suitability or that the attributes determine a player can’t play a role, I focus on the opposite. Football Manager isn’t restricted just because someone can’t play a role based on the suitability on their profile screen. Any player can play anywhere, you’ll just find his decision making may take a hit and it’s not upto the standard of someone more familiar in the role. However that doesn’t mean he can’t play it and cannot be successful or good at it. If someone has the attributes to play a role he doesn’t have listed in his profile, still play him there. It’s the attributes that make up the skillset of a player so he will be fine.

If we take the striker example above, David Brooks is a creative advanced forward. On this save I also have two other types of players who can play as my advanced forward too and each one of them brings a different skill set. The other two players I utilise in that role, one of them offers me a more physical presence and is more akin to a target man above all else. He’s like a battering ram. The other one is your more stereotypical advanced forward.

Now if I was chasing a result and needed to change things around and I knew the advanced forward position wasn’t doing what I wanted, I’d make a change. The player I brought on though would depend on what I felt was the right move. If David Brooks was being bullied then obviously I’d bring on the target man type of player so he didn’t get bullied as much and could hold his own. But if I felt I just needed a simpler method and nothing too fancy and flash, in other words nothing too specific then I’d revert to the good old fashioned type of advanced forward instead.

That’s just one example and I don’t restrict myself, it could be any player I changed really. It all depends on the context of the game and which players I felt were struggling to do what I expect. This is why I build to bring in and develop different kinds of players, so I can have a lot of variety in the side with players I can bring on in any position and they’ll offer me a different take on that role.

Another example might be that of my defensive midfielders. I have the usual type of player for the role but I also have a very creative player who lacks the usual defensive skills for the role. But more than makes up for it with his creativity. I tend to bring him on if I feel my defensive midfield is doing okay but getting caught in possession time and time again and slowing our play down. I might also use him if I feel that the defensive midfielder is struggling for time on the ball. I’d sacrifice the defensive side of things for someone who can distribute the ball better and might be a calmer head under pressure while having the ball at his feet.

Now I could simply do a role change but that would usually impact how my tactic functions and would have massive knock on effects elsewhere. So changes like that are usually a last resort and why do I change the player instead. It’s all about finding what works and fits in for the way you play the game to simplify things for yourself.

If you were watching me play the game and I made a substitution you’d likely just think I was changing a player and don’t realise it would be a tactical tool that I was using. And switching things up to get a different outlook. It would be very subtle but in most cases, would make a huge change to how the role was functioning before.

That’s my number one method. For my second way we look at;

Player instructions

There is nothing fancy or complicated here but rather than impact the entire team and use team instructions, I might focus on an individual from time to time if I see them doing things I don’t like. An example would be if my midfielder was getting pressed heavily and didn’t really have time on the ball but he had short passing. I might decide that going more direct might help him better and release him from the pressure he is currently under. So depending on the situation or scenario, this would impact what I change. 

This isn’t something I do frequently though and in my current save is something I’ve only done four times in six seasons.None the less it’s still an option.

Role/Duty changes

Now we are treading squeaky bum territory and things are starting to go very wrong. Things aren’t that bad yet but they’re well on the way to being disastrous at this point. So if my usual methods highlighted above had not worked then I’d look at changing player roles to give me whatever I was currently lacking but this has drawbacks too. In most cases my tactics are set up to play a specific way and what might seem like a simple role change would mean somewhere else, another role was likely to be changed.

An example would be if my roaming playmaker was having a rough time and he usually is the one supplying the ball from midfield to the front players. Not necessarily being a creator as such but more that he was the link and the one bridging the gap from midfield to attack. If I changed his role to lets say, a central midfielder on a support duty then the whole dynamic of what the player offers the team changes. It’s clear that what usually works wasn’t either and a change has to be made so now he’s a CM support.

What I then have to look at is how does this impact the forward players? If they struggled to get a ball from the roaming playmaker but were seeing it the odd time, how are they now going to get the ball from the CM support? He’ll not link in the same way, which was one of the reasons I initially changed him from a RPM. But exactly how does the CM fit into the current play and now where does the supply come from, to the front players.I need to identify this and see if it’s going to be a major issue and then begin addressing it.

My options would be seeing if any of the other midfielders could possibly supply them the ball and if they can, how does this impact on how we usually play and how do we make it work. Another option may be asking a striker to come deeper for the ball but then again I have to ask who is then scoring the goals? Sure, a deep striker can score goals but now the way we attack has totally changed which will impact how we score.

