Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Ein

  1. As I understand it, the player instruction is always relative to the team instruction.

    On a standard team pressing, the AM's pressing can be increased one notch to more urgent.
    On a more urgent team pressing, the AM's pressing becomes standard relative to the team.
    On an extremely urgent team pressing, the AM's role prevents him from matching the team's pressing so the UI shows less urgent (relative to the TI). IIRC only the PF and BWM can match this setting and become 'standard' with an extremely urgent TI.

  2. 15 hours ago, skelethor said:

    I feel like I need both wingers on attack because they run in behind and that gives me most of my goals.

    I wouldn't recommend it. With both the mezzala and right winger on attack, the right flank will be exposed. In fact, that seems to be where their goals are coming from. Keep in mind that your right back is not the best out there and Dembele has a poor work rate so he'll track back less.

    9 hours ago, skelethor said:

    I can't play standard depth otherwise I'm guaranteed to concede a cross. I'm resigned to defeat

    From the screenshots, it seems that you opted for low depth. I wouldn't recommend ceding that much terrain and putting that much pressure on your defence either.

    Losing to Liverpool can happen of course. However you're doing something wrong if you're consistently conceding 4 goals in 30 minutes. What teamtalk are you using?
    Not sure if it matters but in these types of matches I generally ease off the pressure by wishing my players luck (all the best, have fun) and tell each position that I have faith in them.

  3. First attempt:


    First of all, I noticed that you do not train any match preparation. Before these kind of matches, I would focus exclusively on match prep: defensive shape, attacking movement and teamwork.

    I opted for this tactic:


    Reasoning behind TI changes:
    out of possession
    standard defensive line/LOA because 3 of your 4 CBs (Pique, Langlet, Andersen) are slow.
    standard defensive width due to Umtiti's poor jumping and I don't want to give Liverpool too much space on the flanks
    reduced pressing intensity to urgent; extremely urgent is overkill
    removed prevent gk distribution; not needed, I don't mind them building from the back, the long ball can actually hurt us as we're shorter
    in transition
    goalkeeper instructed to distribute quickly
    ; useful for the counter
    removed distribution type/distribute to position. Ter Stegen is intelligent, best not restrict his options
    in possession
    normal attacking width and passing directness for better balance and flexibility

    removed pass into space; I don't want to give away possession, this will only be used late in the game if they're chasing the game
    removed overlaps: not needed, I definitely don't want the full backs to be caught out of position
    removed run at defence and be more expressive instructions: I don't want the entire team to be doing it
    ticked play out of defence and work ball into box for better ball possession

    I removed most of the PIs
    Ter Stegen: SK-D (a safer option), no PIs
    Umtiti: ahead of Langlet because of his superior speed, PI: close down less
    Pique: I opted for CD not BPD to balance his aggressive traits (gets forward, plays way out of trouble, brings ball out of defence...), PI: close down less
    Wague: FB-S, PI: sit narrower, shoot less often
    Alba: WB-S, PI: shoot less often
    Arthur: DLP-D, PI: close down less
    Vidal: CM-S, PI: dribble less
    Rakitic: MEZ-A, PI: tackle harder
    Dembele: W-S, PI: tackle harder
    Coutinho: IF-A, PI: tackle harder
    Messi: F9, PI: tackle harder, roam from position

    Malcom is on the bench, his pace will be useful late in the game.

    At around the 70th minute, I change mentality to balanced and ticked 'pass into space'.

  4. Also the roles are not set in stone. With Spurs I played Kane as a CF-S but with Villa I play Calleri as a DLF because he's obviously not as good. When the opponent is defensive or playing with a DM and the forward is playing poorly, I might change his role to a PF-S as I'd rather have him apply pressure on the defence than getting marked out of the game.

    I never play with a DLP and BPD at the same same time. If I have a good DLP (Tonali at Villa), I play with two CDs. With Spurs, Dier is more suited as a DM so I play Alderweireld as a BPD.

    Against defensive 442, you may benefit from switching the W-S to IF-S or the DLP-D to DLP-S to overload their vulnerable centre.

