Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community
looping

Learning how to play

Recommended Posts

Thanks for all your answers.

To sum up, I think my basic tactic is ok. The cause of my total failure is my total inability to adapt to circumstances.

What I'm going to try now is, starting from my basic tactic, make adjustments to adapt. For instance, I'll try experiment with width,as NoTekkersRB suggested.

I have also spotted what to do when the opposition outnumbers me in midfield.

This kind of stuff.

3 hours ago, Feddo said:

"Call me slow, but this is what I'm facing."

I started again with 13, and only in the second year of 15 I started to get a real understanding of what I was doing. So I was a bit slow aswell ;-)

One suggestion I'd like to give is give your right wm instructions to cut inside and your right fullback an attacking role or duty. This will give you an extra weapon, walcott/bellerin combo is perfect for this. The cm-d and other fullback give good cover.

You might also want to get a playmaker in your side maybe change the cm-d to dlp-d.

I had a lot of succes with a similair set up (with an am-striker combo though). You'll have variations going forward and enough penetriation to unluck a defence

I agree.

There is only one problem:

On 28/10/2016 at 14:26, looping said:

442 (or its variations) it's not optional. I also want two fast wingers down the flanks, on sitter one creator in midfield, and a big creative-small scorer partnership upfront. Not attacking fb and two cb who defend.

This means I want to exploit the flanks (run, dribble, cross) with my wings, not my fullbacks. As a consequence, I won't give any of my fb an attack duty, just because it is not part of my initial plan, so I don't want to do it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Feddo said:

"Call me slow, but this is what I'm facing."

I started again with 13, and only in the second year of 15 I started to get a real understanding of what I was doing. So I was a bit slow aswell ;-)

One suggestion I'd like to give is give your right wm instructions to cut inside and your right fullback an attacking role or duty. This will give you an extra weapon, walcott/bellerin combo is perfect for this. The cm-d and other fullback give good cover.

You might also want to get a playmaker in your side maybe change the cm-d to dlp-d.

I had a lot of succes with a similair set up (with an am-striker combo though). You'll have variations going forward and enough penetriation to unluck a defence

Interesting advices, I play like this too.
What's your AM-ST partnership (I'm using AM(a) + DLF(s), I'm thinking of using an SS(a)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Watford - Arsenal

Watford v Arsenal_ Preview Line Ups.png

I'm favourite and, as expected, they are sitting deep.

 

Watford v Arsenal_ Tactics Team Talk.png

I expect to win.

 

Watford v Arsenal_ Pitch Full.png

Capoue alone recycling possession. I have to do something.

 

Watford v Arsenal_ Tactics Overview.png

I drop Alexis to AMC strata

 

Watford v Arsenal_ Pitch Full-3.png

This is a typical attack. Do I need more width?

 

Watford v Arsenal_ Tactics_ Overview.png

I add width.

 

Watford v Arsenal_ Pitch Full-2.png

I don't see a substantial difference.

 

Watford v Arsenal_ Pitch Full-4.png

Alexis is dropping deeper than Giroud. Alexis is more a link than Giroud. This is not want I want.

 

Watford v Arsenal_ Tactics_ Overview-2.png

Alexis back to STC strata. I tell Giroud to man mark Capoue.

 

Watford v Arsenal_ Tactics Overview-2.png

I'm not creating chances. May I need a higher tempo? Let's try.

 

Watford v Arsenal_ Pitch Full-6.pngWatford v Arsenal_ Pitch Full-7.pngWatford v Arsenal_ Pitch Full-8.pngWatford v Arsenal_ Pitch Full-9.png

Long ball to Ighalo. Ighalo passes the ball to Deeney. Deeney almost scores. Probably there was too much space between my defense and midfield.

 

Watford v Arsenal_ Tactics Overview-3.png

I drop my cm to dm strata with destroyer-creator roles.

 

Watford v Arsenal_ Stats Match Stats.png

Half time, complete disaster.

 

Watford v Arsenal_ Tactics_ Team Talk.png

I let my players know what I think about their performance (despite I think it's not their fault...)

 

During the second half, simply, I have no idea. I don't know what do to. I ran out of ideas.

 

Watford v Arsenal_ Tactics Team Talk-2.png

 

Despite some substitutions,nothing.  I let them know what I think.

 

Watford v Arsenal_ Analysis Teams.png

0-0 is a fair result.

 

 

What do you think I did wrong?

What do you think I can do in this situations?

How can I unlock this teams?

What's wrong in my tactic to be completely unable to create chances?

What's your overall opinion?

Watford v Arsenal_ Pitch Full-5.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that was screaming you right in the face if that was your "average attack" looked like?

 

ZZen2OH.jpg

 

I always got the impression you could benefit off sticking to completely beginner guidelines and sticking it for a while, such as wwfan's old 12 step thingie which would need an upgrade in parts (in particular role / duties, most important thing by far). Actually this is what I pictured you doing whenever you hit a slump (as in your previous thread), completely changing things around up to multiple times a match and sometimes making things worse in the process as none of your base stuff seemed that odd, so the total collapse suddenly did seem as if there was something going on that was not at all apparent. This can be such a simple game really.

Back then he suggested you should always have a wide back on attack duty -- and no this isn't always a must but somebody who goes all the way helps stretching things massively in this case in particular as that Watford formation packs the middle, they only have the wide midfielders and could actually be overloaded down the flanks. :-) In general, at least one consistently forward pushing wide defender is one key component to unlocking packed defenses, imo. Seen loads of matches where stuff else was eventually forced down the middle, which forced additionally long shots, and more. You'll also have much more crosses from out wide, same as angled through balls from out wide, plus passes played out wide which visibly stretches defenses to shift over that way, which, going by your screenshots doesn't much happen, does it? You seemed to be on the right track, and if you take a closer look the wide guys DO position wider after you apply the instruction but they don't seem to move forward often/aggressively enough to actually be an option? :)

Btw, I too often set the second striker to man mark their "Pivot", the deepest midfielder helping opponents massively to recycle possession,  which you addressed by dropping the fwd to AMC so he does track back, spotting that was a nice find!

Edited by Svenc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Svenc said:

I think that was screaming you right in the face if that was your "average attack" looked like?

 

ZZen2OH.jpg

 

I always got the impression you could benefit off sticking to completely beginner guidelines and sticking it for a while, such as wwfan's old 12 step thingie which would need an upgrade in parts (in particular role / duties, most important thing by far). Actually this is what I pictured you doing whenever you hit a slump (as in your previous thread), completely changing things around up to multiple times a match and sometimes making things worse in the process as none of your base stuff seemed that odd, so the total collapse suddenly did seem as if there was something going on that was not at all apparent. This can be such a simple game really Back then he suggested you should always have a wide back on attack duty -- and no this isn't always a must but somebody who goes all the way helps stretching things massively in this case in particular as that Watford formation packs the middle, they only have the wide midfielders and could actually be overloaded down the flanks. :-) In general, at least one consistently forward pushing wide defender is one key component to unlocking packed defenses, imo. Seen loads of matches where stuff else was eventually forced down the middle, which forced additionally long shots, and more. You'll also have much more crosses from out wide, same as angled through balls from out wide, plus passes played out wide which visibly stretches defenses to shift over that way, which, going by your screenshots doesn't much happen, does it?

Btw, I too often set the scond striker to man mark their "Pivot", the deepest midfielder to recycle possession, spotting that was a nice find!

I totally agree, but...

Your suggestion sends us directly to my OP.

 

"442 (or its variations) it's not optional. I also want two fast wingers down the flanks, on sitter one creator in midfield, and a big creative-small scorer partnership upfront. Not attacking fb and two cb who defend.

Roles and duties

Goalie - Goalkeeper. Again, just a plain old fashioned 'keeper. No need for sweeper keepers as I don't plan on playing with a particularly high line.

Centre Backs - Central Defender (defend) x 2. Nothing fancy here. They just need to defend and pass the ball to the keeper, fullbacks or midfield. No need for risk taking ball playing defenders or a stopper/cover combination.

Fullbacks - Primarily defensive, they need to get up the left flank to provide support behind the ball. "

 

As I said before, having a fullback on attack duty is not part of my initial plan. I want my wingers to run dribble and cross, not my fullbacks.

