Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community
wwfan

Stupid Questions Thread (Tactic and Training Questions Only)

Recommended Posts

I would have one question :) which has better holding position? DLP-D or CM-D? I want to play 4-2-3-1 Denmark. and I would midfielder, who will just sit there and not to get the position. to provide the best protection. such thing as Michael Carrick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What're the main differences between having an IF (S) in the AML position to having a WM (S) with the same default PI's as the IF (S) but in the ML position? I'm just curious because I'm looking to move from a 4-1-2-2-1 formation to a 4-1-4-1 formation and obviously in FM you can't have an IF (S) in the ML position. But theoretically would it work or would moving the player back hinder attacking play?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What're the main differences between having an IF (S) in the AML position to having a WM (S) with the same default PI's as the IF (S) but in the ML position? I'm just curious because I'm looking to move from a 4-1-2-2-1 formation to a 4-1-4-1 formation and obviously in FM you can't have an IF (S) in the ML position. But theoretically would it work or would moving the player back hinder attacking play?

For the most part, it won't matter. At times, the IF(S) will be more inclined to stay further forward when defending and could be better positioned to counterattack. But all else being equal, once they're in the final third, there's no difference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
For the most part, it won't matter. At times, the IF(S) will be more inclined to stay further forward when defending and could be better positioned to counterattack. But all else being equal, once they're in the final third, there's no difference.

Alright, thanks for the help.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Haven't used IF's much since FM14, but I personally find that a WM(A) is more IF-like than an actual IF in the AM L/R slots, I guess possibly due to starting their runs from deeper.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a pot by Cleon than breaks down exactly what every (or almost every) team instruction does.

Anyone know where it is?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There is a pot by Cleon than breaks down exactly what every (or almost every) team instruction does.

Anyone know where it is?

THoGs latest masterpiece pretty much does this too. It's stickied at the top of the forum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
THoGs latest masterpiece pretty much does this too. It's stickied at the top of the forum.

194 pages!!!!

Good lord!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi everyone, sorry in advance for any mistakes and/or bad grammar.

My question is, how best to deal with a DM ( and, to a lesser extend, with an AMC) from the perspective of a 442 formation.

I've been trying hard to implement a 442 but to no avail. Every team I face seems to play a 433 DM ( or 4123 in fm) and it aways seems to hard counter all my efforts to build up my play ( even when facing a weaker team)

I know the 442 isn't a possession tactic and I'm not trying to play a possession based game, but every time I face the 4123 I feel as if I never have the ball.

So I've tried a couple of things.

I've tried to change one of the forwards to a defensive forward on defend, in hopes of him droping deep, hassling the opposing DM and hopefully disturb their passing game. It works a little, mainly when the DM is a playmaker of some sort, but I haven't noticed any major improvement.

Keep in mind I'm limited in OI as I play in classic mode.

I've tried to circumvent the center, (over)emphasizing wing-play, but I can't find the right balance; more often than not I just surrender possession even more.

I could probably just change my formation to adapt to the 4123 but I really want to make the 442 work. So far however it's been a disaster.

I usually set it up with a DLF and AF combo up front, DLPd and B2B in the center ( this changes a lot depending on the opposition), WM and Winger on the flanks with a WB and a FB behind them. So nothing fancy.

Also I tend to use TIs as a situational tool, I often start the game without any TI.

So, any advice about how to deal with the opposing DM?

I've mentioned the AMC but that is less of a problem, I usually just adapt my roles in the center and man mark him).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So, any advice about how to deal with the opposing DM?

I've mentioned the AMC but that is less of a problem, I usually just adapt my roles in the center and man mark him).

If you use a 4-4-2 and face a 4-1-2-3 DM, you will often be outnumbered centrally and that is the reason you see what you do. If you really want to persevere with a 4-4-2, you could ask your deeper striker to man mark the DM, which would see you at least on equal terms with their MCs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I play a 4-1-2-3 counter with a DLP(D) as the DM. What's the best way to get my defense to play less direct without nerfing my DLP(D)? Would I be better using play out of defense and instructing the DLP to play more direct passes? Instruct the DC's to pass it shorter? Or do these accomplish the same thing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My last stupid question (I hope)

What is the core difference between RGA and DPL?

