Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community
THOG

Lines and Diamonds: The Tactician's Handbook for Football Manager 2015

Recommended Posts

4.8 SYSTEM SPECIALISTS

Retain Possession reduces the passing range of all player by one setting. Tempo is adjusted one setting lower and width is adjusted one setting lower. All players are also instructed to play fewer risky passes. This will result in more passes being played directly to the feet of teammates, especially those offering close support. This will greatly increase the team’s emphasis on possession, though if the team is instructed to play with an aggressive build-up style, this will more likely result in players looking to promptly work the ball forward with a quick sequence of combination passing.

It may asked, sorry if I missed it. Retain Possession still has affect team width ? I ask it because of it is not change width in tactic screen. Also close down more increase tempo in the tactic screen. Is it a bug or it change this year ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow. Just....wow. What a read, what a lifesaver, what an absolutely epic, brilliant piece of work! Thanks THOG, this is what I've been waiting for my entire FM life!

Only bit I'm a little confused with....the positional responsibility tables on page 62. I get that reading from left to right is defensive, then support, then attack responsiblities, but there are 3 duties...defend, support and attack, 5 team shapes, but 6 or 7 player responsibilities. I'm very, very likely to be being completely stupid, but I can't work out how you get the players to assume these responsibilities using fewer duties or team shapes than there are responsibilities? If I want, for example, my DLR to 'offer close support to the midfield', do I use a support or attack role? Or is it something else entirely and I'm even more dense than I thought? The answer is probably EXTREMELY obvious and I apologise but look forward to your reply...this has fixed SO many issues for me!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It may asked, sorry if I missed it. Retain Possession still has affect team width ? I ask it because of it is not change width in tactic screen. Also close down more increase tempo in the tactic screen. Is it a bug or it change this year ?

It looks like the instructions have been decoupled. I'll see if I can get confirmation on this.

Wow. Just....wow. What a read, what a lifesaver, what an absolutely epic, brilliant piece of work! Thanks THOG, this is what I've been waiting for my entire FM life!

Only bit I'm a little confused with....the positional responsibility tables on page 62. I get that reading from left to right is defensive, then support, then attack responsiblities, but there are 3 duties...defend, support and attack, 5 team shapes, but 6 or 7 player responsibilities. I'm very, very likely to be being completely stupid, but I can't work out how you get the players to assume these responsibilities using fewer duties or team shapes than there are responsibilities? If I want, for example, my DLR to 'offer close support to the midfield', do I use a support or attack role? Or is it something else entirely and I'm even more dense than I thought? The answer is probably EXTREMELY obvious and I apologise but look forward to your reply...this has fixed SO many issues for me!

Are you playing FM16? The way team shape works has now been overhauled. See the Important Tactical Changes thread for details.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There seem to be quite a few interface bugs with the new tactics screen, unfortunately.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There seem to be quite a few interface bugs with the new tactics screen, unfortunately.

Thanks THOG. We better stick by this great guides.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

THOG thanks for this, really.

I still play FM2015 and whenever is to decide the style i want to play, i always stuck there because i dont know exactly how i want my team to play or to implement it in the game.

After reading the styles of play in this thread, the one that interested me the most was the complex/one touch passing style but without missing the oportunity to play a killer ball to the area, if it arises . I have a team with good technique and i guess it would be interesting to try it.

As a starting point, i removed some of the roles that were doing way too much dribbling for my liking and for that purpose, just like you suggest. Do you mind to answer me some questions please? First, i'll show you my system:

formation.jpg

1- Previously i had a SS instead of AM-A but he was dribbling too much and losing the ball many times. Do you think with AM-A he will still attack the box?

2- Overal, what's you opinion about that formation and roles/duties distribution for that style?

3- About the mentality and TI's, i guess it's better to keep it lower? Something like Counter or Standard and perhaps quick tempo, pass into space, be more expressive? About the shape, i dont know which one could be better for this too.

I know this is obviously theoretically speaking, but i'd like your help here please, i'd be a very happy young guy lol.

Thanks a lot!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An AM-A will still attack the box. AMs in general seem more inclined to get into the area in 16.

