Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community

etcetera

Members
  • Content Count

    73
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by etcetera


  1. I apologise if I'm offending but it doesn't sound like you've worked out a cohesive tactical plan. By that I mean you've got wingers and wide midfielders and 1 tactic and wide playmakers the next, which significantly alters how your team plays. Chopping and changing based on single results doesn't work well in FM. Results can be influenced by many things which will change score lines from devastating loss to emphatic win. 4-2-3-1 and variations play differently to 4-5-1 variations and thus player requirements are different too. I'll be the first to say I don't know a whole heck about West Ham but I would think the midfield 3 of Song, Noble and Nolan is the strongest area of your team so I'd build the team around those 3 and their strengths. Think of a way to get the best out of those 3 and how a lone striker and play into it, would you need a big man like Andy Carroll to get on crosses or a smaller and quicker man?

    Don't worry about arbitrary rules such as 'only 2 playmakers' or '5 or less TIs'. These rules have some logic behind them but aren't hard and fast. FM is about results, whether it's playing the way you want (regardless of win or lose) or trying to stomp the opposition every game. So figure out what works ina logical way, and stick with it.


  2. It's a little counter intuitive but as you find more success, the more defensive you have to play.

    Teams that you beat comfortably previously are going to park the bus against you now. The more bodies you throw forward the more likely you're going to get countered, and once you concede that single goal, it's game over. So you might find yourself starting the game with Standard or even Counter when you've previously started with Control. I've found some games I have to start with Defensive or Contain.

    Against the bigger teams like Chelsea and City etc, you can probably get away playing the same sort of style because their perception of you hasn't changed.

    Once you're perennially successful and the gulf in quality in players is so high, you can play any style you want and still win.


  3. Simple answer to your question would be:

    Yes, just make one of your forwards man-mark their deepest midfielder.

    However, you might want to consider:

    Where are you conceding possession? If your opponent is holding the ball in their half it might not be a problem, as you've got an aggressive lineup that might nick the ball off them as they ponder. If they're constantly 'in the hole' then it's a different issue all together.


  4. I just look at the opposition manager's preferred play style. That alone gives you a good overview of how his team's likes to play and what kind of strategy you should employ. eg Klopp plays a highly aggressive face rush style, so my preferred style to counter his is fight fire with fire. Jose Mourinho likes to close down quickly and play direct, so I like to play cautious possession football against him and try to win 1-0 etc.

    I feel there isn't enough emphasis on individual players in the game and the manager's style tends to come out on top (funny, we're playing football manager!). Carlo Ancelotti never makes full use of CR at Real Madrid despite winning everything, while Klopp can get 20 goals/20 assists out of Wilfried Zaha in a single season.


  5. Dude your defenders are simply world class. If the rest of your team is of similar quality you should be winning the league or at least top 3.

    Here's my advice.

    1) review what your tactical plan is. You said you've used he first tactic for a long time, climbing through the lower leagues and doing OK in the prem. However as you climb the prem you're going to have teams parking the bus against you, and teams trying to dominate you, so you'll need tactics in both circumstances. Your tactic is pretty hum ho in my opinion, it doesn't fill the shoes of a bus parker or a relegation bully. Playing a counter strategy doesn't mean your team plays on the counterattack. It's actually quite a good possession orientated strategy since your attacking players shorten passing range. So let us know how you want to play first.

    2) Small CBs aren't useless at all. They are however less useful in a low-block backs to the wall counter strategy. I would push your defensive line higher up to take advantage of their speed. Your players are young, and generally young players have superb athleticism, so take advantage of it with hassling and higher defensive lines to smother opponents.


  6. So, currently playing as Barcelona and reached a Champion's League final against Bayern, totally dominated the game, but lost on penalties. "Hey ho", I thought, "it happens".

    Even though I usually roll my eyes when I see these threads, I got the feeling I just wasn't supposed to win that match, so I decided to do a little experiment. I saved after the final to come back and continue afterwards, then went and replayed the final ten times, and lost them all.

    Every single time I dominated possesion, 8 times 60%+

    Every single time I had at least double the CCCs (I know full well this is an awful stat, but even from watching the games I had the better chances every time)

    Messi (123 goals over the previous two seasons) didn't score a goal in any of the ten games. He started at Superb morale, and no team talk had a negative effect.