As far as I understand it is mostly movement - RGA tends to move (not too high though) around the pitch to find effective spce and DPL is a holding position unless instructed to roam. Are there any other things, that I miss?

Thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Will a young player benefit from training with the senior squad (in the context that he's training with better players) make the players CA go up, or is it only in matches that this benefits development?

Thinking about letting better youngsters train with the first team and be available to youth matches.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What does criticise recent form do besides upping morale

Some players may make you their favour personal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But does it increase their match/ training performances?

From my experience - yes. Also, players might be less pissed off being benched, as they know, you are not satisfied with their performance. Moreover, there are multiple criticize options, I recall telling my striker off for not being involved in team play and in the next few games he bagged couple assists

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry for another Van Gaal related question in this forum...

I found the G. Neville and Carragher analysis of United's 4-2 win against City fascinating. But what really interested me though was the bit about the high defensive line and the gap between the centre backs and the striker without the ball.

How do you go about getting the team so compact defensively without having a deep defensive line and a defensive strategy?

They don't press in a very aggressive way, ala Dortmund under Klopp, instead they close off the passing angles for everyone except players in very wide areas. And the players don't tend to break from their defensive lines, rather they remain in shape until the ball gets near them.

What team settings would make this work in FM?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sorry for another Van Gaal related question in this forum...

I found the G. Neville and Carragher analysis of United's 4-2 win against City fascinating. But what really interested me though was the bit about the high defensive line and the gap between the centre backs and the striker without the ball.

How do you go about getting the team so compact defensively without having a deep defensive line and a defensive strategy?

They don't press in a very aggressive way, ala Dortmund under Klopp, instead they close off the passing angles for everyone except players in very wide areas. And the players don't tend to break from their defensive lines, rather they remain in shape until the ball gets near them.

What team settings would make this work in FM?

You might want to read the section on obstruction tactics (part 8.3) in my guide.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How does the time players spend on individual training get factored in. I can see what days they do general and match training but I've always wondered when do they do individual training.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How does the time players spend on individual training get factored in. I can see what days they do general and match training but I've always wondered when do they do individual training.

It doesn't get factored in, it's added on top of instead and creates an overall workload.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what sort of defensive line do you use normally? When i play at home i put a higher line and pressing but my defense is slow so in the counter attacks i get crushed. If i put it normal, i receive crosses from deep and my central defenders cant deal with them, so result is loads of goals, and if i put it deep the almost shoot from the penalty spot :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have two young fullbacks. One is potentially a world class player, the other a star player for my league. One is DR and left-footed, the other DL and right-footed. Should I train them as inverse backs, or will I simply waste their potential by not training them in as many categories as I can (ie. complete wingbacks)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have two young fullbacks. One is potentially a world class player, the other a star player for my league. One is DR and left-footed, the other DL and right-footed. Should I train them as inverse backs, or will I simply waste their potential by not training them in as many categories as I can (ie. complete wingbacks)?

I wouldn't bother training them as IWBs, the Role is an out-and-out letdown - does nothing tangibly different to a standard Wing Back in my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
what sort of defensive line do you use normally? When i play at home i put a higher line and pressing but my defense is slow so in the counter attacks i get crushed. If i put it normal, i receive crosses from deep and my central defenders cant deal with them, so result is loads of goals, and if i put it deep the almost shoot from the penalty spot :(

Those issues aren't solely down to the defensive line at all. Sounds like you need to start a new thread detailing what the whole system is set up like, and we'll see what the forum can do to help.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I wouldn't bother training them as IWBs, the Role is an out-and-out letdown - does nothing tangibly different to a standard Wing Back in my opinion.

Thanks, mate. Will focus on CWB and some PPMs, then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a quick question regarding exploiting space. In game i see the space whether it be on the wing or through the middle and the natural inclination would be to go exploit flanks or exploit middle but as i understand it they mess with a lot of other settings and might not get the desired results. So what would be the best way to exploit space especially out wide.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just a quick question regarding exploiting space. In game i see the space whether it be on the wing or through the middle and the natural inclination would be to go exploit flanks or exploit middle but as i understand it they mess with a lot of other settings and might not get the desired results. So what would be the best way to exploit space especially out wide.