For TIs, you want runs from midfield and lots of unpredictable movement. The TIs you mention are all good shouts. Very Fluid is probably the best team shape given you want the ST operating in a creative capacity. The team shape setting is now more drastic, so much so that STs on Structured/Highly Structured can be a bit too cavalier on the ball relative to the rest of the team, even if you give them a creative role. You might add roam from positions as well, though you'll already get that to some extent from the F9 and Raumdeuter.

The system itself looks like it's going to be very open and the two AMs aren't going to give you much flank protection. In the Portuguese league, you should be fine playing a more attacking system, but you'll risk getting blown away in Europe and your right flank is going to be vulnerable. You'll also find that a lot will depend on the WB-S as he's going to be your main source of width and will be frequently sought out as an outlet when things get crowded down the middle, and with your overall shape being quite narrow, that will go double if you come up against a narrow formation. You'll also want to keep an eye on whether the CM-A is crowding out your F9 and Raumdeuter. He might be more useful dropped into a support role, perhaps as a B2B mid. Not necessarily, but keep an eye on him.

The other thing I'd mention is that any high tempo technical style takes time to get right. You not only need fluid tactical familiarity but the team needs to have gelled as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks a lot for your reply THOG!

I'll try then to change a few things and see what happens. I'll go for first with Fluid, Counter attack and much higher tempo to see how it works. I'm afraid that with control mentality, there will be too much urgency for what i'm looking for, due to the players mentality.

You're right about the right flank being exposed, that it's an obvious flaw of this system, but i like to have one moe body in the middle (it's the same formation Cleon used in his Enganche thread, but with different roles).

About the CM-A, i'll surely keep an eye on that situation, B2B it might be a good role in there too. I think i'll also add play wider, seems logical.

Thanks for your time!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi thog, i've read the thread about the changes in fm16, and i read here that some users refer to a guide, where can i find it? Is it linked on this thread? At which post? Thanks a lot!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi thog, i've read the thread about the changes in fm16, and i read here that some users refer to a guide, where can i find it? Is it linked on this thread? At which post? Thanks a lot!!!

The very first post of this thread.......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The very first post of this thread.......

Thank you very much, i really need to study a bit because it's the first time in 15 years that i'm struggling to set up a good tactic, it's like much is changed and much is counter-intuitive, so i've tocrethink many of the previous ideas...moreover the trend is that i'm struggling against weaker teams while i'm doing well against stronger teams (same tactics)...anyone experienced the same? Any idea about that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thank you very much, i really need to study a bit because it's the first time in 15 years that i'm struggling to set up a good tactic, it's like much is changed and much is counter-intuitive, so i've tocrethink many of the previous ideas...moreover the trend is that i'm struggling against weaker teams while i'm doing well against stronger teams (same tactics)...anyone experienced the same? Any idea about that?

This thread is more about linking up FM with real world tactical thought, providing a reference for different concepts (what they do, why they do it, pros/cons) and helping people who want to experiment get the most out of the TC. If you're just struggling to get off the ground, it can be overwhelming, so I'd suggest starting with llama's Pairs & Combinations thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi! First of all, I'd like to congratulate you, the Hand of God, for this manual. IT'S FREAKIN' AWESOME! :D

I've read it, studied it and taken notes. It really helped me to make better tactical readings and decisions.

Now there's a question I'd like to ask...

I've been playing Lower Leagues. And I'd like to know if there are any "tactical contingencies" I should have in mind when your whole team... well... sucks! :D I mean, I've read on some sites giving LLM tips that it's probably best off to play an attacking style after all, and play direct, because a) the players don't have the skills to play a short-passing game and b) the pitch conditions often don't even allow "beautiful football" to be played in an effective way.

Are there any other tips you can give me to apply what I've learned in "Lines and Diamonds" to low-calibre teams?

Thanks, Merry Christmas btw ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This thread is more about linking up FM with real world tactical thought, providing a reference for different concepts (what they do, why they do it, pros/cons) and helping people who want to experiment get the most out of the TC. If you're just struggling to get off the ground, it can be overwhelming, so I'd suggest starting with llama's Pairs & Combinations thread.

