Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community

Rui

Members+
  • Content Count

    18
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Rui

  • Rank
    Amateur

About Me

  • About Me
    Midlands

Favourite Team

  • Favourite Team
    Nottingham Forest

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Aaaah I was being blind after all, just found it . Thanks guys!
  2. Hi all, I finally decided to return to FM after a year by starting a new save on FM19. For some reason I can’t play any games in preseason - when I see the matchday fixture list it just simulates straight to the result after I press continue. I’ve been playing FM for years but can’t figure this one out. I can’t see an option in staff responsibilities either, unless I’m being blind?? Cheers, Rui
  3. Ah Lars Veldwijk - I wonder what happened to him as he did nothing at Forest . Anyway I agree with everything summatsupeer has said. Think about how you want to play first then maybe we can point you towards that direction. At the moment your tactic looks very possession based, rigid and offering little offensive penetration. Just a quick glance and your roles look ok but I think the DM(s) and DLP(d) need to change what ever system you’ll play. The DLP looks like he’ll be suffocated for room to go about his thing by the DM pushing into midfield.
  4. I use a very similar system, all be it on FM 17, and it’s essential I have one FB(s) or else I get cut apart on transitions. Having a full back deeper isn’t such a bad thing in terms of attacking as it enables you to recycle possession when the opposition boots it clear. But it obviously depends on how you wish to play - this won’t be an option if you want to overload both flanks. The HB seems an interesting alternative for cover though.
  5. I'd start off with reading Cleon's countering attacking thread - you're more likely to trigger a counter with a deeper 4-5-1 shape rather than using AML/R's. (And the Counter mentality!). Also worth noting that both Kodjia and McCormack have the "likes to beat offside trap" PPM which will leave them isolated. I'm currently nearing the end of my first season at Villa and the most frustrating thing is just that - terrific strikers with this damn PPM!! They both failed to unlearn it too! I ended up using Ayew if playing a 1 striker formation and either Kodjia/McCormack as a AF(a) in 2.
  6. When I have a good dribbler I typically put him on the opposite side to his foot up front. An AF(a) moves into channels which brings him a bit wider. If he's on the opposite flank then he can "cut in" per se and either shoot or play someone in. A P(a) however will always be on the last shoulder so you'd want him to fire off shots quickly and not faf around with his feet - in that case I would put him on his "natural" flank. Also depends on your midfield support players and which side you have crosses wizzing in from and/or players cutting inside. Do your strikers have any PPMs? This can make a difference: "Shoots with power" - I would put him on his "natural" side. "Places shots" - I would put him on the opposite side (think Henry and how he used to place across the keeper from the left with his right foot).
  7. Your two CMs need to be more disciplined, particularly against 3 man midfields. The CM(d) has "close down more" by default now so he'll be chasing the opposition around off the ball. The B2B will be roaming everywhere when on the ball. Both situations will leave you vulnerable during transitions. I've found a DLP(d) besides a CM(s) to be working okay for the couple of 4-4-2 games I've played recently (Villa). I haven't found their to be a significant gap between my defence and midfield, but granted, I am using very fluid.
  8. I've been trialling out a 3-5-2 (the 2nd variant you've shown with the AMC) in my new Villa save during pre-season and have been frustrated with the amount of crosses the WB's deliver. WB(s) curtails the issue but then they don't get forward enough. "Work ball into box" appears to help to an extent but still the vast majority of my attacks end with a cross. Perhaps this formation is contradictory as to how I like to see a team play - that is prefer to probe (-> through ball) rather than to cross if space permits. Just annoying that WB(a)/CWB(s/a) have the PI "Cross More Often" by default.
  9. I was having precisely the same frustrations when I first picked up FM 16, going from formation to formation and not seeing the football I wanted (it didn't help that I kept changing my footballing philosophy in the hope that something "worked!"). I kept reading the same old "understand your system to avoid weaknesses", "it depends on roles" etc and got rather peed off as I never encountered these common issues on previous FM's, much like many others here! Inspired from my "Jambo-esque" save of FM 15, I finally found some success with the following shape: Control, flexible. My CMa has the roam from position PI, but that's it - no other PI's. This is by no means perfect and still a work in process (not sure on mentality, DLPs, DLFs roles, few other things) Key points: My two "holding" midfielders shift towards the wing when needed, which is aided by the "flat" central 3 I think. The opposition has less time in those deeper, wide positions resulting in less crosses being conceded. The amount of goals I've conceded from crosses has substantially decreased. My APs and IFs track back and offer the defensive behaviour I want; that is "marking" the opposition FB rather than helping my WB defend against the opposition winger. Players tracking back from the AMR/L positions has signficantly increased in FM 16 compared to previous versions. Even an attack duty tracks back at times (depends on mentality though), but I've noticed players