    6 times Bayern scored with their first clear chance, 4 times their very first shot, 4 times their first 2 chances and only missed 4 CCCs over the 10 matches.

    Neuer didn't finish with a rating of higher than 6.9.

    Now, I play a pretty open attacking tactic, so Bayern picking me off is understandable, but the Messi thing just smacks of the game deciding he's scored too many and isn't allowed any more. I'm sure there's a logical reason somewhere in the murky mists of the FM ME, but sometimes it's easy to see why so many people think the game is fixed.

    I've done this a few times, then i remembered a really smart man saying: Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. So then i'd do something totally crazy like change all my roles, or create a completely new tactic with different formation, then I'd win.

    What I'm trying to say is, FM is a game, a game that does a pretty good job of simulating real life, but it's not perfect, so if you apply real life logic onto it, you're going to get hurt.


  7. Do you set up differently against more difficult opposition.

    Yes, I do. Though I have to stress that it's more setting up different against different managers rather than different sides.

    The base tactic is:

    Standard - Fluid

    -Use offside trap

    -Push higher up

    -Shorter passing

    -Hassle

    -Get stuck in

    -Use tighter marking

    BWM on D,

    CWB changed to FBa.

    It's slightly more defensive in the sense that I really want to disrupt the opposition. It was developed mainly to counter Klopp's Juventus side that was ridiculously strong, but it works quite well against other aggressive managers.


  8. If you want a regista as your DM I think you'll need to set one of your fullbacks into a support role, preferably the one behind your winger. Reason being is a regista joins an attack rather than sit in front of the defense. With 2 CWB and insufficient cover in front of your CBs you can be vulnerable to counters.

    If you play with an A or HB it's less of an issue.


  9. I don't subscribe to this universalism/specialist theory either. To me it seems too arbitrary.

    My understanding of philosophy, mentality and strategy is incredibly simple. Philosophy is how many groups of responsibilities do you want. Very fluid being 1, and since all your players have 1 responsibility, then that responsibility encompasses all,which is what very fluid is about. Fluid has 2, attack and defense, but to prevent your units being split, they help each other on transitions. Balanced has 3, determined by roles set by you. Rigid and very rigid is more positionally dependent on which players have what responsibilities.

    You can field any sort of strategy with any mentality framework you want, but some would work better than others. Eg if you want a free flowing midfield diamond. A very fluid or fluid philosophy would help since it'll put them in the same responsibility group. If you use rigid or very rigid, you'll have to tinker your roles and mentalities to promote cohesion. You might want a defend duty in the MC, a more proactive support in DM and maybe a TQ on AM.

    Conversely if you were building counter-attacking system, you might want to promote split responsibilities. Rigid or very rigid might be helpful so you can easily define who does what. But if you want a counterattacking system where everyone sits behind the ball, very fluid might be what you're after.

    So it all depends on what you want to do. This is a game after-all, and although frameworks are designed for certain amounts of cohesion, you can always tinker the individual components of that framework. I wouldn't pull my hair out regarding this to be honest. At the end of the day it's a tiny part of what makes your tactic succeed or fail. I'd just read how the ME describes each philosophy and go from there.


  10. I think any mentality and fluidity can suit any formation and it depends on your play style. But certain play styles are more common for each formation. Maybe I'll start

    4-4-2: generally a more direct attack with lots of width. Defensively can sit back with the '2 banks of 4' or be more proactive and press like atletico last season

    4-1-2-1-2: generally shorter passing down the middle of a narrow midfield.


  11. Switched to this in my last game against a team with a 4-4-2 as i've always struggled against that for and I won. Changed to it for the first full game next and i'm 4-0 after 8 mins! Definitely going to be an option for me against teams who try and park the bus as it seems to create space everywhere

    Glad you've found success with this shape :)

    very good analysis etcetera .

    Did you ever tried to play with a DLPsup, in front of the defence, and the MCs both as BWMsupport, to give coverage to your flanks?

    I haven't, though it does sound like a good idea against the top 1-2 teams away in the CL.

    What I have done is use a more defensively sound midfielder in the right AP slot. He's got pretty decent creative/passing attributes but is a real monster defensively, and I've found that to be sufficient against most difficult opposition.