You're right, but the problem is that in my opinion fm16 changed the link of TC with real life tactical thought, the impression is that the system changed, so before building a tactic i should understand the new system, and i think that understanding it is the focus of this thread

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I've been playing Lower Leagues. And I'd like to know if there are any "tactical contingencies" I should have in mind when your whole team... well... sucks! :D I mean, I've read on some sites giving LLM tips that it's probably best off to play an attacking style after all, and play direct, because a) the players don't have the skills to play a short-passing game and b) the pitch conditions often don't even allow "beautiful football" to be played in an effective way.

Are there any other tips you can give me to apply what I've learned in "Lines and Diamonds" to low-calibre teams?

Thanks, Merry Christmas btw ;)

On the defensive end, you typically want to base your defence on pressure, aggression, physicality and work rate. With poor pitch conditions and overall technical quality, there's more to be gained from prompting mistakes and poor decisions than keeping shape and worrying about them playing through you with passing combinations. That being the case, poor personalities and lazy players are the real worry for me in LLM. Even if a player has relatively good attributes, if he's switching off at the wrong times or impossible to motivate, you're better off with a mediocre player will consistently run for you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've read a few posts that conflict with what's written here so just wondering if you could confirm/clarify.

1) Do retain possession and shorter passing reduce width? According to the guide they do but I came across a post by RTH that stated retain possession does not affect width. In the tactics creator shorter passing does appear to affect width but retain possession does not.

2) Does Closing Down change the D-Line and vice versa? According to the guide changing the D-Line does affect closing down but changing closing down does not affect the D-Line. In the tactics creator changing the D-Line appears to affect closing down and changing closing down appears to affect the D-Line.

I know I'm probably getting hung up in minutia but I like to know what I'm changing when I select a TI and I was confused by the posts that conflicted with what is written here. It also doesn't help that the tactics creator screen is apparently bugged in what it's showing us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 - It was changed in FM16 and it no longer reduces width.

2 - It's a interface bug that SI know about and plan on fixing. It isn't supposed to change d-line (and doesn't in game even though the visual shows it does)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What to do when a team is...incoherent? To clarify, my central midfielders are either gung-ho pressing types, or methodical passers that have little energy in them. I have fast wing players, but their poor mental stats make me fear a pressing style would not work. Central defenders have good physical, but mostly bad mental stats- hell, even tackling and marking isn't as good as it should be. My previous umpteen attempts have ended in frustration. I have no idea how to create a tactic that would combine all these different types of players.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure, sounds like a fun challenge. The first thing I'd try is to set up a tactic based around more specialised roles in a balanced/default-setting style and see if you can get the best out of each player that way. Ball-winning MCs (not necessarily BWMs... you can always just increase closing down individually via PIs) combined with fast wingers, ideally, should combine well in a counterattacking setup.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not sure, sounds like a fun challenge. The first thing I'd try is to set up a tactic based around more specialised roles in a balanced/default-setting style and see if you can get the best out of each player that way. Ball-winning MCs (not necessarily BWMs... you can always just increase closing down individually via PIs) combined with fast wingers, ideally, should combine well in a counterattacking setup.

My best players, according to my Ass. Man. are 2 BWM-s, 4 stars each. I'm Celtic, BTW. I have several (3-4)decent playmaker types, but the problem to creating a midfield lies in the fact that I am short on holding mids with good marking or anticipation. Is there any logical reason to avoid having 2 identical roles in the team? BWM (D), for example. 2 of my centre forwards are high on Aggression, so I know they could pester the opposition defense. Wingers: not a chance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
My best players, according to my Ass. Man. are 2 BWM-s, 4 stars each. I'm Celtic, BTW. I have several (3-4)decent playmaker types, but the problem to creating a midfield lies in the fact that I am short on holding mids with good marking or anticipation. Is there any logical reason to avoid having 2 identical roles in the team? BWM (D), for example. 2 of my centre forwards are high on Aggression, so I know they could pester the opposition defense. Wingers: not a chance.

