What is Team Shape?

[Ö-zil to the Arsenal!]

What is Team Shape?

Team Shape is one of 3 primary factors which determine a players individual mentality.

• Team Mentality determines the team's collective mentality / strategy.
• Player Duty determines an individual's duty, within that collective team strategy.
• Team Shape how individual players prioritise the collective team mentality vs their own individual duty.
  → More Structured team shapes instruct players prioritise their individual duty over the team mentality.
  → Flexible team shape means players balance team mentality and individual duty equally.
  → More Fluid team shapes mean players prioritise the team mentality over their individual duty, hence why we talk about "compactness".
   

Spoiler

Example: An Attacking Midfielder on Attack duty, playing in a team with a Defensive team mentality.

Highly Structured

Prioritises Attacking individual duty over Defensive team mentality, leaving our AM(A) with an attacking individual mentality despite the defensive team mentality.

Flexible

Balances Defensive team mentality and Attacking individual duty leaving our AM(A) with a balanced, neutral mentality.

Very Fluid

Prioritises Defensive team mentality over Attacking individual duty, leaving our AM(A) with a more conservative mentality despite his attacking duty.

How do we apply this in the Tactics Creator?

1. Select the most logical Team Mentality for your overall strategy.
2. Apply Team Instructions to tailor defensive, build-up and attacking strategy.
3. Select a Formation which sets defensive structure and facilitates your overall strategy.
4. Apply Individual Duties to define your attacking structure.
5. Choose your Team Shape depending on how players should prioritise their Team Mentality vs Individual Duty.
6. Select Player Roles and Instructions based on their movement and status as a playmaker (not their name).
7. Set your Set Pieces.
    

 

Spoiler

Example:   Low-Block Counter-Attack.

In this case, we're playing a game where we're not expecting to compete for possession. We want a solid, deep defensive block to draw the opposition forward and then hit them on the counter-attack with 1-2 pacey players.

1. Team Mentality: Counter
   → Gives us a conservative base mentality.
   → Gives us a low-defensive block (Defensive Line & Closing Down) and a narrow shape.
2. Team Instructions: More Direct Passing & Pass into Space
   → Increases the speed of our build-up play, transitioning into attack.
3. Formation: 4-4-2
   → Gives us 2 solid banks of four in defence.
   → Leaves 2 attacking players forward to counter-attack.
4. Duties:
   
   
   
   → Central Midfielders holding, creating a solid defensive core protecting the Defence.
   → Fullbacks, Wide Midfielder on the right and one Striker in support roles.
   → Left winger and Striker in Attack roles, creating the counter attack.
5. Team Shape: Structured
   → Striker and Winger prioritise Attack, meaning they offer the counter-attacking threat.
   
   
   
   → Fullbacks, wide midfielder and second Striker offer support.
   → Minimal influence on the Central Midfield as their individual duty is aligned with the Team Mentality.
6. Player Roles and Instructions: As Above + GK Distributing the ball quickly, to the left flank.
   → We're now two solid banks of four with the Left Winger and Advanced Forward counter-attacking at pace with some support from the flanks.

At this point, I'd watch a game. 

When you look at it this way, it makes the Tactics Creator pretty simple, logical and easy to relate to real life football.

There. That's it. Simple. Next question. World peace? 
 

============================================================

This is a very short article but can be a work in progress, if people don't understand it clearly. I actually wrote a much longer article in the first place but boiled it down and it's actually not as complicated as we often make out.

[petepawn]

Good examples! Thanks!

[Fosse]

I've just about worked out team shape for myself and this just confirms it, great work @Ö-zil to the Arsenal!. It's a shame that we even need such a detailed post explaining the convoluted in game feature anyway.

[Ö-zil to the Arsenal!]

Just now, Fosse said:

I've just about worked out team shape for myself and this just confirms it, great work @Ö-zil to the Arsenal! it's a shame that we even need such a detailed post explaining the convoluted in game feature anyway.

Yes, as a minimum it needs a better description and interface in the tactics creator.

[summatsupeer]

Nice and clear on the mechanics, i'd just had how Team Shape adjusts not just per duty but per strata (D,DM,CM,AM,A).  For example a WB-A and a AF-A in Very Fluid will have the same mentality, but in Very Structured the WB-A will have a lower mentality and the AF-A will have a higher one.  Even though they are focusing on there individual duty in the Very Structured shape, it is relative to there defensive positioning in the formation.