    This tactic started out using a DLP at the DM slot but I always find him to be too static in position. Sometimes the ball gets channeled down a particular side of the pitch but the more advanced players get marked out. A regista will move towards the ball to offer a back pass option that I found DLPs don't usually do. That alone sold me really.


  12. I love this formation and have used various iterations of it this season.

    I have never actually tried using the strikers to cover the opposition wide backs though. If the opposition is playing a narrow formation as well, where the wingbacks will be pressing forward, do you still have the strikers mark them?

    For sure, if they're narrow and if you mark their fullbacks out of the game then all their activity is down the middle, where you've a 4 man midfield and 2 centerbacks with 2 fullbacks able to tuck in if you need.


  13. One thing I have been trying out recently is creating "pseudo-diamond" setups with either 4132 or 4312 (i.e. the formation doesn't literally line up as a diamond, but player roles/instructions create one, with a the central MC being more aggressive or defensive in the 4132 and 4312 respectively) and comparing them to the classic 41212. It's intersting how, despite being very similar one paper, even with pretty much the same instructions, all three have their own advanatges and disadvanatges and I've really seen an improvement since I started being flexible in which I'm using. The big thing about having a three MCs is that the outer two are pushed noticeably wider than in the conventional diamond, particularly in the defensive phase. This results in much better cover on the wings as the outer central midfields will move wide to help the fullbacks if the latter are being overloaded.

    There can be quite a difference between a 4-1-3-2, 4-3-1-2 and 4-1-2-1-2 but it all depends on the roles you select for the 2 middle players in your formation. You are correct about the outer midfielders being pushed out wide. In previous editions of FM this was required for the formation to be viable because you just couldn't get enough width in attack or defense. Isn't so much of an issue in FM14 though. I suppose if you play with a '3' in midfield you probably don't need the 'play wider' shout.

    Another consideration is the roles available in the MC position compared to DM and AM. Regista is only available on the DM so it's a no-brainer if that's what you're into. The AM position gives you more specialised attacking roles that the MC position doesn't have, though if you have a Lampard-style player you might prefer the MC.

    Last of all, perhaps the most important of all, personal preference. To me, a diamond is DMC, 2x MC, and AMC. Anything else is scandalous :lol:

    I've never been brave enough to have the DL and DR as CWB's though, I have them as just WB on automatic. Bit of a cop out, but as most people have mentioned with the diamond, the flanks are where this formation can be exposed, and I was wary of them being too far forward all of the time. I also have the DM as a BWM on defend and the two MC's as DLP support and B2B support.

    The higher defensive line is something that I've tried with mixed results, though I never played it with the offside trap as well, which is where I might have been going wrong.

    The reason I like the CWB role in this tactic is he advances far enough to be considered a 3rd striker. My 2 left backs have scored 4 goals out of the 66 I've managed so far this season. Not fantastic but the threat they pose positionally is very real. If a WBs (assuming you're playing on control mentality) contributes the same then it's working out well.

    High D-line and offside trap obviously depend on how quick your CBs and GK (for sweeping purposes) are.


  14. The 4-4-2 diamond has always been a formation I’ve been obsessed with. Milan, my favourite team used it with great effect for most of the Ancelotti period, winning a league title and 2 Champions League titles while playing a brilliantly exciting style in a defensive and ugly league. It took advantage supremely talented and good looking central playmakers in Andrea Pirlo and Kaka but still gave them two strikers to supply. However the diamond is rarely seen in modern times due to an innate weakness in wide areas, giving plenty of space to the most important opposition players – the fullbacks. The rise of 4-2-3-1/4-5-1/4-3-3 pits 2 opposition wide players against a single fullback, making it even more difficult to succeed with the diamond.

    As with most strategies, the aim of my tactic is to:

    1) Maximise strengths

    2) Minimise weaknesses

    Strengths:

    • 4 man midfield. Narrow 4-man midfields generally outnumber any formations you’re likely to see in the modern game. Giving you at least 1 spare player in offense, and defence.

    • Multiple passing triangles. Narrow shape innately promotes short, quick passing. Vertical movement from fullbacks increase options.

