Jump to content

sporadicsmiles

Members+
  • Posts

    3,798
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    6

sporadicsmiles last won the day on March 6 2020

sporadicsmiles had the most liked content!

Reputation

2,055 "Show me the money!"

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. This would be a good point if the scout reports provided you any meaningful information that you could use to decide if a player was worth signing. Which they simply do not. The scout reports give one word summaries which are provided without any context. This is useful only for hidden attributes (injury prone, big matches, etc). If SI wants to present the scouting as more important, then more information is needed. There is zero chance I am going to be able to decide on a player from a scout report without attributes. I actually like the idea of having scouting work better, that would be great. These changes do not do this, however. They instead are keeping the same scouting information (which is inadequate) and taking away information a user needs to make a judgement. It makes the game a lot more tedious. The problem here is not so much the missing attributes. They will not be coming back as it is a choice from SI (and someone will mod them back). It is that the scout reports are simply not adequate. The scouts should not be weighing in on financial decisions in their rating, for example. I do not need a 36 year old with crappy stats being A+ because he is cheap. If you want to use a scout as a replacement for looking at attributes, he should focus on giving me a proper digestion of the attributes. Anyway, I have made a thread about how I would change this whole thing elsewhere, and perhaps I will also start a thread on the wishlist forum so we can get a discussion going of what we would like to get from scout reports.
  2. In real life a 4141 and a 4123 are the same, for all practical purposes. The same goes for 4411 and 4231. Formation is a fluid thing in reality, and so a team playing in either of the two styles will at different times resemble both formations. This is very different to the case in FM. Here formation is a much more solid concept. You can essentially think of your formation (as set on the tactics screen) as your default formation when defending. Which is not exactly true, but it is a good place to start. You then add roles and duties on top of that to modify how the players either position themselves, or react in certain situations. Typically these changes are either seen in attacking phases or in transitions (I know it is not always the case, but it is generally so). Your attacking formation can be very different to your default formation (here I mean where your players, on average, are on the pitch with and without the ball). My usual system defends like 4123 and attacks like a 424 or even a 325. This is done with roles. What I am getting at here is that the positioning of the wingers in FM matters, because it is going to determine how they behave when you do not have the ball. They will sit deeper in the flat midfields than the advanced positions. This has a number of knock on effects. They will take time to get forward to support the striker in a transition. They will be less well placed to exploit attacking space. They will be more involved in deep build up. They will defend deeper. But as long as you are aware of how FM introduces these differences based on your tactical choices, the formations are identical in what they are aiming to do. In FM they usually differ in how you want to do it.
  3. Well, the tactic is quite conservative overall anyway, especially with the defence set up as it is. As noted, the LOE could just be giving too much space in front of your defence for opposition teams to take advantage of. Try raising the LOE first, to see if it helps with defending. Or better work out how you are conceding most of your goals and let us know, so we can see if this guy feeling is correct or not. You may also want to think about what you do when you lose the ball. If you are seeing you are getting hit quickly by teams, it may be worthwhile asking players to get back to position. If you are seeing that you are too passive in countering buildups, set your advanced players to press more. Then attacking wise I guess it works reasonably well. I'd be tempted to have an attacking fullback on the side with the DLP when you feel you are able to get away with it (home against weaker sides). This will help create more space centrally at best, and at worst will force an opposition winger to track back.
  4. From this we cannot tell how many games they started during the period you promised them more game time, and how many games you played in general. So it is hard to advise you if this is something you can try to do differently to avoid making players unhappy, or if it is a potential bug. How many games were played, how many did each player start?
  5. Which way round? 2 midfielders central in defence to one DM and one AM in attack, I guess? CM(D) and CM(A) would do the job. The point about making them both more central, however, is a good one, and I'd like to see there be more control over that sort of thing for sure. I'll never argue against improvements, just try to help people do what they can with the current tools. I am not a fan of the idea of two different formations though, for two reasons. Firstly, I do not think it is any more realistic than what we currently have. And added to that it will mean you need to add defensive and attacking roles and duties for players. That could work, but it would take something people find complicated already and make it much more complicated. Secondly, people would do weird stuff and expect it to work. 532 to 235 or something, with players moving all over the place in transition, and then wondering why it does not work. And for certain we would get into a mess with people finding exploits for this. Not a big deal really, because people can choose not to use them, but exploits are the sign of a bad ME. What we really need is the game to actually tell you properly how things are working with tactics better than is currently achieved.
  6. This is already in the game. Your defensive shape is the formation you select (pretty much). Your attacking shape is your formation plus whatever roles or instructions you have set. So my default formation defends like a 4141 and attacks like a 424.