[Svenc]

Part of the issue in the TC is also that long-term players relate the "mentality bar" to the old mentality slider, which after enquiring shouldn't/isn't like that. Confused me a hella lot as with such huge "gaps" you previously had teams that couldn't possibly play coherent football, with half the team basically being told to "keep it safe" whilst the other locked in an altogether different locker room and encouraged to "grab and smash" 'em. As such, all the theorems behind the entire concept as when it was introduced never once allowed for such gaps. I'm still personally no huge fan of the thing, btw. Not least because newbies think this would be like the thing that would/could totally make or break a team/season/result when it isn't like it at all. Lost count how often some chose "structured" and then expected their defenders to never join attacks (based on the in-game text), etc.

[Ö-zil to the Arsenal!]

31 minutes ago, summatsupeer said:

Nice and clear on the mechanics, i'd just had how Team Shape adjusts not just per duty but per strata (D,DM,CM,AM,A).  For example a WB-A and a AF-A in Very Fluid will have the same mentality, but in Very Structured the WB-A will have a lower mentality and the AF-A will have a higher one.  Even though they are focusing on there individual duty in the Very Structured shape, it is relative to there defensive positioning in the formation.

Yep, the reason that is currently left out was to keep it simple and that the positional effect is only ever fairly minor. I'm going to see how people digest this information and - all being well - add the positional effect. It'd actually probably be as simple as 2 additional bullets.

 

12 minutes ago, Svenc said:

Part of the issue in the TC is also that long-term players relate the "mentality bar" to the old mentality slider, which after enquiring shouldn't/isn't like that. Confused me a hella lot as with such huge "gaps" you previously had teams that couldn't possibly play coherent football, with half the team basically being told to "keep it safe" whilst the other locked in an altogether different locker room and encouraged to "grab and smash" 'em. As such, all the theorems behind the entire concept as when it was introduced never once allowed for such gaps. I'm still personally no huge fan of the thing, btw. Not least because newbies think this would be like the thing that would/could totally make or break a team/season/result when it isn't like it at all. Lost count how often some chose "structured" and then expected their defenders to never join attacks (based on the in-game text), etc.

Sorry, you may need to re-write that. I have read it 3 times and still cannot understand.

What are the "gaps"? Are you saying that the mentality bar is not related to the sliders? It is. You can actually format the Mentality bar to read the old slider value. The difference is aesthetic. Check out the skinning forum. Not sure if that's even what you're saying / asking?

[Svenc]

4 minutes ago, Ö-zil to the Arsenal! said:

What are the "gaps"? Are you saying that the mentality bar is not related to the sliders? It is. You can actually format the Mentality bar to read the old slider value. The difference is aesthetic. Check out the skinning forum. Not sure if that's even what you're saying / asking?

"Gaps" as in a previous slider spread of like 3-18 across the team. That wasn't done as  broke the team into completely seperate "units", and thus made for incoherent football. When the mentality bar appeared on FM 2017, I inquired at some mods (Cleon and I think HUNT3R) and they told me it didn't fully relate to it. It's a visual cue introduced to highlight the differences in the shapes. If it did relate, you had teams broken completely into units. It's though to tell though as maybe the entire mentality thing had seen a rework. If things worked like they did previous I would never have gone very structured as that didn't translate well at all. I.e. the old "rigid" (structured).

At some point into the development of this, we shouldn't have to hark back to under the hood mechanics anymore anyway when explaining/discusssing this, which is why I was reluctant to post this at first.
 

[Ö-zil to the Arsenal!]

1 minute ago, Svenc said:

"Gaps" as in a previous slider spread of like 3-18 across the team. That wasn't done as  broke the team into completely seperate "units", and thus made for incoherent football. When the mentality bar appeared on FM 2017, I inquired at some mods (Cleon and I think HUNT3R) and they told me it didn't fully relate to it. It's a visual cue introduced to highlight the differences in the shapes. If it did relate, you had teams broken completely into units. It's though to tell though as maybe the entire mentality thing had seen a rework. If things worked like they did previous I would never have gone very structured as that didn't translate well at all. I.e. the old "rigid" (structured).

