kolobok

Members
  • Content count

    731
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About kolobok

  • Rank
    Amateur
  1. The funniest thing I have ever read. To me the importance of tactic (and hence manager) is illustrated by simple fact: I can name a dozen examples when teams with mediocre players won major tournaments (starting from Italy in 1982, to Greece in 2004 and Liverpool in 2005 - yes, to me it was Benites's win) as well as some examples where a team with great players lost because of a coach (France 2006 would be the latest), but I struggle to find the opposite - when team with mediocre coach won anything.
  2. The game is absolutely straightforward: develop a consistent tactic that uses strongest sides of your players and reduces the effects of their weaknesses; build you team step by step, not just bring the best players you can find; let your players develop extremely strong understanding. These are key factors. The words in bold are key too - to build and develop almost always takes time (unless you are a tester and play most of your time). Everywhere, not only in FM. Some people need more time, some less. Not real life? Well, tell it it to Pellegrini, who, I believe, has a qualification higher than 99.999% of people on this forum. The match you see is not a match on TV; it's merely entertaining representation of your settings combined with your players attributes and opposition. So, funny things like a DC running to corner flag whilst ball is in the middle mean only that a combination of your setting with that DC's attributes does not work too well. Would it help if the picture were more realistic (e.g. DC tries tackle from a bad position but you cannot easily pinpoint a mistake so everything looks like just bad luck)? Maybe but rather not as it would take longer to realise that something is indeed wrong. Frankly, I believe that the tactic wizard made things worse. Before that we made mistakes (obvious or not) using sliders but at least we knew what we did. Now one chooses a trequartista because it seems like a good idea (or people on forum said that player A is great at that role). After a few matches one looks at his actual instructions only to find that it would be great to complement trequartista with a couple attacking wingers, who would move into channels (I am totally making things up here). But then it turns out that flanks are too exposed to opposition attacks because wingers don't support defense enough anymore and FBs are not too high quality players to cover it all. Etc. Hope you get my idea.
  3. Just to add a few thoughts. First, zonal defense is more about teamwork than about quality of the defs. The whole defensive line as well as DM suppose to know each other moves, body language, etc. So an argument like: "buy the best defs and they should do" is at least weak. Second. I have not played FM10 long enough to see if the problem of magical through balls can be eliminated over time as all defenders get gelled, but what I can conclude right now is that any attempt to just assign a defender certain role (e.g. stopper) and expect he will do exactly the way you imagine (or even the way in-game instruction suggests) is a huge mistake. Tactical wizard has some advantages over old slider system, but there are drawbacks. The most important one that there is a serious temptation to assign certain roles to players and conclude: "hey, I have covered everything", even though some players cannot serve certain roles (or have limited ability to do so), and sometimes even a combination of the roles may not make sense once you look at the settings side by side. Third. Got lazy to watch all links. Watched the first one - circus. If you want 3 of your players to close down one opponent - great example. But playing this way in EPL, where tempo is much higher, is a suicide. So, compare apples to to apples. First graders tend to run for a ball all together - what a tightness they exhibit!!! Bottom line - yep, there is some "strange" defensive behavior, but I would say that in FM10 it's relatively more related to players attributes (teamwork, concentration, positioning, decision, anticipation, bravery, composure to name a few) than in previous versions. Maybe there is some exaggeration, where lack of decisioning is represented in 3D as dancing around lose ball for a minute, but remember - we are not watching TV. It's just visualized translation of the code. I agree, it's disappointing to see that you concede last minute goal because your def seemed to decide to take a sun bath in the center circle, but in terms of code it just means he made a bad decision (lost concentration, took bad position, etc.) because of his stats, because he has not played enough time with his teammates, or just because he made mistake. If this type of representation is a problem to you - yep, the game has the problem, and always had. If you are ready to translate this errors into tactic-player's attribute issues, then you don't need to worry about it too much.
  4. To add a penny to SFaser's comment: if you watch highlights only, you won't be able to catch a systematic pattern . That is even a world class defender may sometimes behave like a conference level player, and even a conference level ST may occasionally score a-la Messi. Highlights may show that occasion but not the fact that 15 times before and after the ST lost ball in very similar situations. However, from a tactical point of view it's extremely important to catch the pattern as early as possible. Because it gives you a clue: AI tries to break you there. If you believe it's a danger, adjust your tactic. If you don't want to break your own game and is sure that one occasion wouldn't make a difference in a specific match - leave it as is. But you have to know the pattern to make a decision.
