Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About mp_87

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I've always found that you have to stick with a Simeone-inspired save. It takes time to get the approach right and for it to click. I echo what has been said, you really do need the right players, and quality ones at that, to carry it out at a really good standard. They have to be able to run all day (Stamina), want to run all day (Teamwork, Workrate), make the right runs and close down at the right times (Decisions, Positioning, Anticipation), need to be aggressive and get at the opposition (Aggression, Determination, also Strength and Acceleration help) and on top of that when they get the ball have the technical ability to carry out quick counters and transitions, or to play through teams when they face weaker opposition. Personally I think the challenge is to have different set ups tailored to the opposition, and what I think Atleti/Simeone have done over the years in real life - One is to stay compact and counter (the version I think most comes to mind when we talk about this subject), against weaker teams you want to be able to press higher up the pitch, and then there is the drop really deep version they have used over the years against the likes of Barca where it's almost a 4-4-2-0.
  2. I think if you saw the opposition had 3 centre backs and two midfielders ahead of it, first thought would be not to try and go through the centre of the park. But thinking about it, I would. I'd play a 4-4-2 that plays narrow through midfield and try to overload their central block of 5 vs. my 6 midfielders/attackers. Defensively it then also matches up pretty well to what they are doing. I'd want both my wide players looking to come inside and attack the centre of the pitch/half spaces (PPM's or considering playing them coming inside onto their stronger foot may also help here). One striker pulling into channels dragging defenders out. Whilst the other striker can drop off whilst others attack space ahead of him. Something like this for starters:
  3. For me, whatever tactical set up I am going to use, some players are out straightaway if they lack certain attributes - the main ones being work rate, ball control, and composure if I had to name the top three. However I also have no time for players with certain PPM's - Runs with ball often, Tries killer balls often, Shoots from distance. If a player has one of them I might attempt to get him to unlearn it, a combination of them and they have no future in my team. I think most FM'ers jaws would drop if they saw some of the players I would discard from a team
  4. Depends on the save, and what I'm trying to do, but most commonly how I play and what I prefer is an ultra-possession juego de posicion type approach where the principles never change but I will choose a line up based on what the opposition does in order to achieve superiority in certain areas. All three tactics slots will be filled, but beyond that I may have half a dozen (or more) tactics that play out in a certain formation: 4-2-3-1, 4-3-3, 3-4-3, 4-4-2, if I'm against a really weak team then I even have 3-3-4 and what plays basically as a 2-3-5 that are available. These/the roles then might be customised further on a game by game basis depending on which individuals I have selected in the team.
  5. I think it's a combination, as others have said you maybe aren't doing enough to adapt over time or to different opponents. That doesn't just mean to swap mentalities or decide e.g. "this game I'll attack, next game I'll defend" - for a simple example to give you, one match the potential weakness of the opposition might be on their right flank, the next game you play it might be on the oppositions left flank. Etc. etc. There is also the form/confidence factor - maybe on FM it is overblown slightly but we see often in real life "streaky" sides where they are flying and out of nowhere put a run of wins together but for other teams when they're struggling it's a herculean task to turn it around. Also the other day on the previous thread some of us were suggesting to stop chopping and changing so much, and I used examples of how in real life teams that import a whole squad-full of new players (eg. Fulham this season) very often struggle for identity and cohesion. The same is true on FM, you should notice "better football" and your team more easily and efficiently doing as you ask them over time the more games you play. However, after the last thread where you'd got a whole team of new players, I see again that for this current thread/season you have 8 new starting players. Cohesion and team gel etc. is going to have taken a massive whack..... Everyone plays how they see fit and what time allows them but I'm another who'd say you need to slow down and not rush through so many games and seasons, at least not for now, and try to analyse things a bit more. That's surely going to be a benefit tactically, for all the reasons mentioned so far, and also might help with squad building - for instance you mention you've signed Barbosa but now aren't sure he can play as the lone striker in your system. I'm afraid you have to ask the question...... Why didn't that thought occur before you rushed out and signed him? I agree with others also about the expectation factor. Of course everyone wants to push on and see linear progress, but in real life (and also in FM) the PL is so competitive and it fluctuates and there are probably 12-14 teams who start off a season with the number one objective of staying up, no matter what happened in the previous season. FGR must still be in your game a minnow team that has come a long way very quickly and, from a realism point of view, at this point staying up is an achievement that should be kept in mind.