At some point into the development of this, we shouldn't have to hark back to under the hood mechanics anymore anyway when explaining/discusssing this, which is why I was reluctant to post this at first.
 

It's still a very similar set up. You can see the values associated with each combination of Team Shape, Mentality, Duty and Position here -> 

The Tactics Creator needs a much better interface for people to get close to understanding what actual effect their changes are having..

[kidthekid]

I have to admit, I personally find structured more risky than fluid, just because I want my attacking players tracking back and my defenders stepping up, so I tend to use flexible or fluid most of the time. But I do feel like structured can create great football, I used to make the mistake of thinking structured = defensive football

[Svenc]

1 hour ago, Ö-zil to the Arsenal! said:

It's still a very similar set up. You can see the values associated with each combination of Team Shape, Mentality, Duty and Position here -> 

The Tactics Creator needs a much better interface for people to get close to understanding what actual effect their changes are having..

I've seen that before and that's what I mean. Prior you never had advanced players in a contain/defensive mentality on like mentalities like "16/17" without fiddling. That was the idea, there needed to be reasonably tight bands, not huge splits ranging from 3-18 back to front. If that indeed looks like it "under the hood" and that's not just exaggerated visual cues introduced, the mechanics must have gotten a hell of an overhaul though. Previously with mentality splits like that you would have found players fare more isolated and disconnected, not merely positionally, but in the way the team would work together as an unit. You'd have those defenders merely mostly recycling/playing it ultra safe whilst the more advanced guy would just smash it, and have to deal with the incoherent/disconnected teams/football. There was hardly anybody more insightful/knowledgeable prior than wwfan, and he would point you out on such huge gaps/splits immediately if you had made manual tweaks (half of the original Tactics Creator in concept if not more is his doing). I think the entire "locker room" metaphor is of his, that is locking one part of the team into a room and telling them to play it ultra safe, and the other into another and encouraging them to just smash.

As argued, it shouldn't be a point of the debate anymore (the sliders are out and that's that). Their effect was overhauled/tweaked prior on various iterations too, so who knows. Personally it's just that rather than helping it confused me a great deal as soon as that mentality bar was introduced, as that seemingly violated everything the thing stood for previous. Was initially reluctant to post, as that is a great opening post and I was reluctant to derail it into a debate about "under the hood" mechanics. And if that is the actual slider settings, it's apparent that it's  "impossible" by now to have teams as disconnected as in some older versions, be it going structured or fluid!

 

[kingjericho]

Awesomeness. This may be what I needed to get that counter attacking tactic to work. It is solid but very short in goals scored.

[yonko]

@Ö-zil to the Arsenal! another great thread from you. This should help many people understand Team Shape.....finally.....hopefully....

[kingjericho]

In your example of the 4-4-2, you have no specialist roles, yet you choose a structured shape. In your theory is this more important to the overall performance of the tactic than the 12-step guide which links shape to specialist roles?

[cregan]

The 12-step guide was from several versions ago. Creative freedom was unlinked from roles in FM15, IIRC, so the old specialist/generalist split is no longer valid.

[SebastianRO]

@Ö-zil to the Arsenal

 

This is the best and most simple explanation I've ever hear in my 10 years of Football Manager. Many people out there try to explain it simple, but they over-complicate it so much that new players become very confused. I really hope you make more of these. Old players and fans like us we do understand since we saw the game developing over quite a long period of time, but newcomers are assaulted with these terms that they do not understand.

[Ö-zil to the Arsenal!]

11 hours ago, Svenc said:

I've seen that before and that's what I mean. Prior you never had advanced players in a contain/defensive mentality on like mentalities like "16/17" without fiddling. That was the idea, there needed to be reasonably tight bands, not huge splits ranging from 3-18 back to front. If that indeed looks like it "under the hood" and that's not just exaggerated visual cues introduced, the mechanics must have gotten a hell of an overhaul though. Previously with mentality splits like that you would have found players fare more isolated and disconnected, not merely positionally, but in the way the team would work together as an unit. You'd have those defenders merely mostly recycling/playing it ultra safe whilst the more advanced guy would just smash it, and have to deal with the incoherent/disconnected teams/football. There was hardly anybody more insightful/knowledgeable prior than wwfan, and he would point you out on such huge gaps/splits immediately if you had made manual tweaks (half of the original Tactics Creator in concept if not more is his doing). I think the entire "locker room" metaphor is of his, that is locking one part of the team into a room and telling them to play it ultra safe, and the other into another and encouraging them to just smash.

