Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Synx

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. It seems very player personal as well, as one of my left backs would throw in crosses without any stopping beforehand the whole time, while the other one barely gets any in, with the same tactic.
  2. A bit, but I think it more limits the players who would do through balls and over the top balls. Be more Expressive or disciplined is about freedom outside of their assigned roles. If your assigned a role that has already try more risky passes enabled, it shouldn't have much effect on the amount of through balls, whether you chose Expressive or disciplined.
  3. Don't know if he has been posted yet, but I run into this guy when searching for a new striker: Kim Jun-Seon from Gyeongnam FC (South Korea). Only costs 1m, with a wage demand of 3k (after 1 season), and shows high potential according to my scouts.
  4. You tried playing on higher or much higher tempo? I always found that work alright breaking up heavy defensive formations.
  5. Mainly happens if you got low man management really. I always max it out, and haven't had a single person get mad when I compliment them.
  6. Defend/defend as basic defence. Good at everything, doesn't Excell against anything. Cover/defend if you struggle with through balls a lot. Defend/stopper if the AM is their main playmaker and you don't have a DM. (I don't really use this one). Stopper/cover against lone front player teams, and I also use this whenever I play a very defensive DM (like an anchor man). Cover/cover maybe if you play some tactic with double somewhat defensive DMs. For 3 defenders you can combine more freely. I often go for defend/cover/defend, or cover/stopper/cover
  7. Ok, then let's go over all the parts that doesn't make sense or aren't needed in your main tactic if those are your goals: Overlap/underlap. Isn't needed at all. Your right WB on attack gets forward enough without the overlap. It just makes the IF on that side hold up the ball. Doubt you want that. And underlap is more if you play an inverted wingback than for your mezella. Higher defensive line: it feels counterproductive to stopping building up from the back. (much) Higher engage line and (much) higher pressing does that, while the higher defensive line just means their players are closer as well, so longballs are less risky for them. Playing narrow: just makes the playing field narrow for no reason I would say. Unless you get terrible passers across the board it isn't needed. Lower tempo: lower tempo means less risky plays, which through balls, one-twos etc. are. Work ball in the box: it reduced crosses, and with so little players entering the box, seems a bit counter productive. It's prob better to tell some players to shoot less than enable work ball in the box. So I would start by changing those. Drop the under and overlap, ddop work ball on the box, drop the defensive line to standard, tempo and wide to standard, and see how that is. Than your player rolls. What you want from the left IF supp sounds more like a wide AP. Its hard to find a good player for that position, so the IF supp is alright. Give it make more risks (if that's possible) and try killer balls etc. The mezella is fine I would say. I play one with an IF(s) as well and they don't overlap that much. The mezza requires requires a good player though or it seems it doesn't do much. Gets forward when possible is a good trait for him. The IF(s) on the other side could be on attack to create another attack point. It would leave that wide-side a bit open, but if you are willing to change your AP to carrilero it's alright. Then you just got to look at your defence. If you got fast defenders with good vision, and decisions, you can try playing with offside trap. You can tell your IFs to man mark their fullbacks as well. It can sometimes hurt their attacking ability and fast switches but helps while defending. You will be a bit more vulnerable in defence, but you created much more space for your attacking plays. Edit: for MC combos you want a good balance between roamers and holders, and playmakers with risky passes and ones that pass save. Pref one on Def, one on attack, and one on supp. What I proposed would have 1 hold playmaker (the DLP), 1 roaming playmaker (the Meza) and one save distribute player (the carrilero or what's it called)
  8. You got to comprimise somewhere and find another way to overcome your weaknesses. You can't play high up, high pressure, narrow, low speed, extremely controlled, etc, and not expecting teams (especially weaker ones) to just park the buss and go all in on counter attacks. Yeah you are limiting their goal attempts, but at the same time limiting your attack possibilities. You are just turning the enemy goal into a shooting gally and hope one doesn't get blocked by all the people standing in front of it, or stopped by the enemy keeper. You need to change somethinggl to let the enemy play more, and fix your defenses issues in a different way. If through or over the top balls are a problem, don't use offside trap and get 1 fast defender. For corners you can try to or tightly mark the striker/AMC (target of the crosses) with a tall and strong defender, or have fast full backs on a more defensive role with good tackling and shut down the crosses before they come in. If that's just not what you want to do, your best bet is just rely on long shots and set-pieces. Remove work ball in the box, enable play for set-pieces, get some players with good long shots, and train for set-pieces
  9. It depends on your squad as well, and how you use your players. I rotate a lot and have on average a squad with high stamina, so I schedule a lot less rest than the ass manager recommend. I adjust what the ass manager recomands for that week. If he recomands a technical attack week, I will focus on that for that week, but just add more training sessions focused on what my team is complaining about (quickness training mainly) and with core parts of my tactic. A week with games on Sundays looks something like this. Mon: recovery, rest, team bonding (I sometimes drop the rest for something low intensive if it was a home game as they had rest after the match). Tue: 3 train sessions often with quickness as first block Wed: 3 train session Thurs: 2 train sessions with rest Friday: 3 Train session, but often with some match preparation training. Sat: 1 train session, rest, match preview Sunday: rest/travel and match. For 2 games in a week my training often takes a large hit, but still use much less rest. I would often drop team bonding. And still try to add 1 low intensity train session after match days if possible (so it's like recovery, rest, train session).