Logically/necessarily, no, but your concern is going to be a potential lack of creativity from those players. But if you're just looking for them to win the ball and play it forward to the wingers/ST, you don't need them to be brilliant playmakers. As far as the two BWM-Ds go, the potential issue there is that their initial position when you lose the ball is going to be quite deep, so they might not be able to apply pressure quickly and will tend to get dragged out of shape when they do. Throwing an idea out there, I'd consider using two aggressive support MCs ahead of a DMC, setting them up to harry the opposition with the DMC providing cover behind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Logically/necessarily, no, but your concern is going to be a potential lack of creativity from those players. But if you're just looking for them to win the ball and play it forward to the wingers/ST, you don't need them to be brilliant playmakers. As far as the two BWM-Ds go, the potential issue there is that their initial position when you lose the ball is going to be quite deep, so they might not be able to apply pressure quickly and will tend to get dragged out of shape when they do. Throwing an idea out there, I'd consider using two aggressive support MCs ahead of a DMC, setting them up to harry the opposition with the DMC providing cover behind.

I have 2 players who can play DMC naturally. One is a creative midfielder who really can't tackle all that well and has no strength (but has great decisions, positioning, passing and vision. Can be a DLP or AP as MC), while the other one is actually Scott Brown- a BWM (D) both at DMC and MC. Natural at those positions. I realize a holding player is important, but could I play without a DMC, especially in a pressing system? I was planning to use 2 BWM-s to achieve control over games. But reading certain articles made me think using no typical holder in midfield was suicide. Plus, I wish to be a tough opponent to any European team- would a pressing system even work with the kind of defense I have?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you're using two MCs as ball winners, the DM doesn't need to be an exceptional defender (take Pirlo at Juventus as an example). That's not to say it will necessarily work great but a deep creative player behind two workmanlike MCs is one way to set up this kind of squad.

You don't need a DM for a pressing style, but if you don't use one and expect both MCs to close down aggressively. you'll want aggressive DCs who can step out and make the tackle if they're caught out of position.

Can you press high with your defence generally? No way to know for sure unless you test it out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a question about duty distribution and team mentality:

Observing the way TC distributes automatic duties, it is clear that it opts for many attackers in attacking systems and many defend duty players in defensive systems.

However, i have seen users going for many attack duties in defensive systems or conservative duties in attacking systems. Do these anomalies work by manipulating other team instructions and/or by close observation of specific player behavior?

What is the prevalent logic behind the duty distribution mechanism? The penetration/aggressiveness idea you mention in the opening posts is very nice. But what is it specifically that commands that e.g. a defensive tactic should have a low count of attacking roles? Maybe that mighty "run from deep" setting attacking players get and can alter the way the team moves forward?

Alternative format of the same question: a 442 with 3(a)-4(s)-3(d) roles work considerably better on a standard mentality than on defense/attack mentality. Why does this happen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What is the prevalent logic behind the duty distribution mechanism?

Duty mainly affects in-possession positioning and attacking movement, moreso than mentality. The most basic definition of defensive football is that it's a style where the team is concerned with keeping its defensive shape, even when it attacks (primarily as a means of preventing counterattacks). Similarly, the most basic definition of attacking football is that it's a style where the team is happy to encourage mobility across all positions and keep numbers forward in attacking positions even when the team is forced onto the backfoot. Attacking football, then, exhibits less concern with being hit by counterattacks, and to some extent, it may even invite counterattacks since encouraging an opponent to transition quickly will typically see them lose the ball more quickly. Within the AI's tactical logic, a team that increases mentality becomes less concerned with defensive shape and just throws more numbers in the attacking third with greater urgency, and a team that decreases mentality becomes increasingly concerned with defensive shape and typically locks down the defence and midfield in two rigid lines. Since the drop in mentality also sees a reduction of urgency in initiating the attacking phase, this often results in the defensive AI trying to hold onto the ball deep as much as it can.

Now, the interpretative issue here is that shape is ultimately controlled more via duty than mentality. Though mentality does affect certain baseline settings, these can be modified via TIs to the point where its most noticeable effect is the urgency of build up play. This is why, wwfan for example, found that using very attacking TIs and duty distribution combined with a lower mentality more accurately produced the more patient yet quite attacking style of some top professional sides that had players with sufficient technical skill and vision to break down defences without having to rely on urgent transitions and bombarding the box with crosses.