While you can make this work, for me, this is one of the most complicated changes I’d make. It’s probably one of the most drastic things to do that is on my list. But it’s not at the bottom of the list for one very simple reason, sometimes, just a simple duty change can be enough. You can make the player more/less aggressive with a quick duty change.

To give you a quick example, if we go back to the striker coming deep. Let’s say we started out that way and I felt the defensive unit of the oppositions were having an easy time because my striker was dropping off, so they didn’t really have any defensive duties to do. I’d maybe give the striker an attack duty if possible and instantly he would be higher up the pitch and suddenly the opposition's defenders would now be occupied.

A duty change is a lot more subtle than a full role change and in most cases has less drastic consequences elsewhere because the role is still essentially the same, it’ll just be starting higher up the pitch or lower down depending on the duty.

Mentality

Changing mentality is relatively simple and you can change the way you are playing in an instant. However you need to remember that it changes it for everyone in the side and will impact your defensive line and tempo as well. The higher the mentality the more risks you’ll take and the lower the mentality the less risks you’ll take. But this is far down my list due to me normally creating a specific style of play and changing mentality would change everything in the side yet again and mean I’ve possibly strayed away from my style. Now I know what you’re thinking, stop being a stubborn ***** and change if it's needed and you’d be correct. However I am trying to keep things simple and change as little as possible. So this doesn’t really fit that due to how it changes every player's behavior.

Team instructions

Team instructions are a great tool to use but again this falls in line with the above, I’m not keen on using things that change the entire team's behavior unless I really have to. This for me is the last option I’d use and is my ‘out of ideas’ approach. Now I understand how the team instructions work and I understand what they actually change under the hood but for me, it’s still a farce using them. I’ve normally got team instructions selected more than likely anyway based on the style I was creating. Adding more or removing them would take me away from that style or add another layer of complexity to things which I can do without.

So this is how I approach games and think and view the game. It’s probably a lot less micromanaging during games than you were expecting though right? I guess that stems from the guides I normally do but you have to remember, those are normally targeting those who struggle with certain aspects, want to learn more about how the game works or discuss certain footballing philosophies and concepts. So they go into more details than your usual stuff.

 

What’s your plans for changing games around and getting results?

 

how much of the match do you watch? it seems like since your changes are relatively minimal during the game you'd have to at least watch the comprehensive highlights, if not the full game. it seems like it would be hard to make a seemingly minor adjustment when youre not seeing good chunks of the game. take your david brooks striker example. if you see that he's getting bullied and is largely ineffective, you go and make the sub. is this kind of observation made directly from watching the game play? or are you using any of the in-game data to help you make the decision, especially since you have access to individual player numbers?

[DarJ]

1 hour ago, bere23 said:

I never change my shape

I never change my shape too  and at one point I was asking myself if I was playing properly because when I watch people play and they are chasing a game they tend to change everything from shape to instructions to roles etc. and I was considering at one point  to create separate tactic for when I'm chasing a game but I decided against it and just kept playing how I've always played. 

[bere23]

2 minutes ago, DarJ said:

I never change my shape too  and at one point I was asking myself if I was playing properly because when I watch people play and they are chasing a game they tend to change everything from shape to instructions to roles etc. and I was considering at one point  to create separate tactic for when I'm chasing a game but I decided against it and just kept playing how I've always played. 

No i never do that,i always have one slot tactic.Maybe i dont have correct roles to link up nicely or maybe(which i believe this one its my fault) i dont have the correct players.Because with two thing im obssessed with game,first is tactics and second is Youth developement.maybe thats my problem because i always look for young player without high attributes for the league.so im always with back foot in the league

[Elliath]

I still remember reading that article as if it was a month ago. I miss reading your work Cleon. I sometimes regret not downloading the whole Tea and Busquets site when I had the chance.

@Bere23 - I am in the same boat as you. I mostly play LLM and struggle to understand if my tactics is faulty or I don't have the right players for it.

[sparkyunited]

I think the most important aspect of FM that you reinforce @Cleon which many players overlook is the need to actually watch how tactical instructions actually play out in the match engine.  I see a lot of players make a lot of assumptions (some are valid, many are not) about what a particular role or instruction will do, but fail to check how things manifest in the ME and/or think about the relational aspects of the game.  Everything effects everything in building a tactical system that is both effective and performs with the style of football you're attempting to create.  

The old T&B blogs almost always served as a great reminder to watch the ME and understand what my opponents are doing.  I will switch to Full Match highlights at any point during a match if I don't feel like I have a true understanding of how things are playing out.  I find this crucial while building a tactic. Even once my team has things ticking along well, I almost never play on anything less than Comprehensive.

