Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community

Barbosa04

Members
  • Content count

    68
  • Joined

  • Last visited

3 Followers

About Barbosa04

  • Rank
    Amateur

Currently Managing

  • Currently Managing
    Anderlecht

Recent Profile Visitors

739 profile views
  1. @Cleon Thanks for such detailed response. I certainly see that my interpretation of CA style is too specific. And yet I take comfort from seeing that my team is using CA effectively both against attacking and defensive sides, and most goals are scored from distinctive CA move. I'll post a report on it maybe next month when I get the game. And I would be very pleased to know your opinion on it.
  2. Which one is true? Your first sentence implies AI driven CAs don't happen on control/attacking mentalities. Your second one implies it happens for every mentality but the threshold is lower for specific mentalities. I'm not being an ass. Just want to clarify the point as it's an important one and can be a game-changer when devising a CA tactic. Yeah, I agree totally. They can be distinctively different game styles. But would you agree that there are also similarities between the two? If CA football translates for you into having "numbers advantage" - that would require opposition over commit players forward and once you recycle the ball to take an advantage before they get back into their defensive shape, your only option is QUICK transitions (high tempo), urgency in delivering ball forward (DIRECT passing). I have read your "art of CA football" thread and honestly your formation with chosen roles doesn't look counter-attacking at all. I'm also not having a go at you. I learned a lot from your posts through the years, and I see you as experienced player with nuanced knowledge of the game. That's just my own attempt on understanding and devising CA tactic in fm. Ok, to the point - your formation comes with counter (cautious) mentality with only one player in oppositions half. Considering you didn't alter any TIs, there is no added urgency in play/ too few runners from deep, and no way of consistently creating "numbers advantage" with solitary man upfront. In this case only opposition who are willing to attack you may leave some openings for you, but more cautious/defensive side won't give you even a sniff at starting CA, thus CAs are incidental and overall tactic can't be portrayed as counter-attacking. I see that for you roles and PI comes first before mentality and TIs, or at least in this case of creating CA. So it can be a personal choice, but I still have my reservations on such approach. Yes you can have specialist roles who try to make CA happen. While PIs may alter creative freadom/forward runs it doesn't touch urgency of said actions. Your non-specialist players such as defenders are also would be more lethargic in tempo and passing because of lower overall mentality which doesn't bodes well with CA style as it relies on quick transitions. Yes you may somewhat refine each indivuduals PIs and alter TI, but then why pick lower mentality in the first place with lot's of alterations when same can be achieved with higher mentality with small refining. And there is some limit on how much attacking you can modify a player to be in lower mentalities. If this chart is still relevant, let's make a comparison for segundo volante which attack mindedness and penchant for making a run from deep areas makes him an excelent choice for CA tactic. While this is an old chart, there is no DM position on attack duty, so looking on support duty for DM player on counter mentality we get from 7 to 8 "individual mentality" depending on chosen shape. Not much considering the scale is from 1 to 20. While on attacking mentality the swing bumps up to 9-14. And I reiterate that for me the primary characteristic of CA style is quick transitions with urgency in play, and players with higher "individual mentalities" will more likely make the gameflow in such way that is more visually representative of Counter-Attacking football.
  3. I'm quite sure it's the opposite. The lower mentality - the less passing range/directness, reduced tempo and generally more cautious passing which are everything C-A isn't about. While lower mentalities brings somewhat deeper D-line which in theory would help to "lure" opposition to your own half, it's efficiency can be negligible depending on your starting formation and highly negated by aforementioned negatives of lower mentalities. I understand that you may somewhat refine the flow/starting point of C-A by giving specific individuals the weight of playmaking, but I think the starting mentality will have far greater influence on gameflow and rate of C-As. Specifically AI driven counter-attacks happens mostly depending how much opposition is invested in corners/free-kicks and late in game when chasing an equalizer, thus giving you an easy ride in creating counter-attacks.
  4. While there can be different approaches to counter-attacking style, I find any notion of "keep the ball" mentality even if in short passages during the play goes into direct contradiction of C-A style. When you are a dominant team in your league, lesser teams lines up deep with little pressing, which results in not leaving any openings for you to exploit in "counter-attacking" manner. Thus counter-attacks are incidental and so cannot be presented as a part of overall C-A style of play. In my idealistic view of C-A style is proactively giving an opposition most of the ball, inviting to come up to your own half, thus even when you face defensive sides, they will still leave space behind their CDs when they are parked in your half of the pitch with false sense of superiority. Of course there bound to be situations for example after a throw-in when there is no way to launch a lightning fast counter-attack for you but overall the style of play to be regarded as primarily C-A - the nature of most of the scored goals should come from counter-attacking move. At the moment my every second goal comes from pure C-A move which is the primary tool of distinctive pure C-A football.
  5. Both. Barring ultra-defensive tactics, every team will try to counter attack when given an opportunity. You can also "create" a tactic which would increase the rate of counter attacks. The tactic is quite straightforward, put men behind the ball, defend in numbers and try to lure opposition to commit players into your side of pitch, thus "creating" an opportunity to break forward before opposition gets back into it's defensive structure. The default "counter" mentality in the game is not representative of counter attacking football because the URGENCY of delivering the ball forward and making more opportunistic passes are reduced in that mentality. There are dominant teams such as Real Madrid that are good at playing counter attacking football. And there are lesser teams which play standofish football, letting the the opposition to have the most of the ball but hitting back at every opportunity. The latter is somewhat harder to achieve in fm, as in my experience the possession stats strongly correlates with win ratio (barring extreme "keep the ball at all costs" mentality), as teams who regularly cedes the ball possession is less likely to consistently win games. I played the demo of fm18 and as an experiment "created" a tactic with pure counter-attacking style of play. Half way through the season, my teams has by far the least "average possesion" stats in the league between 20 teams at 38%. Every team dominates me, and even at home minnow teams dictates play against me. Nonetheless we are magnificent at counter attacks. So my team sits comfortably at first place in the league. This must be my best fm experience, as such possession stats would always translate into defeats in my previous experiences. I will buy fm on sale, hopefully in june, play the whole season and post the detailed report on my experience.
  6. Barbosa04

