I don't understand tactics (FM '22)

[ScotchWhisky]

As someone whose football experience is limited to watching the Men's World Cup and playing Football Manager since '09, it's obvious I don't understand what most of the tactics... hell, most of the game means.  It's like reading about attributes nothing is as it seems.  Finishing supposedly isn't how good a striker is at scoring goals.  It's how good their accuracy is (which seems the same to me).  

Thus my tactics are always designed by taking educated guesses.  For example, a cautious approach (remind me...  why did SI change it from Counter to Cautious?) tactic tends to have counter options selected.  An attacking approach, on the other hand, would be silly to have things like "play out of defense" and "work ball into box" selected.  Then again, maybe I am wrong on that.

Anyways, the main thing is it seems every time I get promoted from a lower league to a higher league, in this case, Norwegian Second to Norwegian First division, I have a flying start to the season.  It then slows down to where I wind up with a mid-table finish.  And finally, the next season I fight a closely fought battle for relegation.  It seems once they learn my tactics, they beat my tactics.  Fair enough, but what does it take to reconfuse the AI?  Just changing a few settings or should the formation be completely overhauled?  The difficult thing is that alternate tactics cannot save different players.  Only different roles.  So if I go with a classic 4-4-2 formation with a 3-1-3-1-2 formation, then it won't necessarily default to the right players in the right spot.  As a result, I usually stick with one formation.  I just change roles slightly or tactical options.  But then I wonder.  What does familiarity matter because it is very hard to be highly fluid with a semi-pro team on more than one tactic.

TL;DR (actual questions):

1)  When you make your tactics, do you use alternate formations or the same formation with altered sub-settings (Get stuck in, play out of defense, etc)

2)  How important is familiarity?  Does going from near 100% familiarity to 60% make a massive difference to where it's always a bad idea?

3)  If a player is estimated to be 3.5* based on being a Box to Box Midfielder (support), but only had around 30% familiarity in that role, yet is 3* as a Ball Winning Midfielder (defend) with a near 100% familiarity, is it better to play them in the defend role even if you prefer more support?  

4)  I used to think a coaches estimated player ability was in relation to the league average.  However, it seems it's actually in relation to the rest of your team.  Does that mean it's impossible to have all 4*+ players?  I had a player young player with a 4.5* potential.  Got him as a 2*.  Worked him up to a 3.5*.  Always turning in 7.5+ performance ratings.  Then despite continued good performances and little (if any) attribute decline, he suddenly worked down to a 3* and now a 2.5*.  Is that just from signing better players in a similar position?

5)  How do you make a player fully familiar in more than one role?  it seems I can set their training for one role and they will become great at it, but they magically lose the rest.  My goal is always to sign players who can play multiple positions (preferably all the midfield role, all the defense roles, or all the center roles), but if they can only be familiar in one at a time, maybe that's the wrong approach?  

6)  As a non-footballer, if you can have only one legitimate top player at any position, what would it be?  I've always assumed striker.  A great striker beats a great goalkeeper most times is what I've always thought, but maybe I am wrong?  Maybe a star goalkeeper out positions the star striker?  Or maybe a star center midfielder not only prevents plays from materializing, but also sets up goals.  

[Andros]

Perhaps this would be better in the tactics section.

 

I am certainly no expert but I will answer your questions to try and get the conversation going!

 

1) So like i said I am no expert in making tactics.  When I am trying to make my tactic work I cannot focus on more than 1 thing at a time, which means i tend to just have the 1 tactic working at a given time. 

 

HOWEVER, if i was good at making tactics I would consider having 3 tactics.  2 Would be based on the opposition and 1 on the situation.  Essentially I would be looking at what the opposition is doing in terms of:  is it playing a deep block or a high block.  This means I would watch the game and look where the defenders of the other team are positioned when they have the ball.  If the opposition defenders are really high, then I want a tactic to get the ball forward quickly and exploit that space.  If the opposition defenders are sitting back and there is no space, then I need a tactic that tries to pass its way through the defense.  The 3rd tactic would be when i am winning and need to stop the opposition from scoring in the last 10 minutes. 

 

2) A lot of posters say that TACTIC familiarity is really important, and they are more knowledgeable than me so I trust them!  The team is not going to perform exactly how you want until this is high.  As for position familiarity, I would guess that this is less important.  See question 3 for more on this.

