Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


About ajsr1982

  • Rank

Favourite Team

  • Favourite Team

Currently Managing

  • Currently Managing
    MTK Budapest

Recent Profile Visitors

1,551 profile views
  1. From what I can see, it seems to be a case of wingers having a lower propensity to dribble with the ball than in FM17, trying a low-percentage pass instead. My main observation, but I could be wrong. In any case, I posted this really because this should be defensively sound, most of the time, but seems to struggle fairly often. Determination levels in my team are relatively low, which could go some way to explaining things. Infuriating though.
  2. I'll tack on the end of this, because I'm having similar issues. The context being that I've gone from having the best defence in the league, but after being promoted that's clearly not going to be the case and I need to adjust accordingly. My instinct was to fall back on a tactic in FM17 that served me well when I was one of the weaker teams in the league. GK-D FB-D DC-D DC-D FB-S DM-D W-A CM-S CM-A W-S DLF-A A reasonably standard 4-1-4-1 with some attacking threat. Low block, push the play into the congested middle with OIs. No PIs or TIs to speak of other than 'Defend Deeper'. Standard/Structured. There's some risk vs reward going on, but I'm trying to avoid having zero attack threat. As I said, this played out nicely for me in FM17 when I didn't have the best squad in the league. However, in FM18, I really struggle to carry any attacking threat with this system. Furthermore, the defensivel stability is hit and miss. In some games, it works, and I'll play out an awful 0-0. In other games however, I can be on the end of a pasting. I'm watching an analysing, of course, but I'm at something of a loss as to how to go about improving this, or getting that consistent defensive stability I'm after.
  3. Good that you're trying things. A couple of points: The Carriero is really a workmanlike midfielder that will cover the wings/half spaces. So yes, he's a runner, but he moves more laterally than backwards/forwards. My worry is that your midfield is pretty flat and doesn't offer good passing options. Same as your front three. The theory works, but I'd be looking at the match to make sure it plays how you expect. Again, my worry would be that it will play like a 4-3-3- with wingers for most of the time. The IFs will only make that run if it's on, if you know what I mean. They're still wide forwards, so they won't be central all the time. The same as your F9. He only acts like an AM sometimes. Most of the time he will be in the same positions as a regular centre forward.
  4. Well there is no 'best' combination - it depends on what you're trying to do with your tactic as a whole because it has to link to what you're doing in defence, up front and down the flanks. The good news is that in this version of FM, you have lots of options! Lots of questions again, I'm afraid. Do you want a playmaker? If so, who is feeding him and who is he feeding in turn? Who is protecting the back four? Do you want someone offering a goal threat from central midfield? Who is winning the ball back, and where are they winning it back? Do you want neat, tidy, patient interplay, or do you want to move the ball quickly from back to front? When you win the ball, who sits and who doesn't? Who is taking risks, and who isn't? Do you have a nice balance in terms of risk and reward? Does your midfield supplement the rest of your tactic? Are you creating passing options for others? Do your midfielders have passing options when they receive the ball? Something I try to do in my head, or sometimes on a piece of paper, is to imagine what will happen next in each of the following three situations. 1. Your keeper just rolled it out to one of your defenders. 2. You just won the ball back in midfield. 3. Your striker has just collected the ball from a long kick. Try and plot how the play will build up over the next three to six passes and who is making what runs. Think about what can go wrong, and look for situations where the man in possession might not have any easy options. Then try to fix them.
  5. Not really at opposite ends of the spectrum at all - that would be me only paying attention to what the opposition do, which just isn't the case. I more or less follow your approach; I was merely trying to add in some of the extra things I sometimes look at to add something to the thread. I know you never said you use PIs often. I'm not sure I suggested you did.
  6. No, sadly not the way it works. If there are issues with it, you'll get picked apart sooner rather than later. Don't be surprised if you make changes and it doesn't work straight away. If morale is low, it can take a while to turn things around.
  7. I'd urge you to watch the match to see if things are happening as you think/hope they are. You don't need to watch the whole thing, but I'd say extended highlights as a bare minimum when you're trying to get a tactic to work properly. Let's start defensively. You're leaving three players up the field. Can you afford to do that? If you are doing that, you might want to get the ball to them quickly, but by telling your team to retain possession, you're hindering that as an option. In transition, you're leaving three players back, and they're all narrow. Fine if you're facing a 4-1-4-1, but what if you're facing a 4-4-2 or a 4-3-3? If your WBs don't get back in on time, you're easy to hit on the counter in wide areas. Your central midfield carries no attacking threat. You've offset that with 'Exploit the Middle' to some degree, but then cancelled it out with 'Stick to Positions'. Similarly, asking your IFs to cut inside and get on the end of things would seem counter-intuitive to 'Stick to Positions'. If you want certain players to hold position, use PIs to get that effect. Work Ball Into Box also reduces crossing, but can stymie the flow of an attack if there are no good options ahead. I imagine your team passes the ball around in midfield an awful lot. If the ball gets turned over, you're open to the counter. If you come under sustained pressure, you're only defending with seven outfield players.