In addition, if I give a fullback an attack duty I will have to modify my entire setup. For instance:

 

abMblJcac.png
Use this11.com for tactics for football

 

I agree this can create better movement between lines. My wp cutting inside opening space for my wb. On the left, w-at providing with. My main concern would be my dlf-su getting in the way of my cm-su making forward runs. Need to see.

Anyway, even if I start winning (which I'm not sure would happen, because I've already tried with this kind of tactics) with this tactic, I wouldn't be happy, because this is not how I want to play. I want to achieve good results with the tactic described on my OP. I can tweak roles, duties, TI, PI,... whatever, but I'm not going to move from my initial plan.

Not because I don't want, but because this is my plan and I'm going to stick to it.

Please, don't get this as dismissing your advice. It is not. It's only that I want to achieve good results with the tactic I described because it is exactly how I want to play.

 

Edited by looping

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, looping said:

I totally agree, but...

 


Use this11.com for tactics for football

 

Not because I don't want, but because this is my plan and I'm going to stick to it.

Please, don't get this as dismissing your advice. It is not. It's only that I want to achieve good results with the tactic I described because it is exactly how I want to play.

 

 

 

But does it make sense here? :D You basically notice that everything goes down the middle where in that Watford formation all the defenders are, where stuff is packed and you don't find a way around otherwise: "This is what a typically attack looks like". You actually change stuff around, you click on "play wider", you don't see and witness much of an effect as your wide guys who follow that orders visibly don't push up enough, and stick to it simply it's not your plan to do so? I don't follow that logics, tbh. If the plan is width, width doesn't much come itself by just clicking "play wider" in the game. An attacking fullback is always a risk, and if your main thing is safety, that's may be fine a lot of the times, there are moments when I have both of mine on defend duty outright, by the way. But against stubborn defenses to open the scoring there may need to be a compromise or else you'll find them harder to break down as in this case.

 

Edited by Svenc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, looping said:

What do you think I did wrong?

You focused on what the opposition are doing rather than on what your team are doing and how you want to play.

You tried changing things without understanding what the changes would do.

You changed things too quickly - before 10 mins had gone by you had changed your formation and a TI.  Within another 10 mins you changed it back.

You got frustrated, fed up and lost your way.

19 minutes ago, looping said:

What do you think I can do in this situations?

You are facing a team that out number you in midfield.  But you out number them on the flanks.  So what did you do?  You told your players to drop deeper (from an already deep starting position with the counter mentality) and play out of defence - so you invite the opposition midfield onto you, win the ball back, and then try to play it straight back into the packed and overloaded midfield.  You saw this when you spotted Capoue recycling possession but didn't understand why.

So instead of trying to play the ball out through a packed midfield, maybe clear ball to flanks and/or exploit the flanks, which is where your strength is in this situation.

You then add play wider.  Why?  That gives you less space on the wings to play in, so you are compressing space out wide where you are strongest.

I'll caveat all of this slightly because are you actually seeing overloads down the flanks?  With an attacking winger and a supporting fullback behind, is your winger getting enough support?  If not, change the fullback and/or winger role to create overloads down the flanks.

39 minutes ago, looping said:

What's wrong in my tactic to be completely unable to create chances?

To create chances you are basically relying on your wingers to cross the ball.  You need quality crosses and good movement from your strikers to get on the end of those crosses.  A player running in from midfield may also help in order to get hold of loose balls on the edge of the box to recycle the attack if a defender clears it.

Are your wingers crossing from a decent position?  Are they perhaps crossing too early because they don't have any support from a fullback?  On 38 minutes you have attempted 12 crosses (plus 3 corners) but only one has connected.  Why?  Are crosses being made from poor positions?  What are your strikers doing?  Where is your midfield when the ball is cleared?  Analyse your crosses - look at the Team Report, click on each cross to play it back.

Remember, in this situation you are pumping balls into the box in a 3 v 2 situation which favours the defence - your strikers are out numbered.  You don't have a runner from midfield to take advantage of the space in front of the defence, nor (I suspect) do you have an overlapping fullback to overload the opposition wingback and drag central defenders out of position.

54 minutes ago, looping said:

What's your overall opinion?

Overall then, and having said all of the above, how you are playing is how you've said you want to play - you want to defend, you want to win 1-0 (or draw 0-0), you don't want high scoring matches, you want your two wingers crossing the ball.  And that's precisely what happened in this match. So, lets be clear here, for this particular match you got the result you wanted.  If you wanted a different result, you needed to play in a different manner.

Stick to your original plan for each match, that's fine.  But be prepared to be flexible in other aspects if you need to be - formation and TI changes aren't always the answer, especially if you get frustrated and it starts to cloud your judgement.  You're better than that Looping, you just (understandably) lack confidence and actually understand more about the game than I think you realise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, charisma_charisma said:

Interesting advices, I play like this too.
What's your AM-ST partnership (I'm using AM(a) + DLF(s), I'm thinking of using an SS(a)?

Ap-s + cf-a or ap-s + af-a when I need my striker just to focus on the goal.

I needed my striker to stretch the field and finish the chances the players around him created. So no support duty or creator type of player.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is like a déja vu, so I'll be extremely cautious.

I used this for some matches: (don't pay attention to players, because this is not my preferred eleven)

Arsenal_  Overview.png

 

Just one example:

Arsenal v Swansea_ Overview Overview.png

 

Ok. It's true this provides more movement between lines, better play and, in fine, chances, goals and wins. Not the holy grail, I just played a few games, I lost against Manu, and adjustments and tweaks are needed, but, in general terms, this seems to be a good one, especially against deep sides. I've been experimenting with changes in mentality and it was quite good.

With that said, this is a false success because this is not how I want to play. I don't want a WP or a wm cutting inside. I don't want a wb or a fullback on attack duty. Is that simple: this is not what I'm looking for, it's not my style, I don't like what I see. I could play a, for instance, 433 or a 352. No matter how successful they were, this is not how I want to play. I want two wingers down the flanks.

For that reason, I'll take a couple of steps back, and stick to my initial plan. I'll try to improve my tactic using the principles I learnt with this experience and let you know.

 

 

Edited by looping

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@looping 

My end paragraph is the most important one (everything else before that simply related to specific questions you raised about a single match):

5 hours ago, herne79 said:

Stick to your original plan for each match, that's fine.  But be prepared to be flexible in other aspects if you need to be - formation and TI changes aren't always the answer, especially if you get frustrated and it starts to cloud your judgement.  You're better than that Looping, you just (understandably) lack confidence and actually understand more about the game than I think you realise.

"Be prepared to be flexible...if you need to be" is key here.  Nobody can play in just one way all of the time - pick your basic style of play of course, but rigidly sticking to one way of playing all of the time will just get you sacked.  Lets face it, if you're ok with making a small formation change, or asking your team to play wider, what's wrong with asking your players to clear the ball to the flanks, or asking a fullback to overlap on occasion if you think it may help in a specific situation?  That's not abandoning your principles, that's just being a good manager and adapting to certain situations if the need arises.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, herne79 said:

@looping 

My end paragraph is the most important one (everything else before that simply related to specific questions you raised about a single match):

"Be prepared to be flexible...if you need to be" is key here.  Nobody can play in just one way all of the time - pick your basic style of play of course, but rigidly sticking to one way of playing all of the time will just get you sacked.  Lets face it, if you're ok with making a small formation change, or asking your team to play wider, what's wrong with asking your players to clear the ball to the flanks, or asking a fullback to overlap on occasion if you think it may help in a specific situation?  That's not abandoning your principles, that's just being a good manager and adapting to certain situations if the need arises.

Totally.

I'll let you know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, looping said:

With that said, this is a false success because this is not how I want to play. I don't want a WP or a wm cutting inside. I don't want a wb or a fullback on attack duty. Is that simple: this is not what I'm looking for, it's not my style, I don't like what I see. I could play a, for instance, 433 or a 352. No matter how successful they were, this is not how I want to play. I want two wingers down the flanks.

For that reason, I'll take a couple of steps back, and stick to my initial plan. I'll try to improve my tactic using the principles I learnt with this experience and let you know.