Personally I'd still use the "Exploit The....." options. Alternatively you could just stick a "ball attracting" Role like a Target Man or Playmaker into the area where the space is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really stupid question but it occurred to me earlier. Has FM15 not have the option to choose a pitch size at the start of the season or does it just not apply in FM Classic? Having a more difficult time in my third season and it occurred to me that possibly playing a 4132 (being narrow) could possibly have been affected by moving to the Olympic Stadium from the Boleyn Ground and just hazarding a guess but the OS pitch could well be a tad wider than Upton Park. Haven't seen the option so was just wondering.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its available as always in the full fat game for sure. Never played FMC, never will, so cant confirm on that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There's no pitch size selection in FMC.

Thanks RT. Funnily enough I had an old save so checked and the OS and Boleyn have exactly the same pitch sizes anyway so it must be my tactics!!!!

Whilst here and hope you don't mind even though it's an FMC issue I note a couple of things and would happily be pointed elsewhere if this isn't the correct forum but I note that on the Team Report summary the slot where it should state the tactic I am most vulnerable to facing is blank so wondered if it was my game or if it is just a lack of info in FMC? (Half expected it to say "ALL TACTICS"!!) Also in the Club Information screen under Icons and Legends most names are repeated more than once which looks a bit bizarre. I am not using another skin from the norm. Know the last bit isn't tactics or training but guess it is a stupid question!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Personally I'd still use the "Exploit The....." options. Alternatively you could just stick a "ball attracting" Role like a Target Man or Playmaker into the area where the space is.

I like this idea alot. Tried it in a few games where I need to channel my attack down the flanks, works alot better than play wider.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know this may be difficult to answer as instructions, player type etc. is also a factor, but what is a good role for a forward in this formation:

GK (d)

FB (s)

LD (d)

LD (d)

FB (s)

CM (s)

DLP (d)

W (a)

AP (s)

W (s)

AF (a)

Also, are there any other roles I might look into changing? I want to play a patient posession game with a strong defense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any role can be a good role, it all depends on the ability of the player who will be the lone striker & the ability of the players around him as the way they create chances will vary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stupid Questions: Can you train players in teamwork and work rate attributes? Also what does match training Teamwork do? I usually use it in preseason after I have brought in new players.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello all,

Keen to hear about experiences utilizing the halfback role in systems. Is it necessary to have a DLP in one of the two midfielders (4141). Would having a CM(s) work as well without play having to always run through to him?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I wanted a sitting back defensive system I may use a halfback, but most of my systems are attacking, the halfback sits back too much in those systems for my liking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A question for Rashidi if I may.

After going back to the drawing board after my 4132 bizarrely fell apart overnight I took a look at some of your posts and tactics and fell in love with the Samba. Not wanting to lose the striker roles that had done well for me and trying to utilise Stewart Downing I changed the front three roles and currently have this set up.

---------------DF S-----------CF A---------------

-----------------------TQ A-----------------------

--------------BWM S--DLP D--BWM S---------

-CWB A------CD C------------CD D-------CWB A

------------------------GK D---------------------

Must say it plays some lovely football and I am finally getting the best out of Downing who never really cut it as a CM A and have also got Sakho and Valencia firing again but I am in a bit of a quandary. It seems to play a tad better at fluid than it does on another fluidity although at balanced it isn't far off but I am concerned about playing fluid because I have four specialist roles. Obviously that goes against the grain of the Twelve Step Guide so was wondering what your thoughts are about the pro's and con's of fluid or balanced in this set up?

The difference seems very small between the two but that's just to the naked eye watching the games. The one time I did notice it was when at 2-0 up I dropped the TQ and put in a half back. At balanced my Assistant was screaming that there was a big gap between my midfield and attack (obviously no attack duty CM) and yet I am pretty sure that warning disappeared when I swapped to fluid. In both cases the message vanished when I dropped the DF S to a DF D. So as I say is there any reason as to why I shouldn't play fluid with four specialist roles?

Also with this is there any obvious changes you would make as a starting point with this in a hard away game against the likes of the top four? My Achilles heel has very much been these games. I don't mind losing but it gets disheartening when you see the opposition have 30 odd shots on goal no matter what you do. I think my biggest failing is to try and play either too defensive and fail to get the ball forward or go too direct and that means the forwards never get the ball. I know that I can't just plug and play a tactic that will win at Chelsea but being 0-0 after 10 minutes would be a start!!!