 

3) Try to think of tactics in terms of roles and duties as part of a team.  The whole team needs to work together to work well.  I think in this case you are overthinking this one player, i would consider which role and duty would work better for the team: box to box or a ball winning midfielder.  Do you want the player to get forward and be a part of everything?  Or a destroyer that looks to win the ball and get it to another teammate?  Look at the roles and duties around that player, also to the style of play you want.

 

4) So many people on these forums will suggest ignoring those stars.  I think the star ratings are based on the ability of the person judging them (judging current and potential ability) and therefore can change depending on who is rating the players, Perhaps have a look at this site for some information on star ratings.  but I believe that ratings change over time, and this can depend on how much you play them.  In addition, it might be based on the hidden Current ability and potential ability attributes, and reputation.  This means that you could have a player with low current ability, but the attributes that are perfect for the role you want.  Imagine you want to play a defensive game, your centreback is strong, can position themselves well, read the game, tackle and mark.  But cant do anything else (Eg pass).  They might have a low star rating but perform well for you.

 

5) To be honest I dont worry about this.  I don't even look at it.  I just play them in the role and duty I want them to be in and I believe they can perform well enough in.

 

6) At the top level you want a team, not an individual.  But at lower levels you could get away with a superstar as long as this player is better than anyone else in the league.  But this is not American football, basketball or baseball.  A superstar quarterback can take you a long way, or a Jordan ect can dominate and score a lot.  Football needs a team.  So if I had a choice between 1 great player and 3 good players, I think I would lean towards the good players.  However, others might disagree!

 

However, I suspect this is not the point of your question.  Are you just trying to work out the most valuable player?  It really depends on the tactics.  You are right that goal scorers win matches and are very important.  But if I am shopping around for a new player I am looking for holes in my team and who can fill that hole.

 

7) yes I know there wasnt a number seven  But my biggest suggestion would be get a tactic together.  Write down what you want to achieve and why you chose the team instructions, roles and duties.  Then post it in the tactics forum here.  The feedback you get, and the discussions you have might get you to understand things a bit better.

 

Good luck with it, hopefully others will add to this thread and help you out more.

[DarJ]

1. I always use one formation unless there's a team that's playing a specific way and what I'm doing isn't working so I will try to find something to counter that. An example is my current save. I'm playing a 433 and I struggle with teams that play with 2 strikers and there is this team that play with a back 3 an AM and 2 strikers so I decided in some games against them to just move my DM to CB so I match their 3 attacking players with 3 CBs.

2. I don't think it's that important if your players are good and the tactic is good. I've participated in challenges where we change tactics every month and we still do well. It might give you a little boost but it's not going to make bad players play well or a bad tactic perform well.

3. I ignore all that. As long as the player has the attribute to play in any position or role I play them wherever fits my overall tactic.

4. Yes the star ratings are not reliable, they can change based on a lot of things like signing a better player, players form, if you stop playing the player etc.

5. That's not something you have to worry about. Like I said as long as they have the attributes and are familiar with the position you can play them in any role

6. I don't really know this is preference but I might also be weird because I'm willing to throw a lot of money at goalkeepers because I think they can be underrated and you will never understand untill you've had a bad one and then you sign a good one. Even the worst player will score you goals if they get enough chances 

[CARRERA]

17 hours ago, ScotchWhisky said:

1)  When you make your tactics, do you use alternate formations or the same formation with altered sub-settings (Get stuck in, play out of defense, etc)

For me what works best is having 1 Tactic as a base setup which I then alter during the match in terms of instructions, duties and formation. I never go for extreme adjustments though, due to familiarity reasons.

17 hours ago, ScotchWhisky said:

2)  How important is familiarity?  Does going from near 100% familiarity to 60% make a massive difference to where it's always a bad idea?

I assume you are talking about tactical familiarity? Tactical familiarity doesn't make players better or worse, it just makes them play more accurate to what is instructed to their role and the team in general. So if you want your team or a player to play a certain way, then better max out tactical familiarity.

17 hours ago, ScotchWhisky said:

3)  If a player is estimated to be 3.5* based on being a Box to Box Midfielder (support), but only had around 30% familiarity in that role, yet is 3* as a Ball Winning Midfielder (defend) with a near 100% familiarity, is it better to play them in the defend role even if you prefer more support?  

see 2)

17 hours ago, ScotchWhisky said:

4)  I used to think a coaches estimated player ability was in relation to the league average.  However, it seems it's actually in relation to the rest of your team.  Does that mean it's impossible to have all 4*+ players?  I had a player young player with a 4.5* potential.  Got him as a 2*.  Worked him up to a 3.5*.  Always turning in 7.5+ performance ratings.  Then despite continued good performances and little (if any) attribute decline, he suddenly worked down to a 3* and now a 2.5*.  Is that just from signing better players in a similar position?

