Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community
hursty2

I cannot win in this game.

Recommended Posts

No, seriously...look.

(highlighted games are the ones I took over in)

ScreenShot2013-04-02at20822PM_zpsf3adf7f9.png

ScreenShot2013-04-02at20634PM_zps3bae760a.png

ScreenShot2013-04-02at20321PM_zps00c69add.png

ScreenShot2013-04-02at20156PM_zpsd7552813.png

So it's been a pretty miserable time for me on FM13 and I haven't yet enjoyed a game. I use logical tactics as per wwfan's 12 step guide as well as other tactical insights on the tactics and discussion forum but nothing works for me.

Frankly, it's ****.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you want advice from the others members about how to improve your game, you can start by sharing your formation , tactic and your best XI. Maybe then they can spot what you can do to improve your games

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hate to be that guy, but if you're doing so consistently poorly your tactics may not be as good as you believe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with dyne. It would be nice to see your tactics and possibly your team. It would give people a chance to help :).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its all about tactics and roles, sit down and try plan out how to get the best out of your players. Then make a new tactic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my most recent game, the KSK Hasselt one I set up like this now.

-------------DLF(a)--------------

-----------------------------------

--W(s)-------AP(a)-------W(a)--

-----------------------------------

-----------------------------------

----------DLP(d)--DLP(d)---------

-----------------------------------

-WB(a)--CD(d)---LD(d)--FB(s)-

-----------------------------------

--------------GK(d)--------------

RIGID

COUNTER/STANDARD

More Direct

Zonal Marking

The rest as default. My side is predicted to come 12th out of 18 teams and this is what the squad comparison pages look like.

General

Goalkeepers

Defence

Midfield

Attack

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Playing a pair of DLP's strikes me as an issue, midfield partnerships need to compliment each other & in your current setting you risk having both players trying to do the same thing, at a basic level you're potentially wasting a player & leaving your midfield open to being overrun.

I've always found attacking wing-backs to the a poor idea when playing a 4 man defence, especially with little or no defensive cover from midfield, full-backs in a support role provide adequate attacking threat with a stronger defensive mindset, do you find your side frequently gets caught on the break?

Final thought is that having your wingers in advanced starting positions is not a wise move when using a counter attack strategy as they will not naturally drop to a goal side position when defending, if you really want them to take up an advanced position then drop your AP into midfield & play him as a BWM or CM, this will also create more space for your DLF to work with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i think your player roles contradict with your team instructions. if you want to play direct and rigid football you should change your DMs to defensive midfielders (one support one defend)and wingers to inisde forwards(attack).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Playing a pair of DLP's strikes me as an issue, midfield partnerships need to compliment each other & in your current setting you risk having both players trying to do the same thing, at a basic level you're potentially wasting a player & leaving your midfield open to being overrun.

I understand where you're coming from and often use an Anchor Man in one of the roles too but according to the tactics forum it is quite a good pairing for what I am doing. The DLP's will fill holes covered by the attacking full back slotting in when he goes forwards. But I am open to ideas as nothing seems to be working.

I've always found attacking wing-backs to the a poor idea when playing a 4 man defence, especially with little or no defensive cover from midfield, full-backs in a support role provide adequate attacking threat with a stronger defensive mindset, do you find your side frequently gets caught on the break?

I wouldn't say we get caught on the break, more that the side seems to be frequently struggling getting first to the ball when the ball drops into the box. If anything I find that they leave holes by pressing too much.

Final thought is that having your wingers in advanced starting positions is not a wise move when using a counter attack strategy as they will not naturally drop to a goal side position when defending, if you really want them to take up an advanced position then drop your AP into midfield & play him as a BWM or CM, this will also create more space for your DLF to work with.

Agree with this point, I've considered dropping my AP but I have two good players in that position, perhaps 3 so I could opt for a narrow 4-2-3-1 but after doing this got pumped 4-2.

