Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

64 "Houston, we have a problem"

About Pompey_Dan

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

1,505 profile views
  1. Thanks, I have already tried this set-up but find the Mezzala drifts wide into the half space; rarely, if ever, does he move out on to the wing... Inside Forward (left) and Mezzala (right, from same game). I'm playing a simple 4-3-3 (or 4-1-2-2-1 if you prefer); the Mezzala is set to "roam from position" by default and I believe this is why he spends a lot of time in the vacant AMC area. With the AML set as an advanced playmaker he comes centrally more often than an IF but this doesn't alter the behaviour of the MC (also, I don't really want a playmaker in the AML position). Try as I might I cannot get the rotation I am looking for (nb: this is different to having the MC run wide with the ball); has anyone else succeeded in getting the MC to play from inside to out effectively? If so, can you offer some advice - applied as opposed to theoretical ideally.
  2. Is it possible to get an MC to move out onto the wing both with and without the ball? Ideally I want to create an 'overlapping' movement with the wide AM, however, I am struggling to find the right combination of roles/instructions to create a repetitive pattern.
  3. Thank you everyone for those kind words of support. You didn’t miss it, I didn’t mention it! Unless I am specifically building an attacking or defensive tactic I tend to always start on standard/flexible. This is very much a work in progress; one could argue that the team would benefit from a “structured” shape given our patient/possession-based approach, whilst a “fluid” shape may enhance the team’s compactness. I am happy with "flexible" for now. I will be adding to the thread once I’ve played a few more games and analysed the tactic further. Until then, here is a neat little goal which demonstrates much of what was included in the OP… patient approach play, creating space by stretching the opposition, using deep lying Wing Backs to help recycle possession. 24 passes and 9 out of 10 outfield players involved in the build up...
  4. In recent years Marco Giampaolo has impressed many with stints in charge of Empoli and, more recently, Sampdoria. Arguably, the (Swiss born) Italian has over-achieved with both clubs whilst playing an entertaining brand of football. When news of Maurizio Sarri's departure from Napoli first broke the media identified the 50 year old Giampaolo as a possible replacement. Giampaolo almost exclusively uses a narrow 4-3-1-2 formation with the emphasis on positional play, ball retention and playing out from the back. These are some of the more interesting mechanisms Giampaolo employs to achieve his particular style of play: Full Backs who stay deep and help circulate the ball Midfielders & Forwards using lateral movements to create space Encouraging the side to stay compact, even in possession I found his unique interpretation of the 4-3-1-2 intriguing and was eager to see if I could successfully recreate Giampaolo's style of play in FM18. I’ve put some of my thoughts and observations together in this thread. The Tactic I have started a save in Marco Giampaolo’s native Italy as manager of Bari, a Serie B team with promotion aspirations. Here is my interpretation of his preferred formation: I am using just three team instructions (“shorter passing”, “play out of defence”, “use offside trap”) and two player instructions (the goalkeeper “distributes to Centre Backs” whilst the DLF is asked to “move into channels”). Build up play and the use of cautious Full Backs When a team lines up in a narrow 4-3-1-2 formation one would expect to see the Full Backs push on when their team is in possession, stretching the midfield. Not in a Marco Giampaolo side! The Italian prefers his Full Backs to stay deep in a back four with the centre backs, this provides a stable base from which the team can safely play the ball out. Under Giampaolo both Empoli and Sampdoria have placed the emphasis on retaining possession originating from deep in their own half due, in no small part, to their defensive arrangement. To replicate this defensive set-up in FM18 I have opted to use a Wing Back (Defend) on each flank; here is the in-game description for that particular role: This is what I want; I won't be encouraging crosses as a primary means of scoring and am looking to the midfielders and forwards to provide ‘situational’ width when needed. As these average position charts illustrate, even when the team is in possession the Wing Back (Defend) does not venture too high up the pitch. I want to use this shape to promote defensive stability and good ball circulation from deep. Here is the first of two clips; it shows the left sided Wing Back maintaining a position behind the ball. When the Bari No. 21 finds himself crowded out the Wing Back (No. 3) provides an out ball. Possession is quickly recycled via the Wing Back and the ball is played into a more dangerous position leading to a shot on goal. See how the lateral movement of the midfielders/forwards has created space for the DLP. He is unmarked and free to receive the ball and pick out a vertical pass – but more on this later. A more adventurous Full Back would probably have moved ahead of the midfielder and made themselves available to put a cross into the box. I am not saying there is anything wrong with this, it is just not how I intend the team to play. As well as establishing a solid base to play the ball out of defence Giampaolo’s decision to deploy deep lying Full Backs ensures a quick defensive transition when needed. In this next clip the Bari No.9 mis-controls a pass and gives away possession. Because the Wing Backs stayed back during the build-up play the defensive transition is quick and the team are able to prevent a quick counter attack. Creating space through lateral movement On the right and left of my midfield three, either side of a Deep Lying Playmaker, sit two Mezzalas. Here is the in-game description for this role: Like Giampaolo, I want to encourage these midfielders to move horizontally into the half spaces and wide areas and I want the opposition midfielders to follow. What I am hoping is that this lateral movement will create space in the centre of the pitch for the Attacking Midfielder to drop into and promote vertical passes up to him. In the clip below follow themovement of the Bari No. 7 (in white) and watch how the Roma No. 8 follows him wide; see how this opens up space for the pass into our Attacking Midfielder (No. 11) who initiates an attack. This is exactly the sort of movement I am trying to recreate. The downside to using Mezzalas is that the flanks can be left exposed, especially if the opposition Full Backs push on and ‘double up’ on our wide defenders; this is something I will need to watch out for in future games. So far, so good The early signs are encouraging, using some of the mechanisms employed by Marco Giampaolo, Bari are dominating possession and creating chances. The formation is naturally compact (there really is no need for the “play narrower” shout) and our defensive shape is sound. Particularly pleasing was a pre-season game against Roma - we lost the match but the team were performing almost exactly as I wanted them to and demonstrating the Giampaolo mechanisms I had built into the tactic. Losing to a Roma side who are 5-1 for the title and whose first team squad are valued at 27 times that of Bari's came as a surprise to no-one. However, the team from the South-East outclassed and outperformed the Serie A outfit for much of the game and, for the want of better finishing, they could have come away with more. Some source material: https://spielverlagerung.com/2016/05/13/team-analysis-empoli/ https://www.esdfanalysis.com/manager-analysis/marco-giampaolos-sampdoria/