    • 2 players ‘in the hole’. DM can play as a traditional DM, giving solidity at the back with 2 CBs, as you usually see with a 4-3-3/4-5-1. Or, can play as a playmaker a la Pirlo with 2 MCs in front. AMC operates in traditionally dangerous position. Lateral movement helps against opposition DMs. 3 narrow attacking players generally means opposition do not have spare man at back.

    Weaknesses

    • Lack of width leading to problems on offense and defence. On attack, opposition will funnel play down the centre, making passing moves harder to pull off. On defence, opposition will exploit flanks, particularly with tactics with 2 wide men, either fullback/winger or fullback/striker drifting wide.

    The Tactic

    2h8ac5l.jpg

    Roles and Duties

    I see my midfield as the most crucial part of this setup, so I will start here. I prefer to pack my midfield with technical creators and 1 enforcer.

    Defensive Mid

    Regista is selected to give more roaming compared to a classic DLP. The role is not as solid defensively as a DLP, however I’m relying on superior midfield numbers and talent to compensate.

    1z4x1zm.jpg

    My first choice DM sports impressive mental and technical attributes with no glaring weaknesses for his role. Though not particularly excellent at any one area, he’s above average defensively, creatively, and ball retention.

    Center Mids

    Supporting AP on the MC spot with roaming to give more ball retention options and a killer pass option from deep. Supporting ball-winning midfield to give steel and someone to do the dirty work but also another attacking option. Supporting role allows him to win the ball higher up in the pitch and provide a penetrating option from deep. My AP/BWM combo aims to fulfil the 3-man midfield roles of destroyer, passer, and attacker by using only 2 players.

    Attacking Mid

    APa is the role selected for AMC position, with instructions to roam and move into channels. This player aims to craft opportunities for the 2 forwards but also tries to find scoring opportunities. APa gives more penetration and defensive work than a TQ, more movement than an EG, and more creative responsibility than AMC, or SS.

    nozms9.jpg

    My first choice AM is technically gifted and hard working. Excellent off the ball and work-rate allows him to find scoring opportunities for himself and the team. Unfortunately decisions is low and not particularly impressive physically. In last few seasons, he’s contributed significantly in assists and goals scored. He’s my Kaka :).

    Defence

    Not much to talk about regarding defence.

    One fullback more attack-minded than other. More attacking fullback on left side because my ball-winner is on left side. Left back provides significant attacking threat as he’s able to combine with at least 3 others on this side, resulting in 41% of goals from my last 50 games coming from the left wing. Right back is more disciplined, keeps position and offers passing options as opposed to penetration.

    Forwards

    My two forwards slightly more interesting.

    I picked complete forwards both with roam and move into channels because I want them to link play, run onto through balls, and roam. Support duty on right side to help him drop deep or drift wide as more space on right flank. Attack duty on left side to make him the prima punta, he roams less, as LB takes that space, but will do if given opportunity. Defensively, each forward marks his corresponding fullback, for two reasons:

    1) FM doesn’t simulate keeper distribution particularly well. In real games, CBs pull wide, allowing FBs to advance and a DM to drop deep if required. In FM, CBs stay central and FBs sit beside CBs.

    2) I’ve packed the midfield, which should discourage passes from centre backs to opposition DMs and CMs.

    This is reminiscent of how Mourinho played Barca when Thiago Motta got sent off when he was with Inter. Forwards marking fullbacks denies a passing outlet and discourages fullbacks from motoring forward and leaving space for a counter.

    Team Instructions

    Width, creative license and roaming to provide more passing options in a formation that can be quite rigid and narrow.

    Higher defensive line and offside trap to restrict space for opposition. I originally didn’t have these instructions and it resulted in opposition holding the ball in wide areas for long periods, killing the game.

    Retain possession to lower the tempo. This setup is my default tactic against teams I'm expected to win against. Holding the ball gives more time for playmakers to ping the ball around and look for openings.

    In-game examples

    On attack, this tactic aims to ping the ball around midfield until it founds my APa in a good position with space to make plays. With 2 strikers and a left side CWB ahead of him, a willing runner and plenty of passing outlets behind, it certainly makes the AP's job easier.

    Against a 4-4-2

    2j2de8z.jpg

    In this screen, my regista's on the ball, while the 2 advanced playmakers move around trying to receive a pass.

    xng22q.jpg

    He eventually gets the ball to my right sided APs, who then gives it to my APa in between the lines. My CFa (19) makes a run and drags his defender with him, vacating a huge space for my CWB (4) to receive a through ball and score.