As argued, it shouldn't be a point of the debate anymore (the sliders are out and that's that). Their effect was overhauled/tweaked prior on various iterations too, so who knows. Personally it's just that rather than helping it confused me a great deal as soon as that mentality bar was introduced, as that seemingly violated everything the thing stood for previous. Was initially reluctant to post, as that is a great opening post and I was reluctant to derail it into a debate about "under the hood" mechanics. And if that is the actual slider settings, it's apparent that it's  "impossible" by now to have teams as disconnected as in some older versions, be it going structured or fluid!

 

Aha! I think I understand what you're saying.

If I am understanding correctly, you're touching on one of the most common misconceptions about Team Shape - that Team Shape is compactness.

Whilst it is correct that more Fluid shapes, are more compact than structured shapes - all things being equal - Team Shape is not the only way to be compact.

This is where we have weird, illogical systems such as Very Fluid / Defence mentality or recreating Jose Mourinho / Simeone using Very Fluid as it's 'compact'. Clearly not logical in comparison to real-football..

You can keep your team compact using:

1. Team Shape.
2. A compact Formation
3. Distribution of Duties

Distribution of duties is very important (more so than Team Shape at the more structured end of the scale).

This is something I will add to the OP. Let me just think about how to write it clearly.

 

10 hours ago, kingjericho said:

Awesomeness. This may be what I needed to get that counter attacking tactic to work. It is solid but very short in goals scored.

Yep, and hopefully people can see a difference between this counter attack and the Alex Ferguson counter attack which - in my opinion - would be an attacking mentality.

 

9 hours ago, yonko said:

@Ö-zil to the Arsenal! another great thread from you. This should help many people understand Team Shape.....finally.....hopefully....

Let's see. So far, so good. It seems simple in my head, let's see if others read it that way.

 

9 hours ago, kingjericho said:

In your example of the 4-4-2, you have no specialist roles, yet you choose a structured shape. In your theory is this more important to the overall performance of the tactic than the 12-step guide which links shape to specialist roles?

When I started out I used the 12-step guide extensively to help understand tactics - I quote it in my earlier threads - but have found it gradually less relevant as the game as evolved. Remember it's about 5-years old now.

Player Roles mean nothing more than what it says in the Player Instruction team. All I am looking at is:

• Are they a playmaker / target man?
• What are their movement / PI tendencies?
• What Duty is available for this role?

Duty >>> Role, in my opinion.

 

2 hours ago, SebastianRO said:

@Ö-zil to the Arsenal

 

This is the best and most simple explanation I've ever hear in my 10 years of Football Manager. Many people out there try to explain it simple, but they over-complicate it so much that new players become very confused. I really hope you make more of these. Old players and fans like us we do understand since we saw the game developing over quite a long period of time, but newcomers are assaulted with these terms that they do not understand.

Thank you very much. I appreciate the feedback. I actually wrote a lot more in the first place and then cut, cut, cut and think it is now clear and simple as I can make it.

[Putzibram]

If I will ever be able to design a somewhat decent tactic, it will be because of articles like this.

 

I hope it will be added to list of strategy and training guides for easy future reference.

[Svenc]

4 hours ago, Ö-zil to the Arsenal! said:

Aha! I think I understand what you're saying.

If I am understanding correctly, you're touching on one of the most common misconceptions about Team Shape - that Team Shape is compactness.

No, because the mentality slider never solely influenced positioning, and whether at all players would make runs forward (or forward drop deep rather than spearhead the lines) has been dictated largely by duties since. What I mean is this (I don't want to derail, just to clarify -- all wwfan:
 

Quote

SI are saying that mentality structure must be tight, which has been the case since FM07 at least. Free control of sliders allowed managers to set minimum mentality for their defenders, medium mentality for their midfield, and maximum mentality for their attackers. Conceptually within the AI and ME, that is the same as taking your defenders into one room and telling them that the overall strategy today is to defend at all costs, your midfielders into another room and telling them to balance risk and reward, and your attackers into a third room to tell them that we are going to flat out attack at all costs.

