Match Engine Update 13.1.3 - quick overview. ME feedback here please.

[higgins]

I'm not seeing that interpretation from the, admittedly little, stuff I've read. It seems it requires a high line, energetic midfielders and out and out wingers (at least in its most attacking variant). I can accept that the DLP was fundamental to its success, but I'd struggle to accept it was inherently a slow tempo tactic or that the ball was always played short out of defence. The YouTube videos of Conte's Siena seem to suggest they are at least reasonably high tempo and direct, with the FBs pushing up quickly in support of the wingers and regularly hitting first time direct passes to the FCs.

I know some real football managers who sign players just because they saw some youtube videos, but it's not the best way to judge neither a player nor a tactical system that doesn't work as you say (a bit presumptuously, given the fact you didn't even know it).

Anyway, Bela Guttman's well known tactical asset is another example of 4-2-4 that didn't employ direct passing, but probably you won't agree about that.

[Wings69]

Please change 2D back to the way it was. Dreadful now

[catafan]

On the bad side, im seeing players trying very long one touch though balls with the back to the goal. They do have better, easier and closer passing options. The players in question does not have any tactical instructions that would make them pass like that.

The same issue here. DCs seem more eager to feed the ball directly to ST, but 99% they fail.

[wwfan]

I know some real football managers who sign players just because they saw some youtube videos, but it's not the best way to judge neither a player nor a tactical system that doesn't work as you say (a bit presumptuously, given the fact you didn't even know it).

Anyway, Bela Guttman's well known tactical asset is another example of 4-2-4 that didn't employ direct passing, but probably you won't agree about that.

Guttman is a pointless example as he's been dead for 30 years. Football has moved on from them.

Regarding YouTube, I read the two links posted, which both suggest Conte plays a high energy variant of a 4-4-2/4-2-4, that also shifts into a 4-3-3/4-2-2-2 sometimes, then watched some YouTube videos to see if that made sense. From what I've seen it did.

I need to see some serious evidence that it was a slow tempo 4-2-4. Nothing I've read or seen has suggested that it is. The huge amount of tactical theory that I have read suggests that a slow tempo 4-2-4 would not work in the modern game. All the football I've watched also supports this theoretical perspective.

Put it into context. You are suggesting that Antonio Conte's wonder formation relied on everybody in defence passing the ball slowly to a DLP, who then sprayed it around the pitch to two out and out wingers, breaking midfielder and central attackers, who then ran riot. Why did nobody consider man-marking the DLP if everything went through him? He can't have too many easy passing options given his out passes are so limited. He can either make a pinpoint pass to breaking attackers, or channel it back to the defence, who have been instructed only to feed him. Press them and the whole system collapses.

My read would be that although one central midfielder was a deep-sitting creative player, the defence did feed balls forward at pace as well as rely on him. That is not a massive change from the settings in your 4-2-4 tactic. It merely increases passing length a bit for the FBs, perhaps increases TBs by using the 'Play into Space' shout, which will encourage them to hit balls up to or past the wingers. It uses a PM, meaning that if those balls aren't on, they are likely to feed the DLP. If he feeds them back, then they have the same set of decisions to make.

Given that it uses a DLP, it will not be the most direct 4-2-4 ever, as major directness would bypass him. However, it won't be short passing either, as that is an impossibility given the gaps in midfield a 4-2-4 opens up. It has to have some directness. Further, as it is an attacking formation, its philosophy has to be at least on the attacking end of the spectrum. In FM terms, at least Control with direct passing/get ball forwards or Attack on normal.

[Parlabane]

I don't think the FB reaction was too far out of the ordinary. He probably should've sprinted immediately, but then you could argue the winger should've sprinted, too, immediately after the hole opened up. Neither started sprinting for a like a second or two afterward. It was not a matter of strafing the winger. Ask yourself, "How many defenders can catch up to a winger after being completely wrong footed?" The video looks completely fine to me.

So maybe it's a feature. I can accept that. I think I was just thrown because it looks so unnatural. But, I get that the game doesn't always make things look clear.

Re: My DCs.

I've noticed that when they're man marking, they seem to be quite willing to give up shape, which I didn't see happening before either.

One of my games the striker wandered wide out of the box and my DC followed him all the way out, leaving a wide open path for an MC to walk in and pop a goal.

I'm not exactly sure how to tell him to "man mark the striker, but not if he wanders away into a non-attacking zone".