    If your main goalscorer is left-footed (e.g. Salah), you'd want to reverse the entire setup (IF-A on the right, WB on his side, W on the left, MEZ in CML).

    In terms of player profiles, I like complete players with good mentals (teamwork, work rate, determination). Forward players with aggression and bravery as they will be pressing a lot. Flank players have to be quick to capitalise on counters.

    When you're an underdog, you might notice that matches will become harder in midseason and you'll start scoring less. That happens because other teams start taking you seriously and play much more defensively against you. You should still be able to win with some interventions. When you do well and the team's reputation increases you'll be able to strengthen the squad and find it easier to unlock defences.

    PS: PIs depend on the player attributes and traits. For instance with Villa, my CM has 'dribble less' because McGinn/Hourihane are fairly slow and are better off passing the ball than dribbling with it. Take more risks is unticked because McGinn already has 'tries killer ball often'. The DLP has no PIs because he already has the traits I want (try long range passing, dictate tempo, etc.). If one of your front 4 already has the 'dives into tackles' trait, you should remove the 'tackle harder' PI. And so on. This is not a plug-and-play tactic.

  5. 1 hour ago, minkind said:


    Yes but Aston Villa had a relatively poor squad (19th in the league by wage bill and predicted to finish 18th). The goal tally with Tottenham was better (Kane scoring 30+ and the IF and MEZ each chipping in with 15-20).

    1 hour ago, calimero80 said:



  6. I've found this tactic to be very consistent. It aims at balance; good in possession and on the counter.

    It works home and away.

    It's not an exploit tactic so it may require some interventions depending on what you are seeing. For instance:

    When you are leading against stronger or slower teams, you can drop mentality to balanced and instruct to pass into space.
    Against very quick forwards (Arsenal/Bournemouth), you may need to drop mentality and/or defensive line/LOA.
    When struggling to score against defensive teams, you may need to force issue (increase mentality, go wider or use shouts like 'get creative').

    But overall it should work with minimal intervention.



    More conservative version (AV433P):




    S433P.fmf AV433P.fmf

  7. On 27/06/2019 at 22:33, FMunderachiever said:

    A clearly defined style of play should get you to third (POSSIBLY) as West Ham. You should have to do something massively unbelieveable to finish 3rd. 

    Not picking generic roles with no instructions at all and finishing 3rd.

    Your players should be worse than half the league. So they should be also worse at making decisions, positioning themselves, passing, making space, etc etc etc

    Exactly. Putting a balanced tactic and playing to the strengths of the players should be the bare minimum for the professional managers the game is supposed to be simulating. Giving Zabaleta a defensive duty isn't exactly rocket science.  It shows, more than anything else, that the AI isn't getting the roles right.

  8. 1 minute ago, herne79 said:

    It was, back in October.  It's pinned to the top of the forum.  And if you say "but aha! that doesn't mention a UI bug" - if SI have said Team Fluidity is nothing more than a label and that Team Shape is gone, what do you think that says about the UI if the UI says otherwise?  (And it has actually been raised as a UI bug anyway).

    Read the rest of my post. This is not about the label. The label itself simply describes the number of support roles. The question is whether the number of support roles (which is called 'team fluidity') affects the mentality of the rest of the squad (making the defensive/attacking duties stick closer or more distant to them depending on the case). By the way, this is exactly what SI are saying here: "So for example – if you set all your attackers to attack and all your defenders to defend you’ll be playing in a very “structured” manner: defenders defend, attackers attack.  Now change everyone to a support duty and your team will be playing with a more “fluid” style; everybody supports each other."

    I see now that you were getting hung up on semantics. If I throw a stone at someone, he will be killed by the lump of matter we call a stone not by the label 'stone' itself. For all intents and purposes, we can say that the stone killed him. And you'd be wasting everyone's time by saying that 'stone' is just a label.

  9. 55 minutes ago, Rashidi said:

    Ok go ahead change the mezzala back to support and turn the CF to an attack duty. You should be go from fluid to flexible. According to your premise a change in shape will now cause your team to perform better.

