Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About BMNJohn

  • Rank
  1. That was not what I was thinking about and that doesn't answer my concerns. But considering what you wrote, if we were to run that same user benchmark (which loads all leagues apparently) on full details on a very multi-threaded CPU, would we see similar (not necessarily better) performances to the top CPUs of the "default" benchmark? Would they fare better than they do on the "default" benchmark? Or at least, if both types of CPUs were to do that same test, would the ones with more cores/threads bridge the gap in performance with the ones that propose faster clock speeds? It would be very, very interesting and I'd genuinely like to see it. It would make Ryzen and Threadripper CPUs as well as heavily threaded Intel offerings more efficient in a certain way compared to the i5-x700 series (and similar). EDIT: My concern isn't whether FM does or does not use all cores/threads. As far as I'm aware, most relatively modern programs do use multiple cores/threads but don't necessarily exploit the possibilities offered by such architectures. My question is on whether FM can exploit that to run faster in any circumstances.
  2. I just meant that this was a different concept of Total Football, so we have to be careful when we mention the term that we understand what it means. Anyway, with the current tactics creator it is not really possible to actually have a fluid free roaming system in FM. Be careful, this tactic, as mentioned by Ö-zil to whom I still give the full credits for this particularly works well against 4-4-2 (without AML/R) and its variants: 4-4-1-1, 4-2-2-2 DM, etc. Which means that against such systems the results can be deceiving. However it's rather weak against other top heavy systems, and especially 4-1-2-3 and 4-2-3-1, especially the way they work in FM (which is linked to my previous comment about the tactics creator). And these systems are ubiquitous in FM.
  3. If I've learned anything I've watched from the original FM version of this tactic or the real life version of it, it is that this tactic was not designed around the use of an attacking libero at all. Which makes sense: the libero effectively died in his classic form with the offside rule change in 1990 and was buried with the 1992 back-pass rule. You could argue that this Barcelona side still used a Sweeper however (still better than the Cover duty!). Moreover, the use of a deep CM/DM in charge of recycling possession from deep makes the use of an attacking Libero completely redundant, especially in a top heavy formation like this. The FM side of this is that the Libero doesn't work all that well in recent FMs. On Support duty, the Libero is just a fancy Ball-Playing Defender who screws the offside line, so there's no point using it. On Attack duty, if you put a player in the DM strata the Libero doesn't go up the pitch at all. If you remove the DM and he does get forward, he immediately go back as your team loses possession. On the top of that, the Libero doesn't seem to have the playmaker bias, so his teammates will not seek him. Basically, most of the time you're just watching one guy running forward when your team has the ball and then running back when possession is lost, accomplishing absolutely nothing at all aside from tiring himself and screwing the defence in the process by leaving holes everywhere. Also, by forfeiting both a DM and a central defender, you destroy the stability of the team in a setup that's already not too great defensively even in its vanilla form. That said, if I wanted a deep player to be the creative outlet for the team, make surges forward and leave defensive holes everywhere but without destroying the offside trap, I know what I would use: a Regista. Which is essentially Juve's setup from when Pirlo was at the club: a strong three man defence, wingbacks to bring width, two hard working CMs who compensate for Pirlo's inability to defend and two strikers with a creator/scorer partnership. Then, play possession/position based football instead of the more defensive approach Juve used. At least when compared to the Libero (A), the Regista's teammates will try to give him the ball. You also somewhat keep the three man midfield Cruyff wanted. A side note to this and which was mentioned by Ö-zil IIRC: here, "Total Football" does not mean roaming. That version of total football used by the 1974 Dutch squad at the World Cup was defeated by the much more disciplined West Germany. Here, "total football" means having versatile players who can play and fill various positions and roles. Defenders who can actually play a pass, strikers who can create and press, wingers which huge activity able to defend and be available to score... This vision of Total Football is based around the now famous "Juego de Posición". That said, you're perfectly free and welcome to experiment with it. Just report back your findings.
  4. If I'm not mistaken, "Curls Ball" is, or at least used to be a tutor-only PPM. I don't know if it's still the case, but usually you needed to track a player that has the PPM, is old enough to tutor (24 years old or captain of the team), has a good personality and then hope the PPM rubs on the tutee. I was (half) joking about hitting FKs with power though... unless you have the next Roberto Carlos.