Yes, star ratings a related to your team. 3* is an average player on your team and is good enough to be in the starting 11. Its very hard to have a 4 or 5 star player in every position, maybe if the other players in your squad are rather below average. 
If you open up the "Coach Report" you can see his skill / potential compared to the leagues in your country.

17 hours ago, ScotchWhisky said:

5)  How do you make a player fully familiar in more than one role?  it seems I can set their training for one role and they will become great at it, but they magically lose the rest.  My goal is always to sign players who can play multiple positions (preferably all the midfield role, all the defense roles, or all the center roles), but if they can only be familiar in one at a time, maybe that's the wrong approach?  

You can't make a player fully familiar in more than one role. You can only make him familiar in playing different positions on the pitch. However, shifting role familiarity to another doe only take a few matches. It makes sense if you think about it.
 

17 hours ago, ScotchWhisky said:

6)  As a non-footballer, if you can have only one legitimate top player at any position, what would it be?  I've always assumed striker.  A great striker beats a great goalkeeper most times is what I've always thought, but maybe I am wrong?  Maybe a star goalkeeper out positions the star striker?  Or maybe a star center midfielder not only prevents plays from materializing, but also sets up goals.

Hard to say actually, at least in terms of FM I think strikers and Goalkeepers have the highest impact.

Edited August 20, 2023 by CARRERA

[Cloud9]

On 19/08/2023 at 12:06, ScotchWhisky said:

As someone whose football experience is limited to watching the Men's World Cup and playing Football Manager since '09, it's obvious I don't understand what most of the tactics... hell, most of the game means.  It's like reading about attributes nothing is as it seems.  Finishing supposedly isn't how good a striker is at scoring goals.  It's how good their accuracy is (which seems the same to me).  

Thus my tactics are always designed by taking educated guesses.  For example, a cautious approach (remind me...  why did SI change it from Counter to Cautious?) tactic tends to have counter options selected.  An attacking approach, on the other hand, would be silly to have things like "play out of defense" and "work ball into box" selected.  Then again, maybe I am wrong on that.

Anyways, the main thing is it seems every time I get promoted from a lower league to a higher league, in this case, Norwegian Second to Norwegian First division, I have a flying start to the season.  It then slows down to where I wind up with a mid-table finish.  And finally, the next season I fight a closely fought battle for relegation.  It seems once they learn my tactics, they beat my tactics.  Fair enough, but what does it take to reconfuse the AI?  Just changing a few settings or should the formation be completely overhauled?  The difficult thing is that alternate tactics cannot save different players.  Only different roles.  So if I go with a classic 4-4-2 formation with a 3-1-3-1-2 formation, then it won't necessarily default to the right players in the right spot.  As a result, I usually stick with one formation.  I just change roles slightly or tactical options.  But then I wonder.  What does familiarity matter because it is very hard to be highly fluid with a semi-pro team on more than one tactic.

TL;DR (actual questions):

1)  When you make your tactics, do you use alternate formations or the same formation with altered sub-settings (Get stuck in, play out of defense, etc)

2)  How important is familiarity?  Does going from near 100% familiarity to 60% make a massive difference to where it's always a bad idea?

3)  If a player is estimated to be 3.5* based on being a Box to Box Midfielder (support), but only had around 30% familiarity in that role, yet is 3* as a Ball Winning Midfielder (defend) with a near 100% familiarity, is it better to play them in the defend role even if you prefer more support?  

4)  I used to think a coaches estimated player ability was in relation to the league average.  However, it seems it's actually in relation to the rest of your team.  Does that mean it's impossible to have all 4*+ players?  I had a player young player with a 4.5* potential.  Got him as a 2*.  Worked him up to a 3.5*.  Always turning in 7.5+ performance ratings.  Then despite continued good performances and little (if any) attribute decline, he suddenly worked down to a 3* and now a 2.5*.  Is that just from signing better players in a similar position?

