Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

oescus

Is it possible to be successful by just using the 'Tactics Creator'?

Recommended Posts

Over the past week I have physically trawled through multivarious formations/tactics from the, in my opinion, top creators like LoversLeaper, TBH and Mr Hough down to the one man business type of tactics. I am also an avid reader of TT&F, wwfan, SFraser, Cleon and others. The one thing that stands out immediately is the variation of the slider positions, whether in classic mode or the tactics creator. This has led me to wonder how so many tactics can appear to be so successful, considering the variation in the slider positions.

What I would like to find out, is this. As an example, let me select bog standard 4-4-2. By going through the 'TC' I get my basic tactic. The only change I make is to the set pieces. I also construct my five sets from defensive to attack. That's it all finished. I now implement the default training system, bring in the best staff that I can get and I'm ready for the new season. I arrange my six 'friendlies'. I prefer to have the first three as 'easy' matches and the final three at least teams as good as mine own. In the last three I am putting out my best available team.

Now, by viewing my 'TC' 4-4-2 team and players instructions I can see that the are big discrepancies in all the positions of the appropriate sliders, compared to all the other tactics sysyems. To have a successful system I would have thought that somewhere along the line that there would be some similarities for the tactics to work. I ahve not yey been able to find any two tactics that are in some way similar to one another.

With the 'TC', defensive line, width, tempo and timewasting can be 'messed about' with. I began by using the old 5: 10: 15: Putting 5 for all three DL, WDTH and tempo settings with 15 for TW for my defensive tactic. I then used 10 for all four in my standard tactic. I used 15 for DL, WDTH and tempo and 5 for TW in my attacking tactics. I have also tried variations of one number more for each system. I also use the shouts to control the match and sometimes change up or down to another of my set of five tactics. Although I have a liitle success using this system, I can hardly claim to it being anywhere near good enough for publication.

Has anyone else tried to use only the default in game formations/tactics and if so how did they get on? I am intrigued to find out just how little I know or to put it another way, how much I don't know, about playing the game. Kind regards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What do you mean by 'default'? Not using the shouts or changing strategies during game? I play only with the TC. I use the shouts a lot and play around with the different stratagies, roles and duties every game. The only thing I change is the set pieces, everything else is default. I've had a bit of success. I've become an icon at Bromley once, got them promoted a lot of times. Have just now won the League Cup and Cup in Portugal with Benfica, losing the league to Porto by only two miserable points. And other things. And at the 2010 version of the game I managed to win two Cl, two leagues and two Cups with Bayern, Juventus and other teams. Using only the defaults.

If you include using shouts and strategies, there you have my answer.

Cheers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What do you mean by 'default'? Not using the shouts or changing strategies during game? I play only with the TC. I use the shouts a lot and play around with the different stratagies, roles and duties every game. The only thing I change is the set pieces, everything else is default. I've had a bit of success. I've become an icon at Bromley once, got them promoted a lot of times. Have just now won the League Cup and Cup in Portugal with Benfica, losing the league to Porto by only two miserable points. And other things. And at the 2010 version of the game I managed to win two Cl, two leagues and two Cups with Bayern, Juventus and other teams. Using only the defaults.

If you include using shouts and strategies, there you have my answer.

Cheers.

My definition of default is you use the formations and tactics, team and players instructions as is in the TC, without altering them at all. Using the in game shouts is playing the default. Defining your teams philosophy etc is also default. I hope that this clears up my poor descriptions. Your response is appreciated, ricardomac. I hope a lot of others will now respond. I have used the tactics by others but have always gone back to trying to do my own. Now I am trying to be successful with just the in game formations/tactics. It must be possible otherwise including them in the game is self defeating. Kind regards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Brian Clough : Players lose you games, not tactics. There's so much crap talked about tactics by people who barely know how to win at dominoes.

I think Clough also said, players win games, not tactics, and, I think this is especially true in FM.