In reality I just seem to score really stupid goals but I know that they could be stopped. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personal preference would be;

-------------DLF(a)-------------

--------------------------------

--AP(s)------------------AP(s)--

--------------------------------

---------CM(s)--CM(d)----------

-------------DLP(s)-------------

--------------------------------

--FB(s)--CD(d)--BPD(d)--FB(s)--

--------------------------------

--------------SK(a)-------------

Of course this depends on the players at your disposal & I tend go for for a very fluid mentality as I find it gives a much better balance.

Edit: I forgot to mention that a DLP should only be played in the DM position if he has good physical & mental attributes, if he is a little lightweight or is lacking in his decision making ability then he is an easy target to get dispossessed in a very dangerous area of the pitch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My suggestion is to change the DLP (d) DLP (d) to one of this:

CM(d) CM(s)

DLP(s) BWM(d)

DLP(d) DLP(s)

I found that without supporting role, my CB have difficulty to continue the ball forward.

For counter attack, I prefer to use IF(a) rather than W(a), or put both W as support and use AF(a) and AMC/AP (a)

Also if you decide on using IF, change the Rigid to Balanced to make sure your IF more creative.

what are the most common shout you use?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cheers for the suggestions barside, I'll tweak some more.

I tend to use play wider and exploit the middle together, sometimes using the play through defence shout when I see that the opposition d-line is high. Other than that I don't really use them as much as I perhaps should.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Play wider & exploit the middle doesn't sound like it would work (iirc was this a strategy(exploit) against the 4231 Denmark formation?), particularly as your present system is rather light in midfield, chances are you're playing the ball into areas where your side is outnumbered.

You could also try using defensive wingers, I've found them to be very useful & favour then ahead of wing-backs when playing a counter attacking 3 CB system as it allows me to overload in central midfield without being inherently weak out wide, nots sure how they would work in your current system as it isn't something that I've ever tried.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In my most recent game, the KSK Hasselt one I set up like this now.

-------------DLF(a)--------------

-----------------------------------

--W(s)-------AP(a)-------W(a)--

-----------------------------------

-----------------------------------

----------DLP(d)--DLP(d)---------

-----------------------------------

-WB(a)--CD(d)---LD(d)--FB(s)-

-----------------------------------

--------------GK(d)--------------

RIGID

COUNTER/STANDARD

More Direct

Zonal Marking

The rest as default. My side is predicted to come 12th out of 18 teams and this is what the squad comparison pages look like.

I know some of this has already been pointed out above but IMO there are several basic errors:

A) Huge gap between DMs & AMs/wingers - Your DMs are holding station on defend orders whilst all but one of your AMs/wingers/ST are running away from the ball on attack orders. This leaves a big gap inbetween with your AML the only outlet for a forward pass. Given your team orders what I expect you see is lots of passing between your fullbacks and DLPs and lots of aimless balls forward as they come under pressure.

B) Too many people acting as playmakers - Two DLPs, one AP and a DLF.

All in all I just think your player orders/duties don't fit together very well.

Improvements I would make:

A) Central defence - Two flat defenders tend to get caught out with through balls, make one a "stopper" (Comes forward, closes down, competes for balls in the air), the other a "cover" (Sits back a little more and sweeps up behind the stopper).

B) DL - As Barside has said I also don't like a WB (Attack) in a four man defence, make him a fullback on attack duty.

C) DMs - I would have one ball winning player & one playmaker here. Make your DMCL the ball winning one to cover your DL pushing forward (Anchor man or just defensive midfielder should both work although I find one pushes forward more than the other). That leaves your DMCR as the playmaker but open his range by putting him on support duty.

D) ST - I'm a firm believer that lone forwards should be on support duty be it as a DLF, target man or complete forward.

E) AMs/Wingers - Difficult one to get right but generally I would look for two on attack duty & one on support. I would also play around with the AMC orders to find what fits best with the overall tactic (Maybe just attacking midfielder support to start with).