5)  How do you make a player fully familiar in more than one role?  it seems I can set their training for one role and they will become great at it, but they magically lose the rest.  My goal is always to sign players who can play multiple positions (preferably all the midfield role, all the defense roles, or all the center roles), but if they can only be familiar in one at a time, maybe that's the wrong approach?  

6)  As a non-footballer, if you can have only one legitimate top player at any position, what would it be?  I've always assumed striker.  A great striker beats a great goalkeeper most times is what I've always thought, but maybe I am wrong?  Maybe a star goalkeeper out positions the star striker?  Or maybe a star center midfielder not only prevents plays from materializing, but also sets up goals.  

I make three altering versions of the same tactic, familiarity is helpful and this will help your baseline while allowing you to make impactful in game changes. 

Stars are based on importance the squad, form and registration rules. Would use them as rough guidelines for a players potential. Better to look at the attributes when deciding how to play a player in your system if you can. The stars will fluctuate a lot as your team improves and players go in out and form. 

• Players use all their attributes, even if they're not highlighted by the role. 

Train them in the specific role and then play them in it as well 

GK, Striker are vital for any team. After that build up a strong spine of the team. 

Edited August 21, 2023 by Cloud9

[MrCell0phane]

I have also come to discover that the most important thing about determining if a player can play a position is not his star rating or preferences, but his attribute effectiveness in that particular role.

Had a LAM who was the worst member of our squad on paper (2 stars in the Bundesliga) but he was so effective because everything he was actually good at fit perfectly with the role we put him in (IW-S).

[ScotchWhisky]

Thanks everyone for your detailed responses!  I have read them all and it clarifies a lot.  I really wish they would change the whole star system in the future to compare your player to the league.  That is the only thing that matters/makes sense.  One thing sticks out to me though and it's similar to what others of you have said:
 

On 22/08/2023 at 11:09, MrCell0phane said:

I have also come to discover that the most important thing about determining if a player can play a position is not his star rating or preferences, but his attribute effectiveness in that particular role.

Had a LAM who was the worst member of our squad on paper (2 stars in the Bundesliga) but he was so effective because everything he was actually good at fit perfectly with the role we put him in (IW-S).

 

One question I had not asked is what importance does a role player have?  When I moved from Göttne to Flekkerøy, there was one player I sniped from Göttne.  A right winger with a relatively high corner attribute of 12 and he also had very good speed (Acc 13 and Pace 14) and good (11) crossing ability.  Mediocre otherwise:



He was listed as 2* with a potential for something like 4.5 or 5*.  He never improved beyond 2.5* and regressed to 2* when I let him go, though he always seemed to play well.  I finally "upgraded" his position, but based on scouted players, there are only six others I would be able to grab that potentially have a corner taking ability that high.  And I wonder...  how important is having a "specialist" that may not be the best, but can boost set pieces?   My best corners guys now have a rating of 9.

[MrCell0phane]

What do your scouts look like? I ask because, at age 26, this player should be at his full potential as players really don't grow beyond age 23, especially not that much.

I wonder if your scouts aren't very good, so that is their way of saying "we think he's at this level, but we really don't know, so maybe he's a lot better than that?"

Also, this guy is exceptionally mediocre. His corner ability isn't worth his inability to pass or shoot or play defense.

[Andros]

I have no idea what the average attribute would be for a player in your league.  But that player is good at essentially 1 thing - pinging in crosses either from open play or from corners.  If you are using a tactic that utilizes a corner tactic that is well-known for producing goals, then a good corner taker may get lots of high ratings due to getting assists from those corners.  Also, if you are lower down in the leagues, then if all you want this player to do is stay high, get the ball to him quickly so he can use some of his pace to get in behind and ping in a cross to a target man, then he has use.  

 

What does this mean for the star ratings?  Well, i am not 100% sure, but perhaps his CA is mediocre, as reflected in his star ratings.  But you were using him in a way that maximized his strengths and minimized his weaknesses.  Therefore, getting decent ratings out of him.

 

So how important are specialists?  It depends on what you are trying to do!  Imagine you have a tactic that is sitting deep, inviting crosses and hit on the counter.  A CB that has high jumping, heading, positioning and marking, but nothing else can have value as they can be in the right place to win a header and get it out of danger to other players to move it forward.  Or maybe a CM that has high work rate, stamina, teamwork, bravery could be really useful getting up and down the field.  They may not be great passes, finishes dribblers etc, they just do a role.