 

First, I want to commend you on how far you've come. You've picked a style, sketched it out, and tweaked as needed. You've been pretty spot on each step of the way. That's hefty progress. Like @herne79 mentions above, you understand a lot more than you realize at this point. Stage 1 complete.

Now you're encountering a new problem -- your tactics are doing what you want, but what you want isn't working. Welcome to Stage 2! I think a lot of the conversation on your earliest posts jumped in here as opposed to starting with the basics. The good news is that real world tactics can now help (instead of adding confusion).

Let's break down the rough circumstances of your most recent save. You're playing as a top team so you know that all but the other title contenders will sit deep against you. Not only that, there will be little room between compact lines. That severely limits the space for counters unless you get the ball forward lightning quick. How do real world teams attack that? Some combination of width, getting runners forward, intricate build up play, overwhelming with numbers, or aggressive pressing.

By design, your approach really only allows width. You're sitting deep, not pressing, not flooding numbers forward. That doesn't mean that your tactical is set-up wrong, it just doesn't fit with the circumstances of a successful side (either immediately, after a season, or whenever). The big question then becomes how do you modify your tactics to account for being the dominant side? There are a lot of options and they don't necessarily require an entire revamp. Small changes could get you there, but it's going to require bending your initial goals (at least the solutions I can think of).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Ceching You Out said:

 

First, I want to commend you on how far you've come. You've picked a style, sketched it out, and tweaked as needed. You've been pretty spot on each step of the way. That's hefty progress. Like @herne79 mentions above, you understand a lot more than you realize at this point. Stage 1 complete.

Now you're encountering a new problem -- your tactics are doing what you want, but what you want isn't working. Welcome to Stage 2! I think a lot of the conversation on your earliest posts jumped in here as opposed to starting with the basics. The good news is that real world tactics can now help (instead of adding confusion).

Let's break down the rough circumstances of your most recent save. You're playing as a top team so you know that all but the other title contenders will sit deep against you. Not only that, there will be little room between compact lines. That severely limits the space for counters unless you get the ball forward lightning quick. How do real world teams attack that? Some combination of width, getting runners forward, intricate build up play, overwhelming with numbers, or aggressive pressing.

By design, your approach really only allows width. You're sitting deep, not pressing, not flooding numbers forward. That doesn't mean that your tactical is set-up wrong, it just doesn't fit with the circumstances of a successful side (either immediately, after a season, or whenever). The big question then becomes how do you modify your tactics to account for being the dominant side? There are a lot of options and they don't necessarily require an entire revamp. Small changes could get you there, but it's going to require bending your initial goals (at least the solutions I can think of).

 

IRL, I would tell me players:

"guys, we need to score, one step forward, play wide and move the ball quickly from flank to flank.

Be patient, don't waste possession. Move the ball and the space will appear.

I want 2 guys hugging the touchline, if you are in 1 vs 1 situation, try dribble and cross. Otherwise, pass the ball back.

1 striker come deep to drag defenders. 1 midfielder run forward to the space left by the striker.

1 midfielder stay back to recycle possession and try long shots if the chance appears.

fullbacks run forward to support the guys hugging the touchline. Overlap your winger is in a 2 vs 1 situation (so we equal 2 vs 2)"

 

How can I translate this into fm terms?

- Push higher

- Close down more

- Higher tempo

- Width wider (I don't understand this TI. It seems the wider you play, the less space your wingers have)

-------Basically this means increasing mentality--------

- 2 wingers (stay wide PI)

- Work ball into box

- 1 striker on support deep lying duty (DLF, false 9 or other instruction)

- 1 midfielder bbm or cm with get further forward PI

- Fullbacks---> wingbacks on support

 

Do you agree? I ask because I tried and wasn't effective (basically, possession was lost and passes missed. A lot of through balls, even when I used TI shorter passing)

Edited by looping

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, looping said:

 

IRL, I would tell me players:

"guys, we need to score, one step forward, play wide and move the ball quickly from flank to flank.

Be patient, don't waste possession. Move the ball and the space will appear.

I want 2 guys hugging the touchline, if you are in 1 vs 1 situation, try dribble and cross. Otherwise, pass the ball back.

1 striker come deep to drag defenders. 1 midfielder run forward to the space left by the striker.

1 midfielder stay back to recycle possession and try long shots if the chance appears.

fullbacks run forward to support the guys hugging the touchline. Overlap your winger is in a 2 vs 1 situation (so we equal 2 vs 2)"

 

How can I translate this into fm terms?

- Push higher

- Close down more

- Higher tempo

- Width wider (I don't understand this TI. It seems the wider you play, the less space your wingers have)

-------Basically this means increasing mentality--------

- 2 wingers (stay wide PI)

- Work ball into box

- 1 striker on support deep lying duty (DLF, false 9 or other instruction)

- 1 midfielder bbm or cm with get further forward PI

- Fullbacks---> wingbacks on support

 

Do you agree? I ask because I tried and wasn't effective (basically, possession was lost and passes missed. A lot of through balls, even when I used TI shorter passing)

I think with play wider your wingers will be closer to the touchline, so technically less space for them to dribble unless they cut inside

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, looping said:

 

- Width wider (I don't understand this TI. It seems the wider you play, the less space your wingers have)

 

Technically less space for them to dribble but can create space between the opposition fullback and cbs if the FB are inclinded to close down/mark tightly 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, looping said:

 

IRL, I would tell me players:

"guys, we need to score, one step forward, play wide and move the ball quickly from flank to flank.

Be patient, don't waste possession. Move the ball and the space will appear.

I want 2 guys hugging the touchline, if you are in 1 vs 1 situation, try dribble and cross. Otherwise, pass the ball back.

1 striker come deep to drag defenders. 1 midfielder run forward to the space left by the striker.

1 midfielder stay back to recycle possession and try long shots if the chance appears.

fullbacks run forward to support the guys hugging the touchline. Overlap your winger is in a 2 vs 1 situation (so we equal 2 vs 2)"

 

How can I translate this into fm terms?

- Push higher

- Close down more

- Higher tempo

- Width wider (I don't understand this TI. It seems the wider you play, the less space your wingers have)

-------Basically this means increasing mentality--------

- 2 wingers (stay wide PI)

- Work ball into box

- 1 striker on support deep lying duty (DLF, false 9 or other instruction)

- 1 midfielder bbm or cm with get further forward PI

- Fullbacks---> wingbacks on support

 

Do you agree? I ask because I tried and wasn't effective (basically, possession was lost and passes missed. A lot of through balls, even when I used TI shorter passing)

I think those changes are reasonable attempts to solve a packed defense. Like you mentioned, you can individually increase your defensive line, close down more, increase width, or play faster. Or you can up your mentality which does all those things in one. If that doesn't work, let's take a step back to your initial constraints.

You want wingers to stay wide on both sides and fire in crosses. You want your FBs to stay back. You want to play at least one sitting CM. Each of those ideas alone make sense. Altogether though, how are the wingers going to behave when the defense sits deep? They won't have any overlapping support because your FB stay back. They may be able to connect with the B2B as he pushes up, but it's asking a lot of him to find space when he's outnumbered in the opponent's midfield. For crosses there won't be space behind their defensive line to cross into so you're putting it into a crowded box. Not a problem on its own, but you'll only have two forwards in the box to aim for plus the B2B if he makes it in time. How many defenders will your opposition have back? Likely two DCs, the farside FB, plus any CM/DMs that are tracking back.

Reiterating earlier thoughts, you're getting your team to play how you want. You've set them up in a way that they carry out the type of play you had in mind. You're trying the right tweaks to address the problems you're solving. That's excellent progress. The only issue is that how you want to play doesn't really fit the circumstances you're encountering. So let's take it back to the real world. Are there any consistent top 4 teams in any of the major leagues that always play how you describe -- FBs always back, outside midfield wingers that stay wide and cross, at most one runner in the CM pairing?

I think the answer to that is no, because they encounter too many teams willing to sit deep and defend because they're happy with a point. They may adopt that tactic against other top teams or in Europe, but not against the majority of teams in their leagues. The tactic you've created is closer to what a mid-table side would use. My guess would be that's why you've found success at times in your various attempts; when you're playing as a Malaga-type club you can surprise the teams for a season or so before they begin playing you more defensively.

