Jump to content

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


Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Hanan96 said:

So, Deep lying forward (Attack), or Trequarista (Attack) as a lone striker might not too isolated then?

As always, depends on the system as a whole. but both TQ and DLF on attack are less likely to get isolated than AF for example, because both roles tend to drop deeper during transitions. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 14.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Just now, Experienced Defender said:

As always, depends on the system as a whole. but both TQ and DLF on attack are less likely to get isolated than AF for example, because both roles tend to drop deeper during transitions. 

what if the IF is on support duty? Then would it make more sence to have a forward like a AF(a)?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Keyzer Soze said:

what if the IF is on support duty? Then would it make more sence to have a forward like a AF(a)?

As I already said, it always depends on your tactical system as a whole and can therefore vary from case to case. The worst thing you can do is viewing roles and duties - or any other element of a tactic - in isolation from its other parts.

Of course, it also depends on the quality of your player(s) playing a role. Some players are good enough to play as a lone AF, others need more support. But when it comes specifically to the IF/AF combo, I would rather have the IF on support duty than on attack. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

As I already said, it always depends on your tactical system as a whole and can therefore vary from case to case. The worst thing you can do is viewing roles and duties - or any other element of a tactic - in isolation from its other parts.

Of course, it also depends on the quality of your player(s) playing a role. Some players are good enough to play as a lone AF, others need more support. But when it comes specifically to the IF/AF combo, I would rather have the IF on support duty than on attack. 

Just to make sure i understand the logic.... the IF(s) would be a better combo when compare with the IF(a) because, probably because the IF(a) will attack the same channel that the AF(a) will go to. Is that right?

The same way, when in compare with the IF(s)+AF(a) vs IW(s)+AF(a) combo, the IF(s)+AF(a) in theory would work better, because the movement of the IF(s) is slightly more vertical than the IW(s) and because of that will give a better support to the AF(a).

Am i right to assume this?

PS: i know that roles and duties shouldn't be analyze isolated from the tactic as a whole and with the quality and attributes of the players, but sometimes i wish there was a thread  in someway in the line of the old pairs and combinations made by @llama3 where people just ask this simple questions related with paring roles because, despite of the whole setup there are some combos that will always work better and be more effective when in compare to others.

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

Just to make sure i understand the logic.... the IF(s) would be a better combo when compare with the IF(a) because, probably because the IF(a) will attack the same channel that the AF(a) will go to. Is that right?

Yes. Although it does not mean that such a combo can never work. It's just not optimal. But IW on attack and AF can be a good combination. Again, depending on how you set up the rest. 

 

22 minutes ago, Keyzer Soze said:

The same way, when in compare with the IF(s)+AF(a) vs IW(s)+AF(a) combo, the IF(s)+AF(a) in theory would work better, because the movement of the IF(s) is slightly more vertical than the IW(s) and because of that will give a better support to the AF(a).

Am i right to assume this?

Basically, both IF on support and IW on support can be a good match for an AF. 

 

24 minutes ago, Keyzer Soze said:

PS: i know that roles and duties shouldn't be analyze isolated from the tactic as a whole and with the quality and attributes of the players, but sometimes i wish there was a thread  in someway in the line of the old pairs and combinations made by @llama3 where people just ask this simple questions related with paring roles because, despite of the whole setup there are some combos that will always work better and be more effective when in compare to others

Sounds like a good idea :thup:

 In fact, I may create such a thread ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Does it make sense to play direct-attacking football (positive mentality) while using high defensive line? What i see is that vast majority of direct tactics play deeper and less urgent pressing. I am pretty sure Mourinho's Madrid was playing with a high d-line and pressing high (although it was like split block). Isn't it contradicting with that playstyle? 

Is there any benefit of playing direct with a high d-line and pressing?

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Halbraum said:

Does it make sense to play direct-attacking football (positive mentality) while using high defensive line? What i see is that vast majority of direct tactics play deeper and less urgent pressing. I am pretty sure Mourinho's Madrid was playing with a high d-line and pressing high (although it was like split block). Isn't it contradicting with that playstyle? 

Is there any benefit of playing direct with a high d-line and pressing?

It would be a  high risk approach, but sure you could do that. You have to have fast defenders though. The idea that I would have about it is to get the ball forward quickly and then keep it there till I got a scoring chance, so your high line and high pressing is to keep the game in their end as much as you can. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Dr. Hook said:

It would be a  high risk approach, but sure you could do that. You have to have fast defenders though. The idea that I would have about it is to get the ball forward quickly and then keep it there till I got a scoring chance, so your high line and high pressing is to keep the game in their end as much as you can. 

Thanks for the answer. Your reasoning sounds like creating havoc and chaos at the opposition half with tempo and press then finding the net. Probably one would need all-around great players. They must have high speed,technique,intelligence,physicality. 