    No, that wouldn't work for a different reason. I'm not saying that fluidity is the alpha and omega of FM19. Other factors like formation, team instructions, player roles are obviously still (and more) relevant.

    Instead of having this pointless debate, can a developer please confirm that team fluidity has no relation to individual mentalities and that the UI is broken?

    On 24/06/2019 at 23:20, herne79 said:

    The following is taken from the FM19 Tactical Changes thread (verified by SI) pinned to the top of the forum since last October:

    "The way Team Fluidity works is essentially as a guide on how to structure our teams in a way we desire.  Prior to this there was nothing to help us set up our roles.  So for example – if you set all your attackers to attack and all your defenders to defend you’ll be playing in a very “structured” manner: defenders defend, attackers attack.  Now change everyone to a support duty and your team will be playing with a more “fluid” style; everybody supports each other."

    The issue is not whether the team fluidity indicator itself causes the changes but whether playing more support roles (which the game indicates as being more fluid) causes the defensive and attacking roles to stick closer to the team mentality (or the support roles).

  10. And yet I was literally seeing my defenders tone down on their adventurousness and get caught less out of position. And my front players press more vigorously. Confirmation bias? Possibly. Coupling it with what the UI is actually saying to me makes it less likely though.

    I'm surprised at all the denial. Someone wanted in-game proof -- a couple of posts later you're saying that something like that cannot be proven.

    The thing is: team fluidity makes perfect logical sense. The more support roles the more fluid the system is and the more fluid the system the more individual mentalities average out to the team mentality. By contrast, the more structured a system the more individual mentalities stick to their individual duties. It makes perfect sense, I wouldn't want it any other way.

    I always look at individual mentalities for a number of reasons: to see how individual roles correspond with team mentality or the effects of overlaps or playing through the flank. So basically you're claiming that this component of the game is completely broken? If so, have you filed an urgent bug report? Can a developer please confirm this?

  11. This understanding of fluidity helped me go a season unbeaten. After a shaky start where I kept conceding silly goals and squeezing wins, I gave my mezzala an attacking role. This changed the team fluidity from fluid to flexible which benefited my split press (back 5 being more conservative and front 5 being more aggressive) and made me much more solid at the back.



  12. 14 minutes ago, BigV said:

    I'd say that's a bug. I'll test it today aswell see if it is like that but surely an AMR position shouldn't effect a defenders mentality of being cautious/balanced/positive? I'd understand it if it was an MR as a defensive winger or even a WB on defence/support as they'd be useful for defensive purposes. That's a strange one. I'm inclined to agree with Rashidi on this. 

    That was just an example. I could have used a FB instead of a W and the result would still be the same. And it affects all positions.

    I don't think it's a UI bug because it follows a logical pattern. The higher the fluidity the more individual mentalities average out to the team mentality, which is exactly how team shape worked in previous FM games.

  13. 47 minutes ago, Rashidi said:

    You are wrong. Fluidity does not change mentalities. Fluidity does nothing. Duties change mentalities. So if you choose an attack duty it will have a higher mentality than a support duty within a balanced framework, and fluidity did nothing there. The devs have said it doesn't matter and they code the game.

    And yet the UI says otherwise. It can be very easily tested. I'll post some screenshots soon.

  14. No, team fluidity in FM19 is not merely an indication. It actually changes players' individual mentalities.

    For instance, if you play with two attack duties, team fluidity is automatically set to flexible. What happens when you change one of the attack duties to support?

    Team fluidity changes to fluid, which averages out individual mentalities i.e. it increases the mentality of all defensive roles and decreases the mentality of attacking roles with respect to the overall team mentality.

    So a seemingly defensive change like changing your winger from attack to support can actually increase the mentality of your entire back line.

  15. 14 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

    It's very simple. Exploit tactics are those that work perfectly in FM but in real-life football would lead to a disaster (and no RL manager play that way because such tactics make no sense from the perspective of football logic).