  5. Control as a team mentality increases the individual mentality of every player, the higher the mentality the more risk those players will take. With "control" being the third highest mentality it stands to reason that this encourages players to take more risks and play more low percentage (high reward) passes. Yes, "control" naturally increases tempo and pressing but only because these instructions tend to support a philosophy of attacking high mentality football. The two are not mutually inclusive. Do you honestly think France played high risk football against Belgium? If so, then sorry but I think I might have been watching a different game!
  6. Unaccustomed as I am to starting to threads, I thought I’d post a little bit about individual player mentality; specifically about how I think the game assigns this value. I’m not sure I’m saying anything here that hasn’t been covered already - and probably better! - but if understanding how I look at player mentality when setting up tactics helps even one person then that’s pretty cool. I am in no way an expert so please feel free to add comment/correct me where I am wrong. Firstly, where does one find a players individual mentality? Well, it's a crime but SI have hidden player mentality away on the player instructions pop-up; if I had my way it would be an option available in custom views. I believe that paying attention to individual player mentality greatly improves your understanding of a system and the chance it will work as you intended. Are you wondering why your full-back over commits? Why your winger never tracks back? Okay, so individual player mentality isn't the whole story but it is a fairly significant chapter. As far as I can tell there are four key factors which together determine a player's individual mentality: player position, player duty, team mentality and team shape. The notable absence from that list is the player’s role which, so far as I can tell, influences how a player acts but does not affect his individual mentality. FM2018 gathers player mentalities into six groups. Players in each group share mentalities based on their individual duties, team mentality and shape. Here's a visual representation of those six groups… Because FM groups individual player mentality in this way an AMR with an attack duty will be assigned the same mentality as an AMC on an attack duty (in the same team); similarly a DR on a support duty will have the same individual mentality as a DMC with a support duty. Team shape then determines how significant the difference is in mentality between a ‘support’ player in one group and a ‘support’ player in a different group. If a team is assigned a highly structured team shape then these differences will be significant, on a very fluid team shape the differences are almost non-existent. The diagram below helps illustrates how team shape influences the variance between ‘support’ players in four of the six groupings… ...see how the variance between groups is greater in the highly structured set-up. A player's position determines which group they will draw their individual mentality from and, last but no least, duty assigns the player a mentality from one of typically three sub-groups (e.g. defend, support or attack). Knowing how the game assigns individual player mentalities helps me find balance when I am creating a tactic. I will generally have an idea how I want the team to play and which team mentality I am likely to use, next comes team shape. If I have chosen one of the more 'extreme’ team mentalities (contain, defensive, attacking or overload) then I will more than likely avoid fluid and very fluid shapes. For me, these team shapes tend to exaggerate team mentality at either end of the pitch - an attacking mentality combined with a very fluid shape has the defenders and defensive midfielders be too aggressive for my liking, leaving the team exposed to quick counter-attacks; whereas a defensive mentality coupled with a very fluid shape leads to the attacking midfielders and forwards becoming overly cautious and a bit toothless. My choice of team mentality also influences which duties I select. By selecting a defensive team mentality I am setting the base value for individual player mentality quite low. I might want to consider balancing that by assigning certain key players an attack duty - not too many, but where I want penetration - I will also need to limit the number of players on a defence duty otherwise the team will be too risk averse. Conversely, an attacking team mentality sets the base value for player mentality quite high so I might want to reduce the number of players with attack duties and increase those on ‘support’ - especially if I want a more considered build up to my attacks. In my current save I am aiming for an attacking, possession-based style; I want my team to see plenty of the ball but I also want us to create good, high percentage chances. This was inspired by @herne79's thread entitled "Attacking and Possession" This is my 4-4-1-1 tactic... I have employed an attacking team mentality but only have two players assigned to an attack duty… why? My choice of team mentality sets the base value for individual player mentality high, this means I get enough attacking impetus from players on a support (or even a defend) duty. To illustrate this point take a look at my left back, he is an IWB (defend) yet his individual player mentality is still higher than an IWB (support) playing in a team with a counter mentality. With this in mind, he provides all the support and drive I need from him without compromising the team's defensive stability. IWB (defend) with an attacking team mentality IWB (support) with a counter team mentality I have been mostly using a structured team shape (flexible on occasion) but, as mentioned above, I will be avoiding those more fluid shapes as I fear they will draw the individual mentalities closer together and over commit my defence. Well, it's late and I am just about out of steam, but I'd love to hear your thoughts on this subject... do you consider the impact of individual player mentalities when setting up tactics? If so how do you go about this? Or do you completely ignore them, think they are irrelevant?