[Svenc]

Re: Guttman, real world tactics aside, assuming that going on "counter" is indeed an option, I'd suspect the defender's setting to mostly play a possession-based simple game to be a cause for an error here and there, in particular against aggressive opposition. The passing slider should have imho really been labeled as such, rather than reading "passing length" and by labeling certain slider positions as "short", "direct" and "long" suggesting that it would set an absolute in terms of length, but that is another story. It is also utilized by the creator in such a way, meaning that retaining possession or getting the ball forward shouts modify the slider starting from the base starting point set by the strategy and player roles, moving the slider accordingly towards the fitting end of that "retain possession game" vs "get the ball forward" scale.

[wwfan]

Re: Guttman, real world tactics aside, assuming that going on "counter" is indeed an option, I'd suspect the defender's setting to mostly play a possession-based simple game to be a cause for an error here and there, in particular against aggressive opposition. The passing slider should have imho really been labeled as such, rather than reading "passing length" and by labeling certain slider positions as "short", "direct" and "long" suggesting that it would set an absolute in terms of length, but that is another story. It is also utilized by the creator in such a way, meaning that retaining possession or getting the ball forward shouts modify the slider starting from the base starting point set by the strategy and player roles, moving the slider accordingly towards the fitting end of that "possession game" vs "direct/forward passing game" scale.

Absolutely accept that the help regarding how to conceptualise tactics is lacking, and that the sliders are horribly complex and hugely abstract.

A good rule of thumb is that if you want to play a slow tempo, possession-centric game, play with the more defensive strategies, pack the midfield, encourage the FBs to get forward and tick counter attack. If you want to play more directly, go for a more attacking formation and strategy, which semi-bypass the less heavily manned midfield. You probably don't need your FBs overlapping either, as the system will be too quick for them to do so with any regularity. My only issue with higgins' system is that I think he's reducing the passing options out of defence while having his attackers rush forwards, and that it is probably not quite aggressive or high tempo enough. I don't see how that is a good move given his lack of midfield cover. It asks for the defence and midfield to lose possession on the press.

This is what I talk about when I mention structure. If higgins hadn't manually reduced the passing options for his FBs, the only query I'd have about his tactic was whether the tempo was quite high enough for a successful 4-2-4. Because he has, I query the logic of it as a whole.

[Rigga89]

With lots more games under my belt I thought it only write to revisit this and keep my opinion updated.

There's still lots of positives for me:

1. Pressing has improved no end.

2. Back-post crosses are a thing of the past.

3. Unpreventable long shots are gone, my players now only shoot from distance if they see a good opportunity or are about to lose possession.

4. A more realistic number of shots - by your own admission it's a little less than IRL but it plays much better this way.

5. There's lots more positives about the game obviously or else I wouldn't still be playing it after so many years

But there's still some bugs:

1. The biggest one for me is the conversion of chances. Let's take the last game I played, I was Arsenal playing at home against CSKA Moscow which I won 2-0. I had 15 shots and 7 on target. 5 clear cut chances, of which 2 were scored and the other 3 (which if anything were even clearer cut) missed the target entirely including one skied shot from 3 yards out. Add to that 4 half chances and only 2 long range shots and you get the impression that I should have scored more. This isn't a one off either. I've played dozens of games now and almost all are the same; clinical finishers missing golden opportunities time after after time.

2. GK distribution but you know this, though it really does need resolving.

3. Teammates don't move for throw-ins meaning they're easily marked and too many go to the opposition.

4. For throw-ins in the final, my striker will come short no matter how the set-piece tactic is set. It's pretty annoying when Giroud is being thrown the ball and then fires in a cross to the likes of Cazorla!

5. Clearances go sideways & backwards too often. I had my keeper kick the ball out for a throw right by the corner flag when the ball was played back to him and both full-backs were free.

6. I'm not sure if it's just the animation or the match engine itself, but when you watch full games it appears that fouls are being incorrectly registered. I also feel there needs to be a little less tolerance of repeat following.

7. Penalties don't seem to result in cards. You'd have thought fouls in the box are the most likely to result in cards, yet of the multitude of penalties I've seen awarded for and against me only one was given a card.

