Jump to content

okereke

Members+
  • Content Count

    59
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by okereke

  1. hace 49 minutos, zemaniano85 dijo:

    Same resolution here, I can't understand why I can't expand it.... It is so bloody annoying. Everytime I try to play, see that match UI and boom close the game. 

    It's ridiculous, indeed. I have more than enough space to fit another equally-wide (with room to spare) couple of tabs, but all of that space is currently wasted...

    PezODSZ.jpg

  2. hace 30 minutos, Coolcup dijo:

    Fair point! I did notice the player attributes didn't fit properly on the player overview screen when I used the TCS Skin which was a bit annoying.

    I'm using it and while they run a little bit longer than the box I don't have a problem. It's like two mm and they are still readable. I'm cool with it tbh

  3. hace 18 minutos, Coolcup dijo:

    @okereke - this is amazing! I have added your suggested change and can use FM21 skins on touch! Thank you! A quick question - do you find that the header bar is duplicated when you do this? See below, the red menu bar at the top is a duplicate of the one above it. If you find this too, do you know how to fix this?

    Club overview.png

    I have noticed it, yes, but I am not familiar with skin editing nor really mad at that little issue. I'm glad I can use the skins to a 99% functionality, so I can't complain about those little things given how dirty and lazy this adaptation method is haha

  4. hace 11 horas, rafaelbenitez dijo:

    Can you detail the steps on how to do this?

    This is how the "skin_config.xml" file looks after the changes I made to Heffem skin, for example:

    <?xml version='1.0' encoding='utf-8'?>
    <record>
    	<translation id="name" value="Heffem Skin V1 Touch" />
    	<translation id="skin_name" value="Heffem Skin V1 Touch" />
    	<string id="author" value="Krysler" />
    	<string id="description" value="FM21 Skin by Krysler"/>
    	<string id="version" value="V1" />
    	<list id="parent">
    		<string value="fmc dark-widgets" />
    		<string value="fmc tablet" />
    	</list>	<boolean id="fmc_skin" value="true" />
    	<boolean id="tablet_skin" value="true" />
    	<string id="skin_name" value="Heffem Touch" />
    	<string id="required_version" value="21.0.0" />
    </record>

    Basically, the key is adding the whole "parent" thing, and all of the things that have something to do with the touch/tablet/fmc version of the game in that code.

    You download and "install" the skin as always, but before launching the game for the first time after doing so make sure to make those changes so the skin appears in the skin selector of FMT.

    Hope you can make it work!

  5. hace 41 minutos, Fritzle_1893 dijo:

    Of course, here you go. I'm still trying to figure out whether I prefer this view with the customisable colours depending on the attribute value, or if I'd rather choose a presentation with 1-5 stars. But I guess 1-5 stars could be as detailed as the number-values, so there would be not that much gain in realism.

     

    Screenshot 2020-12-02 at 11.44.54.png

    That looks crazy great and I'd love how to apply it to the/my skins if possible. Thanks a ton!

  6. hace 8 minutos, Fritzle_1893 dijo:

    Great, it worked :)

    I tried to resize the font before, but it seems I had to resize it first and then add my icon via appearance="(...)".

     

    Thank you :)

    Could you share a screen of how you made it look in-game? I might be interested in getting those panels/xml files to hide the attributes myself while still having some visual clue of what a player is good at!

  7. With all of this FM Touch delay thing that is going on (the version I have been playing instead of the full version for the last three or four years) I have been wondering... for those that have played both the full and Touch versions of the game lately (FM19, FM20, FM21), or mostly the full/fat version, to which point is the full FM version "adaptable/able to be automated" in terms of delegating tasks to the CPU in order to get a closer experience to that of Touch?

    Is this viable at all? I was convinced of getting Touch alone this year but to be honest, I had not considered that option and Touch seems to be an afterthought for SI these days... Can any provide any info about this? As long as I can get rid of most of the stuff I'm not interested in (press, player interactions, deep handling of training and player development...) and focus on the actual managing/tactics/transfers I'd be cool with the full "adapted" version of the game via task-delegation to assistant managers and such.