Having said that I hope you don't mind me using a tactic that is 90% your roles and duties, it has given me hope again after my 4132 suffered a mental breakdown, along with its manager!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd strongly advise you not to bother making changes based on what the AssMan says. If you didn't see an issue yourself, it's not too worth worrying about. The change of Team Shape will have coincidentally happened when the messages went; I wouldn't read much into that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A question for Rashidi if I may.

After going back to the drawing board after my 4132 bizarrely fell apart overnight I took a look at some of your posts and tactics and fell in love with the Samba. Not wanting to lose the striker roles that had done well for me and trying to utilise Stewart Downing I changed the front three roles and currently have this set up.

---------------DF S-----------CF A---------------

-----------------------TQ A-----------------------

--------------BWM S--DLP D--BWM S---------

-CWB A------CD C------------CD D-------CWB A

------------------------GK D---------------------

Must say it plays some lovely football and I am finally getting the best out of Downing who never really cut it as a CM A and have also got Sakho and Valencia firing again but I am in a bit of a quandary. It seems to play a tad better at fluid than it does on another fluidity although at balanced it isn't far off but I am concerned about playing fluid because I have four specialist roles. Obviously that goes against the grain of the Twelve Step Guide so was wondering what your thoughts are about the pro's and con's of fluid or balanced in this set up?

The difference seems very small between the two but that's just to the naked eye watching the games. The one time I did notice it was when at 2-0 up I dropped the TQ and put in a half back. At balanced my Assistant was screaming that there was a big gap between my midfield and attack (obviously no attack duty CM) and yet I am pretty sure that warning disappeared when I swapped to fluid. In both cases the message vanished when I dropped the DF S to a DF D. So as I say is there any reason as to why I shouldn't play fluid with four specialist roles?

Also with this is there any obvious changes you would make as a starting point with this in a hard away game against the likes of the top four? My Achilles heel has very much been these games. I don't mind losing but it gets disheartening when you see the opposition have 30 odd shots on goal no matter what you do. I think my biggest failing is to try and play either too defensive and fail to get the ball forward or go too direct and that means the forwards never get the ball. I know that I can't just plug and play a tactic that will win at Chelsea but being 0-0 after 10 minutes would be a start!!!

Having said that I hope you don't mind me using a tactic that is 90% your roles and duties, it has given me hope again after my 4132 suffered a mental breakdown, along with its manager!!!

lol I stuck my systems up for people to treat them as templates, or give others ideas, so I aint offended ;-)

Now onto your questions:

1. Fluid or not

My biggest criticism of the whole generalist/specialists demarcation is that it confuses more than enlightens people. I hate any notion of having to distinguish the number of roles and then applying a rule to cover them all for "shape". These specialist roles some of them have higher creativity than normal, and others don't, I may be wrong, but it appears that way to me, without going through the nuts and bolts of each role. When I play the game I treat shape as a modifier to mentality. So the higher you go with shape settings, the more creative freedom you are giving people and hence the latitude for risk. Fluid and structured aren't too dissimilar in how they split a side up in terms of mentality splits. The only difference is how much more c.f you are giving your players. The best guide will always be your naked eye. If you are comfortable then go with the shape that appears to make your system play a lot more cohesively. I only play on 2 shape settings at the moment, structured or fluid, I basically ignore the rest. In fact, I am a huge advocate of removing them altogether. It was relevant when we had too few roles, now with the sheer crazy number that we have today, you can achieve a lot more by using different roles to get the same kind of split we used to in the past via sliders.

Balanced should split the team into three segments, but if you look at how the roles are set up there are really only 2 groups the attacking group and the defensive group, in this case, structured or fluid are best.

2. Assman

My assman plays when I feel like using Insta Match, otherwise I just use him to tell me when players are injured. His tactical advise is muted and unnecessary. The advice module is sorely lacking in functionality at the moment.