One of the things that I have seen on the forums that remains fairly consistent with tactics is, they contain a caveat of some sort by their creators. The, 'your striker needs x, y, z, your fullbacks need to be x, y,z'. This becomes even more evident when you get the, "this tactic sucks" and the response of " No, it is good you just need to get, blah, blah, blah."

The point I am making is, it is all about your players. You mention Sfraser, much of what he writes about is the players. How players work with one another, the balance between them, their development.

So for a system to be consistent it will always come back to the players. Formations are simply just the framework for a player to operate within. Roles and duties allow the players to express themselves.

Using default only with no tweaks, yes , I dare say you can have some success, however making subtle changes can also increase your success.

The screen below is the default for my 4-2-3-1 balance control formation

bwmdefault.png

This is what the game deems to be the general idea of how a ball winning midfielder will operate(in a balanced,control 4-2-3-1). Whether my ball winning midfielder is successful or not will come down the the player. Obviously his attributes will play a part in how well he does in that role. His personality will affect how he does in this role. His morale and the way he is feeling will also play a part in how well he does in this role. Hence if I chose to run the above as a default I could hardly expect to get the best out of my player as I haven't given him any consideration whatsoever. I haven't thought about my player enough and maybe tailored some of those generalisations to allow him to play in a manner that is better suited to him and his personality.

I realise I haven't probably answered your question in the manner you asked and also possibly digressed on another tangent. In the past I have done what you mentioned in your opening line trawled through countless forums looking for the perfect tactic (which is what prompted this post), and quite simply I missed the big picture.

For me now, the shape and tactical instructions play a part, but the players and the relationships contained within that, play a bigger part. Hopefully some of that made sense and doesn't seem like nonsense:)

cheers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

telV7. Thanks for your invaluable input. Your words about needing certain players to be able to do certain things strikes a familiar chord with me. I have often wondered, if you are using one of the many and varied so called 'plug & play' tactics, what action do you take if you are down by two goals going into the second half? I am thinking, that by definition, 'plug & play' there is not anything that you can do. The no tweaks, O.I's or 'shouts' required method surely fails, as there appears to be not any alternative action that you can take with these tactics to retrieve your losing situation.

You have certainly made me think more about seeing whether or not a player is suited to the role and duty that I expect from him. I have not really had the time and if the truth be told, the inclination, to persevere through a minimum of eleven players to get an end result. However, after reading your post I shall endeavour to make the effort. Kind regards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that even plug-and-play tactics use in-game tweaks. I always build a plug-and-play tactic for my long-term save, but knowing my own tactic so well, I also have an arsenal of tweaks I use for different situations. I only need them for about 20-30% of the time, but they are still needed.

I also don't think we should look at the game in terms of player vs tactic. It's not "player is more important" or "tactic is more important." The two are of course, as we all know, compliments. Of course people will say you need certain players for certain tactical setups. That's just a fact of football. Without the right players, that tactic won't work. On the other hand, certain players need certain tactical setups to work as well. Without the right setup, the player won't perform.

So if your team is struggling, you either find a more suitable player, or you create a tactic that better suits your players.

The problem with default tactics is they lack that last 10% IMHO. It's the little tweaks that sometimes decide championships, especially in MP games.

You can do well enough with TC but you can do even better with manual tweaks. Maybe your deep-lying forward are horrible with longshots, but his stuck doing them very often because of the default setting of it. You can't really change it, unless you make a shout that effects the whole team. Your winger is the perfect winger except he's not very good at crossing, so he ends up wasting hundreds of crosses a year. Etc Etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
telV7. Thanks for your invaluable input. Your words about needing certain players to be able to do certain things strikes a familiar chord with me. I have often wondered, if you are using one of the many and varied so called 'plug & play' tactics, what action do you take if you are down by two goals going into the second half? I am thinking, that by definition, 'plug & play' there is not anything that you can do. The no tweaks, O.I's or 'shouts' required method surely fails, as there appears to be not any alternative action that you can take with these tactics to retrieve your losing situation.