    Against a narrow 4-2-3-1

    Although my midfield is theoretically outnumbered, quick crisp passing can get the ball upfield, where I'm at a numerical advantage, or at least on equal footing.

    53wg3r.jpg

    The ball's pinged to the tip of the diamond where I've got a 4 v 3 advantage.

    259cnwh.jpg

    The opposition RCB steps up to close down my AP, leaving my CF (19) a huge amount of space to move into. His RB is torn between whether to stick to my CWB, or move infield to cover the RCB. He ends up staying wide, giving my striker a clear-cut chance, but he fluffs his lines.

    Against a DM

    A DM tightly marking the APa is a good plan to shut my side down.

    x370om.jpg

    In this screen, the opposition has tightly marked my midfield, both my strikers, and my CWB. The ball's passed through the diamond into my right sided CF. He gets tackled but the ball falls to my other forward who slips a through ball to my left back who crosses and we end up scoring. Without an adventurous fullback providing width, this opportunity would never have materialised.

    On defence

    As mentioned previously, both forwards are set to mark their corresponding fullbacks, leaving centerbacks free. CBs in FM don't distribute the ball particularly well and sometimes you end up in situations like this:

    9r51cj.jpg

    The opposition GK has distributed to his RCB. His fullbacks are marked tightly by my forwards, removing them as passing options. His midfield 3 is either marked or passing lanes are closed. My APa (9) eventually dispossesses him, slips a ball to my left sided forward (13) and we snatch a nice goal.

    Weaknesses

    Defensive Midfielder

    Any formation playing a defensive midfielder makes attacking moves difficult. This style focuses on channeling the ball through the middle of the pitch and eventually outnumbering the opposition defense. 1-2 midfields such as a 4-1-2-2-1 make it especially difficult as dropping deep isn't an option. However all formations have inherent weaknesses. I feel the areas marked in red in the next diagram are where you want to get the ball when attacking this formation.

    24yu4o6.jpg

    Getting the ball to the fullback in the wide red areas puts him in a 1v1 situation with the opposition fullback. If your fullback has good a good dribbling attribute, he can create chances like in this diagram:

    14soyyw.jpg

    Here's a screenshot in a game against a 4-1-4-1.

    ibifip.jpg

    My fullback beats the opposition counterpart (#3) which triggers a series of defensive rotations to cover. However rotations are a little slow and the ball is pinged to #10, then 21, then 8, who provides the assist to #19 (underneath blue #4).

    Against formations with a DM, I tend to change my right fullback into a support wingback. WBs provide advanced positioning off-the-ball but won't force your player to dribble from deep into a dead end. Having 2 CWBs can work as well but I prefer to have variation on the flanks.

    3-man backline

    These formations are difficult to deal with in real life and it's no different in game. 3-man defenses give you the spare man against 2 forward formations, but doesn't leave you with a huge numbers deficit higher up the pitch. Though it sounds more defensive on paper, I find back 3 formations to be more dangerous offensively than DM formations that usually field a winger and fullback.

    The only 3-man defenses I've come across while using a diamond so far in my save have been low quality teams and I just roll through them. However Conte has taken over as Juventus head coach and his shape perfectly counters mine: 1-2 midfield AND a back 3.

    Despite not coming across strong competition, I have tried a couple things, though none were particularly effective.

    1) Forwards marking opposition wingbacks. The most defensively sound option. Leaves all 3 opposition defenders free and leaves you with a big numerical advantage in defense. However since your forwards track back so much, you rarely get counterattacking opportunities.

    2) Forwards marking right (my right) sided centerbacks. The idea here is to force the AI to attack down your left, where your BMW is stationed. However opposition WBs aren't marked so defensively less stable. Theoretically better on the counter as forwards are left up front, but they still have a spare man on D if you do.

    3) 1 Forward on most right (your right) sided CB, other forward on DM. Terrible idea, achieves nothing.

    4) Right side forward on WB, Left side forward on on most left (your left) sided CB. Works decently well. Your right side is bolstered by a forward and left side has a BWM to help out against their free WB. 1 forward up front to retain a slight counterattacking threat. Most promising option so far.