8. Own goals seem prolific. Manchester United just beat someone 4-0 with 3 own goals. In the same list of results were several other own goals. I've no idea that real life statistics for own goals, but I'd have guessed 1/2 per weekend PL fixture is about all. They just seem to happen far too often and under silly circumstances.

9. Shots from very tight angles rather than passes into the middle of the box still happen.

On a different topic...

I don't want to be an arse, but having read through your description of your 4-2-4, your system has some serious structural deficiencies. Your short passing instructions for your back line will hinder the possibility of their being able to get the ball upfield to the wingers. They have to go through the central midfield. With the previous ME, not so much of a problem, as the low final third pressing meant they could easily recycle the ball. Now they are under a little more pressure, the lack of passing options will result in regularly losing possession in dangerous areas. Your undermanned midfield and light tackling wingers will then struggle to cope with the counters. You are also very one dimensional in attack, relying on one DLP to spray passes to four attackers, with no overlaps out of defence.

You have some good ideas in your tactic, but I'd argue they aren't being interpreted into the system properly. That, I'd 100% accept, is the fault of the poor in-game documentation.

This is the type of post I like to see from staff and the type I'd love to see more of from everybody. It's much more constructive than all the 'your tactics must be flawed' that we see so often. I suspect I'm like many others on these boards in that I feel I have a pretty solid grasp of football tactics. I've been a football fan all my life, I've actively played a lot of football and I've read plenty of the theoretical side of football also - I'm not claiming to be Mourinho here, I'm just saying I've reasonable understanding of the fundamentals - but the difficulty is knowing which box to tick, which role to assign, or which slider to shift to achieve the desired effect. I can see that a particular player might be murdering me on the wing, or that I'm struggling to defend balls in the air, or that play in the centre is too congested to get anywhere, but understanding the effects of all the different tactical options to address these weaknesses you can see in your side is a big ask. As you rightly say the documentation is woefully inadequate at explaining even half of the options you have.

[WizbaII]

My first impression was, "Okay, whose turn is it to read?!"

Second impression, I agree, except maybe for 8 and 9.

[MichaelBrown]

I seem to be getting the bizarre results people were talking about pre-patch...that I didn't get then!

In my Coventry save, I've beaten Birmingham 3-0 in the cup, and drew 0-0 away to West Ham in the next round, yet I've been gubbed 4-1 by both Scunthorpe and Bournemouth in the league. These kind of results simply weren't happening before this update. Again, it could be coincidence but the evidence is slightly worrying. Even more so, when this sort of swing in results against better/worse teams was one of the main bugbears of people before the update. Weird.

Is that not the same as RL? For example, my team (Leeds) won Everton and Southampton, yet lost twice on the trot (before Everton) and lost 6-1 after Southampton.

[Rashidi]

Yeah, defense is pretty broken in this ME..............I really hope it doesn't take until Christmas to fix this.

Lol I have produced more clean sheets under this me than I have in previous versions of football manager. In as far as patches are concerned the demo version was a joke, conceding a goal every game. since the patch i have only conceded 2 goals in 10 matches. The engine is terrible I should be conceding more, in fact there is no way I should completely dominate sides playing 11 17 year olds vs all these seasoned veterans.

[Rigga89]

My first impression was, "Okay, whose turn is it to read?!"

Second impression, I agree, except maybe for 8 and 9.

I didn't intend for it to turn into quite such an essay! Hopefully it's helpful and constructive though

[demonen]

I'd expect the Barca system to work if the roles and duties were sound and the strategy and philosophy suited the formation. It might not produce exactly the same patterns as Barca, but it should still be viable.

So you actually believe that the ME would handle a formation with no wide players except for two wide strikers realistically? I'll admit I haven't tried it with the current ME, but I'm pretty sure it would be a train wreck. The immediate issues that I can see is that it would be impossible to properly build up play from the back (goalkeepers being stupid, the back line staying too narrow, etc), and have an extremely hard time pressing properly with no clear players assigned to closing down the opposing wide midfielders. I guess I could give it a shot some day to see if the new pressing improvements actually have made formations such as these viable, but I somehow doubt it.

But really: I think it's pretty clear to anyone who has played this game for a while that there are different tactics that are strong/weak in each version of the match engine, and that remains true even if you restrict yourself to realistic tactics. So even if your tactic seems reasonable, it doesn't necessary translate well into the match engine.