    What are the main differences or aspects not included in Touch that are on FM (I think player dynamics is one, for example)?

    Any opinion on this? Thanks!

  8. With all of this FM Touch delay thing that is going on (the version I have been playing instead of the full version for the last three or four years) I have been wondering... for those that have played both the full and Touch versions of the game lately (FM19, FM20, FM21), or mostly the full/fat version, to which point is the full FM version "adaptable/able to be automated" in terms of delegating tasks to the CPU in order to get a closer experience to that of Touch?

    Is this viable at all? I was convinced of getting Touch alone this year but to be honest, I had not considered that option and Touch seems to be an afterthought for SI these days... Can any provide any info about this? As long as I can get rid of most of the stuff I'm not interested in (press, player interactions, deep handling of training and player development...) and focus on the actual managing/tactics/transfers I'd be cool with the full "adapted" version of the game via task-delegation to assistant managers and such.

    What are the main differences or aspects not included in Touch that are on FM (I think player dynamics is one, for example)?

    Any opinion on this? Thanks!

  9. All of this got me wondering... for those that have played both the full and Touch versions of the game lately (FM19, FM20, FM21), to which point is the fat version "adaptable" in terms of delegating tasks to the CPU in order to get a closer experience to that of Touch?

     

    Is this viable at all? I was convinced of getting Touch alone this year but to be honest, I had not considered that option and Touch seems to be an afterthought for SI these days... Can any provide any info about this? As long as I can get rid of most of the junk (press, player interactions, etc...) and focus on the actual managing/tactics/transfers I'd be cool with the full "adapted" version of the game via task-delegation to assistant managers and such.

     

    Thanks!

  10. Welcome to the (active) community!

    I was kinda like you back in the day, never wanting to post and just reading, but once I did it I enjoyed it a lot so I think you definitely did the best you could. Be sure you'll have tons of fun engaging in conversation with the gents around here and it will allow you also to learn much more.

    One thing you constantly repeat through your text explaining your approach is that you still feel that this tactic is not yours, that it is just a combination of other tactics, etc etc... Don't sell yourself so low man! How many real life managers build stuff off their brains without taking ideas from here and there, let alone FM players?

    You definitely spent the proper time learning the game as real managers spent it learning the history of football and where this and that system work and don't, then applied what you considered right for your team and players. Don't think it can get any better, and the way you put it all together in the post, along with the use of images was superb, believe me.

    No wonder you inspired me getting back to the game after a few months of hiatus. Hope to keep reading you around!

  11. hace 23 horas, Swills417 dijo:

    I switched to a variant of this tactic for the last 20 minutes of a EPL game the other night and was delighted with the results. I took of a number of senior players off and replaced them with u-23s. As Arsenal with Ben Sheaf playing as a Mezzela :lol: assisting a goal from Josh Da Silva as an inverted wingback lashing one in from the edge of the box. Also experienced the pitfalls of defending with being exposed to long ball and through balls in behind. Will see how it goes as a backup tactic when chasing a game or seeing out a dominating win. 

    Awesome! As I have it now we're pretty solid defending as you can see by the results I posted yesterday. It seems like I have found the right balance in defense with the triangle of the CBs+BWM.

    hace 18 horas, andymankc dijo:

    I am still wondering why people try to complicate simple things. I am not saying that this is unsucesfull tactic but. Wide players go inside and central players go wide. Even this is the most succesfull tactic ever I am not going to use, because I think that this is pure using game in wrong way. 

    I guess I prefer to do innovative and creative stuff while having fun and exploring some new ways to play the game than just download a pre-made tactic and press the spacebar ad infinitum to see my inbox full of "congratulations on winning the cup again!". Personal taste.

    hace 17 horas, Analog dijo:

    What's the right way to use the game?  :lol:  He's having a bit of fun and being creative with ideas.  