  7. Thank you @herne79 for this thread, it inspired me to tinker with similar possession focused attacking tactics and I’m really enjoying the end product. In truth I have made some compromises; my first few attempts at creating an attacking possession focused tactic (on FM Classic) frustrated - whilst I consistently achieved high possession percentages I was having real problems converting this into chances and goals. The earlier iterations of my 4-4-1-1 tactic utilised 2/3 players on a defensive duty, 6/7 on a support duty and 1 on an attacking duty (an AMC); I found the team lacked variation, predominately attacked down the middle and relied too heavily the AMC to provide the goals. It was only when I made a few changes that I struck upon a balance that I was happy with - trading a little possession for greater attacking intent. I achieved this by switching up the left winger’s mentality from support to attack and by employing an IWB on a defend duty behind the winger and the Mezzala. The IWB (defend) provides a solid platform behind those two more aggressive players whilst offering just enough support; perfect for recycling possession. Not convinced? Try comparing the mentalities of an IWB (defend) in an attacking team with an IWB (Support) in a counter team and you'll see what I mean… IWB with defend duty in a team with an attacking mentality IWB with support duty in a team with a counter mentality My 4-4-1-1 uses an attacking duty, a structured shape and 5 team instructions: Retain Possession; Play Out Of Defence; Work Ball Into Box; Use Offside Trap; Prevent Short GK Distribution. Okay, so I am only six games into a proper save with Lazio but I wanted to post because we are achieving decent possession percentages and carving out plenty of real goal scoring opportunities. I also wanted to give this thread a little bump because, if you get it right, this can be a really fun and rewarding way to play FM. My Lazio team have the second highest possession average and the third highest number of completed passes... we have also created more clear cut chances than any other team in the division. Our attacking mentality also encourages a quick tempo to our passing - this is not possession for possession’s sake, which I think was the point of this thread and the original by @Cleon
  8. Thus far in the beta I've been mostly playing a 4-3-1-2 tactic (sometimes a 4-1-3-2) largely inspired by the 2010 Benfica side in which Angel Di Maria and Ramires both played. http://www.zonalmarking.net/2010/03/02/benfica-the-most-attactive-side-in-europe/ Michael Cox describes the roles of Di Maria and Ramires as carrileros: It's early days and I make these observations with a limited amount of playing time but I have experimated with both roles in the 4-3-1-2 and would argue that, in FM18 terms, both midfielders were actually playing as mezzalas in Benfica's system. In this team di Maria and Ramires would play aggressively from the central position into the half spaces ahead. I consider the FM18's mezzala a more progressive role than it's version of the carrilero; the mezzala is more involved in the attacking build up, getting into those half space in the final third of the pitch. On the other hand I see FM18's carrilero as a lateral box to box midfielder - a touchline to touchline midfielder if you will. This is perhaps illustrated best when we look at the difference in the players heat maps, touches and passes recieved below; first up the mezzala (attack) as compared with the carrilero:- My initial impressions are that the mezzala acts in a similar way to it's central midfielder counterpart with certain shouts applied; whereas the carrilero has it's movement and pitch coverage 'hard wired' into the game. If one were to compare the player instructions for each role one would find... When the opposition has the ball the mezzala (support) closes down slightly more. When his team has the ball the mezzala (support) is set to get further forward, move into channels and roam from position. The carrileros movement appears to be 'hard wired' with the hold position, roam from position and dribble more/dribble less instructions unavailable. Like the man in orthopaedic shoes I may stand corrected, but I consider the mezzala a more 'attack' minded role compared to the carrilero whose lateral movement makes him an ideal option for ensuring ball circulation in possession orientated sides.
  9. I largely agree with @herne79, however, I do sometimes use OI's to achieve a pattern of pressing... for example I will, from time to time and depending on the situation, set the team up a with a heavy central presence and set OIs to always closing down and tackling hard on the opposition wide players (full backs and wingers) - in an effort to force play wide into a pressing trap (using the touchline as an extra defender)
  • Create New...