Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community

charisma_charisma

Members
  • Content Count

    106
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About charisma_charisma

  • Rank
    Amateur

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. As Herne stated in the original thread - it's about inspiration, not about sticking to every single role as it is in real world. That way, it would be very hard or even impossible to create a well-performing system that way. I think a DLF(s) is a good approximation of the CF(s) - you add a "move into channels" PI and it's there. Uncle Sam, I've read your threads from 2010 or so, great work and in-depth knowledge. I'll follow this one as well.
  2. I'm interested whether you considered a 532 formation? A 532 formation would make sense for using the regista. Maybe a midfield of Mezzala (a) + Carillero (su) with a regista behind them? Both of these roles would go wide when in possession (correct me if I'm wrong as I actually still play FM16), Carillero would cover thje space behind an attacking WB on his side (makes sense to use Carillero in a single wide pivot system) while on the flank where the forward-minded Mezzala operates, there'd be a support duty wingback. The 3 ATB would surely be able to hold the ball and deliver it to the Regista. I'd look to lower the D-line + play out of defense + use lower end mentality + structured shape (or just some of these) to make sure you play a slower build up play, making sure there's space between the defence and the regista for him to collect the ball from the defence. He'd than have a few runners in front ofd him - an attacking WB on one side + an attacking Mezzala on the other side + 2 strikers further up the field (the benefit of structured shape).
  3. Yes, it will encourage them to do so, I believe that might be a bad thing. What I wanted to say is maybe a more structured shape would be better suited for this formation as it would help to create space between players positioned in different strata... The combination of multistrata formation with the advanced midfielder dropping deep and the defensive midfielder stepping up with fluid team shape might get your players on top of each other, with no vertical space between them. I know it did for me, so I was interested to see your reasons here.
  4. Could you explain why you opted for fluid team shape? You have an AMC dropping deep and a DM also with support duty (granted, he'll be 'holding position') in a formation with at least one player in each stratum.
  5. Yes, I'm pretty certain that (former) creativity = (today's) vision. In SFRASER's thread creativity was referred to as the ability to see available options, so yeah. The question is whether flair is an attribute that affects risk taking today as significantly as it - according to the thread - did in 2010? This is the "official" definition of flair (https://community.sigames.com/manual/football-manager-2018/players-r167/): A natural talent for the creative and occasional unpredictability. A player with a lot of Flair will be one of the key attacking components in any team but at the same time may need tactical restraint to get the best out of him. Flair and Vision work well together. So it talks about unpredictability and a possible need for tactical restraint - what I can read from that is that a player with high flair will deviate from tactical instruction more (even if you don't play n fluid + "be more expressive" TI + use him in a playmaker role). One could argue unpredictability = risk, but it's not always the case...
  6. I've read this thread, is it still: flair = risk taking? Or is it now: flair = creativity, and (former) creativity = (today's) vision? If flair still affects risk taking, that would be great, you could moderate risk on a player basis, not only on team basis (mentality + team shape).
  7. http://www.squawka.com/news/football-manager-2016-player-roles-explained-the-roaming-playmaker/566433#E52eaTu1v1jRleC5.97 There's an article on RPM, it's Cleon's stuff so it's 100% factual. There's an AVFC 4141 thread from another experienced FM player. There's a lot of interesting issues discussed here, with a special focus on getting the CM(a) further up the field. That may interest you since it explains the importance of (fluid) team shape (however, it's second to mentality in this regard). Personally, when using a lone striker formations such as this, when you only have 1 player in opposition area, I'd go for a RPM instead of AP bcs AP will try "more risky passes" too often. The RPM does not have this PI hard coded and he's more of a runner. This means he'll take his time to run with the ball up the field. Him doing this will provide time for the rest of your team to go up the field too to support your striker and catch up with the play. The AP will most likely just make a through pass to the striker too early while the rest of the team will be unable to catch up with the play.
  8. This is the tactic: Yes, the formation allows for a good build up, we manage to get the ball to strikers almost always. The reason is opposition mainly uses 442 so we have a spare man in one of the CBs, than there is the DM(su) who is completely unmarked, the RPM that drops deeper, roaming in space and attracting the ball and finally the F9 - a role that drops deeper than any other striker roles... I might test your WM(a) configuration when chasing a goal. I avoid attacking duties since I want to play possession style football while at the same time I'm using a high risk mentality. Also, it might be too risky to use that in my setup regularly since as I said, I play a single pivot system regarding the flanks. I assume having an IWB behind WM(a) helps defensively.
  9. I'm also trying to emulate RL Guardiola, his possession style, however, I've had more success with the 3-1-4-2 formation MCFC had used at the beginning of the season than with the 41221. I use a WM(s) on the left flank and a DW(su) on the right flank. The WM(su) role is great for ensuring position, however, since my player has "gets into opposition area" PPM, he'll attack the goal quite often, too. The DW(su) is there to put in some early low crosses (like Sane) and to be more aggressive defensively since I play a single pivot system regarding the flanks. Having all players on support (except one of the central midfielders - KDB) allows me to use control mentality and to play a possession based system. A relatively high risk mentality paired with 2 forwards, an onrushing midfielder and a winger attacking the goal ensures you're a genuine goal threat
  10. Are you suggesting swapping CM(a) and CM(s), so when the AP(s) drifts inside, CM(s) will still be behind so AP(s) will have space to run into and find the ongoing CM(a) who could then go forward or more likely pass it to IF(a) who should be further up the field than the CM(a) since he's positioned in AM slot?
  11. Hi, I'm playing a 4231 deep inspired by Pochettino's Tottenham and Cleon's article. It's FM16, I'm managing Leeds and we're playing Championship (it's a new save, if I may say so in 2018). Some games I win easily, some I loose and don't have any clue why. I assume I might lack width at times, as I only have FB(a) providing it on the left flank, but there has to be sth else... In addition to the CF(a), I wanted the AMR to be a goal so I started with a RMD(a) there. He was to isolated so I changed to an IF on attack. The problem persisted, so the next change was to an IF on support. I also changed DR to WB(auto) to lend IF some support. I use automatic duty for the WB since that equals to support duty on Control, however, there's no "get further forward" PI. The WB will go forward if the attack lasts for some time, e.g. when we start to control the final third. I don't want to focus my play on fullbacks and crossing, I'm playing FM16 and my teams have scored a ton of goals from crosses by now; I'd like sth else this time. Some issues I see are: - AM(a) being deep at the start of moves so he occupies similar position as the RPM. I've changed him to SS(a), but that was too aggressive, he'd go too high up the pitch - if the ball is played to the wing to AP(s), he'll cut inside and pass the ball to feet to AM(a). The AM(a) is often in these situations getting further forward and running into space so the ball is played by AP(s) behind him, - DM(d) closes down a bit too much (he'll close down a player already being closed down by my DL), so I changed him to Anchor Man. Anchor man occupied pretty deep position, so I finally added the "close down less" PI to DM(d). I'm still not sure this is the best option here, maybe I should use a support duty here. The idea behind a defensive duty player that holds position was to provide security for when the FB(a) on the left and RPM on the right go forward. What I like is the RPM (Dembele role), he carries the ball forward, makes intelligent passes and scores some from distance. I really want to keep this. I also like using an attacking duty forward as I want him to be the primary goalscorer (Kane). What I'm not satisfied with is the AM(a), Alli role; I want an all-around player here linking up play and arriving into the box at the end of moves. Right now, he's not synced with the AP(A) and RPM during the build-up. His play is good only after some time, when the move develops, as he will then attack the box as I want him to. Any suggestion and critic is welcome, thanks!
×
×
  • Create New...