Then i give up my desire to play like that:lol: 

Link to post
Share on other sites

How much of an impact does it make if your assistant/coaches have the same preferred formation/playing style as you? Secondly, How would you go about finding staff with the same/similar tactical preferences if you were to play an asymmetrical formation or created a playing style from scratch?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi. I would like my fullback to often Run From Deep, but Rarely dribble. Just either quick, early crosses, or pass to anyone. But fill the wing area

With FB (Support), or WB (Support/Defend) duty, often times, my wing area are empty, that my playmaker hardly able to switch sides.

But FB (Attack) or WB (Attack) or even CWB, they are too often dribble the ball, which often lost it, especially when my best fullbacks aren't good dribblers.

Any Ideas?

Link to post
Share on other sites

^Think this goes beyond a quick yes/no - but WB(s) should absolutely be taking up positions on the wing in the attacking zone when you are in possession in the opposition's half. How they make their way there - trailing the play a bit, in possession themselves dribbling down the flank, or other ways - once you have parked up outside the oppositions 18yd box, all things being equal a WB(s) should be available as an outlet on the wing.

I cannot speak to FBs as I do not use them. Might be worth a separate thread on how to get WBs involved, but not too involved, or do a search and maybe it's answered already or there is a thread you can bump.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Hanan96 said:

Hi. I would like my fullback to often Run From Deep, but Rarely dribble. Just either quick, early crosses, or pass to anyone. But fill the wing area

With FB (Support), or WB (Support/Defend) duty, often times, my wing area are empty, that my playmaker hardly able to switch sides.

But FB (Attack) or WB (Attack) or even CWB, they are too often dribble the ball, which often lost it, especially when my best fullbacks aren't good dribblers.

Any Ideas?

Yes. The best idea is to start your own separate thread, post a screenshot of your tactic there (i.e. in that separate thread) and then explain again what your issue is. Because otherwise you are hardly going to get any proper answer/advice on your question. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, EnigMattic1 said:

How much of an impact does it make if your assistant/coaches have the same preferred formation/playing style as you? Secondly, How would you go about finding staff with the same/similar tactical preferences if you were to play an asymmetrical formation or created a playing style from scratch?

Depends on how much you lean on them. Personally, unless I get one with 20 Motivating to do team talks, my assistant is on Tunnel Interviews and nothing else. I mute all advice. But if you want advice that might be helpful, as well as their overall quality I'd make sure their tendencies are close to yours. For example if your custom playing style includes a high press I wouldn't have an assistant whose Pressing Style is Less Urgent, and if I generally used Play Out Of Defence then I wouldn't defer to an assistant whose Passing Style is Long (but might with one who is Direct if I was also using Shorter Passing as standard as he might tell me when to switch it up and kill a team). That's personal preferences though, hope at least showing my logic is helpful.

6 hours ago, Hanan96 said:

Hi. I would like my fullback to often Run From Deep, but Rarely dribble. Just either quick, early crosses, or pass to anyone. But fill the wing area

With FB (Support), or WB (Support/Defend) duty, often times, my wing area are empty, that my playmaker hardly able to switch sides.

But FB (Attack) or WB (Attack) or even CWB, they are too often dribble the ball, which often lost it, especially when my best fullbacks aren't good dribblers.

Any Ideas?

The Gets Forward Whenever Possible trait can help out here in encouraging a play on a lower duty to, well, Get Forward. Depending on the team mentality you're using the Full Back / Wing Back on Automatic duty might also be useful as they have 0 and 1 (2?) PIs hard-selected, respectively, so could be customised to get forward, but not to dribble more (perhaps even to dribble less). But make sure to check their individual mentality as it changes more drastically with team mentality than others. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure if this question fits in here, but I'm also not sure where else to post it (I don't think it deserves a seperate thread). Feel free to redirect me if it isn't fit here.

I have a regen who I'm going to play as a Target Man on Attack. On loan however, the loaning team has teached him the trait "Plays with back to Goal". Now it's true that that Target Man on Attack isn't fast by any means, and likely will not do much on through balls playing as a TM(A). However... I'm not willing to change my tactic to have him play as a TM(S) for the simple reason my secondary forwards are all fit for CF(S) and aren't the very best goal scorers.

  1. How badly does this trait conflict with the role of a Target Man on attack?
  2. I assume this question is pretty much rhetorical, but is it possible to get rid of that trait even though it's in se a perfect fit for a not-so-fast Target Man?
  3. Can anything be done to stop clubs loaning in players and teaching them unfavourable traits for my tactic?
  4. Any other suggestions?