The latter approach isn't inherently wrong or illogical, it just reflects that the basic AI logic doesn't encompass every tactical philosophy, and since the AI is tuned to fight the AI with the AI's attacking being designed to counter the AI's defensive and vice-versa, this means users who step outside that framework can potentially find tactical advantages that work to their benefit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alternative format of the same question: a 442 with 3(a)-4(s)-3(d) roles work considerably better on a standard mentality than on defense/attack mentality. Why does this happen

I wouldn't say this is necessarily and always the case, but the idea is that if you get the ball forward with more urgency, you need options moving up the pitch with more urgency or your ST will end up running into walls where they have no choice but to take a pop from distance. For defensive, if you're looking to just lock down your own half, you don't want to expose space through which an opponent can quickly move the ball.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey THoG, do you think this handbook of yours needs updating for FM 2016? I'm thinking of the changes to "shape" in particular, but there may be some other stuff that has changed the way rl football relates to the latest FM m.e. as well?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Duty mainly affects in-possession positioning and attacking movement, moreso than mentality. The most basic definition of defensive football is that it's a style where the team is concerned with keeping its defensive shape, even when it attacks (primarily as a means of preventing counterattacks). Similarly, the most basic definition of attacking football is that it's a style where the team is happy to encourage mobility across all positions and keep numbers forward in attacking positions even when the team is forced onto the backfoot. Attacking football, then, exhibits less concern with being hit by counterattacks, and to some extent, it may even invite counterattacks since encouraging an opponent to transition quickly will typically see them lose the ball more quickly. Within the AI's tactical logic, a team that increases mentality becomes less concerned with defensive shape and just throws more numbers in the attacking third with greater urgency, and a team that decreases mentality becomes increasingly concerned with defensive shape and typically locks down the defence and midfield in two rigid lines. Since the drop in mentality also sees a reduction of urgency in initiating the attacking phase, this often results in the defensive AI trying to hold onto the ball deep as much as it can.

Now, the interpretative issue here is that shape is ultimately controlled more via duty than mentality. Though mentality does affect certain baseline settings, these can be modified via TIs to the point where its most noticeable effect is the urgency of build up play. This is why, wwfan for example, found that using very attacking TIs and duty distribution combined with a lower mentality more accurately produced the more patient yet quite attacking style of some top professional sides that had players with sufficient technical skill and vision to break down defences without having to rely on urgent transitions and bombarding the box with crosses.

The latter approach isn't inherently wrong or illogical, it just reflects that the basic AI logic doesn't encompass every tactical philosophy, and since the AI is tuned to fight the AI with the AI's attacking being designed to counter the AI's defensive and vice-versa, this means users who step outside that framework can potentially find tactical advantages that work to their benefit.

THOG, I just wanted to say that this post really helped me understand better what kind of style I wanted to play and how to better achieve it. After making a few tweaks, my team played much closer to the way I wanted. Basically, I was playing a 433 with standard mentality hoping for the F9 to drop, the CM(A) to dart into the box, the IF cut in, and get a nice through ball to whoever was unmarked. I was also hoping for some decent counterattacks, but those were not very effective for me. After reading your post, it inspired me to up the mentality to Control (and Attacking) and make my support winger a Ramdeuter. Now, my attacking players are really attacking. It is fast paced, so it can be sloppy at times (I have a fast, but not extremely technical team), but my CM(A) is blazing past my F9 now for CCCs, my IF(A) is already in position for far post crosses, and the Ramdeuter is a major goal scoring threat. I'm sure I'll need to do some more tinkering (I may be a little too aggressive), but I like the patterns, movement, and urgency that I'm seeing right now. Thanks for such a simple post that really helped me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

F9(s)



AP(s)____________________Raum(a)

DLP(s)________BBM(s)

DM(d)

WB(a)____CD(d)____CD(d)____WB(s)

SK(d)

Hi, perhaps someone could clarify something to me about the setup above. Cleon, THOG, or any other Guru... :)

Is there any conflict/problem having the AP(s) and the DLP(s) on the same side?