We can consider the central midfielders in a 4-2-3-1 as an example: in FM12, they were more effective as defensive midfielders, since playing them as CM's gave up way too much space between the lines (which affected both players and the AI). But if you then look at FM13 before the patch, it was clearly more effective to play them as central midfielders, due to issues with midfielders dropping to deep and not pressing enough. Both tactics are "structurally sound", but clearly differ a lot in effectiveness depending on which version of the match engine is used.

And these kinds of issues do appear every time the match engine is changed. Simply stating that there should be no changes in the performance of "structurally sound" tactics just sounds amazingly ignorant for someone who is supposed to be an expert on the match engine...

[wwfan]

So you actually believe that the ME would handle a formation with no wide players except for two wide strikers realistically? I'll admit I haven't tried it with the current ME, but I'm pretty sure it would be a train wreck. The immediate issues that I can see is that it would be impossible to properly build up play from the back (goalkeepers being stupid, the back line staying too narrow, etc), and have an extremely hard time pressing properly with no clear players assigned to closing down the opposing wide midfielders. I guess I could give it a shot some day to see if the new pressing improvements actually have made formations such as these viable, but I somehow doubt it.

I don't think the 3-4-3 Barca system has any players in the F strata. I'd try this:

GK: SWK/A

DCL: DC/X

DCC: BPD/C

DCR: DC/X

DMC: DLP/S

MCL: MC/A

MCC: BWM/D

MCR: AP/S

AMC: TQ/A

AML: IF/S

AMR: IF/A

Strategy: Counter

Philosophy: Rigid

Adjustments: Shorter Passing, More Expressive, More Pressing, More Roaming, Float Crosses

Shouts: Retain Possession, Pass into Space, Push Higher Up (+ Hassle Opponent on and off during a match)

That would be structurally logical and thus should work.

[themadsheep2001]

I don't think the 3-4-3 Barca system has any players in the F strata. I'd try this:

GK: SWK/A

DCL: DC/X

DCC: BPD/C

DCR: DC/X

DMC: DLP/S

MCL: MC/A

MCC: BWM/D

MCR: AP/S

AMC: TQ/A

AML: IF/S

AMR: IF/A

Strategy: Counter

Philosophy: Rigid

Adjustments: Shorter Passing, More Expressive, More Pressing, More Roaming, Float Crosses

Shouts: Retain Possession, Pass into Space, Push Higher Up (+ Hassle Opponent on and off during a match)

That would be structurally logical and thus should work.

There were times when the "4" was a diamond shape, with Fabregas a false 10 (I would say AMC: AP/S but with RFD Often and Roaming) notably when they destroyed Villiarreal 5-0. But there certainly were no FL or FR, but AML/AMR Inside Forwards moving beyond Messi at FC (Treq)

[wwfan]

There were times when the "4" was a diamond shape, with Fabregas a false 10 (I would say AMC: AP/S but with RFD Often and Roaming) notably when they destroyed Villiarreal 5-0. But there certainly were no FL or FR, but AML/AMR Inside Forwards moving beyond Messi at FC (Treq)[/QUOTe]

Easy to do if you pushed the TQ to the FCC, and pushed the MCL to the AMC position. I've currently got the BWM in midfield, but you could also have him as a DM/D with the DLP moving up a strata.

[Ackter]

Three man defences are amazing <3

[wwfan]

We can consider the central midfielders in a 4-2-3-1 as an example: in FM12, they were more effective as defensive midfielders, since playing them as CM's gave up way too much space between the lines (which affected both players and the AI). But if you then look at FM13 before the patch, it was clearly more effective to play them as central midfielders, due to issues with midfielders dropping to deep and not pressing enough. Both tactics are "structurally sound", but clearly differ a lot in effectiveness depending on which version of the match engine is used.

And these kinds of issues do appear every time the match engine is changed. Simply stating that there should be no changes in the performance of "structurally sound" tactics just sounds amazingly ignorant for someone who is supposed to be an expert on the match engine...

This is you playing the engine, not the game. You might well find it easier to get results in certain MEs by playing different formations, but that does not mean the formation you have discarded cannot do equally well if it it structurally sound. My point is that if you have a solid grasp of the logic of football and know how to interpret it into the TC and shouts, then you can get any formation working reasonably successfully in any ME. If you don't, then you will obviously drift towards formations you feel work better.

[Marko147]

i play with Lazio... without new update I was 3rd when i install patch i loose 4 games with same tactic and players, and I have 2-3 shots per game...