  5. Ok. Let's assume that we play diamond and the opposition has retrieved the ball nowhere near our DM. The diamond formation implies that we do not have man-to-man advantage almost anywhere, so if one of the MCs leaves his zone (say to help FB), the opposition gets an advantage. We have DM and if opposition does not use AMC, the DM is sort of free. However, his job in this case to a) cover his own zone and b) support MC, FB, or DC who is trying to get the ball. So it's quite important for DM to keep his position until he sees a chance to help someone and make a difference. Another important thought here is that since the diamond is relatively weak on flanks, it's important that DCs stay in their positions (to intercept crosses). Hence, every zone (and man) is covered only if everybody keeps positions. The DM provides support wherever needed if he assess situation as favorable. Just to add - it should work very well if the opponent's forwards are not too good in the air, but quick and technically skilled. The DM provides additional coverage against through balls and should make sure that a quick forward does not have time with the ball. Basically, you sort of force the opponent to play through flanks and say: "Hey, you can do whatever you want on flanks but you cannot really create anything out of it". Now, having 3 MCs implies that you want to gain advantage in the middle of the pitch by having extra man there. Defensively the idea is that wherever opposition gets the ball, the MCs cover the best passing options for opposition, whilst FCs and AMCs pressure the defenders. In effect, this formation implies higher defensive line because if opposition player under pressure just puffs ball upfiled, it's DCs job to make sure that opposition FCs don't get it. From attacking point of view, each of your MCs has 5 attacking options to pass (plus FBs - total up to 7), which (assuming opposition plays 4-4-2) almost always leads to either man-to-man advantage (if opposition ML/MR stick to their positions) or open space (if opposition players start chasing the ball and leave their positions). An obvious disadvantage is that such a big crowd in the middle may not work very well against a team that simply does not care about ball possession and plays very defensively, counting on very quick wingers and forwards in a counter-attack.
  6. To me the real difference is about DM vs MCd duties. Diamond implies DM who is really all about defense (Makelele). He is almost useless in a constructive play and his functions are pretty much like "retrieve the ball -> play short pass - then try to anticipate where your services will be needed next time and be there". He is not considered as a passing option by attacking players (unless there is no better one), he does not support attacks other than being always ready to help and get lose ball back as soon as possible. MCd in 4-3-1-2 is a different story. It's also hard working player (Essien, Cambiasso, Mascherano), who provides a lot of support both to attack and defense. He always offers himself as a passing option; he can create something more sophisticated than just short pass to the closest player; he can even dribble sometimes quite successfully. It may look like DM in the diamond formation can actually perform the same duties as MCd but sit a bit deeper (or MCd play as DM but more advanced). But the role of MCr/l also changes as well as DCs' functions. In short, the diamond formation is more about holding positions by the players when defending, whilst 4-3-1-2 (or any 3 MC formation) is more about controlling midfield when attacking and restricting opposition's passing options when defending.
  7. There is no mathematical formula. You create a team, not a bunch of individuals. Your tactic is a system that suits your team. You don't want your DC close down often while everybody else staying there just because your DC has "right" attributes. Take mentality for instance. Individual mentalities set (e.g. DC = 6, FCa = 18, everybody else in between) implies that you want a) to create space; b) each player to fulfill a specific role; c)certain players not to take too much risk. Global mentality would imply more compact team, but you either allow your Defs take some additional risk or restrict your attacking players in terms of risk/reward ratio. Setting some players on individual mentalities while the rest are on global restricts risk (or provides additional "reward thinking") for some players, leaving everybody else compact. What best for your team depends on players attributes, but not in a simple mathematical way. P.S. What on earth dribbling has to do with mentality, closing down with pace and tempo with attributes (tempo is team instruction)?
  8. It does take points from every player. Think of it this way: a player with first touch 20 and 'right foot only' can stop the ball perfectly only with his right foot. If ball goes to his left foot, nobody knows where it will deflect. Hence, when ball goes towards his left foot, he either needs to spend some extra time to change his body position to use his right foot, or use extra touch to actually get the ball. An "either foot " player with first touch 13 don't have a perfect first touch, but you can expect the same effectiveness no matter which foot he uses. So in some sense, these two players are almost equivalent in terms of their first touch ability. MC, DM, AMC are the players that receive the ball from different sides (hence to a different foot) and are supposed to pass everywhere. So for them "either foot" is more beneficial than say for FB or ML. ST would also be greatly affected.