  5. Seems weird, Wiki has him at 60 in his career. FWIW, L'Équipe has Juninho at 77 (or 75) and Beckham at 65. But yeah, IRL it's pretty tough to see 4-5 goals per season from free-kicks. Juninho did score 8 in a season both in 2004-05 and 2005-06, but if you average his 44 free kicks for Lyon with the number of seasons he stayed there... That's pretty much a detail though in this discussion. https://futebolemnumeros.blogosfera.uol.com.br/2015/03/29/ceni-supera-marcelinho-em-gols-de-falta-por-um-so-clube/ As far as FM goes (and I probably said that somewhere else), I find that the "Curls Ball" PPM has a disproportionate effect on free-kick efficiency. I've seen Payet being more dangerous than Pjanić in FM17 just because of this PPM, even if the Bosnian has better Free Kicks, long range shooting as well as pretty much every relevant technical and mental attributes. Sometimes it can even be worth to channel their inner Cristiano Ronaldo and teach them "Hits Free-Kicks With Power" in order to stun the keeper or injure a player in the wall: it's not like the players are good at hitting the target anyway... For some reason, I found that the better the players are at free-kicks, the less likely they are to attempt to hit them directly. Meanwhile, in real-life where players are more likely to put the ball into the box instead. I've never toyed with free-kick routines to see if I could prevent those idiots from shooting all the time; might be worth it considering how fetid their attempts tend to be. Also, I find that in FM there's a lot, LOT of exploitable if not outright dangerous free-kick highlights. It's toned down by the fact that most of them aren't scored nor anywhere near the target; else you could very well have very unrealistic numbers that would put the likes of Mihajlović or Platini to shame. I wouldn't be surprised if it indeed is harsher in FM18 than it ever was before; let's say that I'm not surprised at all by how poor FM free-kick takers seem to be.
  6. If this thread is anything to go by, FM heavily prefers CPU speed to the number of cores. The best CPUs for this test are Intel's i7 x700 series or i5 x600 series. There's a few outliers but most CPUs with less power but more cores/threads tend to perform well below; in fact, only 2 out of the fastest 20 CPUs have more than 4 cores (including a laptop CPU!). AMD Ryzen and Threadrippers don't perform well in this test due to lower clock speed, even if the R5 1600/1600X remains great for general gaming. We have yet to see what Zen+ brings to the table this year as far as AMD goes, or if post Meltdown patches influence the results in any way. That is, if your CPU choice is based on FM performance.
  7. AI managers' preferred roles

    That wouldn't solve new/regen managers playing like ass though, among various other things. That would only help in the very few seasons after the start of the save.
  8. Amended well no since I had decided against purchasing FM18. However, I still fairly extensively played the demo quite a few times. I've already posted some of my findings earlier on; some things have changed and others have remained, but they are consistent with things I had already noticed in FM17 despite the changes in the ME. It's pretty much my own spin on it basically, so might as well discuss your findings too. The formation and roles were these, and the DLP(D) was in the DM strata. For a long, long time I had struggled to make this formation dangerous offensively. Often I'd have massive possession but then either a lot of long shots or dozens of shots on target. In both cases, I'd have very few goals compared to the absurd toothless domination I would have during matches. So since I was stuck, I figured I'd watch a video on how Barcelona used to shape their attacks and what I could to replicate that. So here's a video that I already posted in this page, excuse me for the lack of originality. First, here's a good reminder on Team Shape and Mentality. I figured out I needed to bring more separation between players in order to create a bit more space, so I ditched Very Fluid in favour of a Fluid mentality. Fluid makes the WM(A) a bit more attacking in their runs; it's not much, it's just a very slight change in mentality. It also focuses the CBs to focus a bit more on their defensive duties, and if you want them to bring the ball out of defence (which is very effective because of FM's complete lack of defensive participation from strikers and AML/R stratas) you can either ask them to Dribble More (PI available for BPDs), use the new Bring Ball Out Of Defence PPM or find a tutor with Tries To Play Way Out Of Trouble. The Offensive Four: Coming onto the changes in roles, well there's the obvious changes in the offensive quartet. I prefer WM(A)s to Wingers or other roles due to their much more balanced behaviour. In FM, good Dribblers tend to dribble regardless