Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community
wwfan

Quickfire Questions and Answers Thread (Tactic and Training Questions Only)

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, summatsupeer said:

I would say you have lots of players looking to risky passes, but have a lack of runners, i'd say Retain Possession would suit your Duty selection. Yes you have runners on the wings, but they will join attacks later due to being Structured.  Maybe a slower tempo would help to allow your WB's time to move up and stretch the defence.  Maybe both instructions or just one, would need to see the play.

I think you might of flooded the central area too much with 5 players, Structured will help a bit but you might need to take it further to make the two ST stay up a bit more and to drop the defensive players a bit.  It might be worth making your CF-S a CF-A so he occupies the defenders, keeping them honest whilst your F9 drops to linkup with your AP, BBM and Reg.

I'd not use a CWB because of the above reason, where is he going to roam to?  Really you need him staying wide to provide width and stretch your opponents.  I would add PI's to both WB-S to Stay Wide.

Who is the BPD going to play risky passes to?  Personally with a Reg sat in front of him going "GIVE ME THE BALL" i'd want him to just give it to him.

Have you setup your GK distribution so he doesn't waste it?

Thanks, you cleared up a bit my foggy brain. I will try those suggestions you've said and see how it goes.

I have chosen the CWB because I wanted someone to be more advanced as it looked like most of the times the LB was too deep to support the AP or the CF, so I have decided to go with that as the WB-A might have been too direct for my liking.

Then I agree with you with the BPD, I haven't used these roles too much in my whole FM game-play so I don't know how exactly they work, I am trying to experiment with things right now and see what I can do. But I guess I'll just have to remove the BPD. I will look into the roles and the Team Shape and how they work and see how I can improve things.

 

Edit: Nope, not working.

Edited by kristalshards

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for clarifying, Herne. I had previously read that tempo affects 'pressing' when not in possession but it's good to know that it doesn't. I have tried all of the above prior to my initial post yet I still had the same problem. I appreciate your help but I am still none-the-wiser as to how I can stop individual defenders closing down where there is no need. Secondly, when they do it and it is quite obviously the reason why we concede there is no way of interacting with them to tell them not to do it or to train them not to do it anymore. Of course, you might say their attributes are a contributing factor, this, I understand, yet it happens far to often for it to be attributed solely on the defenders attributes. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, kristalshards said:

Thanks, you cleared up a bit my foggy brain. I will try those suggestions you've said and see how it goes.

I have chosen the CWB because I wanted someone to be more advanced as it looked like most of the times the LB was too deep to support the AP or the CF, so I have decided to go with that as the WB-A might have been too direct for my liking.

Then I agree with you with the BPD, I haven't used these roles too much in my whole FM game-play so I don't know how exactly they work, I am trying to experiment with things right now and see what I can do. But I guess I'll just have to remove the BPD. I will look into the roles and the Team Shape and how they work and see how I can improve things.

 

Edit: Nope, not working.

If the problem is not getting that "build from the back" style, try lowering the mentality so players take safer options and will play lateral/backwards a bit more.  Control is still a attacking mentality that prioritizes forward play more than any other.  This should make it a bit more probing and patient, should resort to long shots less to.

Apart from that we're going to need more than "nope, not working" if you want to get it working.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hi,

I'm trying to developed another version of my 4123 Wide DM tactic, this time trying to use the Raumdeuter in it.

So i came up with this setup:

AF(a)

IF(s)                                 RMD(a)

AP(s)     BBM(s)

DLP(d)

WB(a)    DC(d)    DC(d)    WB(a)

SK(d)

Playing with Control Mentality and Fluid Team Shape.

TI's: pass into space, higher D-line, tight marking, play out from defense, more closing down.

Do you think that it's a odd choice having oen AF(a) when playing as my lone forward.

The idea was having my forward pushing the opponent defense back, so that my RMD had some extra space, and at the same time take advantage of the passes that the AP(s) and the IF(s) can produce.

Should i go with a different type of role for my forward? Perhaps one with support duty?

Edited by Keyzer Soze

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Keyzer Soze said:

hi,

I'm trying to developed another version of my 4123 Wide DM tactic, this time trying to use the Raumdeuter in it.

So i came up with this setup:

AF(a)

IF(s)                                 RMD(a)

AP(s)     BBM(s)

DLP(d)

WB(a)    DC(d)    DC(d)    WB(a)

SK(d)

Playing with Control Mentality and Fluid Team Shape.