  10. Your tactic is strangling your opponent to much, forcing them in their own box leaving little space for the plays you want. And with like 8 enemies inside their box getting shots of that arent blocked or easily saved is much harder. Combined with to many playmakers and to little actual finishers in my opinion (your whole mid field are playmakers and both your IFs with those traits are more playmakers than finishers as well), and its not much of a surprise you are struggling to get goals. I would start switching some of the playmakers into other rolls. If you want to keep the AP, I would atleast change the Meza to something ells, and one IF to attack. Maybe get rid of try killer balls often on your IFs as well, seems a wierd trait for them. And you need to let the enemy play more to create space. So engage them further down the pitch, play wider, or/and play more risky with higher tempo and different passing style. Its easy to get high possession and a lot of shots on goal, but that doesn't mean you are actually doing anything with it. And do you really need all those instructions? It feels you checked everything, which just makes your tactic to complicated to understand. You should really start with a basic tactic with minimal instructions.
  11. Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed the FM18 ME as well, but it felt very limited in what actually worked. While I have only played 1 season so far in 19, I have seen many more successful tactic styles being used by myself and against, especially ones that play more defensive/focus on counter attacks. I will agree the ME defences are a bit to much, but it's not that far from reality again. I remember Argentina vs Iceland, who just parked the buss and it felt pretty much impregnable. Anyway for your tactic maybe getting some PTs would help. All my midfielders started with 'tries a lot of killer balls' which really made them try through and over the top balls (obnoxiously much). I would honestly try a less pressing approach for a possession-based tactic. Try to make your team tik-tak more around the midline, than just outside the enemies box, so there's atleast space for through balls and solo actions from your frontal players. And I will experience a bit tonight see if I can find some stuff that works. Maybe coming from a different starting point helps.