of their instructions, role or duty. For example, I had CD(D)s dribble quite a bit already in previous versions despite their role that shouldn't allow them to. As such, good dribblers with the WM(A) role still tend to dribble but will consider passing more often and are more available offensively in the last third since they don't necessarily Stay Wider like wingers do. Also, despite the higher Mentality from the less fluid Team Shape, they don't defend that much less than on Very Fluid. I also axed the AM(A) for an AP(A): I wanted the polarizing figure of the playmaker, which in FM always attracts a lot of balls. Even with an Attack duty, the AP(A) still comes deep to get the ball and passes it around, but won't shy from dribbling if he has the space to and will be available as a second option around and inside the box. You have to watch him because he well see the ball a lot and can be marked out of the game pretty easily. You could wonder why I do not use the Enganche, who theoretically fits the bill and the description of what this AMC is supposed to be: a player who receives the ball and lays it to other very quickly. Well the Enganche in FM is also a very static player who does not dribble nor try to play his way out of trouble, he's not much more useful to the attack than the AP(A) and he barely participates defensively (still more than the Treq or the Poacher, but who cares about these guys). In other words, to me the Enganche is inferior in about every aspect to the AP(A). The eagerness of the AP(A) to dribble instead of doing quick passes can be annoying, but I'd take that over the FM representation of the Enganche any day of the week. Despite how slow he was, I don't recall Riquelme being unable to play himself out of trouble after all. Then comes the CF(A). The change in duty was pretty easy: I needed to create a bit more space, so having the CF(A) higher up, making runs around and between the defenders was more useful than having him drop deeper in an already very stacked midfield. Much like the AP(A), despite his Attack duty he won't necessarily drive head on and still will play for the team instead of living by and for the goal like say, a Poacher. Also, I had an issue with CF(S) more often than not trying helpless long distance shots instead of trying to dribble through openings; it's something FM is terrible at but it was even more prevalent with the Support duty. The Three Men Midfield: Now comes the three men midfield. I wanted a couple of hard working midfielders able to participate in offence and defence, so the BBM was an obvious choice. Now, the BBM doesn't roam all over the pitch like their PI could suggest: they roam up and down almost exclusively. Also, since they don't dribble nor move around like the RPM or MEZ, you're not going to find them on the wings or similar. I was hesitant at first to try them, but I considered it more after reading the description of the Carrilero, who are described as moving side to side as opposed to the BBM that moves back and forth. The Carrilero is still an useful option to try, but they're very timid midfielders who don't do much in terms of movement, so watch them and watch after them if you choose this role instead. The DLP(D) in the DM strata was something I already had in place in FM17. I simply find that the DLP(D) protects the defence better when in the DM strata than it does when in the CM strata. Even if their average positioning in either strata is very similar, I find that CMs tend to see a lot of balls getting immediately behind their backs, between them and the CBs. I also tried the HB a bit: to me the HB recycles possession better than the DLP(D), but doesn't protect the defence as well. Just my experience. The Defensive Four: Then comes the BPDs and the keeper. There's not much to say about them, I have them as BPDs because I can and because I trust them on the ball. I dislike the Cover duty for the central CD. You'd think that they'd stay slightly back to cover for long balls, but actually they'll try to fetch and "sweep" any long ball, even if that means colliding with your holding midfielder. In such a top heavy formation it can happen often, leading to huge gaps between the remaining two CBs. I hence favour the more balanced Defend duty for the central CD. For the wide CDs, I often hesitate between the Defend and Stopper for the duties depending of how aggressive I want them to be: the Defend duty offers better protection against pacey roaming strikers as they'll just play the offside trap better even without using the TI. The keeper can have any role or duty to be honest, but it's absurdly critical to Distribute To Centre Backs unless you have Peter Crouch up front. FM keeps hoofing the ball to helpless wingers, playmakers and strikers no matter what their stature is or how good in the air they are, and it's absurdly infuriating. I