  6. I'd echo Experienced Defender's thoughts tbh. You're Man Utd. You will have a lot of games where opponents are putting up the brick wall in front of their goal. Look at the screenshot you provided, where is the space for a through ball in behind to make use of a pacey player? If it was me up against a team like that, I'd firstly drop the mentality and accept being a bit more patient with the play. I also think against teams that are parking the bus you need players getting up in support into the area. I'm not sure you need an AP really, all the play is going to be in front of their defence anyway and anyone in that area will see plenty of the ball. I'd go with a CM(s) with get further forward or even a CM(a) who will surge into the box beyond the DLF. I'd also probably switch the Winger to a Raumdeuter, for more unpredictable movement and presence in the box. I'd also remain patient, that looks like your first season. Over time the team should gel better and this be reflected in their play.
  7. On attributes alone, you could do something with Rakitic. Obviously the physicals are pretty awful at the age he has got to, but he could act as an experienced head who can come on and shore up games in the latter stages. I personally wouldn't, purely because his personality is Balanced so offers nothing really from the mentoring aspect I'd want from an older head who'd have a bit-part role, and I almost always steer clear of any player with Shoots From Distance and/or Plays Killer Balls Often. However that's not to say he couldn't contribute for other people, his technical attributes do go well for the PPM's.
  8. The "pivote" is basically the link player in the centre of the pitch. He might not be the key playmaker, but he's always available for the pass. But he also has great defensive responsibilities in front of the defence and stopping counter attacks. As I've said before on this subject, it's a demanding role needing arguably your best player. As for what FM role Guardiola chooses IRL, it depends on the opposition really. It will change from game to game, and often within a game too. If the opposition is pressing high/has two up front then you will often see the player slot back in between the centrebacks to make an extra man and help circulate the ball up the pitch, but he rarely just stays there as play advances. And against weaker teams parking the bus this player can pop up in much more advanced areas to offer a passing option. I think a Regista roams too much, and isn't going to offer the defensive stability/positioning. Half Back is an option if a team is playing two strikers, but I wouldn't use it other than that and it's a role I have some issues with still. I think, a DLP, DM, or even BWM (even pushed up into the midfield strata, if you wish) are options. Depends on a) how creative you want him to be, and b) whether he just sits or you want him to be a little more aggressive at times hunting the ball. You also as ever have to factor in each player and their attributes/PPM's.
  9. This thread/example should be a good case study for FM'ers. A) Don't panic, get angry, and get desperate. Constant chopping and changing often makes things worse, and it's usually done in a rush and leads to illogical instructions and tactics. B) It highlights the temptation factor of FM. No offence to Ciderarmy, and of course you should always be looking to improve your team, but I think he fell into the trap that 99.9% of us who play the game operate - sign a teamful of star names/best attributes/wonderkids as soon as we can do it, with not much thought as to how that star individual (with PPM's etc) fits into how you want your team to play. But that is, and should be, too simplistic. In real life, which teams succeed by just importing a whole new eleven of players and throw them out on the pitch? You might get the odd example, but most don't. Look at Fulham this season as one example of the mess that often happens. If the players were doing well and had got you that far, why completely change it? In FM, as in real life, cohesion and understanding over time is a big part of your team operating how you want it to ultimately. Stability and a gradual build is more realistic, and what should be rewarded in my opinion.
