Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

131 "Keep your friends close, but your enemies closer"

About mp_87

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. I don't disagree with that, I have made my feelings known on things like the ME and UI and how things are presented to the player many times, but that is a few steps along the line... Most people I know, non-forum posters (which will be the vast majority of FM users), who have played FM in the recent past all say the same thing - Would love to play the game still and have fond memories of it from their adolescence, but it's far too complex and detailed for them to get into it or to allow for their scarce free time. Then you look at the FM online world, and there are many, many, many people who dissent because of the complexity of the game, or freely admit to skipping huge swathes of the game. They can't get into tactics, training, press conferences, scouting, analysis, etc. They just want to buy the obvious sh*t-hot players from that years version, put them out with minimal input/minimal watching (or even none, instant result....) with a plug n play winning tactic. Many times I have seen posts bemoaning for instance "How did I concede late on? I clicked defensive, we should be able to hold out", they want it to be that easy to achieve. Realistic or not, I do think separating the games further would be my way to go. Better marketing of Touch (or as I've said before, rename it back to Classic) as a majorly slimmed down, quicker and 'easier' version. Full fat FM as the all-in, no option to skip things, ultra serious, ultra time, consuming version.
  2. Reading the last page or so I think ideally SI need to go further in differentiating the versions of the game. They need to spell out (rather than the gentle steer that is on the whole given) that if you want "fun", classic-style, fast-sim, minimal input way of playing then buy FM Touch. Full fat FM should be all consuming, take much thought and consideration, need maximum tinkering, be headache inducing, require you to be all in, slower gameplay, and strives to be a version far more towards the realities of football management. And really, isn't for most players. I'd probably say about 90% of FM'ers really should be playing the Touch version in this scenario. Highly highly unlikely they do go down this route, for many reasons, but I'd reckon a vast number of the complaints and dissent about FM would disappear straightaway if people played the version of the game more suitable to their outlook/play style/time constraints/knowledge.
  3. @Xenophobic Bean That is just the way I do things, and have never had a problem. A support role striker dropping off the front dragging out a marker and someone (ideally two or three options really) pushing forward past him into the space vacated and now being a good position to do something. It isn't about just selecting more players to bomb forward, but having roles working in tandem to create space and manipulate the defence. The Mezzala/CM(a) argument - Personally I have found that you can get some nice variation with a CM(a), especially if they have a move into channels PI or PPM (and/or even shifting the DM forward to make a flat midfield three and so pushing the two other CM's a little wider) - you will find them wide at times in combination with wide players but also have that direct play which gets them into the box and the mentality has them playing aggressive passes. I did surmise myself what his intentions were, which I do get and can see the use for the Mezzala. But then I'd definitely make the right hand side of the team more aggressive. The AMR position could/should really be an attack mentality, in my opinion, and I'm not sure why a DLP(s) is needed either - with the DM and IWB you already effectively have two holding midfielders, why another dropping deep? That could be a more adventurous role also pushing a little higher. But that is just how I see it...
  4. Late to the party, but I look at OP and straight away think, like others, that just has too few players who are going to be in a position to give defenders a headache and/or score goals. Apart from the striker I don't really see who is going to be getting on the end of things. Then you have to consider against very defensive minded teams you really do have to have good role combos to manipulate defenders and create space for runners. Again, no one getting up in support of the penalty area, but also I'd question the striker role and the individual player we got a screenshot of. I think a lone forward, especially against teams parking the bus, should be primarily a link man bringing others into the game, DLF(a) might do this a bit but I'd prefer a support role, and with that PPM of runs with ball often and an Attack mentality in my experience I assume he, with little support alongside him, is just turning and charging at a packed defence - ie. a real low % option. Also tbh this is another tactic where someone uses an exotic role like a Mezzala and it seems a bit "coz it's a trendy thing". What will they really offer drifting out towards the flanks against a packed defence? I'd personally change that to a CM(a), but if you are intent on using it in combo with the Winger then on the right hand side of the team I'd have more aggressive roles getting into the box to get on the end of the supply line from the left.