Player in question:

 

image.thumb.png.1bcf069658dff14b661ae4f310457236.png

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 02/10/2020 at 05:48, zlatanera said:

Depends on how much you lean on them. Personally, unless I get one with 20 Motivating to do team talks, my assistant is on Tunnel Interviews and nothing else. I mute all advice. But if you want advice that might be helpful, as well as their overall quality I'd make sure their tendencies are close to yours. For example if your custom playing style includes a high press I wouldn't have an assistant whose Pressing Style is Less Urgent, and if I generally used Play Out Of Defence then I wouldn't defer to an assistant whose Passing Style is Long (but might with one who is Direct if I was also using Shorter Passing as standard as he might tell me when to switch it up and kill a team). That's personal preferences though, hope at least showing my logic is helpful.

The Gets Forward Whenever Possible trait can help out here in encouraging a play on a lower duty to, well, Get Forward. Depending on the team mentality you're using the Full Back / Wing Back on Automatic duty might also be useful as they have 0 and 1 (2?) PIs hard-selected, respectively, so could be customised to get forward, but not to dribble more (perhaps even to dribble less). But make sure to check their individual mentality as it changes more drastically with team mentality than others. 

Learning a new PPM sounds good. Howewer, there's 2 problem, when my fullbacks are older and hardly learn something new, or when I need to play defensive to protect my leads. Because it's permanent, not adjustable.

With automatic duty, if I were using back 3 in counter attacking, will they also made frequent overlaps? This one seems more plausible 

Thanks a lot for your tought!

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Bunkerossian said:

Are there any guides on effects of Shouts on the mental state and actions of players?

This is the closest I can think of and in the pinned thread that lists all the guides : 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Hanan96 said:

Learning a new PPM sounds good. Howewer, there's 2 problem, when my fullbacks are older and hardly learn something new, or when I need to play defensive to protect my leads. Because it's permanent, not adjustable.

With automatic duty, if I were using back 3 in counter attacking, will they also made frequent overlaps? This one seems more plausible 

Thanks a lot for your tought!

That seems like more of an overall tactic question than one I can just answer for you straight up. As I said, if you use the Automatic duty, you need to go into the Player Instructions screen and check out their individual mentality as it changes more drastically based on team mentality than any other roles. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

How do you handle the size of your 2nd team? Do you aim to sign players to keep all positions full? Do you sign low potential players if the 2nd squad is small?

Usually, after youth intake I only sign 4 stars or more potential players. But this way my second team sometimes end up very small. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

what is the best method for developing mentals like concentration, anticipation, or teamwork especially in young players? I'm diving into my first long-term, player development focused save, so any tips or posts regarding that will be appreciated!

Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, bielsadidnothingwrong said:

what is the best method for developing mentals like concentration, anticipation, or teamwork especially in young players?

Mental attributes naturally develop with time, albeit slower than physical ones. But if you want to boost their development as much as possible, I would logically assume you should use more team training sessions that target these mental attributes (basically tactical-related training) as well as individual training with the additional focus set to areas that also target those attributes.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I play on cautious mentality and I set my team instructions to "much shorter passing". If I then in personal instructions ask my defenders to "pass it shorter" they will pass it even shorter? What I am trying to ask, is do the "much shorter passing" TI stack with "pass it shorter"" PI?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wanna ask about Flair, we all know it's about pulling off the unpredictable but how is that reflected in the game?

Like, will a high Flair player go against your TI's to try a long shot shot or pass or is it the tricks you see in game. I have this guy who has the Tries Tricks PPI & he'll pull of rabonas & stuff so is it more for things like that & overhead kicks? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Johnny Ace said:

I wanna ask about Flair, we all know it's about pulling off the unpredictable but how is that reflected in the game?

Like, will a high Flair player go against your TI's to try a long shot shot or pass or is it the tricks you see in game. I have this guy who has the Tries Tricks PPI & he'll pull of rabonas & stuff so is it more for things like that & overhead kicks? 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
vor 12 Stunden schrieb Miraculix:

I play on cautious mentality and I set my team instructions to "much shorter passing". If I then in personal instructions ask my defenders to "pass it shorter" they will pass it even shorter? What I am trying to ask, is do the "much shorter passing" TI stack with "pass it shorter"" PI?

In that case, no. There is a limit to short passing. And if they can't pass it short they will kick it long.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If an inverted wingback in the fullback position moves up into the dm strata, does an inverted wingback in the wingback position move horizontally into the dm strata or up into the centre mid strata? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I see that you can give a Wing Back (S) the PI of 'Cross Less Often' OR 'Cross More Often', whereas you can only give a Complete Wing Back (S) the PI of 'Cross More Often'. 