just needed the GKs to cut on that nonsense thank you very much. Team Instructions and general setup: My memories on the TI setup is a bit hazy, but I remember things I didn't like so here we go. In a general way, I tend to tweak TIs depending of what I see on the pitch and don't use too many of them unless required. I usually play on Standard team mentality and tweak from there depending on the scenario of the match, but I much prefer using the hair-dryer method than tweak the mentality if I find that my players underperform. Players in the FM verse react a whole lot better when you criticize them than they allegedly do in real life. If they played terribly, you should criticize them either way, no matter what the opposition: team talks are contextual. If your mid-table players conceded stupid goals against a top flight team or got destroyed, they'll generally react better if you tell them that it was unacceptable than if you tell them they're unlucky Of course you'll have the one-off idiot who will take an issue with the team talk; at least it makes it very easy to see who's gonna take the highway during the next transfer window... Anyway, I usually Close Down More or Much More, use a Higher defensive line or standard as I find that Much Higher lines tend to be susceptible to hoofs. I don't usually Play Out Of Defence as asking the GK not to hoof helps; also, if you're using a DLP(D) you have a playmaker that your defenders will seek and hence limit their incentive to hoof. It also helps with how quick they pass the ball around instead of keeping it and dwelling on it because you told them not to hoof. I enjoy Playing Wider to force my players to use the available space and target free players; I usually don't play as wide as possible unless I really want to stretch out the opposition since it tends to make defending harder, and I don't exploit the flanks. I also tend to Play Ball Into Box unless I want to play really quickly. After that, it's pretty much contextual and depends of what you see. A Variant: The variant on this for teams who defend very deep and don't allow for much space is to switch the 3-4-3 Diamond for a 5-4-1 Diamond, using IWB(S)s instead of WM(A)s and MEZ(A) instead of BBMs. Mezzalas are great at making defences implode from within (that was redundant). I would prefer if IWBs had the same behaviour as they had in FM17: now they act like Lahm only if there's a winger/wingback before them, but if they're alone of the wing they won't vacate their initial position as much. We can't have too many nice things apparently. Oh well, it's not like the MEZ is the next role to be nerf- ahem, tweaked to further represent the reality of modern football©. What do you mean I'm tempting fate? Of course, your mileage may vary. Keep in mind that I do not possess FM18 too.
  9. I agree. FM has been struggling with that for a while. It's especially prevalent on far post crosses, where you should have enough players to cover the opportunities but still concede because your defenders completely forget about the opposition's player at the far post. Or when two defenders close down on a winger near the byline, opening opportunities to pass the ball around or towards the box. Aside from getting better defenders, there's not much to do. Obviously this is considering that you have a sensible tactical setup, of course.
  10. If I had wanted to reproduce Marseille's tactics (which I honestly wouldn't want ), I probably would've gone for something different. 4-4-1-1 instead of 4-2-3-1. Marseille doesn't rely on a tall striker so hoofing it is prohibited. Their wide players have near total positional freedom but still are expected to commit to defensive tasks. They press but prefer to defend low, hence why I prefer the 4-4-1-1 in general. I also have a huge bias against the AML/R stratas too to be fair. although this evening they have chosen to ask their wide players to press high on Montpellier's CBs since la Paillarde plays with three CBs which would validate the 4-2-3-1... if you could get the AML/R to actually defend. I also think Payet's movement is more akin to the WP(A) role rather than the AP(A) on the wing role, although his positional freedom is far greater. Rudi Garcia shafted the 4-1-4-1 in favour of a 2 man midfield who are expected to protect the defence. That said, opponents often find space between the lines and players and I don't think that the team's combination of low overall defensive positioning and closing down works all that well. Marseille makes extensive use of the wings too, where their stronger players lie. Mandanda as a GK(D) and Distribute to CBs or any similar option that will prevent him from hoofing the ball. Sakai as a FB(A), Rami BPD(D), Rolando CD(D), Amavi WB(S) or FB(S). Thauvin IW(S) and Roam From Position, Gustavo CM(D), Zambo Anguissa BWM(S), Payet as WP(A) and Roam From Position. No