    Curious about that 4-1-2-2-1 though.  Two IF's and then two MEZ on attack through the middle.  In my experience the Mez on attack was the aggressive CM role I was always looking for in FM.  He gets really far forward, but I also noticed they seem to make fairly early runs.  With two IF's and two MEZ I'd be worried you just have everyone single file on the edge of the area.  Are you getting good movement?

    To me, the problem is not the MEZ not going forward (they do and pretty well) but rather wide, kind of overlapping the IFs. That is where it gets tricky, because the ME was not build to allow that kind of movement. So yes, what you mention happens sometimes (both a MEZ and a IF getting close to each other in the same area), and also it is often that you see the IF getting wide and the MEZ more on the inside part of the pitch. Not that is bad and doesn't produce results, which are there, but definitely not how I want the system to play.

    hace 16 horas, westy8chimp dijo:

    @okereke i haven't kept up with the thread as much as id have liked because your images don't show on my work laptop... but in line with my previous statement... I'd go as far as to add, you should try wb/IWB with underlap if you haven't already... carnage.

    using the Barca example, wasn't that unusual to see Iniesta wider than the Inside forward who would run central, but also Alba performing underlap to cross from the byline within or on the edge of the box.

    Yes I'm already using underlapping movements to keep IWBs on the inside areas of the pitch while MEZs and IFs get or start the play at wider positions. Definitely a great shape and movement is generated and the combinations are wonderful and work tremendously.

    hace 7 horas, Old Scouser Tommy dijo:

    It's not making a joke of the game. I think you're being unfair there. @okereke has developed a style of play which is winning football matches. Winning matches is about exploiting weaknesses in an opponents tactical system and taking advantage of those weaknesses. His system is doing that and he deserves credit for implementing his style of play and winning games. There is no right or wrong way to play the game only differing opinions as to 'how' it is played. Every manager has a way they want there teams to play.

    If you haven't seen any teams play in this way, using Inverted Fullbacks tucking in allowing Central Midfielders to move into wide areas and Wingers/Inside Forwards coming inside I'm not sure what you've been watching. Pep Guardiola's Man City side do this to great affect. Sane especially starts very wide but is often on the end of crosses and through balls from De Bruyne who is a central player but has moved wide to occupy half spaces. His fullback will then tuck in to provide cover in the area he has vacated. It's quite simple and like @westy8chimp and others have explained it creates passing triangles which in turn create space and essentially goalscoring chances. Coutinho at Livepool would at times start centrally and drift wide to allow Mane to come inside. Iniesta at Barceona would also drift into wide areas from a central starting position and create these passing triangles with fullbacks and wide forwards or wingers. This is not a new thing and is probably quite difficult to get right on FM. I'm using Inverted Wingbacks at the moment actually and I really like how it gives me cover in central areas but still gives me width. My leftback actually has 4 goals in 9 games at the start of the season for Benevento playing as an Inverted Wingback.

    @okereke I like how your system looks and you're having good results with it. Reading the thread I know you've put a lot of work and thought into it and now reaping the rewards. I'm really interested to see how it continues.

    Thanks. I'm definitely not trying to create some kind of "unstoppably-demonic" tactic with these Inspiring Concept threads. I just thought about having some fun doing new stuff and focusing on somewhat "little" things (the use of IWBs, the creation of the Central Winger, the use of a free-movement trio on a strikerless system, and what is yet to come...) rather than playing the casual same old game we all do every year without squeezing the game.

    Glad you're liking it!

    hace 2 horas, yonko dijo:

    I don't think you should be in trouble when using Standard mentality with normal D-Line, closing down, defend duty CBs and HB. I've never had problems with such set up even when I push up the D-line and use offside trap. And I use 2 WBs on Attack. For the record my CBs had 12/13 for pace and acceleration, though anticipation, concentration and positioning were at 14/15+.