You have certainly made me think more about seeing whether or not a player is suited to the role and duty that I expect from him. I have not really had the time and if the truth be told, the inclination, to persevere through a minimum of eleven players to get an end result. However, after reading your post I shall endeavour to make the effort. Kind regards.

how else do you formulate a tactic?in order to be even remotely successfull you have to assign your players the necessary roles and duties when going on to the football pitch.what exactly have you been doing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've had quite a lot of fun trying to get the sliders to be roughly where I want them by just altering the player roles and duties. Whilst this seems a little counter-intuitive (why don't I just alter the sliders if I know where I want them?) I do so because I enjoy seeing the interaction between roles, duties, philosophy and shouts. Quite often the TC throws up a combination that I previously hadn't thought of and gives me more to go on when deciding what to change and what to stick with and it's far more intuitive than playing with sliders which allows you think less about the little parts and more about the bigger picture.

A key point to remember is that your idea of an advanced playmaker is probably not the same as mine and is probably not the same as the TC therefore if you really want the TC to behave how you'd like it to then you have to keep tabs on it.

Just realised that I've gone slightly off-topic, sorry. In response: I definitely agree that players win matches and the 'default' TC instructions will be successful given the right players.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kawee.You are correct about the 'TC' and the 10% and the winger comments which can probably apply to most players and their positional ability.

axehan1. What I have been doing is what I said in my first post. I pick a formation that I think is best for my team and similarly with philosophy etcetra. Then use the shouts to try and control the match.

Millsinho. I shall be paying attention to your link as soon as I have finished this post.

furiousuk. I have never liked messing around with the sliders. I was never able to correctly work out which value to put on which slider. I much prefer the 'TC'. I think that your key point is spot on. It will probably apply to most people who are playing the game.

Keep the posts rolling in. The views of you all have given me both food for thought and the impetus to have started a new save. This time to be more determined to get the right player for the right position and still use the 'TC'. Kind regards to all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I normally use the TC with shouts only, sometimes i'll tweak try though balls or crossing on a player but that's pretty much it.

I've found that using certain shouts with a strategy really help, for instance i used to hate the "defensive" strategy or as i used to call it "concede in the next 5 minutes" but with some shouts like "stand-off opponents" to keep shape or "take a breather" to reduce the runs from deep and therefore having more men on your own midfield to pass around and while it may seem contraditory, having a shout like "pass into space" or "clear ball to flanks" to just get the ball out of there and don't lose it cheaply on a dangerous position also helps.

Keep in mind that in my opinion when you use this strategy it also implies that you have a "negative" formation, so changing to defensive while still playing on a 442 for instance, isn't really that effective, i normally sub a defensive midfielder in to hold the result on those last 20 minutes.

And then just apply this sort of thinking for the whole different situations you face in-game, when playing against the narrow 442 diamond, might be a good idea to just keep the ball wide to stretch play with the support of the fullbacks, if you are playing against an inferior oppostion that is just parking the bus might be a good idea to use "pass to feet" to reduce through balls to keep the ball and wait for a lapse in concentration for that perfect pass, playing on wet conditions just play direct and pass into space with some long shots to test the keeper,etc

I'm not sure i've deviated from the original point but the bottom line is to look at it on footballing terms in my opinion, even though my current 4411 is completly different now it was originally inspired on how the Spurs were playing this season and it worked quite well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So for a system to be consistent it will always come back to the players. Formations are simply just the framework for a player to operate within. Roles and duties allow the players to express themselves.

For me now, the shape and tactical instructions play a part, but the players and the relationships contained within that, play a bigger part. Hopefully some of that made sense and doesn't seem like nonsense:)

cheers

Spot on.

The difference between the TC and the "classic system" is that with an untweaked TC you trade fine control of options for increased ease at putting balanced teams together and getting your ideas down on the pitch quicker albeit much more roughly.