WHAT HAVE YOU DONE???

p.s. Napoli play 4-4-2 tactic (do you watch real life) ?

[BiggusD]

This is you playing the engine, not the game. You might well find it easier to get results in certain MEs by playing different formations, but that does not mean the formation you have discarded cannot do equally well if it it structurally sound. My point is that if you have a solid grasp of the logic of football and know how to interpret it into the TC and shouts, then you can get any formation working reasonably successfully in any ME. If you don't, then you will obviously drift towards formations you feel work better.

There is only one "sound" tactical strategy and that is success.

i played a 4-1-2-2-1 wide (4-5-1) formation until 13.1.3 but no matter what I did it was too weak at defending against through balls through the centre, since through balls have had a boost since 13.1.2 - and even though central defenders have had a boost too it is in no way enough to stop the exploitation of space behind the defensive line. I have no intention of ever -not- be the best team statistically, so dropping deeper just to accomodate ME/player AI shortcomings is not an option.

The solution, of course, was to make a new tactic - one that employs a Sweeper. I used the TC this time, and only "ticked off" tempo and long shots, keeping it simple as you say. Has worked like a charm so far... Both are "structurally sound" tactics with players covering most of the space and strata both offensively and defensively, with players having different roles that suits them and links and connects play. Both are capable of both long attacks and counter-attacks. Both should work excellently, but the answer to "this ME destroyed my tactic" is not and will never be "your tactic was structurally unsound".

It is and will always be "your tactic does not take into consideration the necessities of the current ME, but the previous one". Now it is the insane power of through balls to quick forwards. Previously it was the lack of pressing.

[wwfan]

All well and good, but I haven't had to change a thing and my results haven't altered at all. 4-4-2 in every match I've played in FM13 thus far.

[Ackter]

i play with Lazio... without new update I was 3rd when i install patch i loose 4 games with same tactic and players, and I have 2-3 shots per game...

WHAT HAVE YOU DONE???

p.s. Napoli play 4-4-2 tactic (do you watch real life) ?

Made defending better, which means teams with poor attacking strategies are going to struggle and should really look to improving their tactics.

[BiggusD]

All well and good, but I haven't had to change a thing and my results haven't altered at all. 4-4-2 in every match I've played in FM13 thus far.

Then you are obviously enjoying the fact that the ME-team has finally got flat 442's "right". After all, it is an English game made by English people for a primarily English market.

I must add here that most of the through balls ravaging my old tactic came from the opposition wingers, and a 4-1-2-2-1 has a "hole" right around the place where they are when they hit those passes. With MRL instead of AMRL (going to 4-1-4-1) those wingers would have had a man pressing him and it would not be the full back. I could of course fix this by increasing the aggressiveness of my full backs or making the wingers more defensive-minded, but both of those options would have had serious ramifications for the balance of the tactic. The former would (and did) drag the central defenders out of position making things even worse, and the latter would force me to abandon the "linking striker" strategy and make him the primary attacking outlet with wingers providing support. A flat 442 would be more efficient at preventing those through balls from the flanks in any case. For the record, the wing-backs in my 5-3-2 tactic does that job excellently, so I have not had a single one-on-one against me since I started using it.

[Ackter]

I play 352 and my results have actually improved since the patch.

[luka_zg]

To me ME feels a bit chaotic. I like now that there are through balls but it seems everybody is trying them. My CB's have about 10-15 wrong passes per game which is too much,all they need to do really is to pass the ball to my two DM's...how do you manage to misplace 15 passes..

And I don't like the panic mode of defenders when in possession in their own box..it looks ridicilous. complete chaos and panic,hoofing the ball without any clear idea what to do..

Anyway it is improvement over the last version, but it still needs some work..slow everything down a bit and remove this panic reactions, and not every player on the field should try to send through balls..

[wwfan]

Then you are obviously enjoying the fact that the ME-team has finally got flat 442's "right". After all, it is an English game made by English people for a primarily English market.

I can guarantee you that when I get to the top flight and have a good playing surface and highly technical players, I will play a lone forward, short-passing, continental style counter-attacking system. I can also guarantee that I'll succeed with it, no matter which ME is live when I start using it. Mainly because I play the game, not the ME.