  9. In real life the relationship between defensive line and the pace of the defs is close to zero. Mainly because high defensive line implies very strong pressure on opposition from attacking players. As a result most of the attempts by the opponent to organise quick attack should be unsuccessful due to lack of time to implement a good pass. A little problem in FM is that every AI team facing higher defensive line seems to try and play counter-attack, which is a bit unrealistic as IRL a good team is able to overcome the high pressure from opponent (or put even more pressure, forcing opponent to drop back). Hence, in FM, if you manage a good team then high defensive line, home or away, is the best option. But it should be complement by high closing down and relatively close mentalities. Otherwise you give AI chances in counter-attack
  10. Tell me please, when did you see Barca defense dropping back? The central defs do not support attack too much, but that does not mean they drop back. Barca creates space as their players constantly move, swap positions; the FBs support attacks actively; but most importantly - Xavi and Iniesta both have a great vision and ability to dictate attack tempo and direction. Add here Messi, who can create something out of nothing. Translating it to FM I would suggest playing reasonably wide, short, high creative freedom for MCs and Wingers (obviously, they should be good), high defensive line, offside, higher closing down upfield, FWR often for FBs. However, the most important part is to have a very well gelled team with great teamwork stats (except maybe for wingers), similar personality and no huge difference in salaries.
  11. Tell me please, when did you see Barca defense dropping back? The central defs do not support attack too much, but that does not mean they drop back. Barca creates space as their players constantly move, swap positions; the FBs support attacks actively; but most importantly - Xavi and Iniesta both have a great vision and ability to dictate attack tempo and direction. Add here Messi, who can create something out of nothing. Translating it to FM I would suggest playing reasonably wide, short, high creative freedom for MCs and Wingers (obviously, they should be good), high defensive line, offside, higher closing down upfield, FWR often for FBs. However, the most important part is to have a very well gelled team with great teamwork stats (except maybe for wingers), similar personality and no huge difference in salaries.
  12. To me it's more like seeing if I can implement my ideas with different teams, adjust to specific situation, etc. I don't like the idea of bringing some Conference team to the top as it's basically pretty straightforward yet time consuming (I finish a season in 2-3 weeks at best). I prefer to pick a decent team in England, Italy, France, or Spain (West Ham, Everton, Villa, Udinese, Deportivo, Monaco etc.) and develop it without buying any "superstar" player. I also try not to follow the same pattern/tactic in every game. E.g. I build a tactic based on the squad I have and then develop both the tactic and the squad season to season but not deviating too much from the initial set up.
  13. To me it's more like seeing if I can implement my ideas with different teams, adjust to specific situation, etc. I don't like the idea of bringing some Conference team to the top as it's basically pretty straightforward yet time consuming (I finish a season in 2-3 weeks at best). I prefer to pick a decent team in England, Italy, France, or Spain (West Ham, Everton, Villa, Udinese, Deportivo, Monaco etc.) and develop it without buying any "superstar" player. I also try not to follow the same pattern/tactic in every game. E.g. I build a tactic based on the squad I have and then develop both the tactic and the squad season to season but not deviating too much from the initial set up.
  14. I would emphasise style here. Any style consists of two component: a pass and passing options. There is no point to ask DC to play long ball if all other players of your team set to stay within 10 yards from that DC. Similarly, no short passing will occur if all your players are asked to always run to the opposition box. Hence, when we think about passing style we should think more about whom to pass than how to pass. Ideally at any point each player with the ball should have at least 3 decent passing options (5-6 is better). Short passing implies 2 out of those 3 options must be players closest to him. Not necessary 1, 3, or 10 yards away - just closest. As another player gets the ball, he also should have at least 3 passing options + an option to play pass back. Hence, short passing implies that players stay relatively close to each other. The exact distance here is not too important. Direct passing implies that player is focused on moving the ball forward. Hence out of those 3 passing options 2 should be higher up the pitch and they are supposed to have passing options higher up as well. The return pass is the last option for them. Again the distance is not to important, but the direction is. Finally, long ball implies that the ball is delivered directly from defense to forwards (or wingers) and midfield supports forwards arriving late. Again, the exact distance may vary, but generally speaking it's long
  15. More than 20% crosses completed is an excellent result. 10-20% - normal. Below 10% - might be ok if you have Crouch-like player upfront, so that a completed cross is very likely to be a goal and your players actually bombard the area with crosses. You see - it's much easier for defenders to win crosses: they have keeper to help them; even blocked cross is incomplete cross; they don't need to constantly move to lose an opponent; all they need to do is to head ball away or maybe simply stay there so that ST cannot jump from the right spot to get to the ball. All these factors give defenders huge advantage. Note though that 10% completion implies that your team managed at least 10 attempts (simple math). So if you instruct all your players to cross rarely and you see below 10% completion in the middle of the first half, there is something wrong there. Try to estimate how many attempt has been made and whether it's consistent with your instructions. You may have 50% completion due to 1 out of 2 attempts, but if you have instructed players to cross often it's not good either.