    Conclusion

    I've played the CM/FM franchises since I started high school with CM01-02 being my first. FM14 is probably the first iteration where I've found a 4-1-2-1-2 diamond to be viable. Particularly viable for possession or quick short passing teams due to its compact midfield. Also defensively tight due to how keeper distribution is simulated. In an era where fancy pants inverse forwards, false this and false that dominate the game, it's quite refreshing to have a very basic style that dominated 10 years ago to be viable in this game. The diamond is an incredibly versatile formation that can play very differently depending on how you set your midfield. I recommend everyone who's had enough of 1 striker + 2 winger formations to give this gem a go.


  15. Not sure I'd agree with FM match engine not being able to press well. Jurgen Klopp's teams press you to death no matter which club he manages. What FM doesn't do well IMO is pressing well AND play slow paced possession football like Barcelona did with Pep.

    I'd also think about playing a 2 striker system. What Wenger said about 4-4-2 covering the most space on the pitch resonates well here. Playing from the back in FM is usually done by distributing to the fullbacks, as opposed to centrebacks. 2 striker formations allow you to mark both fullbacks, therefore negating the distribution of 4 players, leaving you an advantage further back. Of course success will also be dependent on how your back 8 matches their front 6 in positioning.

    I've switched to a 2 striker formation for the past 5 seasons and although I've never been impressive in possession or sheer aggression like a Jurgen Klopp's team, anecdotal evidence (via GA, chances against) suggests the possession I have conceded have been in non-critical areas).


  16. 1 - You can train 1 base tactic all the way to fully fluid, or 2-3 tactics at the expense of all being fluid. I have 3 different formations, similar overall style, but adaptations to retain the ball, counter attack, or press heavily. You don't always need an extreme approach, a mildly adapted balance can work well from game to game.

    2 - Target Man by the nature of his default instructions is often isolated - as he clearly in the first 2 games barely had a pass or a shot. He does not possess much movement, and you don't have much running from deep. You have no defend duties in midfield. Not unreasonable to suggest perhaps this can expose you - especially if you are pressing aggressively from a deep position, you will vacate your good defensive position and ruin your shape.

    3 - See above comment.

    4 - Once again, they are opposite shouts, they will work against each other. Not sure what the argument is. Simple.

    You weren't "defending your choices", you were claiming that my points were wrong because, basically, each thing was working fine - except it isn't, which is why you posted...

    1) But all 8 bars are full for both tactics, or are you mean even if they're all full they're still not as familiar as just training for 1 tactic to full? Ie a graphics/display problem?

    2) Agreed, TM appears to work better with the high aggression tactic better, will try to make him roam or something. Also agreed on defense duty, though the TC automatically makes my DLP into defensive duty once I start the game, so I haven't bothered changing him manually.

    3) My understanding is attacking mentality automatically pushes your defense higher than normal, or higher than standard or counter etc.

    4) Perhaps its my understanding of the ME, but to me I'm just increasing the odds of my players playing a through ball or running with the ball, and therefore reducing the chance of doing something else. My team has highest average decision in the league (14-15?) so I'm hoping they can choose the better option.

    I claimed your comments were invalid in my second post, because in my opinion what you posted previously was general and vague. eg you're telling me my team isn't fluid in strategies when the bars were full. I would consider this post 'more polite'.

    Cheers


  17. I play same way as you - prefer to coach only team long time with micro management, including youth development.

    I have 2 base tactics, same as you 4-1-2-2-1 - one is counter and other is what you name bum-rush, more attacking. However, I get my preparing for every single game, I view matches at full and comprehensive mode and adapting my base tactics in every game depends on what i see on the field. I've never reload my game, and yes, we are loosing from time to time. But isn't it exactly like in real life?

    I manage my team through 3 seasons, and have no problems with AI adapting my tactics. 1st season was no good, 2nd season we was promoted to PL and now its my 3rd season - we trying not to be relegated and i think we'll be ok with it.

    I've nothing against losing at all. I don't really reload either, unless I'm experimenting, like playing 10 consecutive games against the same opposition. One season I was 1st in the league at Christmas and promptly drew/lost most of my games after the break and ended up 9th at end of the season.