[Smac]

Three man defences are amazing <3

Indeed

In between the fascinating discussion of which way to employ a 4-2-4 short or 3-4-3 narrow there have been some really good feedback comments on the ME. I hope someone is going to collate these for internal consumption.

Tactics:

One thing that has me very excited by this ME is that I've had to go back and look at each phase of play in order to get the ball from GK--> Defending line --> Midfield line --> Attackers using both positioning and mentality. It's like the good old FM09(?) days where there were endless discussions about how mentality relates to positioning: Well, it does. It really really does now. And moreover, it really matters. Of all the things that have changed from the release ME that will affect your tactical set-up, this is the probably the most critical now. One must consider how to get players "open". Thank Goodness. When you think about the previous ME in comparison you can see how it hardly mattered before because there was a distinct lack of midfield battling and chess-moving. It is now a game of speed chess a bit, but at least it is chess.

I feel a bit badly for those players who will have to start from scratch with their tactics, and that is probably a lot of you. But it is SO worth it once you get some flow going in your team. I don't disagree with wwfan that internally consistent logical systems of some types (a.k.a. "sound tactics") will perform in any of the recent ME's, however I will suggest that not ALL internally consistent logical systems will perform well in both the release ME and the current ME. IE, some tactics that on paper are well structured will be better now, and some will be worse.

For Example: like the above poster has realized, his uber-possession tactic is going to be quite difficult to replicate with the current ME. The underpinnings of such a tactic in the release ME will not hold up possession in the current ME, so changes will have to be made if that is your goal, and even so, it is highly unlikely that you'll be able to shoot for the moon with world record passing numbers; Pressing, tackling, and risk-taking have all increased beyond a threshold that would allow for that. No doubt that it would still be a worthy challenge, but perhaps the bar should be set at 500-600 passes a match rather than the 1000 that were aimed for in FM12. Not that I recommend such a tactical approach for success in FM13 anyways, but if you want to do it I think it's a fascinating challenge this year.

I think many of the feedback points in this thread are quite on target and I do hope they find their targets. There is a bit more yet to do to smooth out the ME, from cutting down on the throughball frenzy to creating a bit more variation in wide play, but this release is a huge step in the right direction. If it isn't performing for you yet, stick with it and develop a tactic that will work for you. I don't think we can expect another patch for a few weeks at least so it will be well worth it to have some success in the interim, and it IS possible. (14-0-0 with 3-2-3-2 (wide wings) and a 4-3-3 (formationally narrow, wide play, wingbacks)).

[DanaInternational]

All well and good, but I haven't had to change a thing and my results haven't altered at all. 4-4-2 in every match I've played in FM13 thus far.

Not sure if you have ever seen this site but gives great tactical insight and analysis and reflects a lot of what you say about the match enghine

Interesting piece on Conte's "4-2-4"

http://www.zonalmarking.net/2011/10/23/antonio-contes-system-isnt-a-4-2-4-but-still-provides-excitement/

[Mr U Rosler]

Its very much feast or famine for me.

Win 5 - 0, Lose 5 - 0, Win 5 - 0, Lose 5 - 0.

Might try a 352 to see if I can get some consistancy.

[Ackter]

Oh my 352 is so not consistent, it's based entirely on the Kevin Keegan philosophy of "yeah you score 4, we'll just score 5".

When it goes wrong, it goes very​ wrong.

[Fancy Gaffot]

The issue with posts and crossbars hits not being counted in stats is still there.

[Marko147]

Made defending better, which means teams with poor attacking strategies are going to struggle and should really look to improving their tactics.

Have you read what i was written? I was 3rd!!!! my defend was very good (and attack) but when i installed patch..evertyhing is changed..

[Ackter]

Have you read what i was written? I was 3rd!!!! my defend was very good (and attack) but when i installed patch..evertyhing is changed..

Yes, because they've improved defending. Which means the attack that was so successful for you was only working because the opposition's defending was weaker. Now that defending has been improved, it shows that your tactics aren't actually that strong when attacking.

I'd suggest looking in the tactics forum if you need help.

[Smac]

Anyone having success with narrow tactics? I've only been using wide since it does such a fine job with 3 at the back. I'm wondering if narrower tactics exacerbate the through ball problem, counter-intuitively.

[Marko147]

Have you read what i was written? I was 3rd!!!! my defend was very good (and attack) but when i installed patch..evertyhing is changed..