clue for Sanson, but he doesn't have a playmaking role and I dislike AM(S) nearly as much as I dislike AML/R stratas. Sanson tends to fill in for Payet's and Thauvin's constant movement rather than dropping deep to get the ball. Germain as CF(A). Germain is more of a supportive player, but I feel the Attack duty is simply more dangerous to the defenders with its movement off the ball. For the subs, Ocampos is fairly obviously a IW(A) which sends Payet in the axis as a AP(A). Maxime Lopez is more proactive than Zambo Anguissa, so CM(S) could do, needs more experimenting: he's a bit light physically and more suited to a three man midfield. Mitroglou can't do much more than AF(A), although I believe his lack of movement and team work is problematic: even if he's not much more successful this season than Germain, the Frenchman is far more active on the pitch. The Greek just tends to completely disappear if you don't play for him. As for the overall team instructions and style, I'd go with either a Standard or a Fluid shape: the whole team defends but there's still some degree of separation between tasks. I'd consider Play Wider to search for space more often. Marseille doesn't play slow but doesn't waste the ball senselessly either: Play Out Of Defence, Shorter Passing if necessary. I'd only consider Retain Possession if the goal is to keep the result at the end of a match. I'd also use Close Down More. You might be wondering why i'd put Thauvin on a supportive role. Well that's the big difference between the "young" Thauvin and today's Thauvin: he's much, much more altruistic and won't necessarily drive himself into corners on the ball. In comparison Ocampos is much more of a true and true attacking player. All of that is just my rambling; I wouldn't necessarily play like that personally even with this formation so take it for what it's worth. Actually there are a few things I'd change, but I already said so early in this post.
  11. The tactics of the likes of Guardiola (or Bielsa FWIW) are poorly reproduced by the AI in FM. I mean, just open up the pre-game Editor and look up for Guardiola's tactical preferences. The AI Guardiola basically uses a 4-1-2-3 DM Wide (sometimes a 4-1-4-1 DM) with all possession markers turned up to eleven: slow as molasses tempo, very short passing, very high possession retention: the ultimate caricature of tiki-taka. As a player you have a lot more chances of reproducing their real life tactics since you're allowed to think out of the box in terms of formations (as the AI is limited to the default formations), role combinations, player choices, so on and so forth. That said, having a static formation instead of dynamic formations whether you have the ball or not (à la PES) does not help; neither does the pressing system in FM (or lack thereof). I don't think that Diego Simeone's 4-4-2 is well reproduced in FM by the AI either the the same reason. You'd really need the strikers and the whole team to defend low and compact; something you'd do as a player by using them as Shadow Strikers instead. You probably wouldn't fancy the indiscipline of Ball Winning Midfielders either, chasing after every ball and leaving huge holes behind them. Fortunately for AI Guardiola, his huge Reputation within FM allows him to still find a job despite numerous sackings. OTOH, simpler setups like Mourinho's direct football tend to do very well in FM, especially paired with great players and humongous amounts of cash. That AI Mourinho doesn't take a random dislike on some of his players also helps. EDIT: I mean, try to make FM understand Bielsa's "3+1" rule when it comes to the number of defenders he'd use.
  12. FM18: Wide Midfielders

    You could also just disregard your assistant "valuable" opinion and play your so-called Wingers as WM regardless. That's what I used to do and still do. "Natural" WMs are more often than not just players too slow or not good enough at dribbling to be "natural" Wingers. Just disregard how full the circle is or if the player is supposedly overqualified for the role.
  13. As according to SI staff (too lazy to find the exact post), in FM18 players in the wide midfielder strata will only drop back to defend if they have a Support duty. If they have an Attack duty, they will stay up to be available to counter. So basically it's impossible to defend the wings with a lone WM on Attack duty, just like it's the case when you use the AML/AMR strata. If you want to use the WM strata you have to use a Support or Defend duty; if you want to use an Attack duty, you have to use wingbacks instead. Which fairly obviously confirms what I've experimented when comparing the WM(S) role and the CWB(A) role in the way they behave and in the way the team behaves. Well there's another difference: with WM(S) I'd rather use Carrileros or CM(S) while CWB(A) allows the use of Mezzala on Support duty.