I dont recall where, but i remember seeing something in the forum that said playmaker should be more apart, and we shouldn't have two playing on the same side.

Is this corret? What problems could my team have he i play both on the left side?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

F9(s)



AP(s)____________________Raum(a)

DLP(s)________BBM(s)

DM(d)

WB(a)____CD(d)____CD(d)____WB(s)

SK(d)

Hi, perhaps someone could clarify something to me about the setup above. Cleon, THOG, or any other Guru... :)

Is there any conflict/problem having the AP(s) and the DLP(s) on the same side?

I dont recall where, but i remember seeing something in the forum that said playmaker should be more apart, and we shouldn't have two playing on the same side.

Is this corret? What problems could my team have he i play both on the left side?

I often use playmakers on the same side. It all depends on what you're creating though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I often use playmakers on the same side. It all depends on what you're creating though.

Thanks for the reply Cleon.

The idea was having my left side to create and my right side to finalize.

The first part is happening with the AP and the DLP creating good situations with the help of the attacking wingback.

Analyzing the heat Map there is of course a huge difference, with most of the play talking place on the left side of the pitch.

But my right side is not working the way i expected. I was hopping for more forwards runs from the Raum and the BBM arriving in the box but im seeing very few.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To have more possession and chances against weaker opposition, are Short Passing and Retain Possession necessary? I find that without these, I am being put under pressure by weaker opposition, despite my attempts to press them. I have players who should be able to press well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

THOG: I've been reading your guide: If I want to compress, do I ask my team to "Push up" and "Play Narrow"? To consolidate do I ask my team to "Drop Deep and Narrow?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi THOG,

Just wanted to ask how to setup a DM-CM-CM triple pivot as i wanted to lock the midfield and have my attacking patterns played in the wings.

Thanks in advance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
To have more possession and chances against weaker opposition, are Short Passing and Retain Possession necessary? I find that without these, I am being put under pressure by weaker opposition, despite my attempts to press them. I have players who should be able to press well.

You don't necessarily need to play it short to dominate possession, especially if your opponent is playing a defensive or long passing style. In terms of pressing, one benefit of a direct style is that it will tend to get the ball ahead of your midfield, so when you lose possession, you'll be able to press and your defence won't be immediately exposed. By comparison, a possession style will naturally increase the risk of interceptions which typically allow an easier transition to counterattacks given that your opponent will have immediate control the ball, possibly behind several of your midfielders.

THOG: I've been reading your guide: If I want to compress, do I ask my team to "Push up" and "Play Narrow"? To consolidate do I ask my team to "Drop Deep and Narrow?

Yes.

Hi THOG,

Just wanted to ask how to setup a DM-CM-CM triple pivot as i wanted to lock the midfield and have my attacking patterns played in the wings.

Thanks in advance.

If the two MCs are sitting back, my immediate thinking would be that the DMC can be more of a pure defensive midfielder since he'll always have close support immediately ahead of him. The problem will be the space between the two MCs and the rest of the attack, especially if the ST is going to be in a role that keeps a reliable target in the box for your wing players, so I'd want those two players to excel with their Vision, Passing and Technique, possibly Dribbling if you choose to make one or both a shuttling Roaming Playmaker who can carry the ball into said gap when needed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Odd question: Which instructions would you use to get players to delay? Stick to position? Close down less?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Close Down Less, Stay on Feet to some extent and a more defensive duty/mentality generally. Stick to Position is not a defensive instruction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi THOG,

Thanks for the reply.

My idea idea is to use a 4-1-2-2-1 (4-3-3) using attacking wingbacks and inside forwards has my main source of penetration, while having my striker dropping deep creating space and my 2 cms providing the passes.

This why i was asking for advice on how to setup my midfield trident. I was thinking alongside of a DM (D); ADP (S) and CM (S)?

Counter Mentality and Flexible shape, white the shouts of retain possession, short passing, play out of defence, much higher def. line and close down more.

What do you advise?

One last question, what's the equivalent of the old shout "hassle oponents?

Thanks again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi! I have a question regarding pressing. You wrote that you could either press in a full pitch press or three-quarter press when using a high block, and a half pitch press when using a medium block. How do you translate this into FM, say for instance with a counter/standard mentality?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi! I have a question regarding pressing. You wrote that you could either press in a full pitch press or three-quarter press when using a high block, and a half pitch press when using a medium block. How do you translate this into FM, say for instance with a counter/standard mentality?

Im also interested in this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Each team mentality has it's own default settings for each instruction. Default setting for D-Line in standard is medium high block. You can lower it to medium-low (default setting in counter) or low block (defensive) or push higher up to high block which is default setting in attacking team strategy. Default setting in higher block is three-quarter press and in high it is opposition third.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's me again with questions. Two things that aren't wholly clear to me, first:

First, we will consider the two basic styles of defending: pressing and containment. A pressing style involves having the team rapidly restrict space around the ball in an attempt to prompt poor decision-making from the first attacker. Normally, this style is associated with teams that defend in a higher block while using either a full pitch press or a three-quarter press. A team that wants to open up more space to attack for a fast transition style may also drop back and defend aggressively around the halfway line in a half pitch press.

Is a medium block with balanced pressure intensity (as with the standard mentality) by definition a half pitch press, or does it require higher closing down? I'm unsure whether the recommended attributes of a containment style or those of a pressing style suit a regular medium block best.

And second:

Patterns based on playing more direct balls into the box are usually associated with a fast transition style, but this is not always the case. A team can build up gradually and attempt to instill panic in an undermanned defence by launching crosses into an overloaded area. This is difficult to pull off, not to mention very risky, and it can require a lot of patience against defenders who are good in the air.

Isn't that a bit of a contradiction, calling a gradual build-up (that I assume would involve short passing) to cross a direct style? A bit more pertinently, why would you call that very risky and difficult? Maybe I'm misunderstanding things.

BTW, the styles of play chapter of the guide is definitely my favourite.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@THOG I'm looking to play an obstructive style, I am thinking either Standard/Counter to get the medium block? With Close down much less? Am I on the right lines?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi! this is what i achieved reading your guide.

20161128113748_1.jpg

 

The system is based on possession ball with through balls, medium high block. The only two things i'm not so sure are the forward (dlf) and the AD midfielder. Maybe is better an advanced playmaker with attack duty. I'm not sure.

20161128182741_1.jpg

these are the instruction given yo achieve the pressing and to close space and to let them reorganize to regain team shape.

20161128182007_1.jpg20161128182009_1.jpg20161128182010_1.jpg20161128182012_1.jpg20161128182013_1.jpg20161128182014_1.jpg20161128182015_1.jpg20161128182016_1.jpg20161128182018_1.jpg20161128182019_1.jpg20161128182020_1.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey THOG,

I don't know if you still read this thread. And I see that there hasn't been a reaction for almost 6 months now. But I feel that this topic is solid as it ever was and therefor deserves some new attention.

I have read this topic a year ago, when I just started to play fm 15 again after a break of a few years from FM. At that time, I thought that this was just a good thread with some very in depth info in it. For me, as a 'new' player, maybe tóó in depth.
But recently I have been struggling with FM, tactically. I'm really trying to make my tactics better and trying to focus on football with a high block and great amounds of possession, but the more I tried thinking about it and reading about it in different topics, the more it confused and frustrated me. Even a week ago, I was really considering throwing the towel 'cause I thought: man, this TC is just too vague for me. 

But then I stumbled again on this topic, and I must admit that I was wrong when I read it a year ago. This topic is not 'just a good thread with some very in depth info in it'. This topic is the very best topic I've ever read and I can now say for certain: it saved me from quit playing FM because of my frustrations with the TC. Now I am really enjoying my savegame again because I finally understand what I'm doing in the TC. Now I'm not only winning games, but more important then winning: I understand what's happening in game and why it happens, knowing more from the TC.

I owe you a big thank you mate. And I really believe that many FM players still can learn very much from this topic. It should be the first go to for everybody struggling with the TC. Especially chapter 4 helped me a lot.

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...