F) You probably need to move away from rigid team orders to get the best out of that formation. As it stands you are attacking with four players & defending with six, you need to encourage more mixed play. I would move to fluid orders or at least the setting between rigid & fluid, this will encourage your fullbacks/DLP to support more and encourage your wingers/AMC to drop back more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, first thing I have to say is that the instructions you give your players tell them to keep possession and pass the ball forward slowly and patiently at the same time as they're told to run like hell forward the instant you win possession and look for options some distance away.

Your midfielders are supposed to keep possession and not pass forward unless the risk of losing possession is low, at the same time as they're told to be creative and look for adventurous passes. Three of four players in front of those midfielders are running away from the ball immidiately and will not be available for a pass. They are also instructed to pass quickly and run directly while primarily keeping possession is the team's focus.

Counter/balanced are rather narrow and slow tactics, while your attacking instructions requires width and quicker tempo.

Basically, Attacking duties instructs the players to Run from Deep Often and gives them a more attacking mentality. The latter makes them look for passing options primarily forward and this will increase loss of possession and willingness to shoot. If you want a balanced tactic, don't use Attacking duties at all. On Support, most roles will have Run from Deep Sometimes, which makes them wait a little bit before running forward - so that they wait for the correct moment to do so rather than do a Forrest Gump. Try a team with basic roles (DMC, DLF,Winger, AMC, FB, DC) only and with Support only except for Defend on the DC's. The team will then become a coherent unit of independent AI players instead of specialist robots intended to complete a patterned play created by you. With that as a starting point, you can steer the play in a desireable direction based on observation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For me, your tactic have three big problems;

1. You have three players (dpl,dpl,ap) that all want to distribute the ball and dictate the pace of the game.

2. Your disposition of full/wing backs with attacking wingers with a 4-man defensive line

3. Your overall playing strategy combined with such an line up is not logical.

So, main problem for me is that you have three players being "playmakers", when you are not even playing possession football. Together with the fact that you play with offensive full backs when you play wingers, means that those players most of the time will fill the same space. It would be more logical, as someone already mention, to play with inside forwards if you look to play offensive full backs, as they can hug the touchline and the "wingers" can move into more central positions leaving the opposing full back with the choice of either leaving the wingers to their central defenders or leave the corridor open for the attacking full back. At the same time you now dont utilize any of the positive things with playing offensive full backs, you get all the bad things of doing the same. With a rigid line up, your wingers (in a very attacking position) will not help out too much in defense, and with the full backs in an offensive position as well you will be overrun on the flanks. Without any central defender in a "covering" position, it would be easy for the opposing team using a poacher in attack, exploit the shortcoming on your flanks, and the play fast balls into their poacher, which should be in a better position then your "not covering" central defenders.

This strategy, for me, would be more logical (and hopefully even successful) if you tried to play fluid controlling football, just used one playmaker, made the wingers play inside forwards, made one central defender "cover", and changed your attacker to a target man or a poacher.

Right now, your dpl´s sit on the same space, your full backs and wingers sit in the same space, and your ap will not ever get the ball. At the same time, you are easily exploited defensively.

Thats my idea on your current tactics. So for me, the logical approach to turn around your loosing streak would be to overhaul your tactics completely.

Good luck!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cheers fellas, it seems as by thinking I was following a logical guide I've tweaked too much and made my tactic a mess. Now I've gone with, thanks to suggestions here, this tactic.

--------------CF(s)--------------

-----------------------------------

--IF(s)-------AM(a)-------IF(s)--

-----------------------------------

-----------------------------------

-----------A(d)--DLP(s)---------

-----------------------------------

-FB(a)--CD©---LD(x)--FB(s)-

-----------------------------------

--------------GK(d)--------------

Fluid

Standard

Default Passing

Float Crosses

Not sure whether I should change to more expressive to get the best out of the front 4?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No real need for a stopper role at the back as the space ahead of him will be occupied by the anchor man & DLP, I'd leave him as a LD(d) & also make sure that the defence is not trying to use an offside trap as the cover defender will not hold the line.