    I think the trick in your system is that it has a lot of moving parts during transitions. But I still think you have gone a little to the extreme with the deep line and covering duty. Even more interesting would be if you moved the IWBs to play from the WB positions. Use HB and watch the CBs split really wide.:D

    Believe me, that game against MTK was incredibly frustrating so I made changes and I don't know, they're working nicely now and we're pretty solid back in defense, so I'm happy for now. Wait until we reach the first knockout round of the EL and get crushed by some big team though haha

    There is definitely a lot of movement and variation in positions. Keep in mind that no less than 6 players start at a point that ultimately changes (IWBs to CM, MEZ to W, IFs to F) so that really causes problems for the opposition who often get lost into who to cover and leaves doors open to crosses or through-balls that make for clear chances in the area.

    I used the HB at first, but having the CBs split too wide caused a lot of trouble while defending long balls because they found it hard to recover and track back in time, that's why I changed the DM position to a BWM role. That way I keep a defensive triangle that holds the position vertically and that doesn't get too wide, so we avoid problems getting back.

  12. "Remember when I signed my contract a few months ago and moved to Merseyside? Remember what they said? 'He won't make it here as in Scotland. He won't be able to handle this level of play. This is no one-team league. No minnows here.' They can suck it now, that's what I say."

    - Robbie Gould, Liverpool's manager.

    iUgmklZ.png

    PS: I did this post for fun and I know karma will hit me back in the forehead making me lose like 8 or 10 games in a row, just in case. :D

  13. hace 10 horas, Gegenklaus dijo:

    Why are you using IWB's on attack? Do you want them charging into the number 10 area? Why not on support? :)

    This has to do with a few things. First, I need my IWBs as CMs covering the whole midfield because MEZ are not supposed to play that role when we are on attack (they are supposed to turn into wingers). Second, if I don't play them on attack, I've seen (or at least I think) that they hit a wall and don't go upfield enough to my liking. Third, they produce overloading situations around the opposition area through the center of the pitch and force the MEZ to get a little wider. Fourth, they sometimes even roam around the edge of the box, which is great for recycling possession. Fifth, they're often so high the pitch that can't track back in time, leaving my CBs and BWM exposed and thus creating exciting moments for the fans out there in the stand. Wait, forget about that fifth point. I need to fix that. :D

    hace 10 horas, denen123 dijo:

    Question: There's emphasis on why you wanted a 'narrow play'. But then you still want width with the movements of the central wingers.

    I'm asking to understand, please.

    This is the struggle of this challenge. Basically, there are three key roles in the system and two completely opposite ways of work for them. Simply put, we have:

    • IWBs + IFs => Start wide, need to get inside.
    • MEZ => Start inside, need to get wide.

    So we can say that we need to widen the field for the MEZ to turn into wingers hugging the touchline, but that would make the IWBs and IFs stay too wide and we don't want that, so we need to counter-act by applying the narrower instruction in order to keep things in kind of place. It is not obvious, it is not perfect, but I don't think there is a better way to mix and mangle all of the concepts running. Yes it may makes the MEZ not go as wide as possible, but they're really not going to go that wide even if applying a wider shape, so I think it's not worth doing it (because then IWBs and IFs would be much more outside than I want them to, so the problems outweigh the benefits).

    Again, hard to achieve the system in the current ME because after all it is all a huge mix of tweaks to try and put it in play, so some things are counterintuitive and definitely not perfect. It is just about finding the right balance and what most resembles the idea, given the impossibility of nailing it down 100%.

    hace 7 horas, yonko dijo:

    I'm interested to see how your players are positioned on the pitch. Do you have some screenshots?

    Very interesting that you have drop deep while also closing down much more. In addition both CDs are on Cover. 

    Same as with the first quote, I hate to do stuff like the one you mention. I'd never play a super deep defensive block and close down a lot, because that may cause and over-stretched formation full of holes everywhere and people running out of position quite frequently. But here, seeing how the defensive pair of CBs and the HB/BWM were destroyed by long balls I wanted to keep them in place as deep and restrained as possible, while still trying to put pressure on the opposition's creative players to try and recover the ball quickly or at least force bad decisions at the start of their plays.