The TC is what it says it is, a Tactics Creator. Once you have a group of players and an idea for how you want to play you can use the TC to quickly put together a fairly effective version of your idea. If you do it the other way, put together a tactic and then select a group of players, then you will be trying to fit square pegs in round holes.

However you can use the TC to set down some basic principles first, then select your players, then define the details.

Personally though I use a heavily tweaked version of the TC. Because the TC is basically a programme that applies rules for formation building that many great players of FM have defined over several years, you can be sure that you are putting together sensible and cohesive team structures using the TC.

However the way I use the TC is like a "library" of Mentality structures or Shapes. Instead of custom setting each mentality for each player, then doing the same again when I want to change my approach mid game, I flick through the TC options which changes all my players Mentalities at once, until I find a shape that "yeah that'll do fine" and away I go.

From this point I personally select the rest of the options like RWB etc. etc, because these don't require team wide changes when making a litte difference. I don't need to reduce every players RWB to play more conservative because I never want my CB's to RWB anyway.

I'm sure you could be very successful using an unmodified TC the way it appears. I want to attack so I will go fluid attacking with Winger Attack and so on. Sure that could work.

However the TC can be interpreted differently and tweaked accordingly to produce a Tactical Interface that is basically a "Classic System" with all the micro-management removed and that can still exploit most of the useful shouts. This I believe is the best of both worlds.

The perfect FM tactical solution in my opinion would be a customisable TC. A TC where you can define how a TQ should function in your team, how a Poacher should function, and so on. This would not only utterly trump the whole "tactics sets" system for staggering depth but would also mean that all shouts could be used by all people employing all variations of tactics.

And if these customisable TC options were downloadable....

Take the game to a new level I reckon. Certainly take communication and interactivity to a new level, and I would be the first to say that I owe a vast amount to these forums.

I was a newb once too, and not so long ago either.

The current TC options do a good job as generalisations, but what use is Winger - Attack to Barcelona or Arsenal or my United side? I would rather myself and a few other folk playing a similar system could get our heads together on here and develop 10 different types of Inside Forward for our TC's. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Coentrao and SFraser. Thank you for your responses. Up till now I have had a decent idea for my new save. However, after SFraser saying ....'I want to attack so I will go 'fluid'attacking with winger attack and so on' .... I am a little confused. Does this mean that your philosophy changes, depending upon which tactic you are playing. I have always picked one philosophy, either 'Rigid' or 'Balanced' and stuck with it regardless of which of the five tactics, 'Defensive' 'Counter' through to 'Attack'. Have I been wrong doing it in this manner? Does the philosophy change as the tactic changes?

I have always held the belief that you should choose your 'philosophy', 'passing style', 'creative freedom', 'closing down', 'tackling', 'marking', 'crossing', and 'roaming' and stick with them. Enlightenment is required, please.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Every team setting can be used no matter how you set the other settings (rigid with attack, hard tackling with low pressing etc.). You have to think what settings make sense to you and how you want to play. If you want to unlock teams sitting back the unpredictability and numbers a fluid philosophy brings can really help. With a rigid philosophy your defending players won't aid in the attack as much and it doesn't encourage movement as much as a fluid philosophy. That doesn't mean you can't attack with a rigid philosophy or can't defend with a fluid philosophy (in fact I find that a fluid defensive tactic can be absurdly strong defensively).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have always held the belief that you should choose your 'philosophy', 'passing style', 'creative freedom', 'closing down', 'tackling', 'marking', 'crossing', and 'roaming' and stick with them. Enlightenment is required, please.

Passing style and closing down, at the very least, are things you should tweak tactically according to the situation, though you can use the shouts ahead of the "adjustments" on the team tactics screen (which often do nothing).

Generally, the others are a matter of personal preference and what suits your side. I'd certainly class philosophy as one of those, it would take exceptional circumstances for me to change it for one match (and that would always be to "Very Rigid").