I think your hierarchy above on in-game match changes is another great reminder to not throw the baby out with the bath water if things aren't going great.  Understanding where things have broken down is crucial to effective game management. Conceding from a corner is a lot different than being frequently caught out to balls over the top of an extremely high defensive line.

Great to have you back @Cleon.  You've already made my return to FM more enjoyable.

 

Edited January 8, 2022 by sparkyunited

[phnompenhandy]

4 hours ago, Elliath said:

I still remember reading that article as if it was a month ago. I miss reading your work Cleon. I sometimes regret not downloading the whole Tea and Busquets site when I had the chance.

@Bere23 - I am in the same boat as you. I mostly play LLM and struggle to understand if my tactics is faulty or I don't have the right players for it.

I'm a LLaMA too and it is a particular issue.  You never get anywhere near tactical familiarity or team cohesion, and players are highly inconsistent, so it's nigh-on impossible to know if a problem is due to you or them! In compensation, the other lot are in the same boat. I often have late season surges, the reasons being a combo of me finally working it out, and the better teams having their best players poached. But you can only apply Cleon's tactical refinements to a limited extent due to the nature of the beast.

[Cleon]

9 hours ago, blackrussian said:

how much of the match do you watch? it seems like since your changes are relatively minimal during the game you'd have to at least watch the comprehensive highlights, if not the full game. it seems like it would be hard to make a seemingly minor adjustment when youre not seeing good chunks of the game. take your david brooks striker example. if you see that he's getting bullied and is largely ineffective, you go and make the sub. is this kind of observation made directly from watching the game play? or are you using any of the in-game data to help you make the decision, especially since you have access to individual player numbers?

I watch the first 15 minutes of the game that is it. You can tell how a game will play out in this time. The rest of the time I watch on key highlights. I also keep an eye on the player ratings, match stats etc too. It's not just one thing.

[Cleon]

10 hours ago, bere23 said:

thank you!!really thank you for your kindness,you are helping us so much and wish we had you here more soon.Every post of you is school and catalyst!I cant  wait for tomorrow  and i hope to learn finally to read the game!

This is the article I spoke about.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Fvtb_IBsrfoiaO3Z44DueRIIaHCnXnHv-IfVspbtDSs/edit?usp=sharing

[bere23]

22 minutes ago, Cleon said:

This is the article I spoke about.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Fvtb_IBsrfoiaO3Z44DueRIIaHCnXnHv-IfVspbtDSs/edit?usp=sharing

excellent!!I'll dive into it right now  

[bere23]

55 minutes ago, Cleon said:

This is the article I spoke about.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Fvtb_IBsrfoiaO3Z44DueRIIaHCnXnHv-IfVspbtDSs/edit?usp=sharing

Really enjoyed it!!i have some questions..

1-Are you watching every time on extented or something to have so much details from game?

2-I noticed you have changed only the mentality to chase the game but i think you said its one of your last decisions.(dont criticise you of course,just noticed it).Obviously it paid off,my point is if you didnt change your mentality,would change anything else to chase the game?TIs,PIs?

3-And last is,at your tactic was your starting mentality cautious in general or you changed to it because of stronger opponent for this game only?

Thank you  

[Cleon]

20 minutes ago, bere23 said:

Really enjoyed it!!i have some questions..

1-Are you watching every time on extented or something to have so much details from game?

2-I noticed you have changed only the mentality to chase the game but i think you said its one of your last decisions.(dont criticise you of course,just noticed it).Obviously it paid off,my point is if you didnt change your mentality,would change anything else to chase the game?TIs,PIs?

3-And last is,at your tactic was your starting mentality cautious in general or you changed to it because of stronger opponent for this game only?

Thank you  

1 - No I only watch games if I need to. I.e if I'm creating a tactic or having issues, then obviously you have to watch or how else would you know what is happening? For most parts though I only ever watch the first 15 minutes. It's an approach I've always used and I've written about it in the past too. In fact an awful lot of people on here actually adopted this approach too. Here is a link for more reading for those interested in how I do this;

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1WVq_0sXHcX5RKEF4Y31mxV2NTcG_B7TulcGl1Lvs6LY/edit?usp=sharing

2 - It's all about the context like I stated in the Plan article you read earlier. After a while all of this tweaking/changing stuff becomes second nature and you just follow your instincts and know what you need to do. The scenario determines what I do so its hard to give an exact answer.