    The Ask-SI-Anything Thread

    Will fm go on sale in near future? It went with 75% discount at the start of june last year. Something similar would be sweet to look forward to.
  7. @duca015 Fair enough, you have certainly raised my interest looking into ENG role. These roles with built-in “close down less” PI makes them defensive liability, but guess as a counter balancing measure they might excel exceptionally attacking wise like raum.s, which is worth finding out. Thank you.
  8. This logic doesn’t apply to fm17. Opposition doesn’t see your tactic and doesn’t adapt to it. Pre-match it counts teams reputation difference and current form and based on that fields its own version of defensive/attacking tactic. Changes during the game is also dictated not by accessing your tactic but by necessity to score or preserve the lead. You can see that as an experiment by starting the same game with vastly different formations. Opponent initial tactic with player roles will remain the same. Yes, with the rising number of asymmetrical enthusiasts, we the plain symmetrical tacticians start to look like weirdos.
  9. 5th post of the thread is updated. ... ... IWBs are class in what they do.
  10. Shuffling is not an option for this system, as its primary objective was putting raum.s on the center stage. In its current configuration it achieves it best. I admit that being more flexible with roles may be more beneficial compared to rigid system. But your suggestion of Eng. role would definitely wouldn’t work for me. My opponents usually field 2 DMCs, and Eng. with a “hold position” PI would an easy target for marking. Add on top of it his attack-mindness and decreased tendency to close down… this coupled with raum.s it may lead to overall unbalanced tactic. As Duca rightly points out, it might be because of striker’s presence. When the choice is between free space out wide and congested wall in central area, the obvious choice leads to former. In the absence of strikers, I find raum.s frequently moving centrally in search of space and to untie from the marker. So raum.s working area includes both wide and central areas in strikerless system.
  11. @WhyMe You may have missed them. PIs are right there in the 2nd post of this thread. But there are not many. Every role I pick for the position already comes with a package of built-in PIs. If they are already doing exactly what I’m expecting from them, then there is no need to overcomplicate their role. There is intricate connection between players, and in this particular system roles that are chosen are excelling in their default configuration. You may check out my PPM preference for some players in that post.
  12. 4th post of the thread is updated ... ... Did I mention that raumdeuters are great at taking advantage of advanced FBs? Well, don't believe me, check for yourself
  13. You don't need to do anything special. They are already 1v1 almost always in attacking transitioning. The problematic part is delivering exquisite passes from the other flank that you are trying to implement. See when you overloading the other flank, your players in there have short passing options around them, and when the choice is between a short sure pass and low probability/hard long ball to raum. who is being stocked by a FB… then the player in possession better go with a safer option. Some creative player on support duty in AMC will be best suited ability wise and positionally (shorter passing length meaning higher success probability). And as you ask for ideal variant for raum.s… I would omit strikers from the system as I would like all risky through balls directed onto raum.s path. In the presence of strikers the overall count of risky passes towards them would be shared. Although strikers who come deep like F9, DF may not as much steal the attention. 4-2-3-1 you are asking may be harder to play without being a strong team in a league, unless you have an excellent CMs. IWBs may somewhat negate the inherent central defensive hole of that system. How about 442 midfield diamond with raum.s instead of strikers?
  14. @wkdsoul you may find F9 to have about the same "average position" as SS. Playing against weaker opponent, I find F9 offers bigger attacking threat. Well, my biggest scorelines came with them 8-0, 11-0.
  15. @Mutumba Do you check your opposition’s fullback role? Before your team gets fully familiar with the tactic, your wide areas are vulnerable from FBs who are joining the attack. Your CDs are on stopper duty, so they will be frequently discharged from their primary position to close down opposition in wide areas, so an excellent teamwork is required from your MCs to instantly slot into CD’s position for cover. Playing cautiously (counter mentality), especially in tough away matches, before players gell together to play as one unit is a safer bet. The description in tactics tab (players are willing to die for each other) will likely translate into match, where your players will have supreme understanding when/how to cover for each other.
×