Tackling and roaming can go in either- some people want their players to tackle hard or avoid picking up cautions, whereas some people will dictate this situationally using the shouts. It can be to your advantage to increase roaming or decrease it, though I tend to avoid adjusting it.

I tend not to override any of the TC settings, because I like using the shouts and there's little point using them if you've overwritten half your settings. I'll sometimes increase a player's creative freedom if the role that suits them best doesn't give as much as I'd like, I increase the RFD of attacking central midfielders, and I sometimes increase or rarely decrease the long shots of a player to suit his ability.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The TC is great for creating a basic framework and then as I watch and learn how it plays I tweak and alter it in a more detailed fashion, also knowing your players is key. I have a great midfielder who should be a beast as an advanced playmaker, but he just plays badly in that role, so I never set it that anymore. I have a great winger on attack mentality but his dribbling/pace arent great so his run settings are dropped to sometimes... and so on.

Theres not 1 player in my senior squad I dont know in detail.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm about to head out, so I'll be a bit "general", but I rely almost totally on the tactics creator settings. The only thing I do head to the sliders for, is my defensive line settings, if playing a direct/attacking game against some bigger sides with problematic forwards. For me, the TC "attacking" mentality structure can sometimes push the defensive line too high and the shouts don't drop it back quite deep enough for my own preference.

That's the only thing I don't use the "default" settings with.

I'll have a variety of formations and systems I'll utilise. All will have common roles and duties, but offer an element of flexibility. Then I'll always build my squad around those systems. It's something I've always preferred and found easier to do. For me, finding a player that suits a positional/role/duty requirements, always seems easier than trying to alter things tactically to accommodate a player. Basically, I build squads around tactics, rather than tactics around squads.

Therefore with the advent of the tactics creator, I'm able to set out the framework of my tactical ideas much more quickly and easily, then get on to building my team. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My appreciation to all of you who have taken the time and thought to respond to my OP. I have decided upon still trying to make mine own formation/tactics rather than a 'tailor made' set. Purely my own preference and not in any way meant to criticise the rather good work done by those who make the 'tailor made' tactics.

I have started a new save with Portsmouth. Due to the lack of variey of players and the current transfer embargo, my best option appears to be a 4-1-2-1-2 or a 4-3-2-1 formation. the meat on this is thus. Philosophy = Rigid, Passing Style = Default, Creative freedom = More Disciplined, Closing Down = Default, Tackling = Default, Marking = Zonal, Crossing = Default and Roaming = Default. My pitch size is standard. I prefer this as I am of the opinion that a standard size pitch offers more options in altering the passing, width, tempo and time wasting as may be required during a match. I feel that if you are already on the smallest or biggest pitch, your options could be a little restricted.

Another problem possibly facing Portsmouth, in FM'11, is that at the end of this season, they may well be needing at least ten new players to make up a twenty five man squad, for next season. I shall probably be looking to sell the likes of Lawrence, maybe even Ben-Haim [wages] and a few of the highest valued -18's team, to raise some transfer revenue. It is going to be an interesting first season.

Your comments on my formation/tactics are, as always, more than welcome. Keep them all coming in. Kind regards to all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I recently started a save with Newport county (BSP) and used a 4-4-2 with only TC settings apart from 1 or 2 slider changes because I couldn't get the players role just right. I even let all the long shot sliders alone which I have never done before but it's working out nicely (top of the table with a huge lead and doing well in the cups taking out two league 1 teams already). A big part of it is my squad which is a lot better than most squads in my league but the cup performances made me confident I was getting (close to) the most out of my squad with this tactic.

To answer the title of this thread: yes it's very possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your input. Marsupian. Perhaps you could divulge which sliders you tweaked and why? I'm pleased to see that you are having a good run with Newport. I wanted to do Southport but I couldn't get around to working out all the part timers. They were a full time professional out fit last year, I'm sure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...