    I don't think Rashidi's liquid is an exploit. It is attacking in terms of mentality, but has plenty of support duties and only the mezzala is on attack. It is a risky tactic though, but that's why he uses it with a top team like LFC. With Stalybridge, he makes tweaks in order to adapt the tactic to the team. If it was an exploit, he would not have to make any tweaks whatsoever.

    He also uses it and does extremely well with Torino while on holiday.

    According to common sense and the in-game description, very attacking is to be used when desperately chasing a goal. I'm seeing many FM tacticians now using it as a default.

    He uses a very attacking mentality but then uses support roles and extremely short passing/very low tempo. Why is that better than positive mentality and more expansive roles/passing/tempo?
    I was reading a thread by another prominent tactician. He uses no attacking roles to increase the overall team mentality. Why is that better than using some attacking roles and a higher overall mentality?
    These are the kind of obscure mechanisms and tweaks that make no obvious sense and relate purely to the game's abstractions.

  16. I didn't use your tactic. It's similar to yours because it's based on the players' attributes and what "makes sense" (the game's descriptions of roles and mentalities). I tweak my tactic a lot as well based on what I see in the game. I never suggested I created the tactic for a single player.


    Exploits are the elephant in the room. They present a huge problem for the game. If you do well, you can't actually be sure if it's down to your tactics working well or because you stumbled upon an "exploit". Take BusttheNet's Liquid tactic. Very attacking, home and away. Is it a "normal" tactic or an "exploit"? The boundary is not as clear as you suggest.

  17. There's a huge difference between what makes sense and what works in game.

    My tactic is very similar to yours (except for the IWBs - I use WBs). I can't get Kane to score. He averages 6.30. I rage quite after my team fails to score a goal in 3 games.

    I download and plug in one of Knap's tactics which does not make any sense whatsoever and which my players are not suited for. Very attacking mentality, counter-press, much higher defensive line, extremely urgent press, get stuck in, tighter marking, no DM, none of the CMs is on defensive duty, both full backs are CWB-A! Suicidal, surely. I proceed to the first match (away vs Southampton who are in excellent form) with zero tactical familiarity. 4-0 win.

  18. 1 hour ago, CFuller said:

    This won't happen because - for one thing - it would take away crucial context.

    Milan signed Krzysztof Piatek because he had a magnificent first season at Genoa. Would it be realistic in FM19 if Piatek tore his cruciate ligaments for Genoa in December but still joined Milan the following month? Would it be realistic if the in-game Piatek scored once in 19 games for Genoa but still went to Milan, whose 20-goal striker Gonzalo Higuaín was recalled by Juventus and then loaned to Chelsea because that's what actually happened?

    Fair enough. In that case, I would actually prefer not to have any January transfers (and loans). If I start in summer 2018, I expect the situation to reflect that transfer window. January transfers should only apply if one starts during or after that transfer window. Having said that, I don't know if or how this could be programmed.

    1 hour ago, CFuller said:

    This won't happen either because - believe it or not - SI don't have the licences to use real-life results. That's why all the World Cup and Euro qualifying results are randomised in even-numbered FMs.

    Ah I see. Real-life results are not necessary per se;  real-life tables would suffice (not sure if this would bypass the licence requirement). After all, FM uses real-life team positions/stats and player apps/goals for past seasons so it would be along similar lines.

  19. 1. Winter Transfers should be set up as future transfers at the start of the season. It's more realistic and will avoid situations where players appear to have moved twice in the same transfer window (e.g. Piatek at Genoa/Milan).

    2. For the sake of those who prefer to start midseason after the winter update (by loading a league like China), real results should be included in the update instead of relying on third party mods. These third party mods are useless because team & player stats are not generated/simulated so they ruin players career stats. Real player appearance and goal stats could be included as well if possible, alternatively they could be simulated.

    3. This is more of a bug. When you takeover midseason, player injuries mess the stats up e.g. if you take over Tottenham in February, you'll notice that Kane and Dele Alli (who both get injured in January IRL) are shown to have played 0 games (as if they've been injured from the start of the season) whereas Vincent Janssen (who starts the season injured for 6 months) has 30+ appearances (as if he'd never been injured).

  • Create New...