How do you get around that? Change your rules as necessary. This is the flexibility @herne79 mentions. I think you have one possibility in the Arsenal tactic above that worked wonders for you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 31/10/2016 at 12:29, herne79 said:

how you are playing is how you've said you want to play - you want to defend, you want to win 1-0 (or draw 0-0), you don't want high scoring matches, you want your two wingers crossing the ball.  And that's precisely what happened in this match. So, lets be clear here, for this particular match you got the result you wanted.  If you wanted a different result, you needed to play in a different manner.

I think herne has hit the nail on the head here - you are playing the way you want because they way you have set up is to grind sit deep and grind out results. 

In every save you've started you've chosen a team who are going to come up against teams who sit deep quite often. If you tried this tactic with, say, Sunderland you would probably feel more rewarded because the expectations are lower and you won't be playing against teams who sit deep against you. 

I think this all comes down to adaptability. This tactic would be fine for teams who press against you because you understand it. But you need to change for teams who sit deep. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Arsenal_  Senior Fixtures.png

Despite I'm having good results, I can already tell you this is going nowhere.

The reason is that I'm only winning:
 

a) Opponent offers space. Then we have a crazy match where anything can happen (ManU, ManCity, Tottenham, Everton)

b) I luckily score first and then opponent offers space.

c) My players are better and despite the opponent plays better I win.

 

Opponents create a lot of chances. I'm not conceding more because they are much worse than me. Cech also helped here.

 

What I don't understand is why my problem (my tactic can't unlock packed defenses) causes a defensive problem and not an attacking problem. My problem is conceding, not scoring. 

My idea with my tactic is:

a) This is a defensive tactic which will allow you to keep clean sheets, so one goal must be enough to win (this is ideally, I know won't happen always).

b) If you are a weak team, the opponent will offer space.

c) If you are a big team, the opponent won't offer space, but the quality of your players will be able to unlock them.

d) If you can't score, at least you will draw 0-0

Facts (matches) show that point b) and c) are correct. I'm failing in points a) and d)

 

What I'm going to do is to tweak my tactic to make it more defensive. I'll go to defensive mentality and I'll drop my 2 cm to dm, one on defensive other on support (maybe get further forward PI). 

We have, then:

Arsenal_  Overview-2.png

What do you think?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, looping said:

- Width wider (I don't understand this TI. It seems the wider you play, the less space your wingers have)

Pretty much when you play wider you're also stretching the opposition which leaves gaps in the middle of the park and since they're stretched they are closer to your wingers therefore giving them less space. You already had enough space on the wings in the example where you selected to play wider during the game when you should maybe have decided to exploit the flanks or changed your FBs to attacking instead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That change would make you more defensive, but I genuinely don't understand your concerns with those results. You've conceded 12 in 15 by my math. That's .8 GPG against. Look at this year's Premier League table. 10 games have been played. One club (Tottenham) has a better record than that (.5 GPG against); one club has the same record (Everton). And that's over a smaller sample size that's likely to revert to the mean as more games are played.

In 2015/2016 the best defensive record was 35 in 38 (.92 GPG against). In 2014/2015 the best defensive record was 32 in 38 (.84 GPG against).

Arsenal (not a particularly defensively oriented team) are in 2nd and conceding at a lower rate than they have been in real life. Yet somehow you think the wheels are coming off the whole thing? You are setting unrealistic expectations. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Ceching You Out said:

That change would make you more defensive, but I genuinely don't understand your concerns with those results. You've conceded 12 in 15 by my math. That's .8 GPG against. Look at this year's Premier League table. 10 games have been played. One club (Tottenham) has a better record than that (.5 GPG against); one club has the same record (Everton). And that's over a smaller sample size that's likely to revert to the mean as more games are played.

In 2015/2016 the best defensive record was 35 in 38 (.92 GPG against). In 2014/2015 the best defensive record was 32 in 38 (.84 GPG against).

Arsenal (not a particularly defensively oriented team) are in 2nd and conceding at a lower rate than they have been in real life. Yet somehow you think the wheels are coming off the whole thing? You are setting unrealistic expectations. 

Atletico Madrid 15-16 18 in 38. 0.47.

And I think I'm playing even more defensive so I accept to score even less (63).

Difficult, yes. Unrealistic, no. A different tactic is needed? Not sure. 

Edited by looping

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After another tremendous fail, I have to admit you were right. 

According to that, is it coded in the game? I mean, is it really impossible (against game codes)?

I want to try again, maybe with another team, with better defensive players (DNA club defend or something like that, probably Arsenal not the best to do that), but I don't want to waste my time. So, the question is: is it really impossible? or it is just as difficult as IRL is?

To explain it better, does the game know the average goals conceded and scored IRL, so it is coded in the game that realistic goals scored and conceded must happen at some point?

Edited by looping

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, looping said:

To explain it better, does the game know the average goals conceded and scored IRL, so it is coded in the game that realistic goals scored and conceded must happen at some point?

Nothing like that is coded into the game. There's no "team x" must have 0.5 goals against per game or it crashes.

Atletico are in a different league to Arsenal, so it's not fair to compare them. In the EPL, the best defensive teams were close to a goal a game against.

Technically, it's possible to have a great record like Atletico did, but it is and it should be rare and difficult.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, HUNT3R said:

Nothing like that is coded into the game. There's no "team x" must have 0.5 goals against per game or it crashes.

Atletico are in a different league to Arsenal, so it's not fair to compare them. In the EPL, the best defensive teams were close to a goal a game against.

Technically, it's possible to have a great record like Atletico did, but it is and it should be rare and difficult.


If it ever needed prove of that, it came in the form of FM 2015 until it was patched, where SI suddenly had made it so that duties for players in the attacking positions determined whether they at all got back behind the ball or not. Depending non which, you couldn't defend for toffee, but at the same time if the attack was still intercepted, it was immediately a counter attack. Which affected AI teams in all kinds of weird ways as well, some of which averaging goals for/against in the league of 5, 6 goals on average a match. :D

vCeZGsT.jpg

Also:

Though arguably it was easier in those versions as rather consistently you had defensive AI teams going with very extreme tactics, such as always keeping up to 7 players behind the ball sometimes even for entire matches (if old patch notes are anything to go by, it is coded into the game that AI managers would/could stay that defensive even after conceding, as they just want to avoid getting hammered, losing by huge margins). From my experience this is rarer to be seen in newer iterations anymore, certainly not for entire matches (for the same reasons, even the AI managed to go with seasons of 8 goals conceded against with top teams on occasion -- most of the few goals you concede that way are then off set pieces, counter attacks, wonder strikes from yards out, individual error or bugs, as else players don't advance much in numbers to challenge much). You should try to play this online, online everbody seems to play attackingly no matter what. It's like an altogether different game on occasion. :-)

HTaiFDV.jpg

That said, I don't think a 4-4-2 as currently modeled in here will bring you hugely defensive records (not that it isn't solid). In parts as fowards need an extra invitation to help defending, or, if you want them to behave like Atletico's forwards sometimes, drop them both into the AMC slot. Additionally anything that allows for two centre midfielders who continiously stay deeper in my opinion makes for a much more robust defense. A 4-4-2 doesn't much allow that, and is overloaded in the centre against the most popular formations currently in the game. A 4-4-2 DEEP will or would likely give up controlling the centre on top, as two DMs sit deeper than CMs. On FM 2016 I think with a top side of a league I had opponents down to averaging less than 10 shots (which you need to count manually, simple stats like that should really be available in the game). But I did so by switching to a 2nd prepared/trained setup, an alteration of the primary tactics with an additional midfielder staying deeper, which was more geared to simply recycling the ball as soon as a lead was taken. If they don't get the ball, they can't attack, after all. Then again, top sides in real football averagins less than 10 attempts against is happening in real football too. http://www.footcharts.co.uk/index.cfm?task=basics_shots

 

Additionally, the EPL is a much more competitive league in the game as well at the start. La Liga is the completely opposite, though it has gone from being a two teams league to being a contest between three serious contenders in the last several years. One of which being Atletico. There is no EPL side that has defensive records like that. The last of which was Chelsea, more than ten years ago after they were one of the first who got an injection of heavy cash from the outside, plus a healthy dose of Mou.

