Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community

bbgunn

Members
  • Content Count

    63
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About bbgunn

  • Rank
    Amateur

About Me

  • About Me
    Osaka, Japan (but I'm American)

Currently Managing

  • Currently Managing
    Real Kings

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. That is a good point. OK, I’ll give it a try.
  2. Yeah, you can use OIs on opposing fullbacks, or the PI to man mark specific players. I just don’t like to use those if I can because they can pull players out of position or mess up a team’s shape.
  3. Thanks for all the replies, guys. Yeah, it could be that I'm playing too deep, giving the opposition too much space and forcing my midfielders to close down. I'll try a higher line or higher mentality and see if that helps. I'll also look into running a 4132 for more stability.
  4. Defensively, I like what you're doing. I like to set up my defense the same way, except I keep the d-line normal. I think I can deal with crosses in the box, so I would happily give up some space on the flanks in exchange for dominance and good defense in the middle.
  5. I understand that somebody has to close down in my own third, but I don't want my whole midfield to do so, if at all possible. You're probably right about how I look at my team's attributes. While they are bad, I remember when I looked at the comparison screen that very few of them were near the bottom of the division. They were all average or below average, with some good attributes overall like acceleration, off the ball, finishing, jumping. I'll take another look and reevaluate. It could be that the team is not suited well towards sitting back and absorbing pressure, but perhaps another strategy might work. Well, I never use OIs, and PIs are listed above: just Distribute Quickly and to the Half Back for the GK, Close Down Less for CBs, and Close Down More for AMC and the two STs. That's it, other than the default ones for roles such as the Complete Wingback. I'll have to look at the attributes when I get home today, but you might be right that there's high aggression and/or poor positioning. I do remember, though, that my ass man said aggression was pretty bad on our team, but whether bad means high or low, I don't recall.
  6. Here’s a video link showing one of the goals I was talking about. I’m in blue and orange, and the opponent is in red and white. You can see, at the beginning of the clip, how my entire midfield has run over to the flanks to deal with the threat, leaving the central area exposed. https://youtu.be/Tr5utqdpN1w Sorry... I haven’t yet figured out how to embed YouTube videos.
  7. I actually expect one of the support CMs to help on the flanks - preferably the one closest to that flank - and they do. However, the other three midfielders close down with him. That’s the problem. This happens despite my using a Defensive strategy and despite a Structured shape, and despite Close Down Less. The AM(a) actually has Close Down More as a PI, but that’s to hassle the opposing D-line or DMs. I don’t want the HB going to the flanks at all. I want him to shield the back line. It sounds strange, but overall I want the central midfielders to help out less on the flanks, not as much as they are currently doing. One CM drifting to the flanks to help would be enough. I’m happy to give up the flanks and let my wingbacks do most of the work. What I don’t want is to give up central midfield and allow them easy long shots or unimpeded runs at my D-line. I’m facing a lot of 4213’s with two DMs, and when they attack on the counter the advanced wingers draw my central mids with them, them their three midfielders advance into the space my diamond vacated. As I said in the first post, my players’ attributes are atrocious, which is why I don’t want them to close down. I want them to sit in a rigid shape and make the opposition play through me, instead of us flooding to one flank and leaving space. The 1-3 shape might work defensively, but my AM is pretty good in the AM position and would need retraining to play CM. Plus, I’m really happy with how my front three look on attack, and I would like to try to fix my defensive problems by other means if necessary.
  8. Hey ladies and gentlemen: I'm currently running a save on FM Touch 17 with a team called Real Kings in the South African First Division. The team is pretty bad and picked to finish last in the 16-team division, but has two good strikers and a good AMC. I've chosen to run a narrow 442 diamond. Unfortunately I am at work right now, so I can't provide a screenshot of the tactic, so text will have to do at the moment: GK(d) CWB(a) -- CD(d) -- CD(d) -- CWB(s) HB(d) CM(s) -- BBM(s) AM(a) DLF(s) -- AF(a) I use a Defensive mentality because the team has low mentals (Aggression, Teamwork, Work Rate, etc.), and I don't want them doing any kind of closing down, but I want them solid in defence. Team Shape is Structured to keep creative freedom and roaming low. I didn't start with any TIs set as a base because I wanted to keep things simple, but lately I've had to use Close Down Less. I'll explain why in a bit. PIs: -GK: Distribute quickly and to HB -CBs: Close Down Less -Front 3: Close Down Much More THE PROBLEM The back four pretty much seem to defend like I want, a solid line of four that stays rigid and stays with strikers even if a full back/CWB goes out to close down a winger. The front three are awesome. They open space for each other, and having the right CWB venture farther forward gives the DLF another option and opens up gaps in the opposing defensive line. The problem is the central diamond, especially on defence. Now, with this formation, I expect to be bombarded by crosses, and I think this setup can deal with it most of the time unless we're playing a quality team. However, what I didn't expect was the central four to drastically shift to the left or right to deal with attacks on the flanks, leaving unmarked opposing central