3 - I always play cautious. Well, its rare I ever go above balanced mentality in general.

[Br3nB]

50 minutes ago, Cleon said:

1 - No I only watch games if I need to. I.e if I'm creating a tactic or having issues, then obviously you have to watch or how else would you know what is happening? For most parts though I only ever watch the first 15 minutes. It's an approach I've always used and I've written about it in the past too. In fact an awful lot of people on here actually adopted this approach too. Here is a link for more reading for those interested in how I do this;

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1WVq_0sXHcX5RKEF4Y31mxV2NTcG_B7TulcGl1Lvs6LY/edit?usp=sharing

2 - It's all about the context like I stated in the Plan article you read earlier. After a while all of this tweaking/changing stuff becomes second nature and you just follow your instincts and know what you need to do. The scenario determines what I do so its hard to give an exact answer.

3 - I always play cautious. Well, its rare I ever go above balanced mentality in general.

Interesting you say you never go above balanced, I’ve been experimenting with attacking/very attacking mentality with loads of support duties due to many threads from someone on these forums.

What is produces is wonderful but blunt football with no real threat in many games.

This makes me want to try the lower end of the mentality spectrum and make my team more aggressive with roles instead?

I’m guessing this is a viable option for even big teams like Arsenal?

[Cleon]

5 minutes ago, Br3nB said:

Interesting you say you never go above balanced, I’ve been experimenting with attacking/very attacking mentality with loads of support duties due to many threads from someone on these forums.

What is produces is wonderful but blunt football with no real threat in many games.

This makes me want to try the lower end of the mentality spectrum and make my team more aggressive with roles instead?

I’m guessing this is a viable option for even big teams like Arsenal?

Yeah its viable with any team

[Cleon]

2 hours ago, Br3nB said:

Interesting you say you never go above balanced, I’ve been experimenting with attacking/very attacking mentality with loads of support duties due to many threads from someone on these forums.

What is produces is wonderful but blunt football with no real threat in many games.

This makes me want to try the lower end of the mentality spectrum and make my team more aggressive with roles instead?

I’m guessing this is a viable option for even big teams like Arsenal?

This was written a while ago and about the 4231 but this still applies and is why I use lower mentalities. It's quite in-depth though;

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1b4wMBJWixYOjp2NWglCNzepQ5DkZ9FdelziYwbCOB7c/edit?usp=sharing

[blackrussian]

2 hours ago, Cleon said:

1 - No I only watch games if I need to. I.e if I'm creating a tactic or having issues, then obviously you have to watch or how else would you know what is happening? For most parts though I only ever watch the first 15 minutes. It's an approach I've always used and I've written about it in the past too. In fact an awful lot of people on here actually adopted this approach too. Here is a link for more reading for those interested in how I do this;

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1WVq_0sXHcX5RKEF4Y31mxV2NTcG_B7TulcGl1Lvs6LY/edit?usp=sharing

2 - It's all about the context like I stated in the Plan article you read earlier. After a while all of this tweaking/changing stuff becomes second nature and you just follow your instincts and know what you need to do. The scenario determines what I do so its hard to give an exact answer.

3 - I always play cautious. Well, its rare I ever go above balanced mentality in general.

thanks for the link. good read as always. when you first start a save, do you build your tactic around the squad or do you have a specific tactic in mind and put together a team that will work with the roles needed for the tactic? the latter would be if you have a general tactical philosophy that you follow. say you generally play counter-attacking intense pressing type of football and you have a team that has low fitness and stamina. are you going to try and remodel the squad to suit your needs?  

[Cleon]

30 minutes ago, blackrussian said:

thanks for the link. good read as always. when you first start a save, do you build your tactic around the squad or do you have a specific tactic in mind and put together a team that will work with the roles needed for the tactic? the latter would be if you have a general tactical philosophy that you follow. say you generally play counter-attacking intense pressing type of football and you have a team that has low fitness and stamina. are you going to try and remodel the squad to suit your needs?  

I know I say this an awful lot but it really depends. On the Blades save I always try and replicate real life. On Other saves I might just make something to suit the squad. On other saves I might just have an idea and want to try it out etc. I don't have a 'style' that I play all the time.