Edited by Svenc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I've read so far in this threat is a lot of ideas coming thru and solutions and possible outcomes. But what I'm missing in al this is a reflecting on how the AI is going to defend you. Take a step back and think about how you are going to defend a team that playes the way you do. You've been so busy thinking about how you want to attack that this part seems like its been neglected.

Remember you are a big side, that is an important point for the next part. Your plan is to attack down the wings where your wingers stay wide and cross. So what options do I have as defending team to counter your attack?? Simply make sure that

a. Your wingers won't receive a ball and therefore they cant cross and wont be able to score

b. Prefend your wingers from crossing making it impossible to score

c. Placing enough bodies in front of goal making it impossible to score.

I just need my wm to help defending and make sure 1 midfielder and the opposite fullback wil help in the box and I've countered a, b and c.

A striker dropping deep and an unrushing midfielder exploiting the space that opens up if the centreback follows. Once again, how to stop this?

A. A player in the dm strata who will either block the pass to your striker or cover your midfielder

B decrease the space between defenders and midfielders so there is no room to exploit.

You can overcome a lot of this problem with space or fast attacks. Space you wont have as Arsenal an fast attacks wont happen with a patient build-up. You can also give the opposition more problems by adding a third or fourt attacking route. This is why I suggested the wm cutting inside and an attacking fullback. The one screenshot where you said this is a tipical attack exactly highlights my points, you can also question why you need 5 players defending 2? Thats a loss of at least 2 players in the attacking third once again limiting your options.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Try to read some of strikerless.com I think you can learn a lot from that blog. Certainly I did!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, HUNT3R said:

Nothing like that is coded into the game. There's no "team x" must have 0.5 goals against per game or it crashes.

Atletico are in a different league to Arsenal, so it's not fair to compare them. In the EPL, the best defensive teams were close to a goal a game against.

Technically, it's possible to have a great record like Atletico did, but it is and it should be rare and difficult.

I understand what you mean this despite I have literally no idea about coding (literally, 0).

What I mean is if it is "coded" the same way it is "coded" that Messi will score more than Peter Crouch (because Messi has better attributes).

Does anybody think the game is quite EPL centric?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Feddo said:

Remember you are a big side, that is an important point for the next part. Your plan is to attack down the wings where your wingers stay wide and cross. So what options do I have as defending team to counter your attack?? Simply make sure that

I am a big side at this moment. This is a dummy save just to learn. I like to play with mid table teams

 

2 hours ago, Feddo said:

a. Your wingers won't receive a ball and therefore they cant cross and wont be able to score

b. Prefend your wingers from crossing making it impossible to score

c. Placing enough bodies in front of goal making it impossible to score.

This. In fact, just placing two players (wm and fb) marking my wingers stops my attack. 100% right.

2 hours ago, Feddo said:

You can overcome a lot of this problem with space or fast attacks. Space you wont have as Arsenal an fast attacks wont happen with a patient build-up. You can also give the opposition more problems by adding a third or fourt attacking route. This is why I suggested the wm cutting inside and an attacking fullback. The one screenshot where you said this is a tipical attack exactly highlights my points, you can also question why you need 5 players defending 2? Thats a loss of at least 2 players in the attacking third once again limiting your options.

My patient build-up and  my 5 players defending are to avoid counterattacks. To some extent, I accept my attacking plan is weak and I won't score. This is fine and understandable. What it's not fine and understandable are crazy matches with a lot of chances for both. I can't accept a 3-3 draw  against West Brom (accidents happen, I know). This is why I go again and again more defensive.

I think I'll take a new approach. I will implement something like this 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Svenc said:


If it ever needed prove of that, it came in the form of FM 2015 until it was patched, where SI suddenly had made it so that duties for players in the attacking positions determined whether they at all got back behind the ball or not. Depending non which, you couldn't defend for toffee, but at the same time if the attack was still intercepted, it was immediately a counter attack. Which affected AI teams in all kinds of weird ways as well, some of which averaging goals for/against in the league of 5, 6 goals on average a match. :D

vCeZGsT.jpg

Also:

Though arguably it was easier in those versions as rather consistently you had defensive AI teams going with very extreme tactics, such as always keeping up to 7 players behind the ball sometimes even for entire matches (if old patch notes are anything to go by, it is coded into the game that AI managers would/could stay that defensive even after conceding, as they just want to avoid getting hammered, losing by huge margins). From my experience this is rarer to be seen in newer iterations anymore, certainly not for entire matches (for the same reasons, even the AI managed to go with seasons of 8 goals conceded against with top teams on occasion -- most of the few goals you concede that way are then off set pieces, counter attacks, wonder strikes from yards out, individual error or bugs, as else players don't advance much in numbers to challenge much). You should try to play this online, online everbody seems to play attackingly no matter what. It's like an altogether different game on occasion. :-)

HTaiFDV.jpg

That said, I don't think a 4-4-2 as currently modeled in here will bring you hugely defensive records (not that it isn't solid). In parts as fowards need an extra invitation to help defending, or, if you want them to behave like Atletico's forwards sometimes, drop them both into the AMC slot. Additionally anything that allows for two centre midfielders who continiously stay deeper in my opinion makes for a much more robust defense. A 4-4-2 doesn't much allow that, and is overloaded in the centre against the most popular formations currently in the game. A 4-4-2 DEEP will or would likely give up controlling the centre on top, as two DMs sit deeper than CMs. On FM 2016 I think with a top side of a league I had opponents down to averaging less than 10 shots (which you need to count manually, simple stats like that should really be available in the game). But I did so by switching to a 2nd prepared/trained setup, an alteration of the primary tactics with an additional midfielder staying deeper, which was more geared to simply recycling the ball as soon as a lead was taken. If they don't get the ball, they can't attack, after all. Then again, top sides in real football averagins less than 10 attempts against is happening in real football too. http://www.footcharts.co.uk/index.cfm?task=basics_shots

 

Additionally, the EPL is a much more competitive league in the game as well at the start. La Liga is the completely opposite, though it has gone from being a two teams league to being a contest between three serious contenders in the last several years. One of which being Atletico. There is no EPL side that has defensive records like that. The last of which was Chelsea, more than ten years ago after they were one of the first who got an injection of heavy cash from the outside, plus a healthy dose of Mou.

This is what I can't accept. Ok, my tactic is not good attacking, but this absolute disaster defending is what is unacceptable. My problem is defending.

Sunderland v Arsenal_ Analysis Teams.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sacked again. 3/3. 100%. 

At this point, I have to  choose:

a) break my principles and play the way fm wants me to play.

b) give up playing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, looping said:

Sacked again. 3/3. 100%. 

At this point, I have to  choose:

a) break my principles and play the way fm wants me to play.

b) give up playing

 

Like many others, I think you are struggling with the tactical set-up and how to use them. The game (kind of) reflects the real world if you break real life football down to simple terms of being a game of Attacking and Defending. The more Defensive strategies have lower settings than the more Attacking Strategies - we just don't see it anymore. 

 

It is not so much a question of "is my Counter tactic good enough" - which could always be the case if you somehow have conflicting instructions within the tactic that usually can cause a problem on the pitch. If your tactic is fairly sound, the question would be more in the lines of "am I using the Counter effectively at the right times". You see, sitting back and Countering is going to be hard to accomplish if your opponent is simply sitting back not giving you the chance to Counter - then what is the plan? Have both teams look at each other until some set-piece or bizarre incident becomes 50-50 between you and your opponent - an opponent that you should actually be running over? I think that playing Counter every game will not be an effect long term solution.

 

Football in simple terms is knowing when to Attack and when to Defend - you can always try to stick to your plan but if it doesn't work, then what? This probably haunts plenty of Managers across the world. Take my 12 year old younger son as an example. His coach is a huge Cruijff fan so he wanted to implement a 3-4-3 tactic (with a diamond midfield) playing free flowing attacking football. The result was that the 3 man defense didn't cover the field well enough, the kids struggled with their roles, they didn't have enough condition or strength or speed to be able to play that type of football. Needless to say they got their behinds kicked up and down the pitch. The coach finally made the tactics for the kids much more simple and easy (after some good advice from one of the parents ;)) and now they are doing much better...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Loversleaper said:

 

Like many others, I think you are struggling with the tactical set-up and how to use them. The game (kind of) reflects the real world if you break real life football down to simple terms of being a game of Attacking and Defending. The more Defensive strategies have lower settings than the more Attacking Strategies - we just don't see it anymore. 