3. Away matches

In away matches, assuming you have defaulted to control switching mentalities is easy on the fly, you could also ask your CWB to swap to FB (S) and you could change the role of the TQ to an AM (reason: he can be set to hard tackle and close down aggressively, giving you an effective pressure point for opposing DMs and DLP). Away matches is all about protecting the flanks, some systems will come at you, in fact if you learnt the system on control, you could easily drop to counter and press less without losing too much familiarity, assuming its fluid to begin with

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lol I stuck my systems up for people to treat them as templates, or give others ideas, so I aint offended ;-)

Now onto your questions:

1. Fluid or not

My biggest criticism of the whole generalist/specialists demarcation is that it confuses more than enlightens people. I hate any notion of having to distinguish the number of roles and then applying a rule to cover them all for "shape". These specialist roles some of them have higher creativity than normal, and others don't, I may be wrong, but it appears that way to me, without going through the nuts and bolts of each role. When I play the game I treat shape as a modifier to mentality. So the higher you go with shape settings, the more creative freedom you are giving people and hence the latitude for risk. Fluid and structured aren't too dissimilar in how they split a side up in terms of mentality splits. The only difference is how much more c.f you are giving your players. The best guide will always be your naked eye. If you are comfortable then go with the shape that appears to make your system play a lot more cohesively. I only play on 2 shape settings at the moment, structured or fluid, I basically ignore the rest. In fact, I am a huge advocate of removing them altogether. It was relevant when we had too few roles, now with the sheer crazy number that we have today, you can achieve a lot more by using different roles to get the same kind of split we used to in the past via sliders.

Balanced should split the team into three segments, but if you look at how the roles are set up there are really only 2 groups the attacking group and the defensive group, in this case, structured or fluid are best.

2. Assman

My assman plays when I feel like using Insta Match, otherwise I just use him to tell me when players are injured. His tactical advise is muted and unnecessary. The advice module is sorely lacking in functionality at the moment.

3. Away matches

In away matches, assuming you have defaulted to control switching mentalities is easy on the fly, you could also ask your CWB to swap to FB (S) and you could change the role of the TQ to an AM (reason: he can be set to hard tackle and close down aggressively, giving you an effective pressure point for opposing DMs and DLP). Away matches is all about protecting the flanks, some systems will come at you, in fact if you learnt the system on control, you could easily drop to counter and press less without losing too much familiarity, assuming its fluid to begin with

Thank you Rashidi/and RT.

1. Interestingly I have played a few more matches switching between balanced and fluid. There isn't a right or wrong with these It seems. I started with balanced in one game was at 0-0 and just changed to fluid and scored a fantastic goal. Whereas sometimes starting fluid I will change to balanced and get a better performance. Maybe creative freedom is a reason? I agree with you that this should be removed and IMO a PI Creative Freedom modifier should be used. For example you can't give a CM A more creative freedom as an individual role which would have been a godsend for certain creative players. For me it would be Stewart Downing. Decent passing and great vision but poor dribbling. A decent attacking playmaker in many areas except dribbling but all attacking playmaker roles have dribble more as a hard coded PI whereas with a CM A I can stop him dribbling as much but can't higher his CF!

2. Thanks to you and RT. I will ignore my Assistant!!! Mind you in this case he may have had a point. By withdrawing my TQ I had the DF and CF closing down. With no CM on attack there probably was a gap there so hence changing the DF to Defend where he hopefully hassled their DM more than push up on the centre backs,.

3. Yep defaulted on control. Fascinating really as I always really used standard with TI's. Is defensive too defensive in your opinion or is counter the better option? None of my defenders are great passers and I read somewhere that a counter mentality was better used by teams with good passers?

I read part of one of your threads and you hit the nail on the head with a comment about the lesser of two evils when stopping the opposition. I think the example used was did you stop Carrick or Mata. Perfect comment that I think a lot of us don't think about. I probably think about Mata too much and drop in a DM but that only invites pressure as the opposition have the ball in an offensive area and now you are trying to stop them. Whereas if you targeted Carrick you can try and stop the source which in turn hopefully reduces the number of times Mata has the ball. If you target Mata then he could have the ball 20 times in a game to make something happen. If you target Carrick then Mata may only have it 10 times so you reduce his opportunities. It is almost like being pro active rather than reactive.

The change from CWM to FB may work I will try it. I found with my 4132 that didn't work well but that may have been due to no link with the forwards,. With a 4132 your CWB's are the link I found but with a 4312 there is that AM which probably takes the weight of responsibility off the WB's/FB's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can use counter with any side if u are worried bout pass conversion use the PI take less risks. Yeah with narrow formations the trick for getting your defends right usually lies with ur midfield players

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...