  5. I'd change things about the tactic, that I find illogical but as you're getting results and seem happy enough I'll skip that. As for Liverpool, seems you're not adapting to your opponent. I don't know how far into the game you are but in early seasons they are the team that is your equal/maybe better than you. You say you're emulating Guardiola, well what does he do in these bigger matches? Very often they're much more cagey, in FM terms a reduced mentality, and a lot more safe passing around the defence and midfield. Player roles will be more conservative - fullbacks holding position and adding another little more defensively minded midfield player by changing De Bruyne's role or bringing in Gundogan. As a starting point. I'd drop mentality, I'd change the Wingback roles (which I don't get in the first place) and even change the wingbacks as they are both the bomb forward type, change the centreback roles, and the striker should become more of a link man. TI's also are overkill.
  6. I'd class that as a lot of players in 'no mans land' with those roles and instructions. If the opposition you face manages to be defensively solid (logical shape and instructions, and/or lower mentality) I can see a lot of your players being in positions in front of their defensive structure and then it could be a struggle to break them down. And without the ball, well.... As ED says, that defence, three centre backs or not, is going to be under all sorts of pressure with the midfield set up as it is.
  7. Where I would start: GK(d) - Your 'Schmeichel' would be a bog standard 'keeper for me. Told to distribute quickly and maybe to the flanks. Ideally, relevant PPM used to initiate quick throws rather than as a PI. FB(s) - My memory of Neville is that he was always a fairly steady player who chose the appropriate moments to push forward on the overlap, he wasn't cavalier in his play or constantly advanced in his positioning. Possible PI's of stay wider and get further forward. CD(d) CD(d) - I'd leave them as standard to start with. Can experiment with Stopper/Cover later on. FB(s) - The left back was a supporting role backing up the winger ahead of him. Only PI I would consider is cross from deep. WM(s) - With Sit narrower and/or Roam from position to replicate the Beckham role and create room for the overlap. Probably also tasked to cross more often, and depending on PPM's possibly also riskier passes and shoot more often. BWM(d) - This would be the Roy Keane role. Whilst it wouldn't be a totally accurate representation of his ability to burst forward or his forward passing, I think to translate into FM, especially if you're not a totally dominant super team, it would need to be a defend role. CM(s) or BBM(s) - I think with the chosen mentality a support role is correct, they will arrive late in the box. Relevant attributes and PPM's would give you an even closer replication of Scholes, if desired. (NB. In tougher games where you might want a more solid central midfield duo, as United used to do with the use of Nicky Butt, I'd go with an additional BWM(s) alongside the BWM or CM on defend duty). W(a) - This would be the obvious starting point for the Giggs role, I wouldn't rule out WM(a) though either as it may best replicate how he got into the box at the back post. Think with either role chosen, no PI's to start with. CF(s) - The striker roles are the hardest to choose. This was probably Yorke's role, he could do everything at his best. So if you have a good all-round player start with this, if not maybe a DLF. AF(a) - Possibly another Complete forward, but my memory of Cole was that this role comes to mind for him, and again depends on the player you have in FM - a lesser player I'd go with the AF. Placed the more advanced on the left hand side, mindful of Beckham's diagonal passes/crosses coming from the right. Mentality - Positive. Transition - Counter Out of Possession - Lower Line of Engagement, Defend narrower (this is what 1999 Utd did, plus in FM is better for a 4-4-2 shape I suspect). As others have said, I'd start with a fairly blank canvas before adding TI's gradually. I'd start with zero In possession instructions to start with to see how the football is played before adjusting to what I saw. I'd consider more urgent closing down to try to initiate counter attack opportunities, but again would see how it went initially. Finally I might also go with Overlap right, to get the often seen situations where Beckham held the ball and waited for Neville to run past him, but once again would see how the tactic faired initially, and if I did opt to use it would reconsider the roles on the right hand side, particularly the wide midfielder.