  10. I think there is an argument to be had to settle on one tactic and allow the team to gel rather than to keep chopping and changing looking for the magic formula. Against teams that have parked the bus there will be many games where it is "pointless" possession and you aren't going to cut through them at will, but you should start to see better play/understanding the more games you play which will overcome these teams in more efficient fashion. I'd also say that, whilst we shouldn't take stock in just one or two attributes out of the whole package, most of those players, despite on first glance looking super and having good Decisions for instance, lack in Teamwork and Concentration. Against a packed defence that could possibly influence them losing patience and trying to force the play.
  11. It should also be said that playing a (extremely) high line will always carry considerable risk. Watch games in real life and even the best teams have days where they get exposed and get, in Kurupted's words, slaughtered. It's the trade off to be had with that style of play. That should be no different on FM.
  12. If I had to do a full post of the tactic and all instructions and talking points I'd be here half the night and haven't got the time right now (though if people want to discuss it will reply as I can over the next few days), but will say that my template has been for various editions of the game: SWK(s) FB* CD(st) CD(st) FB* WM(a) CM(s) BWM(d) CM(s) WM(a) DLF(s) Fullback positions are dependent on what the wide players are doing. It's been trickier work in the last couple of ME's, but I've been very happy with the replication and how the football plays.
  13. For me, the Winger role is one that shouldn't be used. Far too one-dimensional and is for direct football in FM gameplay, because it so tends towards running and crossing.
  14. I don't know about FM19 and the new tactical options as I'm not playing it yet, but since about FM14 or 15, and trying to replicate the evolution in how Guardiola sets up his teams, I've found for my tastes you get better results using a 4-5-1 shape if you get roles and duties correct and, whilst some concepts of his play cant be achieved, you can get a pretty good replication. The only issue has been with pressing, and that the wide players in midfield strata will drop back in front of his fullback before then closing down, allowing easy passes to be made (as I say, I don't know if this is now different with the line of engagement options) but can be worked around somewhat, albeit not perfectly, with specific man marking instructions. But with Guardiola imitations there are so many things to get right. Roles/shape selected have to work in harmony with each other. The mentality with the ball. The aggression and risk to the press, roles/duties help with this. Attributes and especially PPM's and the right players are crucial. I know it goes against official advice, but it needs a ****load of TI's, PI's and OI's in combination. And I think more than anything else, if you are aiming to control the game for 90 minutes, you've got to watch the matches and be able to analyse it. Every minute of them. React to what is happening during the game and change things (whether that be shape, mentality, role, duty, instruction) where necessary. Getting it right takes time, a lot of it if you're like me and ultra critical and striving to get as close to perfection as possible . It needs commitment put into it. However it does eventually pay off and you will be pleasantly surprised as to what you can achieve.
  15. I think there are definitely issues with the Guardiola style of football. It is hard to translate it into match engine instructions/attributes and how the ME and some roles work (eg. the ultra direct and largely one dimensional wide players in the AM strata that work unsatisfactorily in this type of football on FM). Some of the concepts, not just with but also without the ball, are though just beyond the capabilities of the game at this point in time. They probably will continue to be for some time yet. You just have to accept that sometimes. Also this approach does require considerable in-game intervention. Constant little tweaks to player roles, instructions, where/how the ball is moved etc etc. depending on how the match is unfolding. I think that's largely beyond the AI, and lets be honest probably 99.9% of human managers cant be bothered to do all that. However I think there are some things that probably should be scrutinised. As has been mentioned the last couple of editions of the game have seemed to shift the balance towards a rather more simple, get it wide at tempo and get it in the area type football that at times is a bit on the messy side. And, purely my impression, I might be wrong and I hope this isn't taken as criticism, I do get the impression that within those who make the game, and even with all the consultants they have, there is a lack of understanding really to this type of football and more (complicated and unnecessary for some....... ) heavily tactical/possession styles that have become en vogue in the last few years, and so the game struggles a little to keep up. That shouldn't be a surprise though I suppose, as most making the game will be (casual) football fans, and most of the theory/ideas behind it will go straight over the head of the vast majority of football fans.
  • Create New...