In attack just leave things alone to start with & see how things pan out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Try to change the left IF into attack. And I think something must be done to your CF(s) but I'm not sure what

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would have your second central midfielder as a CM (s) or similar, and the DLP as a defensive duty. This would leave a Carrick type in front of the back four, to sit in that space and still be a defensive option, while his partner will bridge the gap between midfield and your attacking midfield line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well first try with the new tactic, away against the side above us in the league.

ScreenShot2013-04-02at80639PM_zpsb9fcd0be.png

I'll perhaps implement the two suggestions above but first let us celebrate. :applause::cool:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Try to change the left IF into attack. And I think something must be done to your CF(s) but I'm not sure what

The ST is fine, he can refine it into target man or DLF depending if the player is more creative or big and strong.

The IFs will make the tactic a narrow one though with four attacking players essentially targeting the opposition DCs. Against defensive teams that sit back you could find a problem but given you are playing as a lower ranked team the opposition will give you more space to exploit.

You'll find if you do well one season you'll probably suffer "second season syndrome" as the opposition close down the space and restrict your passing options.

I would have your second central midfielder as a CM (s) or similar, and the DLP as a defensive duty. This would leave a Carrick type in front of the back four, to sit in that space and still be a defensive option, while his partner will bridge the gap between midfield and your attacking midfield line.

He hasn't got any MCs in the formation and having the DLP on defend duty increases the gap between defence and attack and discourages the expressive play you want from a playmaker.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Congratz, now all you need is to tweak the top 4 combination, because those have the most combination possible. I hope all those "rant" post become like this thread

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I switched the left IF to an attack duty and he scored in the next game, resulting in a 2-1 win against another fellow relegation side.

Also, I wasn't ranting just venting my problems with the game. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Glad all has worked out. Nice work people :thup:.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I switched the left IF to an attack duty and he scored in the next game, resulting in a 2-1 win against another fellow relegation side.

Also, I wasn't ranting just venting my problems with the game. :D

Good to see you're turning it around :thup:

Don't want to rain on your parade but don't think the job is done, you'll need to tweak your tactics to adapt to the changes the opposition make over the course of the season(s), especially when they start to play narrow or defend in numbers.

As I'm also playing in the Belgium Third Division (Torhout) I can offer some additional advice:

At that level players will make regular errors/mistakes so I've took to playing a control style which serves two purposes - A) Gets the ball out of your half quicker limiting mistakes at the back & B) Puts pressure on the opposition defenders which can lead to them making mistakes.

Be prepared to switch styles though during a match, I regularly switch between counter/standard/control depending on the scoreline and what is happening on the field.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Good to see you're turning it around :thup:

Don't want to rain on your parade but don't think the job is done, you'll need to tweak your tactics to adapt to the changes the opposition make over the course of the season(s), especially when they start to play narrow or defend in numbers.

As I'm also playing in the Belgium Third Division (Torhout) I can offer some additional advice:

At that level players will make regular errors/mistakes so I've took to playing a control style which serves two purposes - A) Gets the ball out of your half quicker limiting mistakes at the back & B) Puts pressure on the opposition defenders which can lead to them making mistakes.

Be prepared to switch styles though during a match, I regularly switch between counter/standard/control depending on the scoreline and what is happening on the field.

I definitely still need to keep an eye on the opposition and will try to do that to the best of my ability.

And regarding the mistakes thing, it's unreal how many mistakes my players make, so frustrating.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He hasn't got any MCs in the formation and having the DLP on defend duty increases the gap between defence and attack and discourages the expressive play you want from a playmaker.

Well yeah obviously he'd have to push his two central midfielders up from DM, but it's a combination that I've had a lot of success with, especially with an AMC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
B) Too many people acting as playmakers - Two DLPs, one AP and a DLF.

I don't agree with you at all regarding too many playmakers! I play a 4-1-2-2-1 formation with a DLP (D) in the defensive midfield position, a DLP (S) in the MCL position and an AP (A) in the MCR position and never had problems whatsoever! And I don't tick the Playmaker option either ... I leave it off! In my opinion and from my experience it's a good midfield trio. In fact, I almost always dominate the midfield / possession and the AP scores a lot of goals as well.