[blackrussian]

7 minutes ago, Cleon said:

I know I say this an awful lot but it really depends. On the Blades save I always try and replicate real life. On Other saves I might just make something to suit the squad. On other saves I might just have an idea and want to try it out etc. I don't have a 'style' that I play all the time.

yeah for sure, thats about as subjective as it gets. ive generally used templates/plug in tactics (with some minor tweaks for the squad) bc i didnt have a lot of free time to tinker with my own. now ive a bit more time i can devote to this, so im watching more games to try and make my own from scratch. thats the most fun aspect of the game for me.

oh fwiw, the wayback machine has some of your old blog saved with the images intact. so ive been reading a few of those too https://web.archive.org/web/20190511142558/https://teaandbusquets.com/blog/creating-a-tactic-the-paysandu-way-6

[Ferdy5]

Would love to see the old tactic recreation that appeared in the original.

 

Fergie's 3 great teams would be outstanding additions to it (94, 99, 08)

Edited January 9, 2022 by Ferdy5

[DarJ]

59 minutes ago, blackrussian said:

im watching more games to try and make my own from scratch.

What has helped me get muvh better is that when I watch the match I try to anticipate every pass before it happens. I've found that doing that helps you think and when the pass doesn't come off you might already have an idea on why. Another thing is thaat I've started to watch games in 3D. While you can see the shape of your tactic on 2D, 3D gives you additional information like where the players is facing, what foot he's using etc

[backpocket]

6 hours ago, Cleon said:

I watch the first 15 minutes of the game that is it. You can tell how a game will play out in this time. The rest of the time I watch on key highlights. I also keep an eye on the player ratings, match stats etc too. It's not just one thing.

How do you rewatch full matches now? I find that the option is missing now on replays so had to keep clicking back when it jumps to another highlight.

[blackrussian]

20 minutes ago, DarJ said:

What has helped me get muvh better is that when I watch the match I try to anticipate every pass before it happens. I've found that doing that helps you think and when the pass doesn't come off you might already have an idea on why. Another thing is thaat I've started to watch games in 3D. While you can see the shape of your tactic on 2D, 3D gives you additional information like where the players is facing, what foot he's using etc

yeah thats a good shout. ive pretty much stuck to 2D, but im sure im missing a good amount of nuances like that. 

[DarJ]

1 hour ago, backpocket said:

How do you rewatch full matches now? I find that the option is missing now on replays so had to keep clicking back when it jumps to another highlight.

You don’t really need to re watch full matches because on comprehensive you see every highlight that leads to a shot. They took out the option to rewatch full match probably because it wasn’t being used that much

[crusadertsar]

1 hour ago, DarJ said:

You don’t really need to re watch full matches because on comprehensive you see every highlight that leads to a shot. They took out the option to rewatch full match probably because it wasn’t being used that much

Yeah pretty much this. Agree about full match rewatch not being used or needed. But kind of miss the old option to record and upload a highlight.

[Selby Tiger]

How much do opposing teams figure out your tactics over the course of a season, two seasons, etc? I've heard, and it makes sense, that they will "solve" your tactic over time, which suggests you need to make subtle changes over time. How much is that true? Or is it just about having good enough players that it doesn't matter?

[DarJ]

1 hour ago, Selby Tiger said:

How much is that true?

I don't think it's really true, what happens is at the beginning of the season let's say you are predicted to finish bottom of the league most teams will set up to attack you so you can exploit that but If you keep doing well at some point they'll stop doing that and start setting up a bit more defensively 

[HUNT3R]

On 08/01/2022 at 14:13, Cleon said:

Context is everything. I wrote this in the past.

 

............................

 

Fantastic post, Cleon.

The last time I wrote a little about my approach, it was also about player selection being the main focus. If it's a tough match, selecting stronger midfielders with better balance, positioning, tackling, anticipation etc so that they can 'bully' the other team's midfield. Selecting the right type of striker(s) for the job, depending on the strength of team I'm facing (perhaps faster players where I expect to counter attack or more physical strikers if I am up against a packed defence) I am facing or which players will be in the defence against me. A did a quick search and found these two posts:

 

 

[Cleon]

13 minutes ago, HUNT3R said:

Fantastic post, Cleon.

The last time I wrote a little about my approach, it was also about player selection being the main focus. If it's a tough match, selecting stronger midfielders with better balance, positioning, tackling, anticipation etc so that they can 'bully' the other team's midfield. Selecting the right type of striker(s) for the job, depending on the strength of team I'm facing (perhaps faster players where I expect to counter attack or more physical strikers if I am up against a packed defence) I am facing or which players will be in the defence against me. A did a quick search and found these two posts:

 

 

I actually had this post bookmarked and have read it numerous times. I like the ideas behind it as it also mirrors how I play and is very different to the normal stuff that pops up on here :). I also still have the old team talk one you did for Clear Cut Chance. I still refer to it from time to time. The rough version you sent all them years ago is still on my drive 

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1TOE83d1z2WhqdTsloIdbJ9zXV5ejivPPvYYKnXpikEk/edit?usp=sharing

[bere23]

@Cleon is that possible to find this thread on your drive? 

