Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community

macca7292

Members+
  • Content Count

    101
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About macca7292

  • Rank
    Amateur

Favourite Team

  • Favourite Team
    Leeds United

Currently Managing

  • Currently Managing
    Niort

Recent Profile Visitors

1,255 profile views
  1. Good to see you're still around the forums. Hope you're well and thanks for all your help and superb threads over the years!
  2. All the best for the future. I've really enjoyed your articles and threads over the years !
  3. I'm no expert but I don't think identical flanks is necessarily a bad thing, just here they're identical and there's no penetration. I've seen plenty of tactics with both wingers on attack duty that have worked, like anything else it depends on the other roles around them. Using that as an example you would probably end up splitting your team into an attacking unit fairly advanced and a more defensive unit deeper. In that circumstance, a short passing game might not be appropriate as your players would be a fair distance apart. I think the main reason for not making both flanks the same is to give a bit of variety, so that your attacks are a bit less predictable. For the OP, I'd change one of the inside forwards to an attack duty,the opposite side full back to an attack duty and the other inside forward to winger on support.
  4. This is what I do - there may be a more efficient way! In graphics / boxes / dialog / background change blurred val to false in paper xml Change blurred value to false in blurred xml in graphics / yacs / background / overlay
  5. I've done it on mine - can't remember what I did off the top of my head but I made a note on the PC. I'll post later when I'm on it.
  6. I posted this a while back as part of Herne's ti and pi challenge for fm18. Still works - I got Niort promoted to league one in France first season using this with libero in cd position
  7. Was about to post the same thing! I'd maybe even give the right back an attack duty.
  8. I don't think there's much wrong with your tactic. A lot is down to personal preference but I'd be tempted to change your inside forward on the right to a winger on support and put the cm a on that side or even change the cm a to a BBM if you want to be a bit more defensive.
  9. I had the same issue, couldn't see the "create your own style" button. Thought I was going mad!
  10. I've got the same issue. The end column increases in width and you can't see what is in it. If you auto size all columns , it shortens the condition / sharpness column so you only see the circles, not the numbers. I notice a suggested work around in the other thread of having those columns separate which I'll try.
  11. I guess the best thing to do is watch a few games on full. If you want your dlp to be a bit more mobile, you could move him to the DM strata and change him to a regista. I think your formation looks good though, I can see how the mezzala would move into space the f9 has left and how the left wing back should have plenty of space to attack.
  12. Thanks for the update! Skin looks amazing
  13. Also, I've never been a fan of a lone striker on attack duty (I know that they can work but I've never managed it!) I'd go dlf (s) or false nine to link with the midfield better and leave space for your inside forwards to attack.
  14. The first thing I'd say is do you really need all those TIs and PIs? General advice is that unless you can give a convincing reason for them being there, don't use them. Watch a few games on full (or first 20 mins at least) and see if what you think should be happening actually is. In terms of your roles, I'd be tempted to go wb(s) on the left and wb(a) on the right and I think you could get away with making your dlp a support duty and the mezzala a cm on attack. If nothing else I'd go with the wing backs - with the inside forwards cutting in there should be space for them to attack.
×
×
  • Create New...