    I think some aspects of this FM is quite realistic, though the realism isn't what makes me play it. To me the game is just a huge spreadsheet. Good players and tactics etc just increase your chance of winning, but you're never guaranteed to win, just like real life.


  18. I thought I'd give myself plenty of time to 'cool off' before coming back to see what your advice was.

    I present my thoughts to you as coherently as I could, thoroughly explaining to you why I've selected each role, duty etc, for some reason you think I'm arguing with you. I welcome your criticism, unfortunately none of the points you've raised are valid to begin with.

    1) What's the point of training 2-3 tactics in the pre-season until all 8 bars reach full if they're not fluid enough to be switched from game to game? Do I need to download the FMRTE to ensure I've got maximum fluidity?

    2) I can't quote you the post on the forum but someone had said targetman supply depends on your shouts.

    3) Is it a must to have 'Push higher up' selected with offside trap?

    4) As explained above.

    Please don't assume I've facerolled my keyboard to get to where I am, I am merely defending my reasoning for my choices. I've racked up 10-15 days of actual playing time on this save and for you to assume I'm not going to defend my choices is quite frankly, bloody offensive.


  19. Well thanks for being blunt.

    Point 1: Both extremities were trained in the off season so both are close to being fully trained and familiar.

    Point 2: Lone target man up front gave me the best performance over the last 2 seasons regardless of which approach I had. With pass into space the TM supply gets changed to run onto balls. I saw no discernible difference between any of the other roles and duties, except F9 and DLF(s). Given the number of touches the TM had, I don't think isolation is a problem.

    I don't have a defense duty in my midfield because I've got 2 players in the DM positions. My DLP constantly drops back to get the ball anyway, with defensive duties he stands back too much. When I played my '2' in the CM slots I always had 1 on D. My defensive woes aren't about not having enough bodies back defending. It's 2-3 players closing down 1 person, creating huge gaps. It's the top 3 marking/tackling players getting passed around by technically and mentally inferior teams.

    Point 3: I am using a high defensive line, I'm playing an attack strategy, it's got a high defensive line by default doesn't it?

    Point 4: Pass into space to supply my targetman, run at defense because my wide players aren't the most creative, so I ask them to create space by dribbling.

    No logic in your opinion doesn't mean I face rolled my keyboard and ended up with these shouts. I built this tactic from balanced standard no shouts to what I've got now, and I don't see how 5-6 shouts is excessive in any way. I use 2-3 for defense and 2-3 for attacking.

    Indeed a clearly superior team with poor tactics does get beaten. But if Bradford played Arsenal 8 times like I've played CSKA, Parma etc, would anyone expect Arsenal to lose 8 times?


  20. I quit this game. It's obviously far too difficult for me.

    I have to replay the same game 5-10 times to get any sort of acceptable result. With high tempo tactics, low tempo tactics, pressing tactics, stand-off tactics. It's just ridiculous. Opposition teams (bottom 10 of their divisions) rip my defenses apart regardless of what I do. They're playing tiki taka compared to my stoneage England NT tactics. Can't hold onto the ball for 5 passes even with shorter passing and retain possession on. Starting the game on defensive isn't defensive enough against Sampdoria who's 20 points below me on the league table. If I hassle, they route-one it to their <15 anticipation finishing off-the-ball, acceleration striker and boom. If i sit back they pass me to death. Meanwhile my 17 finishing anticipation OTB striker smashes shots into the keeper, the side netting, row Z, or just stand around.

    There's no movement from my front 4, just stagnant standing around not doing **** all. I don't even know where to begin to describe what's wrong.

    1 season ago the same tactics got me a CL, and look at my team now. AI figuring my tactics out or adapting or whatever, I don't understand how an AI adapts against 2 polar opposite strategies at once. I've played CM/FM for 10 years and haven't seen this much cheese, players of absolute **** quality showing better technical skill and mental game than a far superior player.

    Inter put 3 fantastic goals past me, I look at the guy that scored them and I nearly vomited. More attributes under 10 than over, 4 physical attributes over 15.

    I must've played the same 5 teams over 40 times in total in the last 2 days, and I wouldn't be exaggerating if I said I've won 3/40. Tactics or not, a clearly superior team shouldn't be going 3/40.

    As above, obviously this game's too difficult for me.

×
×
  • Create New...