 

It is not so much a question of "is my Counter tactic good enough" - which could always be the case if you somehow have conflicting instructions within the tactic that usually can cause a problem on the pitch. If your tactic is fairly sound, the question would be more in the lines of "am I using the Counter effectively at the right times". You see, sitting back and Countering is going to be hard to accomplish if your opponent is simply sitting back not giving you the chance to Counter - then what is the plan? Have both teams look at each other until some set-piece or bizarre incident becomes 50-50 between you and your opponent - an opponent that you should actually be running over? I think that playing Counter every game will not be an effect long term solution.

 

Football in simple terms is knowing when to Attack and when to Defend - you can always try to stick to your plan but if it doesn't work, then what? This probably haunts plenty of Managers across the world. Take my 12 year old younger son as an example. His coach is a huge Cruijff fan so he wanted to implement a 3-4-3 tactic (with a diamond midfield) playing free flowing attacking football. The result was that the 3 man defense didn't cover the field well enough, the kids struggled with their roles, they didn't have enough condition or strength or speed to be able to play that type of football. Needless to say they got their behinds kicked up and down the pitch. The coach finally made the tactics for the kids much more simple and easy (after some good advice from one of the parents ;)) and now they are doing much better...

I agree.

But my problem is not that. How to explain it..

Ok, I'll do my best here.

 I admit my tactic is weak offensively, at least in fm terms. I admit it I know it, it is understandable.

I'm playing with Arsenal, so teems sit deep against me. My tactic is too conservative (too many players staying back, basically).

According to that, I would expect (and accept) problems scoring. Many 0-0 0-1, etc...

But this is not what's happening

Unfortunately, I was sacked and deleted the save, but, when I was sacked I was the top scorer of the league. An average of almost 2 goals per game. I know this was not caused by my tactic. This was caused by the superb quality of my players.

The problem was defending. I showed you how many chances the opponent was creating. This is what I can't accept. My defensive weakness.

Too defensive tactic+top scorer of the league+defensive weakness.

This is what I don't understand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Two things, 1: Counter is not exactly "park the bus" (even more so if you are not sitting narrow) and 2: have you ever heard the term "Attack can be the best Defense". It's about getting the balance right on the opponent - I think most teams play differently against Barcelona than they would against Braintree Town in the real world. Looking at your games suggests that there are games where the Counter does seem like a good solution where other times it simply doesn't. I am not convinced that the Strategy Ladder is merely cosmetic.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your thinking is completely alien to me, until that's sorted, I don't think you'll get to grips with this. =( Probably said this many times over, but I know a lot of guys who keep this super simply, never spot half the stuff you evidently do, and never struggle. First of all, as you see in the above shots, having two attacking wms isn't that conservative to start with. It's immediately a 4-2-4, basically. You're not going to have lots of 1-0s and 0-0 unless you set up to do so, for instance packing the deeper areas, and not in the EPL, as you'll face a lot of equal and some better teams, who all expect to get a result against you, and even some relegation contenders having decent enough talent. I don't like the 4-4-2 variants here anyway as they are in the game, as you've spotted yourself that the forwards don't really track back unless you field an AMC or make them manually marking somebody. That's a completely different scenario to the likes of Atletico either way. I see a strong connection here to the last thread personally, where you tried to squeeze similar fantasy stats out of a midtable La Liga team, not going to happen, except maybe on much much older versions where AI tactics were poor or with an engine exploit (on FM 2012, having both wide backs on defend duty sitting back and three central midfielders sitting in front of the defense doing likewise for 90 minutes was viably, and able to close out any number of opponents an AI could throw at it, whilst still being a threat in attack due to marking issues). None of this is scripted as such, but partly data research, partly AI tactics and engine, same as Messi typically scores more goals and stretches defenses more regularly by successfully dribbles than your average guy, better defenders lose less tackles and headers and marking scenarios in the play, which is naturally also connected to research.

Anyway, in the match against Watforwd, you basically notice how and why you struggle to break them down, but as said by Herne, you still stick with your comparably conservative plans, and actually get that 0-0 result, which is arguably exactly what you were encouraging. The reason of which simply because of sticking to the plan. You then suddenly DO change your plans, presumably in a misguided attempt to get arguably completely unrealistic stats/performances in one of the game's most competitive leagues. Up to the point that you change formation outright, with a 4-4-2 deep which I barely use (and think to be a rather specialist counter attacking thing -- I may stand corrected). With that you concede midfield and invite opponents in your half as DMs position significantly deeper than CMs. That's a lot of shots, but most of them are from adventurous range, likely because you somewhat successfully forced them to shoot from range, as 2 DMs position significantly deeper as CMs. Which may not be that bad a sign, in particular if the shots from within the box were from set pieces. Similar to the Watford match, isn't that somewhat expected to happen? I What opponent is this, by the way? [I personally found the 4-4-2 deep difficult and specialist myself as that gap between forwards and midfielders is much harder to close when you gain the ball as in a standard 4-4-2, which makes it easier to lose the ball again which naturally affects defending all over again, but that may be me. Not my type of formation (one of the very very few). :D ]

Edited by Svenc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, looping said:

I agree.

But my problem is not that. How to explain it..

Ok, I'll do my best here.

 I admit my tactic is weak offensively, at least in fm terms. I admit it I know it, it is understandable.

I'm playing with Arsenal, so teems sit deep against me. My tactic is too conservative (too many players staying back, basically).

According to that, I would expect (and accept) problems scoring. Many 0-0 0-1, etc...

But this is not what's happening

Unfortunately, I was sacked and deleted the save, but, when I was sacked I was the top scorer of the league. An average of almost 2 goals per game. I know this was not caused by my tactic. This was caused by the superb quality of my players.

The problem was defending. I showed you how many chances the opponent was creating. This is what I can't accept. My defensive weakness.

Too defensive tactic+top scorer of the league+defensive weakness.

This is what I don't understand.

Just because you make a low risk tactic, doesn't mean it will be defensively solid.  Especially when you consider the players you've shown in those positions.  If you want to be good defensively then you need players who are good defensively, just telling them to play safer won't make them mark/position/tackle/head/jump better.

In your 442 you've left two players up front, but then look at the players in midfield, none of them are exceptional at defending, 2 of the 4 are very attacking attribute wise.  If those poor defensive players are caught out it can create more work for the rest of your defence, even if they're players of the quality of Koscielny.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Loversleaper said:

Two things, 1: Counter is not exactly "park the bus" (even more so if you are not sitting narrow) and 2: have you ever heard the term "Attack can be the best Defense". It's about getting the balance right on the opponent - I think most teams play differently against Barcelona than they would against Braintree Town in the real world. Looking at your games suggests that there are games where the Counter does seem like a good solution where other times it simply doesn't. I am not convinced that the Strategy Ladder is merely cosmetic.

 

 

 

11 minutes ago, Svenc said:

Your thinking is completely alien to me, until that's sorted, I don't think you'll get to grips with this. =( Probably said this many times over, but I know a lot of guys who keep this super simply, never spot half the stuff you evidently do, and never struggle. First of all, as you see in the above shots, having two attacking wms isn't that conservative to start with. It's immediately a 4-2-4, basically. You're not going to have lots of 1-0s and 0-0 unless you set up to do so, for instance packing the deeper areas, and not in the EPL, as you'll face a lot of equal and some better teams, who all expect to get a result against you, and even some relegation contenders having decent enough talent. That's a completely different scenario to the likes of Atletico. I see a strong connection here to the last thread personally, where you tried to squeeze similar out of a midtable La Liga team, not going to happen, except maybe on much much older versions where AI tactics were poor or with an engine exploit (on FM 2012, having both wide backs on defend duty and three central midfielders sitting in front of the defense for 90 minutes was viably, and able to close out any number of opponents an AI could throw at it, whilst still being a threat in attack due to marking issues). [Defensively, having one wide back who goes all the way regularly helps in keeping the ball and thus defensively actually oftenly, as any of the above attacks is almost bound to break down, as play has bogged down with defenders sitting deep, there is just no passing lanes that are opened up anymore.. and if an attack breaks down the ball is with the opposition who then attack themselves, but that's another story.]