    The fact both CBs are on Cover is related to what I already said. I know it may sound extreme, and it may change over time when I play more games against stronger teams and see how the pair works, but I just wanted to have two guys down there with restricted duties just focusing on defending.

    hace 2 horas, djpdavey dijo:

    Can we get a clip of the play?

    Sure. I will play some more demanding games (Premier League and the start of the Europa League) and then upload some videos and provide some tactical image breakdown as I did in IC#1. I just didn't want to start pumping stuff during the preseason because it may not fully represent how the system works given the weak opposition.

  14. En 3/9/2018 a las 23:18, Gegenklaus dijo:

    I can understand why you would use AP instead of IF’s. AP’s literally goes into the half spaces much sooner than the IF’s. The IF’s might work better if you go strikerless as they have much more space to attack. 

    Still looking forward to see what you come up with. I really like using IWB’s myself. The whole logic is quite cool. They occupy CM’s position and can cover their flanks much sooner during the defensive transition - which is acutally one of the reasons likes to use them; they make the distance during defensive transition much smaller; The fals 8’s either Press high or cover in midfield - wingers can get back quicker to support the flank. 

    The only thing I hate most is the goddamn wingers in AM-strata. They dont hold the width at all when the Ball gets close to goal or even before. I wanna use them in the AM strata as it really helps with the high press but they tuck inside too soon and squezze the space for the two 8’s that push up into the number 10 space/half spaces. 

    The role that holds width the longest is Wide Target Man ... :D

    the system I try to create is somewhat City’s; where the wide attackers provided width, the 8’s attacks through center and half spaces and the fullbacks protect for counter attacks and helps retaining posession. Its a really cool system as it attacks through all the channels on the pitch and protects most of the channels. 

    I ditched the APs as soon as I fired the game today and played 5 minutes of the first game :D I didn't want more ball-magnets on the system, much less ones with "playmaker" attached to them. We're keeping the IFs there for the time being.

    As explained, IWBs are doing what I want them to do. They are false CMs and play like them. Get the ball, pass the ball, don't get too fancy. And they are hyper fast tracking back and positioning on defense (even while actually being players meant to play on CM positions as you can see by the names in my best XI).

    Man if I could make your comment about the Wingers real and 100% true that'd be glorious, and I acknowledge and recognize that they may not hold the wide position as much as you'd like, but in my case I need them to get inside as hell but I don't think I'll ever get fully happy with that. At least they try, tho.

    About that City system you mention, well, you know what I think about it. Lovely stuff.

    En 4/9/2018 a las 13:46, Swills417 dijo:

    God damn! Every time I go into a well put together tactics forum thread I want to completely change my team! Could you mitigate the players not holding width by setting team instructions to the widest possible option? 

    Happens to me all the time. I read something here and I want to take on a completely different challenge. I read a book I want to start with another team. I read an article I want to sign a player. Crazy stuff haha!

    Yes you can tweak players' roles with PIs and looking at their PPMs, but even with that some roles are hard-coded to work in a certain way and even for those not that exaggerated, you still find problems. Not a perfect ME, but well, we have to adapt and that makes it challenging and fun to try and come with new systems and ideas, so it's okay.

  15. Preseason completed. So far, so good, yet not so good.

    ubtDAl1.png

    Am I happy with the results? Sure. Look at the numbers: 34 goals in 7 games and only 5 conceded (I don't even know what happened against MTK, the team was utter crap to be honest for some mysterious reason). Am I happy with the way the system is playing out? Hmm... Not 100%. At least not until the last game against Tranmere, which yes I know is not 2011 Barcelona but still. That felt like the game in which the tweaks I did to the formation made it work the closest to what I want to achieve. So this is it.