with support almost always do. The APs on the right wing helps significantly with possession, coming inside to allow more passing options but also darting at his man when the right opportunity allows. My CMa essentially acts a AM and provides support to the lone striker. I've noticed the behavior of the striker to drop deep depends on the support behind him. I used to have no PI set to my CMa which resulted him being far less in that AM strata. In turn, I was frustrated to see my DLF/F9/CFs not dropping deep (unlike FM 15!!). It's like the ME forced him to "occupy" the oppositions CB's. I then tinkered with moving my CMa to the AM slot and to my surprise, saw horizontal movement of my ST. Obviously the AM provided far less defensive support, so shifting him back to CMa and added the "roam from position" PI. This has offered the right balance between the movement of both my attacking CM and ST, without compromosing on defensive shape. I'm pretty sure this is linked to the "retain possession" TI. I recently removed this from my tactic and found considerably more of those first time crosses being attempted. Before, I saw exactly what you described which was bloody frustrating when there was 3, sometimes 4 players in the box to aim for. In some regard, I guess we can't argue as by not crossing the team are following instruction and "retaining possession". But even in quite obvious opportunities to cross, they either pass back, revert to their weaker foot to cross or delay in front of the opposition player and have their cross blocked. As a result, I've had to concede possession for more penetrating play. Lowering the tempo and "play out of the back" shortens pass length by default, so I still (mostly) see the passing game I want to play but the ME still allows crossing.Morale is: Keep experimenting as you will eventually create a balanced system. Hopefully 16.3 will help in this regard, but it's entirely possible to play football you want to envisage on this version. Well, at least the football you "sort" of want to envisage in my regard. (work still in progress, I'm very much a FM amateur compared to most of you! )
  10. I do see quite a few opportunities for him to cross, although I suppose this is more with players rushing into the box rather than actually in the 6 yard box waiting. I should say that I've had my RPM(s) set on CM(a) for a few games and I certainly see him pushing forward, but it impacts his overall productivity so have settled for the RPM role. I initially had my IF on attack duty but he was hardly getting involved in moves. I'll try tinkering him again with a view to using him as a "second striker", along with changing my ST role as you've suggested. Thanks guys.
  11. First off I'd like to say a big thank you for a terrific guide and discussion. Top job! I'm currently in preseason during my first FM16 save (N.Forest) and have been observing friendlies to understand the good/bad of my core tactic: ----------F9(s)---------- IF(s)----------------W(s) -----RMP(s)-B2B(s)----- ---------DM(s)---------- FB(s)DC(d)DC(d)FB(a) ---------GK(d)---------- Standard, Flexible / TI's: Retain possession, roam from position, play out of defence / PI's: GK to distribute short I've generally seen been pleased with what I've seen despite some quirks here and there but understand it's very early days. I'm still experimenting with optimum roles for my CM's and also deliberating over my IF role. However I'm most concerned about the W(s). He's arguably the most exciting player I have and is brilliant at jinking runs past defenders but hardly crosses the ball despite great opportunities to do so. He often gets some space from the opposing FB, thinks a bit (could be a 3D animation flaw?) and often passes it to the my supporting FB who then typically passes in field or attacks the box himself. I've tried setting his passing directness higher but this has little impact (although only tried this in one game). Sure, by not crossing we keep possession but it's equally frustrating to see an opportunity for a whipped cross go to waste when I have players in/or rushing into the box. Are there any solutions to this? I was perhaps thinking of increasing my mentality to control which may promote more crosses?? I dunno. Any help would be appreciated. Many thanks, Rui.
  12. Cheers! Yeah it takes damn long to analyse but it's definitely worth it. It's just making time that's the problem!
  13. I really hope SI/Sega address this issue next year as it's not ideal for newcomers to FM. I used to be a fan of no sliders due to simplicity however it's a real pain when you're after a specific way of playing and a lot of parameters are hidden. +1. The best chance of creating a tactic you want is to watch games in full and analyse (I learnt this the hard way!). You'll spot things you don't like and gradually add team and player instructions to get the system you want. I used to refrain from this as I just wanted to get on with actually progressing through games, like most do I guess, but it's actually quite fun and rewarding to get the team playing how you want. Hopefully the creators will be transparent in the future so this process doesn't take as long.