  8. I think it's good you're trying to get this to work, and it's certainly not easy. You may have a point about needing the right players, and you may want to think about trying to convert a player with the right PPIs. A box-to-box midfielder might make a good IWB/A, for example. I think the general issue I have is one you've already identified. It's hard to see where the goals are coming from. It sounds like your IWB is moving into midfield and acting like a CM/S - he'll get forward and support the attack if it's safe to do so, but perhaps isn't taking as many risks as you'd like. There's also the issue of balance - your team looks pretty open to the counter attack down the flanks. I'm just tossing out an idea here, but let's see where it goes. What about something like this? GK CD/D CD/D CD/D IWB/A WB/S DLP/D BBM W/S RMD/A CF/S It basically moves your BWM back into defence, but enables a slightly higher starting position for the IWB, which might facilitate him getting further up the pitch. I don't know for sure, but you might try it. It also offers a further attacking threat from deep from the BBM. There's the issue of potentially getting overrun in midfield on the counter, so you might have to play around with positions and duties there, but with your front three higher up the pitch you should see them getting into more goalscoring positions, I'd hope.
  9. Nice article, Cleon, and more or less how I play the game. I tend to go lower league though, where it can be more difficult to build a varied squad I suppose. My current tactic is a very stereotypical 'Early Premier League' 4-4-2. Two centre backs, Two FB/Ds, a solid central base of a BWM/D and a CM/S, two attacking wingers and a DLF/S, AF in attack. I don't stray away from that setup. I'm trying to stay solid in the middle, take very few risks at the back and effectively attack with four players. My CM/S might chip in if the situation suits. I think it's important to say (and I'm sure you do this) that the general principles of building a tactic means that you should be able to build something that will, more or less, cope with anything the AI can throw at you. We've all seen the opposition change from a 4-1-2-2-1 to a '4-3-3- Narrow Attacking' after going a goal down. The key thing here is to not panic, I think. Why? Because the opposition just panicked, and you can take advantage of that. I'll go with substitutions where I can first and foremost, but I tend not to use PIs as much as you. The opposition formation widget is something I look at, and I'll tweak a team instruction. For example, if I see the opposition FBs are more attacking, I might tick 'Pass Into Space' and 'More Direct Passing', as there is probably more space for my forwards to attack in behind. Likewise, if the opposition goes narrow, I may 'Exploit Left/Right Flank'. If they have a lot of players high up the pitch (such as a 4-2-3-1), I might not want to try passing the ball out, so I'll go more direct. The last thing I'll do is alter a duty (not really ever a role). If I can see one of my full backs is having a hard time, I might drop one of the wingers' duties to Support to help him out a little more, though I'd typically try to do that with a sub, putting a more defensive player on. If the opposition plays a defensive 4-1-4-1 I might up the FBs' duties to Support to help the wingers out, because otherwise they're kind of wasted when I have the ball.
  10. Can you explain your rationale for a few things? Namely, your team instructions, and what you're generally trying to achieve. A few questions to generate discussion. Who is creating your chances? Who is finishing them off? What are you doing to prevent counter attacks? What does your attacking transition and build up play look like?
  11. Nice write-up, and a good take on a classic formation. Really glad to see the variety of midfield roles available this year. It was also good to see you point out the importance of putting the right players in the various roles.
  12. He only has one IWB. The DLP/D is on the same side as the IWB/A, so I'd envisaged something more like... CD/D CD/D DLP/D W/S IWB/A CAR/S WB/S AM/S IW/A STR
  13. I'm not sure about this. He is trying to create an overload in the midfield and provide the attacking thrust in central areas that perhaps a standard 4-man midfield doesn't allow for. Yanking a man out of midfield looks like it will create a defensive imbalance to me. I actually can't see too much wrong with this on paper. I feel like Standard/Structured is the best fit, but you've clearly tried different things. However, if you want your players to act in quite a defined way, I'd try losing 'Roam From Positions' as a team instruction. Other things I'd try would be an attack duty on the AM, maybe as a SS if you're struggling for goals. I can see that all your forward thrust is in central areas as well which might make you easy to defend against, so you could try him as a Treq to get some lateral movement into your attack. Not an easy one to get to work, but rewarding if you can. Good luck.
  14. Developing a Diamond

    I think the issue I have with it is that the roles are set up in a relatively rigid D - S - S - A formation. That means your diamond stretches at the tips, but doesn't do a lot else. That is, it's relatively static and predictable and easy to defend against. This installment of FM has given us lots of midfield roles to play with, some of them aimed directly at making the diamond an attractive option. I think you can get much more movement in that diamond, personally.
  15. There's no rule of thumb, exactly, but my preference is to use Team Shape as a multiplier on top of roles and duties. If I find I have a reasonable divergence of duties in my team, I might go more structured, but it depends on the situation. If my default situation is Standard/Flexible, and I have a winger with an attack duty. I might be defending a lead and so I drop my team mentality to Counter, but perhaps I want my winger to be the out ball to maintain an attacking threat. I might change to Structured to help that. Similarly, I might switch to fluid to being him closer to the team mentality if I want him to get back in and help his full back out more. As the others have said, roles and duties are the main thing. I use Team Shape to get the details how I want them. I see it as useful for having control over things that might be 'in between' roles and duties.