Even though its not a hard coded PI for CWB (S), will a Complete Wing Back (S) cross more often than a Wing Back (S)? Assuming no crossing frequency PIs are selected.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lets say I have Player A and player B are set to swap positions. At the onset of this decision, Player A doesn't have any positional or role familiarity with Player B's position - my question here is then, will Player A get this from game time or will he need to be trained specifically in the position? I have a feeling it isn't split at all but this is my first time with this particular swapping set up.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What's the big difference between an AP and a AM and how do they play with attacking or supporting roles together behind a forward?

Same question about the defensive midfielders: one runner and one creator, which is the best combination?

Thanks!

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, sejo said:

What's the big difference between an AP and a AM

The key difference is obvious - AP is a playmaker and hence a ball-magnet, whereas AM is not. Another difference is that the AP is hard-coded to take more passing risks. 

 

2 hours ago, sejo said:

how do they play with attacking or supporting roles together behind a forward?

Same question about the defensive midfielders: one runner and one creator, which is the best combination?

Proper answers to these two questions cannot be given without knowing the whole context of a given tactic, which means that you'll need to start a separate thread if you want to discuss it. 

On top of that, there is no such thing as "the best combination" in FM nor in RL football/soccer. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't started a thread on this because, at present, the tactic is just a theory. I want a CM pairing of a BBM and a BWM. What would be the best role to have in the DMC position? I understand that both the BBM and BWM are very 'mobile' players, so the DM will need to be 'static'. 

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

I understand that both the BBM and BWM are very 'mobile' players, so the DM will need to be 'static'.

I wouldn't say that BWM is "very mobile". It has a lower starting position than, for example, CM-Su or CAR, which indicates it's fairly defensive in its nature. BWM also can't be instructed to Roam From Position, which I interpret as it being a disciplined role.

BWM used to benefit from holding roles more in previous iterations, when it had Close Down Much More locked in, which means it used to stray from its position very regularly. Nowadays, it's Pressing Intensity is Standard (unless increased in Team Instructions), so it's far less risky in that sense.

When I personally use a BWM in central midfield (to cover for aggressive WB, for example), I like to give my DM more freedom. Regista or DM-Su are my favorites.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It depends on the narrowness of the opposition defence. The 2D view is really great for making the spotting of this obvious. Against a really tight narrow defence I often use the instruction to play wider in attack to force a full back out to meet a player on the wing who has the ball near the touchline, which then creates a space infield.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe I'm being very blind, but I can't find the strength of a players weaker foot anywhere (using standard skin). I can see this information if I compare two players under the Positions and Roles tab (given me the relative strength of both feet) but on a players own profile I can only see the preferred foot on the player profile. Any ideas where I should be looking? Thank you.

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, brookie1402 said:

I think it is on the Tactics panel in the Development tab - the view which has the pitch and how well suited he is to each position.

Awesome, thank you. Still a bit buried away and a couple of clicks from the profile page, but at least I don't have to load up a comparison to another player.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have little tactical knowledge in FM but from a real life point of view, and I know it sounds like a cop out, but I'd say it depends on your tactical set up. It's a players ability to stop and change direction, so for low block, narrow defences with little space, I'd say it isn't too important as all the 'defending' should be in front of your back line. But defending on the half way line and being vulnerable to balls over the top, then I'd say it's a little more important given players have to turn and sprint back. May be useful for players who find themselves 1v1. Imagine a full back having to twist and turn to defend against a tricky winger for example.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, brookie1402 said:

It depends on the narrowness of the opposition defence. The 2D view is really great for making the spotting of this obvious. Against a really tight narrow defence I often use the instruction to play wider in attack to force a full back out to meet a player on the wing who has the ball near the touchline, which then creates a space infield.

Yes but wouldn't that happen regardless anyway because wingers are already instructed to stay wide? Which is sort of my point

Edited by aderow
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, isignedupfornorealreason said:

Dunno if this counts;

 

How important is "Agility" in general? For defenders in particular?

Is low agility basically like the Boumsong of defenders?

I place a very high importance on agility when it comes to wide midfielders (cutting inside) and forwards. Haven't thought about it for defenders much, but changing direction quickly could be helpful for them too.

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, isignedupfornorealreason said:

Dunno if this counts;

 

How important is "Agility" in general? For defenders in particular?

Is low agility basically like the Boumsong of defenders?

Agility is the measure of how quickly an outfield player can stop, turn, and start moving again. So it's pretty important for defenders, especially fullbacks, who will have to compete 1v1 with tricky attackers running at them. If you play a narrow, disciplined back line you might get away with a tugboat or two if they have cover each side so they won't be turned and exposed.

It's one of the key attributes that divides good centre halves from top level ones imo. You can look extremely capable in a bottom half side and then completely hopeless in one with higher aspirations just from a lack of agility. The more players your team commits forward the greater need you have for those you leave back to defend 1v1 on counters.

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...