TI's: pass into space, higher D-line, tight marking, play out from defense, more closing down.

Do you think that it's a odd choice having oen AF(a) when playing as my lone forward.

The idea was having my forward pushing the opponent defense back, so that my RMD had some extra space, and at the same time take advantage of the passes that the AP(s) and the IF(s) can produce.

Should i go with a different type of role for my forward? Perhaps one with support duty?

I've had RMD do really well for me as the main goal scorer in multiple tactics.  I typically used more mobile ST roles such as F9, CF-S or CF-A who would be a creative player.  The more controlling possession tactics used the support duty to help with possession and potentially draw defenders out.  The more fast attacking style I used CF-A so he would occupy the defenders but still move around a bit and create for the RMD, the CF-A was my secondary goal scorer.  I think a AF-A + RMD-A are two goal scoring focused roles who are trying to get in behind the defence so might get in each others way and not create space or chances for the other.

I'd also watch for the BBM + RMD being on the same side, both will roam and if the BBM tries to get into the box the RMD might already be there.  I think having the AP-S on that side makes more sense to play balls through to the RMD.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see that people do use 2 attacking duties on 1 flank fairly often. I had thought that was a big no-no. Why is it apparently, still doable?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Bunkerossian said:

I see that people do use 2 attacking duties on 1 flank fairly often. I had thought that was a big no-no. Why is it apparently, still doable?

If the advanced player is a player who moves / cuts inside such as IF, AP or RMD then it gives the deeper player space to attack.  But because you have two attack duties you have to consider who will support and cover for those players.  Plus if both push up to try and get in behind, does it fit your style with fewer supporting players?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I read earlier in this thread that defensive compactness isn't effected much, if at all, by fluidity. I could have sworn I've read in numerous threads that this is one of the main factors in selecting a team shape. Am I going crazy?

If it's true that it doesn't make much of a difference in defensive compactness, can you recommend a starting point to getting an extremely compact defensive shape? 

Thanks. :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, summatsupeer said:

I've had RMD do really well for me as the main goal scorer in multiple tactics.  I typically used more mobile ST roles such as F9, CF-S or CF-A who would be a creative player.  The more controlling possession tactics used the support duty to help with possession and potentially draw defenders out.  The more fast attacking style I used CF-A so he would occupy the defenders but still move around a bit and create for the RMD, the CF-A was my secondary goal scorer.  I think a AF-A + RMD-A are two goal scoring focused roles who are trying to get in behind the defence so might get in each others way and not create space or chances for the other.

I'd also watch for the BBM + RMD being on the same side, both will roam and if the BBM tries to get into the box the RMD might already be there.  I think having the AP-S on that side makes more sense to play balls through to the RMD.

Thks for the help summatsupeer,

I understand the idea of having a more mobile ST, but that was the reason i choose the AF(a). I thought that he was a very mobile player having the instructions "move into channels" and "dribble more" selected by default. More mobile when compare with the CF(s) or CF(a).

In some games, i already had chosen the F9, mainly against bigger teams.

Anyway, i'm gonna give it a try playing with a CF(s) or CF(a) as my ST.

And also thanks for the tip about changing the position of the AP(s)-BBM(s). It makes much more sence the way you said it. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

What are the key attributes for our assist manager gives the best OI's?

Tactical Knowledge? Tactics? Both? Others?

Thks

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎8‎/‎24‎/‎2016 at 14:42, liam9sufc said:

Besides the playmaker/target man box being ticked, is the difference between roles purely based on their PI's?

 

For example, the box to box midfielder(s) role has only one hard coded PI - roam from position, CM(s) has no hard coded PI's. So theoretically should a B2B(s) play exactly the same as a CM(s) with roam from position PI added? Is it right to rule out FMs description of the roles and the fact they are positioned differently on the TC screen in these cases?

 

In case it was missed being the last post on the last page :)

Edited by liam9sufc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Keyzer Soze said:

What are the key attributes for our assist manager gives the best OI's?

Tactical Knowledge? Tactics? Both? Others?

I'd go with Tactical Knowledge and Defending, as OIs are defensive by nature.  Just exercise caution when using them as they can throw your tactic out of balance.  And if you use an AM (or other member of staff) to set OIs, always check what they set just in case they do something dumb.

1 hour ago, liam9sufc said:

Besides the playmaker/target man box being ticked, is the difference between roles purely based on their PI's?