midfielders in the middle. I expect and want one of the CMs, and maybe another player, to move to the flanks to deal with a threat, while the other mids stay central. I don't want all four of them doing that. We've given up goals in which an opposing winger or fullback will draw my central diamond to the flanks, then whip a pass to the central zone outside our own penalty area, where they make easy long shots or cause my CBs to have to deal with unmarked deep runners and playmakers. I thought with Defensive/Structured the team would be quite rigid on defence, but apparently that's not the case here, so I tried the TI Close Down Less. The problem still happens. Going Fluid would help bring the team closer together and help cover central midfielders, but even on Defensive I find the defenders come up more to support attacks, leaving us more exposed on the counter. And it still doesn't solve the problem of the central four shifting too far to the flanks like a wolfpack. The result - especially lately since the AI has started to respond to my tactics - has been results like 2-5 or 2-4. Any advice would be most welcome!
  9. I haven't used a sweeper keeper on attack duty before, so I'll leave #1 to others, but I'll try the other two. 2. In a 4-1-2-2-1 it's better to have a CM on an attack duty to get forward and help out the lone forward. An AP on support won't do that; they'll kind of stay back and dictate play from there. A BBM will get forward, but they will be starting from very deep most of the time, so if it's not fast enough for you, have one of the CMs on attack. 3. I think a False 9 is the best role for you, although I'm not sure how much they help defensively.
  10. I was able to play the next three matches last night, the last of which was a home game. Since my Counter tactic was successful away but too passive to do much at home, I decided to go back to the system I had used before which was inspired by Loverleaper's Tactical Central and Insight thread. In a nutshell, prepare five different tactics based off of the five mentalities, from Defensive to Attacking, and use one based on match odds, home and away, the strength of the opposition, etc. Very briefly, in those two away games I used the Counter system as stated above, except I changed my DF(s) to a Trequartista because it suits that player's attributes more. We drew the first one 1-1 and won the second 1-0. The home game was a titanic match. My team, Figueirense, was 3rd in the table and we hosted the 2nd place team, Atletico Paranaense. A win would be massive for us, since my board was expecting promotion with a team that was predicted by the media to finish 6th. We were comfortable favorites in this match, so I decided to create an Attacking tactic. I kept the basic 352 formation, but made some changes. AF (a) Treq (a) AP (s) -- CM (a) WB (a) -- -- DLP (d) -- -- WB (a) CD (d) -- CD (d) -- BPD (d) GK (d) As you can see, I dropped my right forward back to the AM strata. The reason is that, despite him being "accomplished" in the forward role, that player plays best as an AMC. I've always struggled with getting him involved in the offense, and he consistently racks up 6.4 and 6.5 ratings, even when the rest of the team is around 7.0. So I experimented with him in his best scenario: a Treq in the AM strata. I also changed both WBs' duties from Support to Attack. All the other roles and duties were left as is. The mentality was of course Attacking. I also changed the fluidity to Fluid to give the team more creative freedom to break down the opponents' Magic Box. For TIs, I removed Work Ball Into Box. I was nervous about this because it meant more long shots and crossing, but I wanted to see if that would actually help us break down the opposition more. My DM is really good at long shots and has a related PPM. I also added Retain Possession to the already-selected Shorter Passing and Lower Tempo, in an attempt to further slow down the high tempo on this mentality and make my players take their time a little more with the ball. The result? A dominating 2-0 win for our first home win of the season... after 15 Second Division matches! We are now first in the table. Amazing! Some observations: I'm at work, so I can't open up FM and check, but if I recall correctly, we had something like 14 shots, 5 on target and 3 CCCs, with 57% possession. I can't remember the pass percentage, but it was either in the 70s or 80s. But what was most shocking - and I remember this clearly - can you guess how many shots Atletico Paranaense had? Yup, ZERO. I did not expect us to shut them down so well on an Attacking mentality. I wasn't even trying to play a pressing game. Both goals came in open play. My WBs did put more crosses into the box. Some were deflected away, of course, but despite a 6% cross completion percentage, we had some good opportunities. Had certain headers been on target, we might have had a couple of more goals. So crossing isn't so bad. Despite having Attack duties, my WBs did not go too far forward at the beginning of attacking moves. They often dropped back to provide a passing option, then tried to beat their man to put a cross in from near the byline. In addition, they often dropped back to defend when the opposition tried countering. I was happy with that. Even with the few times they were beat, my outer DCs did a good job of stepping out and challenging them on the flanks. My Treq AM had a 7.7 rating, easily his highest of the year. He seemed much more involved at the AM position, effectively dropping into space and fashioning chances for the players around him. Had it not been for my CM(a) and his 8.1 rating and one goal, the Treq would have been Man of the Match. I might keep him there permanently! Finally, the other goal was scored by my DM on - you guessed it - a long shot outside the penalty box. I'm going to have to leave Work Ball Into Box off for the time being. Thank you for your advice!