 

Quote

Huge mentality splits are problematic as they inhibit the overall strategy of play. If the defence is only focused on defending and the attack only focused on attacking, you will get disjointed play. A 1-20 split goes against the logic of the system. You might be able to get it to work with luck, but it is more likely to result in horrible play.

In other words, in particular the structured setups would do exactly as what SI wanted you to prevent from doing before as that wasn't to much benefit, hadn't been for years due to leading to disjointed play. Alternatively, the bar is just a visual cue, and doesn't translate 1:1 to the previous sliders. Or there's been a fully rework either way. That's where my initial confusion with the mentality bar introduced was coming from. Whilst that doesn't imply fully-on extreme 1-20 splits, at such huge ones (2-18 on very structured counter for instance) it still suggests totally different to where this was before. Points of reference (everything here posted by wwfan).
 

 

 

 

[Ö-zil to the Arsenal!]

@Svenc Sorry to cut off the discussion but this is really not what this topic is intended for.

This topic is intended to understand what team shape is and how to apply it. You're talking to the wrong guy to get the tactics creator changed. I'm nothing to do with SI. There's a bunch of threads knocking about to talk about how the game could be improved etc but this is not one of them.

Let's keep it on-topic and help people understand how to get their own tactical ideas working in the match engine using the tactics creator.

[Svenc]

12 minutes ago, Ö-zil to the Arsenal! said:

@Svenc

This topic is intended to understand what team shape is and how to apply it. You're talking to the wrong guy to get the tactics creator changed.

This isn't about getting the tactics creator changed. It is that I still find it confusing when you and others link the mentality bars to the previous sliders, explicitly. For new guys that doesn't matter. For the old guard, it may be a tad confusing (no matter if things work as they still do -- on prior iterations, you weren't good off if those translated 1:1 to the sliders). Otherwise as said, didn't want to derail, as the rest is fantastic!!

[PonjaConRulos]

23 hours ago, Ö-zil to the Arsenal! said:

Team Shape how individual players prioritise the collective team mentality vs their own individual duty.
→ More Structured team shapes instruct players prioritise their individual duty over the team mentality.
→ Flexible team shape means players balance team mentality and individual duty equally.
→ More Fluid team shapes mean players prioritise the team mentality over their individual duty, hence why we talk about "compactness".
 

I think this is the description that should be in the game. I don't think people is overthinking shape, the FM description of shape is too complicated and confusing because it involves creative freedom, so it makes you think that Fluid is Barcelona 2011 and Structured is Simeone. Also, it talks about stratas but it never mentions duties. 

[Argonaut]

8 hours ago, Ö-zil to the Arsenal! said:

Player Roles mean nothing more than what it says in the Player Instruction team. All I am looking at is:

• Are they a playmaker / target man?
• What are their movement / PI tendencies?
• What Duty is available for this role?

Duty >>> Role, in my opinion.

What I'm curious about is whether or not there is anything under the hood with player roles (excluding playmaker/target man designation).

For example, is the CM-S with 'Roam From Position' selected the same as a Box-to-Box Midfielder? I would wager, and even hope, that it wouldn't be the same. I'm not the kind to deeply analyze things on a micro level, I prefer the macro level. But if I was making a tactic I would expect a BBM-S to "bust a gut" to get forward and back more than the CM-S with roaming. Perhaps whether or not he busts that gut is more due to his attributes than his role and instructions, but I would hope that it would be a bit of both.

Great thread by the way. Team Shape is one of the first questions I ask myself when making a tactic, and its nice to have a simple guide.

[bdixon]

I still don't get it. It's too bloody confusing which is starting to frustrate me. May as well just stick it on flexible and forgot about it.

Is there anyway a real life comparison could be used as an example?

I tend to always use fluid, why? well because most of the blog/vlogs and other guides I've read or watched tend to use. 

 

[Anaconda Vice]

22 minutes ago, bdixon said:

I still don't get it. It's too bloody confusing which is starting to frustrate me. May as well just stick it on flexible and forgot about it.

Is there anyway a real life comparison could be used as an example?

I tend to always use fluid, why? well because most of the blog/vlogs and other guides I've read or watched tend to use. 

 

I think the real life example here is close to Simeone and Atletico.