Been using this system for the last 2-3 seasons and it's always been successful :) Obviously, since I use 3 specialist roles, the Philosophy is Rigid and Mentality is Attacking. I usually use this formation when playing at Home and up til now, I'm unbeaten at home for 2 seasons!

So, again, it's not a case of using too many playmakers ... if the team can afford them and you have the resources, why not?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So, again, it's not a case of using too many playmakers ... if the team can afford them and you have the resources, why not?

Because if you use three playmakers you are lacking in other areas, no ball winners closing down making life difficult for the opposition, no one getting forward to support the forwards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Because if you use three playmakers you are lacking in other areas, no ball winners closing down making life difficult for the opposition, no one getting forward to support the forwards.

You're wrong .... TOTALLY wrong!!!!!!!! I can assure you!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you look at the Detailed description of what the difference between a DLP and a BWM is, you'll see that none of them specifies that a DLP will playmake and a BWM will win balls.

Since FM is a game of statistics and numbers, what DLP will do is increase the chance of that player playmaking and BWM winning possession, but both will do both if their attributes indicates it. This means that when you sometimes want the DLP to win balls and the BWM to playmake, they will not do so, and making plans for the DLP to -not- win balls and the BWM to -not- playmake is always inferior to allowing them to do so. Thus, it is wiser to plan for each player to do everything to increase the chance of the right action to take place at the right time.

All in my opinion, of course.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You're wrong .... TOTALLY wrong!!!!!!!! I can assure you!

Theron, you talk about if your team can afford playmakers as though they are inherently more expensive than other players.

Good player are generally more expensive than other players.

Perhaps your 3 DLP tactic works because you have very good players. If the others are right (I don't know anything about tactics except my own so not passing judgment), perhaps it won't replicate for others with as much success as you are having if they don't have good enough playmakers to fill the roles (as would be suggested by the OP's choice of teams)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Theron, you talk about if your team can afford playmakers as though they are inherently more expensive than other players.

Good player are generally more expensive than other players.

Perhaps your 3 DLP tactic works because you have very good players. If the others are right (I don't know anything about tactics except my own so not passing judgment), perhaps it won't replicate for others with as much success as you are having if they don't have good enough playmakers to fill the roles (as would be suggested by the OP's choice of teams)

I know that the OP's choice of teams are not World Class teams and I wasn't referring to his teams.

I just didn't agree with Cougar2010 when he said 'Too many people acting as playmakers is wrong'. In my opinion, it's not - IF you have the right players. They need not be World Class players either but if they are, obviously better.

That's why I ended my post with 'if the team can afford them and you have the resources, why not?'!!!

And just to be clear, I don't use 3 DLPs but 2 DLPs and 1 AP :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't understand why people need to critique others' suggestions. Tactical ideas obviously wouldn't be suggested unless the poster has had success with them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since the change I my record stands at;

P:11 W:6 D:1 L:4

So much better, which means I'm enjoying the game!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Win one, lose one. Nek minnut...

Sacked! WTF.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cheers fellas, it seems as by thinking I was following a logical guide I've tweaked too much and made my tactic a mess. Now I've gone with, thanks to suggestions here, this tactic.

--------------CF(s)--------------

-----------------------------------

--IF(s)-------AM(a)-------IF(s)--

-----------------------------------

-----------------------------------

-----------A(d)--DLP(s)---------

-----------------------------------

-FB(a)--CD©---LD(x)--FB(s)-

-----------------------------------

--------------GK(d)--------------

Fluid

Standard

Default Passing

Float Crosses

Not sure whether I should change to more expressive to get the best out of the front 4?

Personally I wouldn't have 2 IFs in that formation, as they will both be cutting inside, making the centre very crowded so I'd change one to a winger. I'd keep the AML as an IF as the DL on an attack duty will get forward into space the AML leaves by cutting in, so I'd change the AMR to a winger.

edit: Sacked, unlucky! Still, you can take this advice forward for your next job.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

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

Create an account

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

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...