  8. Probably at some point. The last two or three editions I have first tried the demo, not liked the game, and then ended up either being gifted it or found myself with a free week at some point and really purchased for the hell of it and to satisfy curiosity. I don't get very far though! The game is at a bit of a crossroads though. In the last few years there has seemed to be more and more avoidable and silly little bugs/quirks to the game that have somehow slipped through the net when previously these might have been isolated incidents. The highest level of polish needs to be reapplied to what is being presented. Tactics and the ME are where I want to see big change. In the short term, a total rethink on wide play and related behaviour and how the roles are hardcoded is high up the list on the existing platform. Personally though what I hope for is that SI get to a point where they can do a massive tactical revamp and bring in more nuanced, detailed, and complex possibilities. Particularly splitting options both with and without the ball, and dependent on where you are on the pitch.
  9. Definitely facets that are under-represented in the game, and have been since basically forever. I'm another who cant recall seeing a GK ever get a card, concede a penalty, etc. As for injuries, training ones definitely occur on a regular basis. In game injuries are rare - very occasionally have seen a keeper pull up with a minor knock when kicking a ball (I cant say for definite, but iirc mostly this happens in pre-season games in my experience). Collision injuries I don't think I have ever seen.
  10. But watching commentary only and looking at the stats is not going to be able to show you the how and why things got better, just the end result. And what works for one game might not work in others, you need to have some trends and build up some evidence. Work the problem. Lets go back to the start... Ignore what the player ratings were. You say games were "scrappy and not fluent", this can happen with new players and a team that's hasn't gelled yet which is something to bare in mind if you've made a lot of transfers and tactical changes. What were you seeing that you'd like to have improved, and what style of play were you trying to develop in your initial tactic? (or was the first one that you posted what you have been using?).
  11. I don't know where to start.... The place to start from is not some funky shape. You've got everyone lined up with a bias towards the right, and now focusing the play down the left.... Absolutely no need for two DLP. As for what the system rates them as, ignore it. You do not need perfect green circles. I'm not familiar with some of these players, I've looked them up now... Are these really suited to counter attack football? I see a lot of technical players who will want to dominate the ball. As I said, set up a throwaway save and experiment from there, not in the middle of one of your main saves. Chopping and changing and introducing tactics moments before kick off is likely not to go well. And you must have just rushed through that match on minimal highlights. How can you learn by doing that or react to what is happening in game?
  12. Firstly, some general points. I can appreciate it is tough when you're first starting to try and make logical tactics and/or trying to implement a specific playing style. It is good that you are doing it, keep going it will get easier. But as has been said to you already, you have to slow down and put some work into the learning process. You learn by watching the matches and how things play out. I know it's a bit boring, it's not what people want to do in the time they devote to FM, but at this point don't set up a long term save. Just set up some throwaway saves to experiment with tactics to help learn what works, what doesn't, and what effect different instructions have. Watch matches in full. On the ratings, I just wouldn't tear your hair out about it. Sometimes it indicates underperforming players, sometimes it is just quirks in the FM algorithm. Since I can remember it has never been perfect, some positions overrated, some underrated. For example, most of my tactics include a midfield pivot, designed to just recycle the ball and mop up/intercept when the opposition clear it away. This player for me invariably averages 100 passes a match just simply keeping things moving, circa 95% completion rate, and has endless interceptions. But he never scores, doesn't assist, and doesn't tackle much as he doesn't need to. In as many editions as FM as I can remember it's a miracle if he gets over 6.7 rating. The game thinks this player does nothing of note, so will never get accolades or awards in game, but really they are one of, if not the, most important cogs in my machine. As for tactics, start with minimal instructions until you are sure of the effect they have and you are clear about that will help with your playing style. In your tactic there, it is a mass of contradiction. A lot to go through so I'll just bullet point: Two central midfield playmakers who will want the ball, a left flank set up to all converge, but the play instructed to go down the right. This is the first thing to address. I'd just get rid of the instruction. If you want to press high and counter quickly, other instructions need to go: Work ball into box, why you want that? Low Crosses, for me that's not one that goes with quick counter attacks. Play for set pieces is also definitely not needed. I'd personally be wary of Higher Tempo also, until I knew I had the players to play at high pace, but not saying to definitely get rid of it. I'd experiment with and without it (normal). Also, when it comes to pressing Raum and AP are hardcoded to not be the best at pressing. That's not to say they wont, but are weaker than other roles. In a 4-2-3-1 high press I usually don't put a playmaker in those four attacking roles. Some people would, to maximise pressing I wouldn't. And if you want to counter quickly, do you need two midfield playmakers? There could be a tendency to look for these players rather than the forward pass, I would monitor that closely... But to be the main man the Raumdeuter needs a path clearing for him. In your side if he goes forward to score goals the Attacking forward is in his way. If he comes inside to be a creator he's meeting the Mezzala and probably the Advanced Playmaker. Also that left flank is way too attacking for me. If the Wingback is bombing on then the central midfielder should be a more conservative role I'd say. Why does the Mez need to go into that space also? If you think he does, then rein in the fullback role. All in all there is a good chance he just gets crowded out.