 

[DarJ]

@Cleon I noticed that in the 2 tactics you posted on the other thread, you have work ball into the box ticked. Is there any particular reason for that other then reducing the amount of crosses?

[Cleon]

18 hours ago, bere23 said:

@Cleon is that possible to find this thread on your drive? 

 

It's somewhere, I'll share when I have the time to find it later or tomorrow.

11 hours ago, DarJ said:

@Cleon I noticed that in the 2 tactics you posted on the other thread, you have work ball into the box ticked. Is there any particular reason for that other then reducing the amount of crosses?

The reason for this is the low line of engagements and because of playing a low d-line. I want play to build up naturally and players move upfield together. So for this I try and reduce crossing because my strikers com very deep to help out defensively. If my players cross earlier than they should or too frequent they'll bypass my entire side and be crossing into empty space. So its used to try and be more thoughtful with the ball.

[branco2511]

Would love the Art of counterattacking to be updated! I'm a big advocate of the 4-1-4-1, and right now, due to the loss of a few players, playing on the counter could be my way forward. 

@CleonThank you for your work, your guides are always well written and clear. Keep up the good work!

[robot_skeleton]

6 hours ago, Cleon said:

So for this I try and reduce crossing because my strikers com very deep to help out defensively.

Do you feel like support duty strikers come too deep too often when defending in FM22? (compared to previous editions) I know it is a general question that is somewhat influenced by the overall setup, but I was surprised that you mention this as well because I also noticed that strikers do help out a lot.

[DarJ]

8 minutes ago, robot_skeleton said:

I was surprised that you mention this as well because I also noticed that strikers do help out a lot.

It was one of the things that were mentioned when the game was being promoted 

[Cleon]

43 minutes ago, robot_skeleton said:

Do you feel like support duty strikers come too deep too often when defending in FM22? (compared to previous editions) I know it is a general question that is somewhat influenced by the overall setup, but I was surprised that you mention this as well because I also noticed that strikers do help out a lot.

They naturally come deeper on FM22 than other versions of the games. But it's more profound in the sets ups I use due me to using a really low line of engagement and a low line. 

[kepz]

I am about to get really stuck into your ideas around playing mentality and the way it affects the team's position on the pitch when out of possession.

 

I already exclusively play with 'balanced' mentality but I have been switching based on game/situation. I think I'll also follow your advice on 'plan b' and whether or not its suitable to have one prepared. 

 

This thread is great and exactly what I come to this forum for. 

[glengarry224]

On 08/01/2022 at 04:13, Cleon said:

If I go behind in a game then the context and the manner in which I am currently playing is the most important thing. Even if I go 2-0 down, the context of why is everything. You can be playing extremely well and go behind due to bad luck, or just for the fact the opposition did a great move.

Great post and this is key.  But I also look at the reverse.  If I'm leading but my opponent is getting many more chances and is crushing me in Xg, I look to make changes. 

I do usually have an underdog tactic especially for lower league teams.  In more recent saves, I've created many more alternate tactics, just for fun.  In general, once I learn the changes I'm most likely to make during a game, I train an alternate tactic with those changes, so that my players get more familiar with them. 

Player role/duty I change the most:  wingbacks, especially if I'm leading and they are tiring (obviously a sub is better but not always doable).

 

[llama3]

Most of my changes of formation are quite subtle & logical - things like, moving from a 4-2-3-1 to 4-4-1-1 is essentially just moving the AML & AMR back to ML & MR - similar roles, nice and easy - something subtle just to amend what you're doing, but not wholesale. I do have a plan B, but that plan is to vary what I do, not a wholesale change from Tiki-Taka to Route One. So for example, I tend to use a Fluid Counter style, when I normally play a possession style - I still need players available on the ball, still shorter passing, but just a touch quicker and we sit a bit deeper. 

I was playing Man Utd away with Arsenal yesterday evening, switched shape, wary of being away to a rival, sat in and struggled most of the game - was still 0-0 with 15 minutes to go, switched back to my usual shape and Martinelli put me in front in the 88th minute. Sometimes we overthink this game...

[Anteater]

What approach do you take with general training Cleon?  Hands on or delegate to assistant manager?  Any pros and cons between the two methods?  Thanks.