If they improved defending...how can I then recieve 2 goal per game??? and before patch my defend was best in league

[Ackter]

If they improved defending...how can I then recieve 2 goal per game??? and before patch my defend was best in league

They've also changed other things like closing down and pressure.

It sounds like your tactics were very one-dimensional, which is why they were effective but aren't any more.

[Renegade7]

Played my last 1/3 of the season with the new ME (Greece 1st season with Olympiakos FC). Seen all the improvements mentioned above, but there are 2 small problems. The first is that if you apply the patch in a saved game like me (where most of the season is already out) you may actually have to rebuild your whole tactics from scratch. I had to do many non-logical tweeks to my tactics before the patch in order to get something from a game (playing very fluid, overloaded tactics just praying that a SINGLE through pass will get to my striker!). After the patch my tactics gone rubish, which is very sensible (and lost the first game played after the patch 0-4 from a very weak opponent.) So the best thing to do is to start a new game, or wait for the next pre-season of your saved game to build new tactics that fit to the new ME, as the previous tactics just do not seem to apply. The second problem is that i still have a lot of woodwork in my games, much more than a match would have IRL. 3 post hits per game is something above the IRL average I think (the stat refers to the total woodwork hits per game, including the ones the opponent have.)

[Ackter]

The previous tactics apply fine as long the previous tactics were well balanced.

I'm going to guess that the majority of people struggling with tactics since the patch are those that don't use the Tactics Creator.

[valehannes]

I've been playing in 2d and seen great improvement since patch. It first looked a bit scary because in the first 2 games 6 players got injured but in the next 10 it turned back to normal. The game looks a lot more 'real' now with actual attacking plays instead of the pass around the defense plan. Overall things look a lot better. I'm actually doing really well which is super suspicious .

Bad things that I've noticed:

* When theres a loose ball that an 'enemy' player is going for (after a corner kick) and it looks like a sure fire counter attack is about to happen, my team waits for him to get to the ball before starting to fall back to defend. Might be a match enginge interpretation thing but I don't like it.

* Goalie distribution actually sort of works even though it wasn't changed in the patch. On defender collect the goalie actually distributes it to my defenders when putting the ball back into play. The problem comes after the defenders get the ball - they notice that they're being marked and pass the ball either straight or through other defenders back to goalie who hoofs it like a maniac. I realize this is already in the works so just ranting.

Going to try 3d tonight.

[Ackter]

valehannes, can you please post about those issues in the bugs forum, and upload PKMs to show them happening?

[Renegade7]

The previous tactics apply fine as long the previous tactics were well balanced.

I'm going to guess that the majority of people struggling with tactics since the patch are those that don't use the Tactics Creator.

The problem is that the well balanced tactics that you mention just DID NOT WORK -at least for me. Of course balancing the tactics again after the patch (and after the players got used to the new mentalities and tempos) things work just fine. Not that i win all games, but at least when i loose, i loose in a way that makes sence!

[molemenacer]

Used the new patch last night and am very happy with the result. I play a 4-3-2-1 with an AML as an IF and a AMC with an out and out winger on the right, really good to see my IF cutting inside and my WBL bombing up past him and putting crosses in and my winger on the right hugging the touch line and putting crosses in as well.

My player behind the striker is an AMC or a T depending on who is playing and they get involved defensively and drop into midfield to collect the ball as well. Overall really happy with the update and loving the way my team is playing football at the moment.

Scored a goal last night were i was pushing high up the pitch and pressurizing the opposition, i won the ball on the half way line with their midfield now out of position and 4 1 touch passes later between my IF, T and Poacher resulted in my T scoring. Really good to see your team pressing the ball rather than an individual

[Äktsjon Männ]

This is you playing the engine, not the game. You might well find it easier to get results in certain MEs by playing different formations, but that does not mean the formation you have discarded cannot do equally well if it it structurally sound. My point is that if you have a solid grasp of the logic of football and know how to interpret it into the TC and shouts, then you can get any formation working reasonably successfully in any ME. If you don't, then you will obviously drift towards formations you feel work better.