  12. That's a fair point, but it doesn't really invalidate the argument I was making. Most posts, including yours with most suggestions made in here, are all looking for that high pressure, possession style play with great soccer as well, which from a realistic perspective doesn't exist. Tik-Tik playstyle has always been the most boring one to watch, and has lately not even been that effective as even top teams using it, like Germany during World Cup, and Barcelona and Bayern at the moment, are struggling a bit with it. They are still doing fine qua standings, but most of their games are slow with low amount of goals, more relying on individual out plays than perfect set-up plays. Qua realisme this ME is much better than last year, which unfortunately for you (and everyone ells that wants to play tik-tik domination) means slow and boring gameplay with a tik-tak playstyle. I can't really fault the ME for something that is in line with realism. What you want (high pressure, controlled with great soccer) is proppely still possible in the current ME but requires a lot more effort, probably certain players, and a cohesive tactic to work. It's not something you can just plug and play into whatever team you are managing and do fine with it. The trough balls, solo actions, and stuff like that happen in game, just not with a tik-tak playstyle. I mainly play with a direct - high pressure counter attacking strat, and Im getting more goals from through or over the top balls, one twos, etc. Than from crosses and set-pieces. But it's nothing like a tik-tak, or possession playstyle. I'm not saying the ME is flawless (it's for from that), but for me from a realistic standpoint this ME seems much better than fm18 one, with a much wider variety of tactics that actually work, and a more realistic strength vs tactic vs result (as in bringing up a mediocre team requires much more effort)
  13. Why would it make what I said wrong if I don't have a working possession tactic? You (and most other similar posts) are litterly trying to combine a fast, aggressive pressing style, with a slow, tactical and save possession style. That should be hard to pull of. I'm not saying the ME is completely fine, but his tactic has issues that has nothing to do with the ME (as for once the ME actually counter the weaknesses really well) He pressures and push the enemy high up, leaving very limited space for the enemy team to play around. Result is a lot of enemy players in their own third. He plays with 4/5 playmakers (depends if you classify the CF(s) as a playmaker) who has limited room to play with, and limited amount of actual finish players. Result is that they just pass between themselves and shoot from range. Both of those has nothing to do with a bad ME. I haven't made a possession based playstyle yet, as I got limited playtime and don't really like that style, but that doesn't mean I'm automatically wrong. Pushing up high and control playstyle together should be hard to pull of (especially for non-top teams), as it heavily relies on individual skill to just outplay your enemy. Even in IRL those tactics don't provide nice football. It's a lot of passing around, with long range shots. And they don't even push/pressure the enemy as hard as most people want to do here. They let the enemy play on their own third, and pass much closer to the middle line than the enemy box. The tactic just creates boring soccer as that's what it's supposed to do, and the ME seems quite accurate on that front. If I would make a tactic around your goals, I would start by just giving the enemy more space to breath, so you got more space to make plays. Remove the counterpressure (maybe even add regroup part), drop the engagement line/defensive line, and tick down the pressure slide by 1 or 2 parts, and go from there. The counter when you got the ball can stay if he wants. Then change some of the roles. The AM(s) and Mez(a) can work together, but I would change the the striker to a more aggressive role (DLF(a) or maybe even AF), and the RMP to a more simple role (BB or maybe even a CM(s), to have a better spread of playmakers, holders, finishers, etc. Maybe change the WB on the AM side to an IWB so it takes the spot of the Mezzela, and make sure the other WB runs up a lot in the space left by the IF. And go from there. See what problem your running into and try to fix them, before claiming the ME just sucks. But if you want to ignore everything and keep blaming everything on the ME, as I haven't tried a possession-based tactic, be my guest.
  14. People are to fast in blaming the ME when their tactic doesn't work honestly. Possession, and to a lesser extent crosses, have dominated tactics over the last years. Like 90% of all fm18 tactics where 4-3-3 or 4-2-3-1 possession/pressure style tactics: push up high, high tempo, high closing down, etc. Didn't matter if you were playing a top team or an underdog, possession was pretty much the way to go. And I would say those should be hard to pull of as it doesn't make much sense combining them. Possession playstyle need space to function. You can have great playmakers but if they are all bunched up around the enemy box it doesn't leave much space to make plays. You want to play save and slow waiting for the perfect pass, but you need space for those plays to exist. Gegenpress at the other hand wants to play narrow and push up far, but not play save at all. They want to get the ball quick, and make a very fast transition. They don't care about possession. Most tactics posted here with the claim the ME is trash combines both of these playstyles with parts that completely counteract each other. They push up high with high pressure to get the ball back quickly, but then play control and slow when they got the ball. You are litterly pushing the enemy in their own box, ofc they are going to park the buss and rely on counter attacks. And ofc your playmakers can't find any plays and just shoot from distance. There is no room to make plays.
  15. I would say the carrilero isn't that out of place in the gegenpress template. A carrilero role is to provide a wide back-pass option. In the template gegenpress tactic your IFs cuts inside with your wing backs taken over the space left behind by the IFs. Both wide player are far up the pitch, and your carrilero stays a bit further back and provides that safety pass-back option. If you would play with wingers and not IFs, carrilero wouldn't make much sense, no. Your wingback don't pull up as far, as they would just walk in the way of your wingers, so they would already provide the save wide pass-back option.
  • Create New...