 

For example, the box to box midfielder(s) role has only one hard coded PI - roam from position, CM(s) has no hard coded PI's. So theoretically should a B2B(s) play exactly the same as a CM(s) with roam from position PI added? Is it right to rule out FMs description of the roles and the fact they are positioned differently on the TC screen in these cases?

Some perhaps are, others probably aren't.  There will be similarities but it's not that straight forward.  A CM(s) with More Roaming selected isn't going to play quite the same as a B2B to follow the example.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've always gone with the assumption they were for some reason, I think I'll look into detail how major/minor the differences actually are when I have the time.

Thanks Herne :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like Keyzer Soze a few posts above me, I was considering a tactic with a raumdeuter on one side and an inside forward on the other side.  Since I am quite bad at setting up my own tactics I did a google search to see what other people were doing to make it work, the issue I have is that I came up with two pieces of information that kinda counter eachother.  One was a post from Rashidi on his blog explaining in detail the differences between a raumdeuter and an inside forward.  Rashidi wrote that the RMD needs someone behind him to exploit the space he leaves behind, so an attacking wingback, and that the inside forwards needs someone behind him who locks down the space behind him while the IF makes his attacking moves, so a fullback on support.  On the other hand I found information suggesting that the inside forward works a lot better when he also has someone behind him that attacks the space he creates by cutting inside and dragging defenders with him.

 

So which one is correct?  Would a F9 also dive into the space that the inside forward creates and would that be enough?  Or is it more that the RMD will always look to find and run into space so he will "always" leave that space behind for someone else to fill while the inside forward will not always be able to create the extra space and therefor a fullback on support is sufficient for when the IF indeed does create the extra space?

Or are both right and is it more an issue of having to balance the team defensive wise?

Also would an offensive partnership of a RMD-F9-IF be enough to dislodge teams that park the bus against you, or is that partnership something more suited to a counter attacking style since there would be more space to exploit?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I have this tactic that I am working on atm.

 

Tottenham_Hotspur___Overview.png

 

My main concern is the space between my BBM, AMR and RB and I feel that sooner or later, that space will be exploited by a skillful player and will cause me sort of problems. What I have worked out so far is to move the AMR down to a MR position and give him an attack duty to try and replicate the IF-S.

 

Tottenham_Hotspur___Overview-2.png

 

I had to play around with the duties as I didn't want either flank to be too attacking so I ended up with that. Now thing is, if I wanted to keep the formation with the AMR, what could I do about that space?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This really is a stupid question : how long does it take the AI to "learn" my tactics? If I alternate players but in same position and role would it take them longer? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Swillo said:

This really is a stupid question : how long does it take the AI to "learn" my tactics? If I alternate players but in same position and role would it take them longer? 

The AI cannot 'learn' your tactic, ever, so the answer is never.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, HUNT3R said:

The AI cannot 'learn' your tactic, ever, so the answer is never.

Thanks, I did say it was a stupid question :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, little question about "Tempo"

I have a tactic, 4123 wide DM, setup up luke this:

DLF(s)

W(s)                                    IF(s)

CM(a)       AP(s)

DLP(s)

WB(a)    CD(d)    CD(d)    WB(a)

SK(d)

I play with control mentality.

Sometimes i feel that my WB(a) dont get to the attack because the play is too rushed by the others players.

How can i avoid this?

Is reducing tempo the solution?

Apart from tempo, what else could i do?

For example, the TI look for overlap, could help? because it tells to the more advanced players to hold on?

Edited by Keyzer Soze

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's an option, only trying it will find out if its the solution.

Control mentality will make your players prioritize forward play to create a chance.  Slowing the tempo will make them take a few moments longer to see there options and to pick the best option, but it won't change how they prioritize the options.

Other instructions like Team Shape might also contribute, a very structured shape will make the deeper players less risky so will take longer until its safer to get forward rather than making earlier runs during transitions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, summatsupeer said:

It's an option, only trying it will find out if its the solution.

Control mentality will make your players prioritize forward play to create a chance.  Slowing the tempo will make them take a few moments longer to see there options and to pick the best option, but it won't change how they prioritize the options.

Other instructions like Team Shape might also contribute, a very structured shape will make the deeper players less risky so will take longer until its safer to get forward rather than making earlier runs during transitions.

ok,

But about team shape i play fluid, so the wingbacks should join in earlier.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Keyzer Soze said:

ok,

But about team shape i play fluid, so the wingbacks should join in earlier.

Perhaps, but also remember that Fluid adds in creative freedom, so players will be looking to make more risky passes and take a few more risks.