But there are formations that do work better than others and also a lot of obvious quirks in every version of the ME that you'd be daft to not take notice of. There was no point in playing a 'structurally sound' 4231 with two MC's in FM12 because the version with two DM's simply worked better. Similarly there was zero reason to play a fast and direct style in pre-patch 13 because of the glaring issues with pressing - why give the ball away when you can just knock it around in the opposition's half and probe for openings even if you're Salisbury Town up against Chelsea. Sure you can choose a fully real life logic based tactic through the TC and get reasonable results out of it but all you're really doing is deliberately handicapping yourself. It's a piece of code after all not real people playing football, so when I see illogical or detrimental behavior I seek to fix it by whatever means the game has given me. In FM12 for example that meant using a lot of asymmetrical formations because of the lack of movement between the lines in defaults. The results were movement patterns and build up play that resembled real life football much closer than anything you could do with symmetric systems.

All well and good, but I haven't had to change a thing and my results haven't altered at all. 4-4-2 in every match I've played in FM13 thus far.

Well then how can you then have such elaborated opinion on tactical variety and latest match engine tendencies when all you do is pick the most basic tactic that the ME play is developed around? 442 is pretty much the one thing that's bound to work 'reasonably' in every version of the ME even if you stick to defaults.

[PaulC]

Can I ask please that anyone posting YouTube examples of errors please also post the pkm file for the match plus description of the issue in our bugs forum please?

Cheers,

Paul

[smallclone]

Well then how can you then have such elaborated opinion on tactical variety and latest match engine tendencies when all you do is pick the most basic tactic that the ME play is developed around? 442 is pretty much the one thing that's bound to work 'reasonably' in every version of the ME even if you stick to defaults.

It didn't for me. Monaco : played 7, won 0 : sacked.

[dazbowski]

So are SI and the mods saying that the original engine wasn't fit for purpose as many people have created tactics that "beat" it now have to start all over despite buying player to fit their style of play? Ridiculous isn't the word, I've got Stalybrige into the Prem in 7 years and now my tactic has been rendered useless. Whether I had exploited the engine or not I now have to rebuild my team and find a new tactic that works. In the mean time will get relegated and probably sacked.

Cheers.

[tlm_77]

It didn't for me. Monaco : played 7, won 0 : sacked.

I'm Burnley. 4-4-2 now working for me. As wwfan states, the ME is now different (better) and old tactics were not 'sound'.

I took his words on board, now I'm seeing amazing results.

EG - I have a BTB mid who is now actually bursting forward and getting goals as well as winning possession back.

What did I change? Well, I restricted him too much.

I looked through what I thought was a sound 4-4-2 set up - in fact, in many areas (key areas too) I was contradicting instructions and limiting movements etc.

I didn't realise this until I read what wwfan was saying.

I'm now absolutely loving this ME and the game in general.

[wez007]

Managed to try the update last night. Injuries seemed ok but 5 OG's in 7 games is a little worrying...

Ive never had the patience to spend a huge amount of time on tactics, i just can never be bothered (plus im awful at it) so I generally download one that suits my team and go from there. It does seem in this revision that it takes a HUGE amount of times for tactics to bed in but thats probably a good thing and more realistic. the 3d view is still pretty nasty if you ask me, lots of dancing on ice going on. Not a huge bed wetter as mostly play in 2d classic.

Good to see we are getting somewhere now though, steps forward

[hluraven]

So are SI and the mods saying that the original engine wasn't fit for purpose as many people have created tactics that "beat" it now have to start all over despite buying player to fit their style of play? Ridiculous isn't the word, I've got Stalybrige into the Prem in 7 years and now my tactic has been rendered useless. Whether I had exploited the engine or not I now have to rebuild my team and find a new tactic that works. In the mean time will get relegated and probably sacked.

Cheers.

You think it's not ridiculous that you got Stalybridge to the Premier in 7 years but that it is ridiculous that you need to get better players and tactics to stay there?

The ME was not perfect before, no-one has said it was, and it is not perfect now, but it is getting better. This is normal and logical for an ME, the FM12 one had thousands of tweaks and over 10 versions released. Some things in tactics needed tweaking each time if the tactic took advantage of/was being symied by the previous version. That's normal and the alternative is to never improve the ME in case someone does worse after, which really would be ridiculous

[PaulC]

The FM2013 ME is a new model and its the nature of the beast that it will take several updates to find optimum balance. Its also inevitable that some people will run into trouble as updates fix flaws that allowed their tactics to thrive previously.

There is no other way of creating the ME that we all want, than this process, and I make no apologies for that.

Can I ask out of interest, of those of you who are finding it difficult, how many are using the old classic tactics vs the Tactics Creator?