  13. a) Stop getting hung up on the match ratings, is my advice. b) What are you actually trying to achieve? As has been said, the roles and instructions are a bit of a mess. You cant just look at those two positions in isolation when trying to build that combination. Other roles around them will need to complement them in order for them to shine and have a balanced team. Also, if as it seems, you're trying to get a threatening left flank with the Raumdeuter heavily involved and wingback bombing on outside him, why is the play focused down the right flank? Amongst many other things I'd change, that is going to be one reason he/they are doing very little.
  14. Of course it's possible, you can get lower league teams/players to play possession football if you so wish. It depends what you're aiming for, but you can even rack up 65% plus possession on average whilst still winning and creating plenty of chances in games. It does require time, patience, and to be prepared to put the work in. Lets take the matchday first, if you want to (well, near as) always be in control and dominate and rack up the high %'s then you have to watch matches in full and micromanage. Your formation and/or roles will have to differ from game to game, to counter different threats, exploit weaknesses, maintain superiorities, etc. You will have to react within games if the opposition makes changes. Sometimes if your players just aren't performing on the day you have to change things up eg. tempo, risk settings. And, even though it's boring from a gameplay point of view, you have to kill chunks of the game, eg. ten mins before the break just go overkill on the settings for keep ball etc. or when you're 2-0 up in the second half. I haven't even mentioned getting the tactics right in the first place, and this is an area where I'd differ from many who do these sorts of threads..... It also requires time to build a squad. Possession football carried out very well will take seasons worth of work. To build a squad with the required technical and mental attributes, traits, and to have gelled into a unit, plus longer if you wish to focus on academy (the right coaches, players, etc.). @Crazy_Ivan is completely right in terms of the vision of what players you need and how to go about it such as retraining players. I see so many FM'ers trying to play possession football or showing off saves and going like "Defenders need Strength, Tackling, Jumping, Pace etc" and I think, why? You're aiming to have the vast majority of the ball with it on the ground, I want technical qualities more to be able to build up play. Sure you might be caught out sometimes if your defenders then aren't of the 'classic' mould, but if I'm doing things right and have the vast majority of the ball and attacking most of the time I can accept it. You definitely don't need world beaters, a good coherent plan and putting in the effort will yield results.
  15. What he means is that you've selected extremely aggressive OOP instructions, aiming to win the ball back high up the pitch and condense space. Yet with the ball you have instructions to pass into space (where is this space going to be, if you're successful and do win it back quickly and/or have the opposition penned in?). High/extremely high tempo is also unnecessary and will just be rushing the ball forward into space that isn't there and misplacing passes, especially with the selected Mentality. And as I said on a post yesterday, people try and use high tempo settings too early in their tactics, for my liking anyway, it needs the appropriate players and good tactical familiarity and team gel to carry out. Then there are the roles chosen. You're funnelling everything towards the centre of the pitch, with inverted wingers and playmakers, which would suggest playing more intricate football and playing through teams. Not looking to get in behind teams at every opportunity. And in the pressing phase, Playmakers are one of the weaker roles in terms of hard-coding/instructions for this task, I'm not saying you cant press successfully using them but if I was trying to play Gegenpressing type football I wouldn't personally use a playmaker role in those front four positions of the 4-2-3-1.
  • Create New...