Anyway, in the match against Watforwd, you basically notice how and why you struggle to break them down, but as said by Herne, you still stick with your comparably conservative plans, and actually get that 0-0 result, which is arguably exactly what you were encouraging. The reason of which simply because of sticking to the plan. You then suddenly DO change your plans, presumably in a misguided attempt to get arguably completely unrealistic stats/performances in one of the game's most competitive leagues. Up to the point that you change formation outright, with a 4-4-2 deep which I barely use (and think to be a rather specialist counter attacking thing -- I may stand corrected). With that you concede midfield and invite opponents in your half as DMs position significantly deeper than CMs. That's a lot of shots, but most of them are from adventurous range, likely because you somewhat successfully forced them to shoot from range, as 2 DMs position significantly deeper as CMs. Which may not be that bad a sign, in particular if the shots from within the box were from set pieces. Similar to the Watford match, isn't that somewhat expected to happen? I What opponent is this, by the way? [I personally found the 4-4-2 deep difficult and specialist myself as that gap between forwards and midfielders is much harder to close when you gain the ball as in a standard 4-4-2, which makes it easier to lose the ball again which naturally affects defending all over again, but that may be me. Not my type of formation (one of the very very few). :D ]

 

9 minutes ago, summatsupeer said:

Just because you make a low risk tactic, doesn't mean it will be defensively solid.  Especially when you consider the players you've shown in those positions.  If you want to be good defensively then you need players who are good defensively, just telling them to play safer won't make them mark/position/tackle/head/jump better.

In your 442 you've left two players up front, but then look at the players in midfield, none of them are exceptional at defending, 2 of the 4 are very attacking attribute wise.  If those poor defensive players are caught out it can create more work for the rest of your defence, even if they're players of the quality of Koscielny.

Thanks for your answers.

I'll take a step back and think again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's a great thread which helped me develop my 4-4-2 (which is now my main tactic). My specific tactic and an analysis on how it plays is listed at the very end of the thread( the last two posts in fact!). I am playing as Leeds, was promoted from the Championship to the Premiership at the end of season 1 and have played 4-4-2 most of the time in the subsequent 2 seasons, during which time I have finished in the top 10 both times and won the Capital One Cup this last year. I have tweaked my tactic as I have gone along, but the one I have posted is the current 'final version' and I enjoy using it (certainly it fits my players well). It may give you some ideas as to how a Defensive/Fluid 4-4-2 can be an attacking threat.

Oh and by the way... the most important thing I have taken away from reading the countless excellent tactical articles on this site is this: Don't try to plug and play someone else's tactics, look to your own players and design with them in mind... as soon as I started doing this I started to develop a successful tactic for my team.

Good luck :)

Edited by facman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Being a manager in real life I can understand why you are being sacked. You are like a pitbull that just doesn't give up, but also like a pitbull when you bite something your jaws are looked down and can be opened.

Meaning that I have to complement you on your sturdiness and that you wont give up. But I would have a problem with the fact that you cant let go of an idea if it doesnt work and either choose something diffrent or think outside the box. You need time to develop your managerial skills and that is something that in most topleagues isnt avaible, do your job and do it good right now. 

Something other to consider is that at Arsenal you will never get away with playing like you do. Just look at the type of football they play, they choose beauty over prices. They are allmost a dutch team that cares more about a beautifull match where the were the moral winners than they actually care about the win. 

Mayby Italy is a good place to start, serie B or a lower level serie A? They allmost all play the way you want to play

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One question:

Teams using a higher mentality are easier to defend? I mean, a team with Control mentality plays more direct passing, so, if I'm waiting packed, they will, to some extent, crash against me.

If a team uses a lower mentality, they move the ball more patiently and can find better space.

Is that right? Would this explain why I'm conceding more against defensive sides, despite they are not hitting me on the counter?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, looping said:

Atletico Madrid 15-16 18 in 38. 0.47.

And I think I'm playing even more defensive so I accept to score even less (63).

Difficult, yes. Unrealistic, no. A different tactic is needed? Not sure. 

15 hours ago, looping said:

After another tremendous fail, I have to admit you were right. 

According to that, is it coded in the game? I mean, is it really impossible (against game codes)?

I want to try again, maybe with another team, with better defensive players (DNA club defend or something like that, probably Arsenal not the best to do that), but I don't want to waste my time. So, the question is: is it really impossible? or it is just as difficult as IRL is?

To explain it better, does the game know the average goals conceded and scored IRL, so it is coded in the game that realistic goals scored and conceded must happen at some point?

 

"Unrealistic" may have been a harsh word choice. But when you're  hoping to emulate one of the biggest outliers in the last decade, "difficult" doesn't do it justice. I think you're moving the goalposts though. Going back to some of your earlier threads, you wanted a defensive tactic that worked. Based on the string of results with Arsenal (before you dropped the CMs to DMs), you've created it! Now you're trying to emulate a defensive masterclass of a season that only occurs once every few years across all the top divisions in Europe. That's a much harder task.

As a few others mention, it's not hard-coded. There is no guarantee that Messi will outscore Crouch in any given season. He's just highly likely to given better attributes and a better team. SI intends for most events to be as difficult/unlikely as they are in IRL.

If your goal is to achieve a historic defensive record a la Atletico or Chelsea, you're going to have to get a lot of things right. My attempt at this wouldn't use a 4-4-2 because of the gaps between the lines. Maybe a 4-3-3 (set up as a 4-5-1 in FM) or a 3-4-3 (set up as a 3-2-2-2-1). You're going to need a hell of a back line and midfielders to choke your opponent's play and win challenges.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, looping said:

One question:

Teams using a higher mentality are easier to defend? I mean, a team with Control mentality plays more direct passing, so, if I'm waiting packed, they will, to some extent, crash against me.

If a team uses a lower mentality, they move the ball more patiently and can find better space.

Is that right? Would this explain why I'm conceding more against defensive sides, despite they are not hitting me on the counter?

Exactly right :thup:.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, looping said:

One question:

Teams using a higher mentality are easier to defend? I mean, a team with Control mentality plays more direct passing, so, if I'm waiting packed, they will, to some extent, crash against me.

If a team uses a lower mentality, they move the ball more patiently and can find better space.

Is that right? Would this explain why I'm conceding more against defensive sides, despite they are not hitting me on the counter?

 

3 hours ago, Ceching You Out said:

Exactly right :thup:.

Following the logic, the best way  (if there is best) to defend a defensive mentality is not allowing them to pass the ball patiently? So the "best" way to defend a defensive mentality is a high mentality and the "best" way to defend a high mentality is a low mentality? 

I'm overcomplicating...?

Edited by looping

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, looping said:

 

Following the logic, the best way  (if there is best) to defend a defensive mentality is not allowing them to pass the ball patiently? So the "best" way to defend a defensive mentality is a high mentality and the "best" way to defend a high mentality is a low mentality? 

I'm overcomplicating...?

"Best" way to defend low mentality is to close them down, pin them back in their own half, don't give them the ball. You don't necessarily have to use high mentality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, jazzyboy said:

"Best" way to defend low mentality is to close them down, pin them back in their own half, don't give them the ball. You don't necessarily have to use high mentality.

What would you suggest 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, James9 said:

What would you suggest 

I was thinking close down more ti and close down always on deep opposition players with oi. Pretty much giving them the incentive to hoof the ball long. Which you can also achieve with higher mentality.. there isn't one absolute best way to do it.

But yeah I feel there is no harm in closing down the ai when they go defensive since they are usually narrow, so wont mess up our shape too much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was inspired by Looping's 4-4-2 DM formation, so decided to give it a go.

b7c0eb554f66c78552d470e080b8c76b.png

 

We played surprisingly well against West Ham.. Well, they shot a good percentage on target, but most of them were from corners headed straight to my GK.

f67f1707f1b49c447a841971b5a36d5b.png

 

Few things I noticed: the wm-a ( Fer) really gets in the box, sometimes I feel he is a striker. Also the wb-s is not as aggressive as I thought. I play Neil Taylor (LB) as wb-s and he is really conservative so far, he only bombs forward when my wm-a is too advanced and has nowhere to go, which is surprising considering the pi get further forward.. The average position of Naughton (#26) and Taylor(#3) are pretty similar.