  11. Guilty as charged! You might have convinced me to take "Work Ball Into Box" off of my tactics in my next match and see what happens. Who knows, maybe a 5% cross competition ratio ain't all that bad if it results in a few goals.
  12. Okay, I'll give it a try, then. Thank you! I think I'm too cautious sometimes. Perhaps some risk is necessary to win.
  13. This is a continuation of the FM 2014 save I talked about in this thread. However, I've come across a new, more specific problem, so I thought it would be best to start a new thread. For those of you who were reading that last thread, I'm in my second season with Figueirense, a Second Division team in Brazil. After getting rid of some expensive players in the offseason and bringing in some loanees, and losing some AMCs in the process, I made the switch from a 442 narrow Diamond to a 352 with 2 wingbacks and a DM. This turned us into a defensive fortress; teams struggle to score goals on us. With the 352, we made our way through the Santa Catarina State Championship and won the title for my first trophy. However, in the Second Division against better competition, something odd has happened. Check out my recent home and away form: Away form, last 5 away games: 4 wins and a draw Home form, last 5 home games: 3 draws and two losses Usually people playing FM manage to win at home, but struggle to win away, myself included. But here, I have the opposite problem. Before I go any further, let me give you the tactics. AF (a) -- DF (s) AP (s) -- CM (a) WB (s) -- -- DLP (d) -- -- WB (s) CD (d) -- CD (d) -- BPD (d) GK (d) Mentality is Counter and Fluidity is Balanced. The only TIs are Shorter Passing, Lower Tempo, and Work Into the Box. I use Shorter Passing because it's a narrow formation and Work Into the Box because I want to limit crossing. Lower Tempo is on as a base setting, in order for us to be patient and open up the opposition's Magic Box. However, I will change it depending on what the opposition is doing in the match. For example, if they are heavily pressing, I will remove Lower Tempo or even change it to Higher Tempo. The only PI is on my GK: Distribute to Defenders. Let me explain a bit about my tactical choices. I experimented a bit with the mentality during the state championship and I found that the team seems to play better on Counter. Possession and pass percentage stats are great, and sitting back a bit and being patient seems to open up a bit of space for my forwards to attempt to attack the opposition goal. Fluidity is Balanced because I don't want the team as a whole to have too much creative freedom, but the midfield trio is very creative and technically skilled. My Wing Backs are set to Support duties because when they were on Attack duties, they crossed the ball into the box too much. My forwards are not physically gifted; they are more technical, and the advanced forward is pacey. Against the Boxes we usually face, my forwards more often than not are not going to win aerial challenges against 4-6 opponents in the penalty area. I'd rather try to draw them out and then attack goal via a well-placed through ball. I use a Defensive Forward (Support) because I like what he does compared to a Deep Lying Forward. A lot of the teams using the Magic Box build attacks from the back, and I think it helps to have a forward harassing the back line and put pressure on them there. The downside is that he doesn't drop deep often to link with the midfield like a DLF does. On the other hand, my player there doesn't play well with a DLF role, but does somewhat well with a DF role. The Ball-Playing Defender is there to help give us some more attack options in this inherently defensive formation. He is on the right side to try to link with the DLP and the CM(a). Anyway, when we do win, it's usually 1-0 or 2-0, which is fine. All of our draws have been 0-0, save for one which was 1-1. Our two losses have been 0-1. Again, I think our defense is solid and doing a great job. But the offense leaves a lot to be desired. The forwards don't score much at all, and at home they hardly attempt shots, which seems to suggest a problem with supply. POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS (1) Up the Mentality for Home Games, say to Standard or Control. I've actually made this sort of change at halftime of a few matches. It doesn't seem to help much. The opposition is already keeping men back in my home stadium; using Standard or Control just seems to pack them more tightly into their own box, meaning my MCs are making more long shots and my wingbacks are crossing more. Plus it leaves me more open to long passes behind my slow defense. One of my losses and my 1-1 draw were the result of that scenario. (2) Change one or both of the WBs to Attack duties for home games. Maybe I just need to bite the bullet and put more crosses into the box and see what happens. But again, my forwards are not very physical. Plus, ever since I switched both WBs to Support, I haven't seen many counter attacks down the flanks. Opponents now counter via the long ball. So, any advice? Thank you in advance.
  14. Sorry to reply so late. Thank you for the reply! Yeah, using wingers would be my first plan of action against the Magic Box. Creating overloads on the flanks would be a nice way of breaking down the opposition in Brazil. However, Figueirense is cash-strapped, so I either have to do what I've been doing, which is to use a narrow formation and find ways to use that to win, or play players out of position in the winger slots.
  15. I just read in this forum thread that to get my forwards to drift wide, like I was seeing the AI forwards do, I should give them the "Move Into Channels" PI. According to that thread, it works like the old "sarrows" waaaay back in ye olden FM tymes. I'm thinking that getting both my forwards to move into channels would help shred that defensive Brazilian Box and give, say, an onrushing AM or CM space to attempt a shot in the area. Am I wrong in thinking that? Any advice regarding tearing apart a Brazilian Box and making space for my attackers?
×
×
  • Create New...