Have you had a look at where the issue may originate from?  Is the SK(A) for example punting the ball long too often?  Maybe the the DLP(S) is playing a few too many long range passes?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, my bad.

The DLP, playing in the DM position is on defensive duty.

And the SK is not on attack, but on defensive duty also.

 

I play the game in a tablet, so i don't have the option to see the full game, but it seems related with the midfield. Perhaps the CM(a)+AP(s) is rushing the play too much.

On the wing, i have to players (WS and IF) both on support, so i don't think the problem is there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds like you want something to keep possession a bit more, so i've shamefully lifted the options and explanations from the Possession guide by Cleon.

Quote

Highly Structured Team Shape – This would allow space to open in midfield and encourages players to keep it simple.

Lower Tempo – This encourages players to look for support and not to rush with their play. Players will be looking up and accessing their options more.

Roam From Position – Encourage players to make themselves available, keeping support options available. It’s probably one (if not) the most important aspect of ball retention.

Dribble Less – You don’t want many players dribbling with the ball because you want players in support and the idea is to retain possession. Dribbling can see passing options reduced.

Pass it Shorter – It’s all about keeping it simple with the ball. The longer the pass the more likely it can be under/over hit, mistimed or even intercepted by the opposition.

Retain Possession – Again it reduces passing length making it even shorter and cutting the risk of through balls out.

Work Ball Into Box – You don’t want players shooting from distances and wasting chances. Not only that but it would give the opposition the ball, which kinda goes against possession right?

Play Out of Defence – Building attacks from the back is basic possession football.

Distribute Short – If you don’t then you will often find your keeper booting the ball long and wasting possession. Your keepers distribution will likely have the single biggest impact on your overall possession. So make sure he isn’t wasting it.

I think you should just give your initial idea a try, lower the tempo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, pocketspace said:

Does the F9 attract balls more than a DLF?

Possibly.  

If you are asking if there is something hard coded into the game to make an F9 attract the ball, then no.  As far as I am aware, only the defined "playmaker" type of roles (AP, DLP, RPM, TQ, WP, Regista) and the "Target Man" role have something hard coded to make them attract the ball more than other roles.

However, different roles will see more of the ball simply because of how the move on the pitch.  A Poacher (for example) will see less of the ball simply because they hang around the box waiting for a scoring chance, whereas an F9 will get more of the ball because they'll be more involved in build up play due to their movement.  But that isn't because they "attract" the ball, it's just because of their movement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does the play wide/narrow instruction affect offensive shape or defensive shape or both?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your offensive shape.

In the defensive phase your team naturally withdraws into a compact unit anyway, regardless of instructions.  If you play wide offensively your players will have a little further to transition back when defending, so there is a small indirect impact for the transition but not the actual defensive shape.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Which mental attributes factor in for complacency in matches? I have an on-loan CB who very often get complacent in matches where we lead by 2 goals or more. I have option to buy, but a little unsure on his mental state.

Edited by Ji-Sung Park

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it possible, when creating a tactic, to tell a specific position to man mark another specific position in the opposition lineup or does it have to be done at the start of every match? Also, is it still possible to tell players to swap positions? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, EnigMattic1 said:

Is it possible, when creating a tactic, to tell a specific position to man mark another specific position in the opposition lineup or does it have to be done at the start of every match? Also, is it still possible to tell players to swap positions? 

Only when starting the match as far as I know.

Swapping can be done by clicking "Playing Instructions" in the tactics screen at any time. Not "Edit", but "PI".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Ji-Sung Park said:

Which mental attributes factor in for complacency in matches? I have an on-loan CB who very often get complacent in matches where we lead by 2 goals or more. I have option to buy, but a little unsure on his mental state.

Complacency can be a bit of a dark art with various factors such as player personality, Manager status & attributes, Team Talk (and individual Player Talk) tone & effectiveness, squad rotation, and match importance all (possibly) having an impact.  I'm yet to see an all encompassing guide on this subject.

Check your Assistant Manager feedback reports and his Pre-Match feedback (Overview>Feedback from the Team Talk screen) before and after you've given your Team Talk as this can highlight to you who may become complacent and may require an individual pre-match talk.  Also try to vary your Team Talks as repetition will turn off players.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What would be the use for separating the lines with Structured or Very Structured? These 2 mentalities are restrictive on creativity, but what  is their secondary effect used for?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure exactly what you are asking, but Team Shape effects both creativity and depth.