  14. Inspired by Cleon and Jambo98, I've decided to analyse my first two games in full. I doubt this will last as it takes tiiiime! Wrexham away - lined up as a 4-4-2 General shape looked good at the start but I noticed Ozil and Ramsey were continually occupying each others space. I'd set Ozil to roam from position (not a fan of static AMs) and it appeared this was conflicting with Ramsey's default free role of being a box-to-box. Thankfully, this was far less pronounced as the first half went on, almost as if they were "learning" each others game (not sure if the ME would do this though!). Welbeck, as a DLF (a) was definitely leading the line and not coming short to interfere with Ozil. I was after a 1-2 man triangle and this appeared to happen at most times. I think this is assisted with Ozil's PPM to "come deep to get ball" and naturally, Ramsey pushing forward with the attack. Romero acts as I want him to a tee - rarely getting forward but able to pick a pass when Ozil and Ramsey are further afield. Another example of how the shape looks when the defense has possesion. Sanchez and Depay are essentially positioned in the "AMR" and "AML" slots which is good to see. The former was terrific in this game, coming off the touchline and latching onto through balls from Ozil and Welbeck on numerous occasions. Depay, however, was very ineffectual. As a WM(s), I set his PIs to "dribble more" and "cut inside" (I essentially wanted him to act as an IF(s)) but he ended up with a measly 28 passes in 60 mins (only Gibbs managed less with 24) and made ZERO runs off the ball. His average position is where I'd want him, but as said, he was simply making up the numbers. Another concern for me was Ramsey's movement when the opponent had the ball.... he was closing down a ridiculous amount. This made the "triangle" much bigger and almost certainly susceptible defensively against good opposition. I changed the whole team around after 65 mins, with Giroud up top as a DLF (s) and Munir just in behind as a SS. There was a hell of a lot of interchanging between both with Munir pretty much acting as the striker (this was confirmed on the average position map). Put simply, I did not like the way Giroud played at all. He will naturally look to play others in with his PPM of "play with back to goal".... couple that with a role of DLF (s) and he is hardly going to have a shot in my opinion. Result: Wrexham 0 - 4 Arsenal Bolton away - lined up as a 4-1-2-2-1 I'd seen signs of the system potentially being weak against a 3 man midfield when playing Wrexham, so I was interested to see how it faired against the 4-1-2-2-1 of Bolton. I made one change - switch Depay to a WM(a) from (s) but keep the same PIs. Within the first 10 mins I was seeing very promising signs - he was much more involved, open to passes from Ozil and making penetrating runs into the box. Gibbs, on the same flank off course, also played a lot better which I'm not surprised by. Talking of Gibbs, I may change his role to from WB(a) --> CWB as he's not quite as aggressive as I'd want him to be currently. One problem I noticed with Depay though is he was closing down a tad too much and left Gibbs exposed on occasion. I assume this is down to changing his role to attack duty but I'm going to avoid adding a PI for now. The match finished 0 - 0 however I was generally pleased with my attacking play as we created a lot of chances but failed to convert (too early to be concerned about that imo). The midfield triangle was still functioning how I'd want, although Ozil was roaming around considerably more in this match and almost always available for the ball, and Welbeck continued to lead the line and making the right decisions when to run at the defense or play teammates in. Ramsey continued to burst forward when Ozil came deep which was also good to see. Sanchez was the least active player in the attacking third - completely opposite to the previous match. Not sure if this is due to changing Depay's role since there were a lot more attacks going through the left side of the pitch. Above is a typical example of the defensive structure when being probed by the opposition. As you can see, it's the good old fashioned two lines of four - exactly how I'd want. My only concern is their DM (Spearing) being allowed to dictate things. I would have liked to see Ozil actively marking him but I suppose this could be solved by introducing a man mark instruction. To his credit though, I often saw him sprinting back to close down Spearing which was of some use. The obvious advantage of having a lazy AM is being lethal on the counter and because of that, I'm reluctant to add a man mark instruction until I'm forced to against top opposition. If against a narrow formation, I'd probably stick Ozil into midfield due to the likelihood of being overrun. Ramsey was still closing down too much, as he was in the previous game. I reckon it's time to add a PI for the next match. I'm considering putting the keeper as a sweeper since I'm playing a high line but think I'm going to analyse a few more matches before I make a change. The overall tempo of the play is just a bit too fast for my liking despite having the "lower tempo" TI activated. I guess this only nullifies the increased tempo caused by the "control" mentality to an extent, so technically I shouldn't be expecting a slow game. I suppose a medium-ish tempo is ok - it's Arsenal at the end of the day and every midfielder has the capacity to use that extra bit of pace to open up defenses. Finally a note on Giroud and Munir. I subbed both on after ~70 mins with them set as a DLF (a) and AM (a) respectively. As noted above, having Giroud as a DLF (s) is overkill due to his natural tendency of playing back to goal. I noticed that they interchanged far less in these roles yet Giroud still had the knack of dwelling on the ball unlike the proactive Welbeck. Very tempted to sell Giroud now or risk him as 3rd choice since it's not how I'd want my striker to play. I've been having a look at Joel Campbell, who I still have at the club, and I think he could be the ideal understudy to Welbeck. Needs work on his strength, but he has the technical skills and pace to be the main source of goals I'm looking for. Anyway, thanks for reading. Any advice is much appreciated - I've probably missed some obvious improvements!
×
×
  • Create New...