  7. xG something you have to take with a pinch of salt sometimes. Really, xG/shot is a bit more indicative of how well your team performs. Look at your graphs for xG. You are creating a lot of very poor chances. Sure, this adds up over time, but each shot is very unlikely to go in. What this tells you is you need to focus on quality over quantity, and not to rely on the xG stat in isolation. There is also a pretty worrying trend that you are conceding some pretty low xG chances, it seems, but you would have to watch the goals you concede to see what is happening there, it is hard to comment on it. Looking at your tactic, the obvious culprit is your tempo. It is extremely high, which means everything happens at a million miles an hour, and your players just maybe do not have the time to create nice chances. So the easiest thing to try is to take the tempo down and see what happens. You can expect to see less shots, and you may also see your xG drop, but this is not something to worry about. Check the xG vs time graph. You want to see it rise in bigger steps, which means you create less chances, but they are better chances more likely to lead to a goal.
  8. I like to retrain players who are either AMC who are good as shadow strikers or strikers who are good as F9 to play as the CM(A). Assuming you can afford to have a midfielder in the team who is not going to be tremendous defensively. It also helps if the CM(A) has good vision and passing, because he will often be able to slide in the IF or DLF with a nice pass after getting the ball in an advanced position. And another tip here is if you can train your striker to play one-twos, he can often link up very nicely with the IF and CM to play them in if they pass and run forward.
  9. I use the same colours for my numbers as you, but in a different way (red = bad, blue = poor, green = good, yellow = excellent for me), so when I glanced at this and saw so much blue I thought "damn I would have bitten off their hand for that price and this player". Then I looked at the numbers and was like "....oh, I see".
  10. You cannot have a MEZ role for the central midfielder in a flat midfield 3. Nor a CAR. These roles are specifically for midfielders who play next to the flanks. Not sure if that is what you meant, but I thought I would clear it up. The goals you describe are exactly the goals I would expect to concede in this tactic. Your two CMs will always be quite advanced when you attack, and very out of position for the MEZ. The wing backs will always be high. So there is space on the flanks, and in midfield. This is made worse by an attacking mentality, which makes all these roles just more likely to be higher up the pitch (and raises the D line). Then it is compounded by the fact you have counter press, which means those players out of position will look to press the ball rather than get back into position. So if your counter press fails you are going to be overrun pretty much wherever the opposition attacks. You would need incredibly good CBs and a really good DM with anticipation, positioning and speed to attempt to play like this. It is something I would use when I do not care about conceding because I need a goal. So if you want to be more solid defensively, then you need to tone some of this back. Rather than using counter press and setting blanket pressing instructions (which are just gonna draw your players further from position, you defensive shape is "wherever the player happens to be") you can focus on the players you want to stay forward pressing, and let others retreat. Your front 3 plus the MEZ, for instance. Let everyone else get back into position a little bit, and the press buys them time to do so. That should at least give a semblance of defence to this tactic. Looking at the attacking side. The right wing is a nice overload. The left wing is creating some space for the AP to operate in, so you should create a decent number of chances. With your settings thought everything might be a bit rushed. Does the CF work nicely in this role? Scores and helps create space for others? Not a role I have tried like this, so I am not that familiar. I'd worry he would get a bit lost in some games (especially against a back 3). Are you looking to use the DM to spray passes around for everyone, or just as a deep lying pivot to recycle the ball? If it is the latter, he does not need to be a DLP. Just a standard DM would do it. The problem with a DLP is he attracts the ball, which means he gets it when ideally he does not need to. A DM will act just as a player who can recycle possession, and help changing the ball to the flank. This will make the AP the real focus of your attacking play centrally. Not sure if that is what you are looking for, but it is almost always how I will have the DM in a three man triangle like this.
  11. Are the download links still broken for people? I have no issues downloading them, and they are hosted on the forum rather than externally. If anyone has any issues let me know, and I will see if I can work out what is going on.
  12. Yes, sorry, Cameroon is being weird and I cannot figure out why. I am planning a huge revamp of all the files in FM22, so hopefully I can fix it then. I suspect this is a conflict with some other changes, but the files at 5 years old and a bit of a mess.
  13. I have not been playing a lot of FM this year. The pandemic and being stuck in a new country pretty much alone without many ways to blow off steam meant I have gravitated a little away from competitive games to more relaxing open ended ones this year. Things I can do to relax without having to think about winning or doing well. So I have not really done much that I would be be able to write about and show. I still play every now and then, but it has been a while since I did a long stint. It is also a matter of finding the correct time and motivation for me. Again with a lot of home working in the last year I have had to make a hard line between working and not working. So sitting and writing does feel a lot like working, which means I am not enjoying doing it as much as I have in the past. This is something that is on my mind to eventually get around to doing, and now we are hopefully getting a little bit back to normal maybe I will find that it is possible to bring some of these things back. Hope you all understand! Thought it was better to at least post some update than to leave everyone hanging.
  14. Thanks, I will check for that. I totally forget this was a thing.
  15. Feel free to disagree! I do not claim to have the gospel word, just tell it how I see it. And if something works for you, then of course you should stick to it! I definitely agree it is easier to set up the positive version of this, partly because it is simpler to plan attack than coordinate defence, at least in my experience. And when you get the defensive side wrong, it usually goes wrong spectacularly. A positive setup going wrong usually means you create poor chances only. This depends. Usually when I am expecting to win I will set up in my standard way of playing, and take it from there. I do not really have a hard and fast set of rules. I just watch the game and adjust as required. Sometimes I will understand I need to be more direct, sometimes more patient. Or exploit the flanks, or notice a particular man marking scheme, or realise I am too high. Most often I can just see that we will score and it will be fine. I do not think there is one correct way to do this, it is always situational.
×
×
  • Create New...