Very Structured is the one extreme where creativity is very limited, players will rely on their assigned roles and act acording to those, but it also see's the players spread out more up-and-down the pitch (depth) but not horizontally. This is linked to creativity because your Strikers are responsible for attack and will track back much less as they are generally further up the pitch, defenders are responsible for defending and will very rarely get involved in supporting the attack, and all strata's in between are spread out accordingly i.e DM's more defensive oriented, AM's more attack oriented, MC's somewhere in the middle.

Very Fluid is the other extreme where every player is very free to be as creative as they feel applicable; it will also have all the players play very compact up-and-down the pitch, again not horizontally. This is linked to creativity because defenders will naturally be closer to the attacking players and will help out with attacks, fullbacks will get down the flanks, defenders will help keep possession etc; strikers and attacking midfielders will attack and also be more inclined to track back and help out defensively.

It seemed odd to me at first that it would effect both creativity and depth, but when you think about it those things are definitely linked.

Edited by Craigus89
Re-structured

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Bunkerossian said:

What would be the use for separating the lines with Structured or Very Structured? These 2 mentalities are restrictive on creativity, but what  is their secondary effect used for?

It is tied to player mentality, which incidentally, creates the vertical compactness that Craig was talking about above. It isn't creativity that causes this, though. Structured and Very Structured systems create a wider mentality spread between the stratas of play. Your defenders have lower mentalities and your attackers have higher than in fluid systems. This creates the separation as defenders don' get as further forward and attackers don't drop as deep. The use is for creating a clear separation in player jobs on the pitch. You want your defenders defending, your attackers attacking. With fluid you get more blurred lines between attack and defense. Does this make sense? So uses for structured could be a rigid type system where you want more separation for specific passing styles, perhaps you are weaker defensively and so want your defenders to play more conservatively, maybe your players are not strong two way players and are best suited to specific jobs on the pitch (attack or defend). There are a number of possibilities for using structured systems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Dr. Hook said:

It is tied to player mentality, which incidentally, creates the vertical compactness that Craig was talking about above. It isn't creativity that causes this, though. Structured and Very Structured systems create a wider mentality spread between the stratas of play. Your defenders have lower mentalities and your attackers have higher than in fluid systems. This creates the separation as defenders don' get as further forward and attackers don't drop as deep. The use is for creating a clear separation in player jobs on the pitch. You want your defenders defending, your attackers attacking. With fluid you get more blurred lines between attack and defense. Does this make sense? So uses for structured could be a rigid type system where you want more separation for specific passing styles, perhaps you are weaker defensively and so want your defenders to play more conservatively, maybe your players are not strong two way players and are best suited to specific jobs on the pitch (attack or defend). There are a number of possibilities for using structured systems.

Hi Dr Hook,

 

Just to add another question from this. Whenever I think about tactics, I think I'm much more of a Structured manager, I like my CB's to stay back, my full backs to be more cautious, a DM to really be more thinking about his defensive duty and then my strikers to be more thinking of scoring and midfielders creating etc. 

However, due to thinking of wanting structured but having a team who suit 442 much more than another formation, I worry the options of Structured/Very Structured is going to cause bigger gaps between defence and midfield and midfield and attack, so to counter that possible separation without losing the structured style I really want, would you recommend either of these to try to improve matters? 

 

Retain Possesion/Shorter Passing - thinking because it should pull the players closer together to try to lose some of the separation

Higher defensive line - not sure if this will actually bring the whole side closer together but my thinking is, if the defence is higher up the pitch it would push the other two lines forward a bit too but because there would be less of the pitch to play around then it could in theory bring them together? 

 

The other things I would think is runners from midfield, my wide men will probably be doing the most of this to plug the gap between midfield and attack, also a striker who drops deep would come in handy to help plug that gap, while I imagine the full backs and maybe the more defensive minded of the midfield duo could help plug a gap in between defence and midfield.

 

I'm hoping I'm thinking along the right terms but worried this won't really be a good idea to use 442 and structured. 

 

Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, herne79 said:

@Conflictinbanno

What you outline is exactly what I did with my 4-4-2.

Was this in the thread where you made Thames Ironworks FC? 

I may have to give it another read as it has been a while since I last read it so can't remember, my only worry there is, my players are nowhere near the class of yours. You probably remember my Ipswich save that I've kind of abandoned for a while from getting into other games on Xbox a bit more, but feel tonight I want to pick it back up. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Conflictinbanno

The only other thing to consider with using a higher defensive line is how much you are using a high block/pressing up the pitch with your attackers and midfield. I have come seriously unstuck using a high line but not having an effective press with balls over the top, whether that is because of my tactics not working quite right in relation to the press or having lazy players. In a lower league team this could be more of an issue?