3f3e01fcb597a4b746de00ad4b1c07d9.jpg

6402fd69f4dfaf2d444fe74bb62ba8a0.jpg

c3dee9b4ee2c5563eac12b17040ec672.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jazzyboy said:

I was inspired by Looping's 4-4-2 DM formation, so decided to give it a go.

b7c0eb554f66c78552d470e080b8c76b.png

 

We played surprisingly well against West Ham.. Well, they shot a good percentage on target, but most of them were from corners headed straight to my GK.

f67f1707f1b49c447a841971b5a36d5b.png

 

Few things I noticed: the wm-a ( Fer) really gets in the box, sometimes I feel he is a striker. Also the wb-s is not as aggressive as I thought. I play Neil Taylor (LB) as wb-s and he is really conservative so far, he only bombs forward when my wm-a is too advanced and has nowhere to go, which is surprising considering the pi get further forward.. The average position of Naughton (#26) and Taylor(#3) are pretty similar.

3f3e01fcb597a4b746de00ad4b1c07d9.jpg

6402fd69f4dfaf2d444fe74bb62ba8a0.jpg

c3dee9b4ee2c5563eac12b17040ec672.png

I'm making adjustments in my initial tactic in a very similar way. I payed more attention to what my fb were doing and my conclusion is that they are not doing what I wanted (initially) them to do. They are not supporting enough my wm-at so my wm-at is always (if I face a deep defense) 2 vs 1 situations. IRL this doesn't happen, even when a team plays with wingers, even when the plan is my plan (exploit flanks with wingers, not fb overlapping) fullbacks must support more. If they don't, winger ends in a cul-de-sac 2 vs 1 situation, tries to dribble and loses the ball.

I'm trying with wb-su. They have the pi get further forward, but they don't get further forward , at least, as I expected. I tried with fb-su giving him the same PI and, surprisingly, it seems better. I want to test more and I didn't have time today but I think this is the key. My wingers can't dribble 2 players sistematically. They can on occasion, if they are extremely gifted, but can't do it consistently. Even if I placed Garrincha there this would fail.

Not a bad point to drop cm to dm, so they provide more cover to fb getting further forward. More testing is needed. I hope during the weekend I'll have time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then there must be an instruction that restricts them, or maybe its the mentality that wont allow them to go forward.

My fullbacks do support a lot and thats not allways because of the ti overlap. I usualy play with fluid and control, could that be the reason??

@jazzyboy wm-a who cuts inside is usually my third goalscorer, he is like an IF who playes a bit deeper. Gives tactics a bit more stability defending without loosing attacking power.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, looping said:

 

Following the logic, the best way  (if there is best) to defend a defensive mentality is not allowing them to pass the ball patiently? So the "best" way to defend a defensive mentality is a high mentality and the "best" way to defend a high mentality is a low mentality? 

I'm overcomplicating...?

You're definitely not overcomplicating; that's a very good question to think about. The very short answer is yes, a high mentality can be very effective versus a low mentality, but let's think a little bit deeper about why. Moving up the mentality ladder (i.e. Standard to Control, Control to Attacking, etc.) does a few things all in one. It increases your defensive line, closing down, risk taking. It also makes your defenders more willing to play out from the back and your forwards more willing to be direct. Why does that typically disrupt a low mentality?

Because a low mentality wants to clear their lines and then slowly, cautiously work the ball into attack. Numbers will be slower to get forward. They want simple passes. By pushing higher and being more aggressive closing down, you compact the pitch. When there isn't a simple pass available in their own half, a more defensive team will just hoof the ball forward to be safe. Generally you can then claim possession and start your attack again.

Mentality isn't the only way to get these changes. You can increase defensive line and closing down a la carte without changing how your own team acts in possession. You can also modify your formation or roles to a more pressing formation -- fewer DMs, the right forward roles so that they close down as well, etc.

 

13 hours ago, looping said:

I'm making adjustments in my initial tactic in a very similar way. I payed more attention to what my fb were doing and my conclusion is that they are not doing what I wanted (initially) them to do. They are not supporting enough my wm-at so my wm-at is always (if I face a deep defense) 2 vs 1 situations. IRL this doesn't happen, even when a team plays with wingers, even when the plan is my plan (exploit flanks with wingers, not fb overlapping) fullbacks must support more. If they don't, winger ends in a cul-de-sac 2 vs 1 situation, tries to dribble and loses the ball.

I'm trying with wb-su. They have the pi get further forward, but they don't get further forward , at least, as I expected. I tried with fb-su giving him the same PI and, surprisingly, it seems better. I want to test more and I didn't have time today but I think this is the key. My wingers can't dribble 2 players sistematically. They can on occasion, if they are extremely gifted, but can't do it consistently. Even if I placed Garrincha there this would fail.

Not a bad point to drop cm to dm, so they provide more cover to fb getting further forward. More testing is needed. I hope during the weekend I'll have time.

Good catch! Glad you're able to start picking that kind of weakness out. That's one of the things we'd talked about before (regarding the constraints you set for yourself). With at least one more attacking fullback you'll get better numbers down that flank. Just to prove that I don't know everything, I would've guessed that a WB(s) would work in that situation. Seems like it's not, maybe because you're Counter-Structured. But you've got the method down -- identify the problem, try a reasonable fix. If that doesn't work, try something else. Evolution, not revolution.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure yet about the fb-wb question, but it's time to update this thread.

I've changed my formation.

abMcyv8alq.png
Make your football formation with this11.com

Team Instructions
Play out the defense, Push higher up

Player Instructions
GK: Roll it out, Slow pace down, distribute to central defenders

CM-DE: fewer risky passes

AM-SU: Move into channels, roam from position, close down more, dribble more, more risky passes

Reasons of the changes
Basically, I moved one of my strikers to AM position. The reason is that in every game the opponent played with 3 central midfielders I made my striker to man mark one of them. As long as my formation is my defensive formation, it's quite obvious that what I need is one more midfielder. I  reached the same conclusion than herne in his thread but the reason is completely different. This may suggest 442 is not working properly in fm, but that's another question which I'm going to ignore now.

Team instructions and player instructions are the same. Only 1 change, obviously my new position, role and duty. I want my AM to be a hardworking trequartista. I want him to link midfield and attack like a trequartista but I want him to contribute more defensively. What I did is customize his PI and tell them to close down more so he is a help from behind the ball when defending.

I also removed PI to my wm because the initial idea was crossing. Now I only have my AF inside the box...

What I need now is to involve more my fb in attacking. I don't want the classic wm cut inside and fb overlap. I want them to support the wm and overlap on occasion. Basically, what I said here:

18 hours ago, looping said:

I'm making adjustments in my initial tactic in a very similar way. I payed more attention to what my fb were doing and my conclusion is that they are not doing what I wanted (initially) them to do. They are not supporting enough my wm-at so my wm-at is always (if I face a deep defense) 2 vs 1 situations. IRL this doesn't happen, even when a team plays with wingers, even when the plan is my plan (exploit flanks with wingers, not fb overlapping) fullbacks must support more. If they don't, winger ends in a cul-de-sac 2 vs 1 situation, tries to dribble and loses the ball.

I'm trying with wb-su. They have the pi get further forward, but they don't get further forward , at least, as I expected. I tried with fb-su giving him the same PI and, surprisingly, it seems better. I want to test more and I didn't have time today but I think this is the key. My wingers can't dribble 2 players sistematically. They can on occasion, if they are extremely gifted, but can't do it consistently. Even if I placed Garrincha there this would fail.

Not a bad point to drop cm to dm, so they provide more cover to fb getting further forward. More testing is needed. I hope during the weekend I'll have time.

Another issue is my striker. I'm not sure if he is isolated. I need to pay more attention to that, but, what's your opinion about my AM-AF pairing?

 

Next goal
Once my fb/wb issue is fixed and my attacking pair effective, I want to develop a new tactic. The reason is that the tactic i'm working on now is not the best to unlock packed teams. I prefer to have tactical variety than adaptability, according to this thread:

My last step will be to develop a third tactic, a completely defensive tactic. Step by step.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×