    sGe8NMU.png

    I know. I know. You're think "oh look at this ***** putting all those TIs and PIs and having no clue what he's doing". I understand your logic, but bear with me. You have read my thought process and what I want to achieve. You know this is not some random stuff throw to the ME that works just because the ability of the players featured in the XI. No. I'm building something I have an image of pretty clear in my mind, and that formation, and all of its instructions make it work as close as possible to how I think it should work. A few notes:

    • The DLF works wonders. He drops, participates in the game, but is a threat up front. Me likes.
    • I've tweaked and re-tweaked and then tweaked again what now are the IF(Su). Believe, they've driven me incredibly nuts. But finally, I think the best way to make them drop a little deeper and getting them some more into inside positions to be overlapped by the MEZ is by assigning them both the Support duty and also heavily customizing their PIs to get narrower, hold the ball and roam. I've tried countless combinations, but this seem to be the best one.
    • The MEZ are never going to be "true" Central Wingers, that's for sure. I give up and we have not even started the season yet ("how dare you!?", I heard in the distance). Again and as with the last point, this is the closest to a Central Winger you can get on this FM. They are on Attack duty to give room to the coming IWBs (our truly fake/false CMs here), and I also PI'd them to run wide and dribble more.
    • I was using a HB but was forced to change the role. Honestly I don't care that much about the defensive side of the game for this challenge, but I don't want to get screw over and over, and the HB made the CBs split and that created massive holes in defense that even ****** MTK exploited as hell. No more my Hungarian friends. BWM is a win-win and I loved the defensive triangle that I created in IC#1 with Celtic, so I'm cool there.
    • The CBs go on Cover because holly hell those holes. Too much to stand each and every game. No more risky business down there fellas.
    • The IWBs were also a little of a headache during the first creation phase (up until like v5 or v6 of the tactic -- I'm at v10 now) but I've finally gotten to a point where they are pure false-game-building-CMs. They go up, stay inside and don't go crazy overlapping, which is not what they need to do because that is supposed to be the MEZ task.
    • I'm currently playing a SK because we go quite high as a block so I guess having someone deep in there covering the CBs doing stupid stuff is necessary. Not a lock tho, may get back to a classic GK in time if there is not a lot of difference.

    As far as the team instructions, oh boy are they a bunch:

    • I want to retain possession because I understand that makes the team take more time to finish plays and that allows players to relocate into their "real" positions on offense. It seems to be working more and more as MEZs overlap the IFs (not always but what can I do...) and the IWBs get settled in midfield pretty nicely.
    • The shorter passing has more or less the same effect, and I don't think going flank-to-flank is a must here. It is not something I had in mind when developing the system and I'd rather play that short-distance game so it's alright. Same playing out of defense. I don't want long balls that go for nothing and doesn't allow the system to fully develop and display.
    • By narrowing the playing space I force the IFs and IWBs to get in. It works to an extent to fulfill my ideas.
    • Higher tempo and CDMM is what Klopp taught me.
    • And finally, by "forcing" the underlapping instead of leaving it open I've observed that IWBs are quite restricted and remain inside the central zone of the pitch instead of going wild wide, which I don't want to even mention. It doesn't seem to affect the MEZs and IFs interaction too much, so I'm happy with it.

    I'll wait and play some Premier League / EL games before updating with some images and videos so you can see how the system looks in a more detailed way, but I hope this breakdown of the stuff and update on how things are as of now gives you an idea of how I'm putting together my "real-life" thoughts into the beloved FM match engine and tactics creator.

    Edit: Forgot to mention the mentality and shape:

    • Standard mentality. Don't go to crazy up the pitch or sit to deep. I've come to realize I'm a disciple of the Standard, which nonetheless I change during games depending on how the opposition is playing, the result, etc... to move the lines up or down the pitch as I need it.
    • Flexible shape. "Booooooriiing!" Yep. A lot. But really, nor do I want the lines to be to close (may make it hard to reach further zones against strong teams giving the whole concept developed) or too separated (basically because if we get caught we're pretty fudged against quick and precise booming counters).

    As always, any comment/suggestion/question is appreciated and will be properly addressed :D

×
×
  • Create New...