By the sounds of it, a Standard mentality might be a good balance for you from what you have described, but obviously haven't seen the rest of your system...

Edited by Craigus89

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Craigus89 said:

@Conflictinbanno

The only other thing to consider with using a higher defensive line is how much you are using a high block/pressing up the pitch with your attackers and midfield. I have come seriously unstuck using a high line but not having an effective press with balls over the top, whether that is because of my tactics not working quite right in relation to the press or having lazy players. In a lower league team this could be more of an issue?

By the sounds of it, a Standard mentality might be a good balance for you from what you have described, but obviously haven't seen the rest of your system...

I'll probably start a proper thread to show the full system, problem is, I'm at the playoffs so don't have many games for the rest of the season. However, I can't see me losing my job whether I qualify or not as I'm performing above expectations overall, I'm just not perfectly happy as the team can be very inconsistent. My only fear is losing my best player if I'm not promoted. 

Luckily I'm not in the lower leagues I'm in the Championship and I could consider using close down more on the poacher of the two strikers and even possibly the supporting striker of F9/DLF depending who I'm using there but I don't want them to be pushed to far out of position from closing down. 

Going by memory however I think my setup was 

Gk(d)

FB (A) CD (D) CD (D) FB (S)

WM (S) CM (D) DLP (S) W (S)

F9/DLF (S) P (A)

I tried varied ideas of using Fluid/Very Fluid with be more disciplined but I much prefer my team to stick to their roles more so the Structured/Very Structured mentality suits me personally much more. I think the WM has PI's to try to mimic an IF a little to Cut Inside/Dribble More and be a threat at goal too, I also think the CM (D) has close down less as I think the role from memory codes to close down more which sometimes worries me he will move out of position at times. TI's wise this could all change following my question above but I think I had be more disciplined (something I would drop if I go structured) and stay on feet. Other than them I can't remember what ones I have! 

 

From what I like though, I don't mind pressing from the attackers, however the rest of the team I like without the ball to keep shape and be hard to break down rather than closing down loads and winning the ball back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stick a thread up, I'd be interested to see your whole system as I really like the 4-4-2 as as it can be so versatile.

I'd also be interested to see the players you use in whatever you think the key positions are for your system. That is often overlooked on these boards when people try to help with tactics in my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Craigus89 said:

Stick a thread up, I'd be interested to see your whole system as I really like the 4-4-2 as as it can be so versatile.

I'd also be interested to see the players you use in whatever you think the key positions are for your system. That is often overlooked on these boards when people try to help with tactics in my opinion.

Craig I'll definitely do one when I'm home and on the machine with the save. So should be up later this afternoon/early evening. 

Key players I find tough though, bizarrely a player that has made himself key to me is my Poacher, first season I had Sears who had probably a season I couldn't even have dreamed of scoring something like 30 goals, unfortunately he was injured right at the end and for the start of next season so I signed Dwight Gayle who has had a similarly successful season so far. However, I wouldn't say they are the key piece to the tactic, I find the major ones are LM/RM RB, the CM who is a playmaker and the False 9 as combined I feel they all make it tick and are probably why the Poacher had the success he has. Hopefully with the full thread it can give a better insight to it all overall though! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding tutoring of young players, does personalities stack up? If I have a youngster who is Very ambitious and I have him tutored by players that are Driven and/or Model Pro, could he turn in to a Perfectionist?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Velodromè said:

Regarding tutoring of young players, does personalities stack up? If I have a youngster who is Very ambitious and I have him tutored by players that are Driven and/or Model Pro, could he turn in to a Perfectionist?

Unlikely.

During Tutoring it's not actually the "personality" that gets changed, it's some hidden attributes (and Determination).  Different combinations of different hidden attributes define the personality.  So the hidden attributes in the player being tutored can get changed up to (but not exceeding) the tutor's hidden attributes.

This is why sometimes at the end of tutoring a player ends up with a different personality to the Tutor's - because not all attributes that define the personality have changed sufficiently to "make" that personality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Question from the sidelines:

What do you guys do to get motivated? I have some time off now where it would be perfect to play a little, but I feel jaded with FM16 and not very motivated to fire up a long running save. I used to go with some replicas before when I felt this way, but now I can't find anything I'd like to try etc.

Ideas?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...