  14. Quite honestly, after experimenting more with it, it's "almost" easier to attack and defend with a 5-4-1 Diamond WB than with a 3-4-3 Diamond. More than defending (which is an issue), my biggest gripe with the 3-4-3 Diamond in FM is attacking. With rather "average" to "good" players, the team is so high up the pitch that the three attacking players (the ST and the wingers) end up on the same line as the opposition's defence. Therefore, there are much fewer runs from them. Also, the CMs and the AMC often end up with the ball in such situations, and since the team is really high up the pitch they also don't make that many runs. In short, they often try long shots due to the lack of movement, which is very frustrating because sometimes there's an option to play a through ball between the defenders, but the midfielders won't consider it. When you use world-class players (or players sufficiently above the league's average), they don't shy away from trying such passes, which can make this tactic lethal. It also works if you're countering: the space offered is mercilessly exploited by your players, with multiple runs and a lot of flair. If you switch the wingers to a Support duty, they become more timid with their runs and don't offer as much support. If I ask the CMs to be more aggressive... well you better not lose the ball, and generally committing more bodies to an already stacked defence with a top heavy formation isn't really helping. Back then (FM15/16/17), using Wide Midfielders with the instruction to Dribble More helped somewhat with that, bringing more variety in the way they pass and move with the ball. Of course, teaching a multitude of players to Play One-Twos helps somewhat with adding fluidity to the setup. I really struggled a lot to create the space and the runs to prevent players from taking stupid long shots and consider passing the ball around when you have lots of possession. I get to see the ball a lot and play really deep into the opposition's half/last third, but I have tried a lot of the relevant instructions, but I struggle to actually create movements. That, or I haven't found a way to get on the pitch and smack my players in the back of their heads for them to consider some passes that seem worth trying when watching from the touchline. Here's an illustration: the possession movement fails when the CM stays too long on the ball. This situation ends up in a goal for my side anyway because when we get the ball back, we're able to instantly counter-attack and suddenly, there's a lot of space to exploit. Meanwhile, when using a 5-4-1 Diamond WB, here are my findings. One, Complete Wing Backs are absurdly aggressive players. Two, since they're WBs, they attack from a lot deeper. They see and make runs that WMs roles don't seem to consider. The flip side of that is that CBWs on Attack duty spends a lot of time very, very wide, requiring players who can actually exploit crosses. The second matter is that while it's easier to defend the wings, it's not actually easier to defend deep in general: you have a line of five players behind a diamond, which doesn't offer good pitch coverage at all and allow for overlapping runs on the wings shall the opposition play with aggressive wingers and FBs/WBs. I'm not too much of a fan of CBWs due to how they excessively hug the touchline and the byline, staying really, really wide all the time. I'm not to fond of Wingers (the role) for that reason either and usually prefer Wide Midfielders (the role, yet again) instead. However, WMs have slightly lower mentality and don't usually make aggressive runs off the ball either. Of course, there's no such thing as a formation that can cover the pitch perfectly with eleven players anyway, so you have to compromise. I'll have to watch some Barcelona 90's football to see better how to organize the attack. Like this video for example.
  15. Thanks for the feedback. I eventually downloaded the demo, and after struggling to score with a 4-1-4-1 DM (and more accurately, struggling to find shooting positions despite having possession even within the opposition's penalty area), and after Zabaleta broke his leg in an international game I could've pulled him from, I gave the 3-4-3 Diamond a go. Quite honestly, I could never use it against a 4-2-3-1 Wide in FM17 at all, especially against fast wingers. So when this happened, especially against Liverpool, I was incredibly surprised. Quite a few sitters were missed too and the scoreline could've been more generous. While not optimal defensively, the combined action of the IW on Support and the Carrilero were enough to block the wings, especially when the team is asked to Get Stuck In and really commit to the press. Too often I find that the each player presses on his own instead of pressing being a team/collective effort; certainly an area where FM can make a LOT of progress. I feel in this version of the ME that the players cut the trajectories of the opposition's passes better instead of running backwards. That said, Sturridge went through the game like Ronaldo did that summer of 1998... As per usual the AI would've rather played him injured than playing someone else. He didn't finish the game either, actually he left the field on a stretcher. How I set it up: