Nearly to give up (probably i suck in this game)

[MHovel]

I'm newbie with the game compared to other people here.

On my earlier life, I used to play football in a semi-professional team, but got a tough injury (knee+ankle) which forced me out of the game and with tough decision i made, i stopped playing football forever.

I have knowledge with football, but a knowledge from a player perspective and a manager isn't the same.

anyway, I became a huge manager simulation fan and tried the game out in 2015, while i really like the concept, i must admit i struggled in every way, due to 2 reasons:

1. My English wasn't that great, but recently, i improved it slightly a bit, it was even worse (still requires more improvements)

2. I didn't fully understand the whole shape and mentality thingy which caused me to struggle.

lately, I read a lot tried to understand the whole part of shape and mentality and saw some of the "Bustthenet" videos, and I must admit he did very well to explain it.

So after i read a lot and watch some tutorials and explanations, It's time to try things by myself. I choose a club, this is not the 1st time I'm trying Bournemouth save, due to PC HW issues I lost my previous saves (anyway, in all of the last times i failed).

I started a new season with Bournemouth, i brought some players to the club after i sold Matt Ritchie for 15M (I had to bring some good CM, and more quality depth to the squad).

This is my tactics:

 

 

I played against Liverpool away, 1st match of the season and it ends as a draw against them, the only reason it ended this way is because they got a red card after 10 minutes.

I defiantly think that this tactic won't be good for next matches, i have that feeling I'm going to fail again.

If we couldn't win Liverpool with them having 1 player less after almost the entire match, than that's defiantly not good.

I thought about concetrating on 1 tactic so i will get familiarity much faster, i also have team cohesion on high intensity.

I also tried to go switch control and attacking mentality against liverpool (same system and shouts) still didn't seems to worked well, it looked that we are even exposed in the back, so i switched back to counter.

I might say, maybe the problem is with the attacking duty i gave to my CM which causes my CM bomb forward, and leave his designted position. the BWM is already trying to win the ball and he leaves his position, so there is no one to hold the midfield besides the DM, am i correct?

Please let me know if there are maybe other problems, i just feel like giving up already...

 

Sorry for my grammar.

[summatsupeer]

One game doesn't tell you the trends of your tactic, might just of been an off day for some key players.  First step I would take is read the FAQs and some of the guides related to the style of play you want to create so you get a better idea of the tactics wizard as your RL knowledge might not directly match how things work in game.  For example to formation is your defensive positioning so with 2x IF on attack duty they aren't going to drop back to make a flat 4 midfield and are less likely to track back compared to support duty from the higher positioning due to there mentality making them take more risks.

The thing that stands out to me is you had 2 shots on target out of 17, what quality and type of chances were they?  I would analyse them to see if players were isolated or rushing rather than waiting for a better chance, or if it was a good chance and good choice to shoot but just didn't work out.

More attacking mentality does not equal a better attack, it changes the way you play to be more risky, but do you need to take more risks to create a chance?  Sometimes more patience is needed to create a weak spot rather than trying to brute force it.

What style of play are you trying to create?  With Shorter Passing + Play Out of Defence it feels like your trying to be more patient with possession, but then you have CM-A and 2x IF-A bombing forward.  If your looking to try and draw opponents onto you to create space behind them i'd consider a 4141 instead and assess how attack minded your midfield should be.  If your just using Counter to play a lower risk style then you might want to consider how the advanced positioning of your AML + AMR can help defend when you aren't pushing up or closing down potentially leaving lots of space in your own half between your wide players.

Keep at it, the more time you spend watching the games and getting a feel for what things do the sooner it will click and make sense. 

[Bigpapa42]

You don't need to apologize for your English or grammar. Completely understandable. And we all get frustrated as we learn the ins and outs.

I would start with two questions....

1. What kind of football are you trying to play?

2. What problems are seeing when you watch the match?

Having a clear idea of what you want to do is rather important. So when you are watching the match, you can more easily identify concerns. But watching the matches is really important. Cleon had a great thread on how he sets his tactics, plays through the match, then watches it back later to look for issues. That helps you tweak and refine the tactic. But, importantly, it allows you to see how it plays before you start tweaking. And tweaking in volume can be ineffective, because each change has multiple possible things it will affect, meaning you can alter way more than intended.

You've already identified one concern - the two CM roles. They also conflict a bit with your shape and mentality. Structured and Counter is fairly defensive - your players aren't going to be pushing forward to press when they don't have the ball. So you are already conceding a bit of space as the opponents attack. But you aren't defending in number - you have your back four and your DM. Your two CMs aren't always going to be back, and your front 3 contribute very little defensively. Having the 2 IFs on Attack again doesn't really help out and contradicts a bit your Counter mentality.

Shorter passing can be an issue when you have your players spaced out a bit. Your DLP is going to be the passing fulcrum... but who does he have as passing options? Horizontal passes to the FBs, who aren't that likely to bomb too far forward, or vertical passes to the CM or BWM. The two IFs and the F9 are probably too far forward to be passing options given the passing setting. Your limiting his options.

Another thing to remember is that you need to be realistic with your expectations. Bournemouth start as one of the weakest squads in the Prem. You did a nice job of using that money to improve them, but the Prem is full of high quality sides with depth. An away draw to Liverpool is not a bad result, even with them being down a man.

Also, you have General Training on Team Cohesion, which is vital with so many changes. But how is the squad blending? You can check your Assistant Manager's Team Talk feedback to see. With that many additions, it will take time to have the squad come together.

[looping]

I'm not an expert by any means, but comes to my mind:

- Counter mentality has already short passing upfront. Do you need more short passing?

- Why is everybody running to the middle? You are congesting that zone. You have a bwm, who will make some late forward runs, a cm-at bombing forward, 2 if cutting inside and a false 9 dropping deep. All of them to the same area.

- You have no width. Both IF cutting inside and nobody staying wide. Your fullback on sup, with counter mentality, will stay back more often than not. I think you need some support and width which a wb may provide. Why don't you try, in one flank a fb-winger and the other side if-wb, for instance?

 

[MHovel]

10 hours ago, summatsupeer said:

One game doesn't tell you the trends of your tactic, might just of been an off day for some key players.  First step I would take is read the FAQs and some of the guides related to the style of play you want to create so you get a better idea of the tactics wizard as your RL knowledge might not directly match how things work in game.  For example to formation is your defensive positioning so with 2x IF on attack duty they aren't going to drop back to make a flat 4 midfield and are less likely to track back compared to support duty from the higher positioning due to there mentality making them take more risks.

The thing that stands out to me is you had 2 shots on target out of 17, what quality and type of chances were they?  I would analyse them to see if players were isolated or rushing rather than waiting for a better chance, or if it was a good chance and good choice to shoot but just didn't work out.

More attacking mentality does not equal a better attack, it changes the way you play to be more risky, but do you need to take more risks to create a chance?  Sometimes more patience is needed to create a weak spot rather than trying to brute force it.

What style of play are you trying to create?  With Shorter Passing + Play Out of Defence it feels like your trying to be more patient with possession, but then you have CM-A and 2x IF-A bombing forward.  If your looking to try and draw opponents onto you to create space behind them i'd consider a 4141 instead and assess how attack minded your midfield should be.  If your just using Counter to play a lower risk style then you might want to consider how the advanced positioning of your AML + AMR can help defend when you aren't pushing up or closing down potentially leaving lots of space in your own half between your wide players.

Keep at it, the more time you spend watching the games and getting a feel for what things do the sooner it will click and make sense. 

 

10 hours ago, Bigpapa42 said:

You don't need to apologize for your English or grammar. Completely understandable. And we all get frustrated as we learn the ins and outs.

I would start with two questions....

1. What kind of football are you trying to play?

2. What problems are seeing when you watch the match?

Having a clear idea of what you want to do is rather important. So when you are watching the match, you can more easily identify concerns. But watching the matches is really important. Cleon had a great thread on how he sets his tactics, plays through the match, then watches it back later to look for issues. That helps you tweak and refine the tactic. But, importantly, it allows you to see how it plays before you start tweaking. And tweaking in volume can be ineffective, because each change has multiple possible things it will affect, meaning you can alter way more than intended.

You've already identified one concern - the two CM roles. They also conflict a bit with your shape and mentality. Structured and Counter is fairly defensive - your players aren't going to be pushing forward to press when they don't have the ball. So you are already conceding a bit of space as the opponents attack. But you aren't defending in number - you have your back four and your DM. Your two CMs aren't always going to be back, and your front 3 contribute very little defensively. Having the 2 IFs on Attack again doesn't really help out and contradicts a bit your Counter mentality.

Shorter passing can be an issue when you have your players spaced out a bit. Your DLP is going to be the passing fulcrum... but who does he have as passing options? Horizontal passes to the FBs, who aren't that likely to bomb too far forward, or vertical passes to the CM or BWM. The two IFs and the F9 are probably too far forward to be passing options given the passing setting. Your limiting his options.

Another thing to remember is that you need to be realistic with your expectations. Bournemouth start as one of the weakest squads in the Prem. You did a nice job of using that money to improve them, but the Prem is full of high quality sides with depth. An away draw to Liverpool is not a bad result, even with them being down a man.

Also, you have General Training on Team Cohesion, which is vital with so many changes. But how is the squad blending? You can check your Assistant Manager's Team Talk feedback to see. With that many additions, it will take time to have the squad come together.

 

8 hours ago, looping said:

I'm not an expert by any means, but comes to my mind:

- Counter mentality has already short passing upfront. Do you need more short passing?

- Why is everybody running to the middle? You are congesting that zone. You have a bwm, who will make some late forward runs, a cm-at bombing forward, 2 if cutting inside and a false 9 dropping deep. All of them to the same area.

- You have no width. Both IF cutting inside and nobody staying wide. Your fullback on sup, with counter mentality, will stay back more often than not. I think you need some support and width which a wb may provide. Why don't you try, in one flank a fb-winger and the other side if-wb, for instance?

 

Thank you very much for you help, comment and your time guys.

I read a lot really a lot of guides, and saw some video's, correct me if im wrong with my assasments: (i felt like some guides are misleading, but i also took into account there is no just one way to play football).

By letting my IF the attack duty was the reason i didn't wanted them to play risky passes more often. with (s) duty it's already ticked and cannot be changed and while i have players like iturbe with 8 decisions and lingard with 11, i thought of avoiding playing it on support (i know it effects shape somehow).

If i wanted them to go down and help defending, i would have go with fluid mentality, with fluid mentality i will struggle to score a goal my theory was: because it's compact shape which everyone is going to participate on defending the stirker will go even much deeper and we are going to be very far from the opposition goal and we are going to struggle scoring.

correct me if im wrong with my assasment.

 

when i started this save, my CM (A) was on (S), so i had 2 players IF (A) duty and 1 striker on front on support.

i have full backs on support and i thought i will get much better defensive line if i keep the shape as is.

I  uploaded the PKM if you are intrested to see, i use to watch matches on compehansive, always even pre-season friendlies in order to try to understand how my tactic handles and behave.

btw, at the start of the match against liverpool (after a couple of minutes) i added the work ball into box because i didn't like the fact that my players started to shoot from distance and missing the target.

the idea of switching to more attacking mentallity was to build more pressure (high defensive line), and to force livepool to make some mistakes at the backline.

if i remember correctly, i switched to attacking mentality and not sure but i think i also added lower tempo or even much lower, so with shorter passing, it will even reduce more the risky passes in the third, also with work on the ball ticked.

My theory didn't worked or it didn't really match what i wanted to achieve with the changes?

 

My style of play I cannot match it with my players right now, i guess.

IRL i like to win the ball fast and to hold the ball and move it patiently to the goal. I want my players to push higher of the pitch and win the ball in the opposition half and after winning the ball to retain the possesion and moving the ball backward to a safe place and start the attack patiently and wisely.

with counter attack, it might be direct passing from backline and moving the ball patiently on the third, this is why i ticked the play out of defence, the shorted passing is ticked because i believe in short passing, cannot stand watching players playing the ball upfront and ignoring the midfielders, this is why midfielders are exist.

I agree that as a player when you are tired you sometimes doesn't follow or stick to what the manager said not because you don't want to, also could be because of tiredness and also confidence that you gain DURING or before the match due to your individual performance (confidence is 80% of the players real abilities, obviously you still need to have abilities but without confidence no matter how skillfull you are, you are 0!).

When i picked the tactic, i used IF for one reason, all of my wing players are one footed and the roles are IF, if i switched their position i might need to change the roles for both wings to winger.

for example, iturbe is left footed only and lingard is right footed, so in this case i have to switch iturbe to the left wing and play him as a winger, same with lingard.

or i can use lingard as a winger on the left side (left foot resonable) but if he will try to cross (while with winger on support he will try to cross more often), he will probably gonna fail with that or he will be inaccurate with his crosses more often which is understandable why.

I never use other people tactics, not because they are not good or something, it's probably awsome, but i won't enjoy what the game actually offers.

I also saw a lot of tactics out there which doesn't make any sense with all those shouts TI, PI, even with low end players, this is when i start questioning if the game is broken, after all it's a PC game.

 

 

In my previous save, my idea was having 2 CM (s) in the midfield to hold that position and to support the attacks only when necessary (only one of them will go forward when is necessary and the other one is holding position which i assume i can give one of them the role of deep laying playmaker but i still prefer the CM due to the variety it offers).

when playing with 2 CM (s) what bothered me was, when we had the ball, they were too close to each other, and they were like interrupting each other (like if you have 2 playmakers which comes to get the ball), none of them have any PPM that has to do with come deep to get the ball or something like that, i think it's a bug, i have no other explanation for that.

CM should stick to his position unless he instructed otherwise, if we have the ball i expect from my CM on the right side to stay there and not coming to get the ball on the left because i have a  there already (but obviously if the ball is on the left side I expect my midfied on the right to come a bit closers but not in that way which he is like very close to the CM.

the game match fluidity is getting screwed and it's easy for the opponent to win the ball back and to counter, so with this save i told to myself to trying to mix up thos roles, but honestly, i don't like ball winning midfielders since they are going out of position to win the ball back and the can lead to midfield being too exposed.

 

I tried to be more informative about how i think.

ofcurse, I'm not saying the way i think is the best way.

I hope this will answer my way of thinking and maybe with that you can help me to understand and think outside the box or maybe to clear some thing in case my understanding with FM16 in few aspects aren't correct.

Liverpool v Bournemouth.pkm

[summatsupeer]

12 minutes ago, MHovel said:

By letting my IF the attack duty was the reason i didn't wanted them to play risky passes more often. with (s) duty it's already ticked and cannot be changed and while i have players like iturbe with 8 decisions and lingard with 11, i thought of avoiding playing it on support (i know it effects shape somehow).

If i wanted them to go down and help defending, i would have go with fluid mentality, with fluid mentality i will struggle to score a goal my theory was: because it's compact shape which everyone is going to participate on defending the stirker will go even much deeper and we are going to be very far from the opposition goal and we are going to struggle scoring.

correct me if im wrong with my assasment.

I don't link Risky Passes to Decision Making, the players going to try and go for a lot of them regardless.  I value Decision making more in slower possession style systems where I want players to pick good quality chances to break open an organized defence.  In higher tempo systems where i'm attacking space and there probably limited options or the option is really obvious then I don't feel decisions is as useful compared to physical + technical ability.

Team Shape won't modify there position that much, attack duty will increase there mentality plus they're in AML+AMR so won't move back to ML+MR unless they decide to track a FB.  I use fluid team shape in my current save and score a lot of goals, if anything i'm not happy with my defence.  It means your team will have more creative freedom to do something different from your instructions and will be in close support of each other.

Quote

when i started this save, my CM (A) was on (S), so i had 2 players IF (A) duty and 1 striker on front on support.i have full backs on support and i thought i will get much better defensive line if i keep the shape as is.

But your formation is the defensive positioning without the ball before closing down / tracking markers / runners.  If you don't want your attacking wide players to try risky passes and want them to help more defensively then try WM-S and give them instructions to Cut Inside plus Dribble More if you want them to.  I'm using WM-A as a deeper IF-A, the only difference i've seen so far is he collects the ball in deeper positions more often and brings the ball forward.  In the attacking third i've not noticed any noticble difference except he tries to play my ST through a little bit more (due to having Risky Passes Often).

In the defensive phase a FB-A will defend practically the same as a FB-S.  A defend duty won't defend better than a support, its just he will stay in his position more when you have the ball to be in a position to defend when the ball is lost.

Quote

btw, at the start of the match against liverpool (after a couple of minutes) i added the work ball into box because i didn't like the fact that my players started to shoot from distance and missing the target.

the idea of switching to more attacking mentallity was to build more pressure (high defensive line), and to force livepool to make some mistakes at the backline.

if i remember correctly, i switched to attacking mentality and not sure but i think i also added lower tempo or even much lower, so with shorter passing, it will even reduce more the risky passes in the third, also with work on the ball ticked.My theory didn't worked or it didn't really match what i wanted to achieve with the changes?

It's a dramatic change in your mentality (risk taking) so rather than waiting for a high percentage opportunity they would try pretty much everything, against a team who's parked the bus they're probably forcing things and resorting to pot shots.  From what you've said it sounds like Standard / Control would of gave you what you wanted with the ball, then add push line higher and close down more to create more pressure.  Even with lower tempo the Attacking mentality still makes players look to take risks and be very forward thinking, so can lose your pressure trying low percentage things. 

Of course if your team relies on using physicial&technical players to attack space the opponents leave, but lack the creativity and other attributes required to break a organized defensive team down (even one with 10 men) you could struggle.

Quote

 

My style of play I cannot match it with my players right now, i guess.

IRL i like to win the ball fast and to hold the ball and move it patiently to the goal. I want my players to push higher of the pitch and win the ball in the opposition half and after winning the ball to retain the possesion and moving the ball backward to a safe place and start the attack patiently and wisely.

with counter attack, it might be direct passing from backline and moving the ball patiently on the third, this is why i ticked the play out of defence, the shorted passing is ticked because i believe in short passing, cannot stand watching players playing the ball upfront and ignoring the midfielders, this is why midfielders are exist.

I think Counter + Play Out Of Defence makes sense for what you want.  You can always add higher line + more closing down if thats what you want and you have the players who can defend that way.  If you maxed those instructions I think you'd have something closer to the default pressure of Control.  If you lower your mentality too much then players might be more inclined to clear it long due to the risk of playing out from the back, especially if they lack composure.

Quote

In my previous save, my idea was having 2 CM (s) in the midfield to hold that position and to support the attacks only when necessary (only one of them will go forward when is necessary and the other one is holding position which i assume i can give one of them the role of deep laying playmaker but i still prefer the CM due to the variety it offers).

when playing with 2 CM (s) what bothered me was, when we had the ball, they were too close to each other, and they were like interrupting each other (like if you have 2 playmakers which comes to get the ball), none of them have any PPM that has to do with come deep to get the ball or something like that, i think it's a bug, i have no other explanation for that.

CM should stick to his position unless he instructed otherwise, if we have the ball i expect from my CM on the right side to stay there and not coming to get the ball on the left because i have a  there already (but obviously if the ball is on the left side I expect my midfied on the right to come a bit closers but not in that way which he is like very close to the CM.

the game match fluidity is getting screwed and it's easy for the opponent to win the ball back and to counter, so with this save i told to myself to trying to mix up thos roles, but honestly, i don't like ball winning midfielders since they are going out of position to win the ball back and the can lead to midfield being too exposed.

I dislike having the same role+duty in my midfield, I feel they try and do the same thing and get in each other way sometimes.  It's the England nation team problem when trying to play Lampard and Gerrard and have them take turns going forward, but it never really flowed and always felt forced.  Just play one of them and let them do what they're good at and have a different player to the sitting job.

Remember you selected Fluid team shape which comes with a good amount of creative freedom,  if this was also when using Attacking mentality then players get more freedom to roam from position to.  If you want players to stick to there positions then tell them so, either through a more rigid team shape and/or the team instruction.

 

From what you've said I would try a 4141 with Counter/Standard with Structured Team shape with Play Out Of Defence and increase your d-line + closing down if you want your pressure.  As Looping says you need width to stop teams defending narrow, I suspect this was one of the major problems in the Liverpool game (can't watch the PPM atm).  Consider having one FB-A behind a WM-S who cuts inside and keep the FB-S behind a WM/W who doesn't cut inside so you have width on that side.

[isignedupfornorealreason]

On 28/09/2016 at 10:20, summatsupeer said:

In the defensive phase a FB-A will defend practically the same as a FB-S.  A defend duty won't defend better than a support, its just he will stay in his position more when you have the ball to be in a position to defend when the ball is lost.

I might be nitpicking... But a FB/S will defend better than a FB/A in the transitional phase imo. Stays back and wide, which is usually where the lovely long balls/clearances go, and where the opposing striker drifts. FB/A won't always be in that position. One of the upsides of the FB/S imo, despite the... shall we say slightly weaker attacking contribution?

 

On 28/09/2016 at 10:20, summatsupeer said:

 I'm using WM-A as a deeper IF-A, the only difference i've seen so far is he collects the ball in deeper positions more often and brings the ball forward.

I find it changes the angle of attack. An IF-A by virtue of being so high up the pitch will cut into the corner of the box. A WM-A will be more likely to cut through the halfway line. Also the IF is tremendous at finding space for the switch the play, partially due to the way crossing works, compared to a WM/A, at least in my experience.

 

 

[summatsupeer]

22 minutes ago, isignedupfornorealreason said:

I might be nitpicking... But a FB/S will defend better than a FB/A in the transitional phase imo. Stays back and wide, which is usually where the lovely long balls/clearances go, and where the opposing striker drifts. FB/A won't always be in that position. One of the upsides of the FB/S imo, despite the... shall we say slightly weaker attacking contribution?

I thought that's what I said but sure I agree.  My main point is attributes decide how well a player does something, the role & duty affects there positioning and what they try to do. For example changing a FB-S to FB-D so he defends better isn't correct, changing it so he stays back so is in his defensive position sooner is correct.

Quote

I find it changes the angle of attack. An IF-A by virtue of being so high up the pitch will cut into the corner of the box. A WM-A will be more likely to cut through the halfway line. Also the IF is tremendous at finding space for the switch the play, partially due to the way crossing works, compared to a WM/A, at least in my experience.

I've recently change my IF-A to WM-A (with PI's) so i've been watching it closely.  It depends where he collects the ball, if its in the same position as the IF-A would of been in then they behave the same.  It is more likely he collects it deeper during transitions and to cut inside earlier as you pointed out, but during the attacking phase he is pretty much where a IF-A would be.

Not notice any difference in positioning when switching play TBH, my WM-A was my top scorer as IF-A and has started well so far this season, either getting back post crosses from the W-A or cutting inside before shooting.

[alanschu14]

More attacking mentality does not equal a better attack, it changes the way you play to be more risky, but do you need to take more risks to create a chance?  Sometimes more patience is needed to create a weak spot rather than trying to brute force it.

I found this was big for me.  I just got promoted to EPL and my team got off to a 0-1-4 start with some big losses to Tottenham and whatnot.  My thought then was to not change my formation (since players were well suited to it) from 4-1-2-3 DM, but to tweak my roles.  I opted for a more conservative, patient play style by setting my players to defensive/support roles (I actually don't have anyone set to "attack") and shifted my "counter" to "defensive" and removing retain possession (since defensive was going to slow things down anyways)  Idea was to really make it hard for the other team to score because I'd happily take some draws.

Turns out I saw a spike in my offensive production.  I was scoring more goals and getting much more shots on net.  Basically I was maintaining possession better and felt my team did better moving up the ptich "as a unit" with players always having support.  I erased my terrible start by winning my next 3 games and going undefeated in my next 8.  Was super stoked.  It resulted in a pretty patient game on offense, waiting for the other team to make a mistake.  It also provided a lot of defensive support which let me get a few more opportunities on counter attacks as it seemed like it baited other teams to slide their players up a bit more.

[isignedupfornorealreason]

On 30/09/2016 at 16:47, summatsupeer said:

Not notice any difference in positioning when switching play TBH, my WM-A was my top scorer as IF-A and has started well so far this season, either getting back post crosses from the W-A or cutting inside before shooting.

Hmm, interesting, different set ups I guess. I had only just really managed to find something that got my IF-A smashing in 30+ goals, which is a bit insane for my setups. Normally a lot more blunted than that!

 

17 hours ago, alanschu14 said:

Turns out I saw a spike in my offensive production.

Yeah, dropping more defensive generally seems to produce better quality football for me, in terms of chance creation anyway. In theory, there's not so much a need to take risks if you have quality players anyway, depending on how you look at things.

[MHovel]

I don't know if it's just luck, or might be also usefull tactic.

After all, i decided to watch full matches and to see what doesn't really works.

even thought it's not the end of the season, this...........:

 

I conceded only 6 goals!!!!

We didn't lost yet, but i assume it will happen eventually.

I'm struggeling a bit in the attack side, but i think i know what is the problem, but wanted to ask something.

The system i used to play till now was the same besides some roles i tweaked while i thought it was needed (ie. i used to play sometimes with CM (a) instead of (s), but if i saw that i need more powerfull and help in the midfield, i would stick him as a support.

sometimes i switch the DM from (s) to (d), i might say that maybe i will switch it to (d) permantly, but not sure about it yet, because with support he tend to support the midfield, which is more important in my opinion, and i have the stick to positions shout enabled so im confused.

 

I also added some players instructions, especially for those who have limited skills (low vision, anticipation etc...) and some other tweaks that i thought will improve their game.

I used to tweak between counter to defensive mentality but at the end i kept with defensive, seems like it's more similar to how i want my team to play.

 

not to mention that my team doing really great, and i lost important player that i brought to my team for 5 months (gago), I'm really surprized.

I'm really wondering if i can repreduce it, just to see if it's not a bug or something.

 

[MHovel]

I forgot to add this and i cannot edit my post anymore.

[summatsupeer]

44 minutes ago, MHovel said:

I don't know if it's just luck, or might be also usefull tactic.

....

I'm really wondering if i can repreduce it, just to see if it's not a bug or something.

 

You found the bug Leicester abused in RL 

I think too many players just make changes for the sake of it or because of stats, but you've making reasoned changes from what you've observed which is great.

Tactic looks balanced, the only thing I would look at is if the W-S and FB-A are trying the same things and getting in each others way?

Could be players are on form and when they start to dip a bit you might find things a bit harder but just ride the wave.  If you can keep it up teams might not be as attacking against you so they will be harder to create chances against due to less space.

[mikcheck]

And perhaps a more aggressive role going forward in your central midfield.

[alanschu14]

That looks very similar to the tactic I've been having success with too

As others have touched on you have some decent options available too if you feel you need it.  For instance I use a halfback but I can adjust team shape by changing that role to something else.  A common one I use is changing the CM-S to CM-A and stuff like that too if you need it.  Same with maybe moving the W-S to an IF or Raumdeuter and stuff like that.

 

Congrats on your early successes though!