[cregan]

5 hours ago, Argonaut said:

For example, is the CM-S with 'Roam From Position' selected the same as a Box-to-Box Midfielder? I would wager, and even hope, that it wouldn't be the same. I'm not the kind to deeply analyze things on a micro level, I prefer the macro level. But if I was making a tactic I would expect a BBM-S to "bust a gut" to get forward and back more than the CM-S with roaming. Perhaps whether or not he busts that gut is more due to his attributes than his role and instructions, but I would hope that it would be a bit of both.

IIRC, it's been confirmed in various threads that other than playmakers of various stripes and target men (who both 'attract' the ball in their individual ways), there are no under the hood differences between roles. A BBM is exactly the same as a CM(s) set to roam. Whether he busts a gut or not is down to the usual things - work rate, aggression, stamina, decisions, etc. etc. - but the role is the exact same.

[coach vahid]

Hi @Ö-zil to the Arsenal!

Just a quick question about this thread...you explain the attributes need for your previous thread and I would like to know what your looking for when you play a counter style.

Thanks.

[Armistice]

Hi there good thread, this is pretty much very nicely written the stuff I've been trying to figure out in the last month so it's a great article, wish it would have been released quicker.

 

Anyway when you say that Team Shape tells a player to prioritize his individual mentality over collective, is that their individual mentality taken in consideration totally separated from the Team Mentality or within it? Like say, an AM-A, with Defensive - Highly Structured is the same as AM-A, with Control - Highly Structured in terms of what they do on the pitch or there are still differences? Like is Team Mentality in this case just a base of passing style, width etc and it doesn't affect individual mentality much?

 

@summatsupeer

@Ö-zil to the Arsenal!

[Jean0987654321]

15 hours ago, coach vahid said:

Hi @Ö-zil to the Arsenal!

Just a quick question about this thread...you explain the attributes need for your previous thread and I would like to know what your looking for when you play a counter style.

Thanks.

Not Ozil (duh :p), but I'd look for good defenders, a good holding player (Positioning, Tackling, Marking, Strength) and then I look for some pacey attackers that can also finish.  (Pace, Acceleration, Finishing, Composure). That would be a start. Also a good goalie should be needed (yea, I know) since he's gonna take on a lot of shots. I'd rather get one who'll actually save them

[jjtile]

Jeez - if someone had posted that table like five years ago, it'd have saved a lot of head scratching.

So, essentially, with a couple of exceptions, More fluid reduces the mentality of players in the AM and Striker tier, leaves players in the M tier unchanged and increases the mentality of the players in the D and DM tiers?

That's it? 

[summatsupeer]

1 hour ago, jjtile said:

Jeez - if someone had posted that table like five years ago, it'd have saved a lot of head scratching.

So, essentially, with a couple of exceptions, More fluid reduces the mentality of players in the AM and Striker tier, leaves players in the M tier unchanged and increases the mentality of the players in the D and DM tiers?

That's it? 

Not really.

1. Team Shape adjusts the starting mentality applied to a player using the team mentality.  
2. The players duty (defend/support/attack) will then be applied to the players mentality.
3. The more structured the shape, the larger the effect the duty has on the players mentality (regardless of position), the more fluid the shape, the lower the effect .

[jjtile]

1 hour ago, summatsupeer said:

Not really.

1. Team Shape adjusts the starting mentality applied to a player using the team mentality.  
2. The players duty (defend/support/attack) will then be applied to the players mentality.
3. The more structured the shape, the larger the effect the duty has on the players mentality (regardless of position), the more fluid the shape, the lower the effect .

I'm not sure that different from what I said - other than the exact order in which modifiers are applied - but interesting nonetheless.

[tyro]

Very nice and "compact" explanation of team shape. Makes a lot of sense and is very simple. Thank you. 

Maybe now to add to this someone or maybe you could also explain the mentalities as it seems that people also get confused about the names of "attacking" , "counter" etc.

In my mind they are just pre-sets (kinda like the roles that have certain player instructions build in). I think still many do not realize that attacking affects so much, like width , tempo, closing down, defensive line, etc. and they just add exactly the same instructions to it to make it attacking when it already is. They choose attacking then they immediately add higher tempo and more width which in fact creates a super tempo and width tactic that might be overboard. 

I think in your low block example you already showed why you chose counter and what it does. 

[Armistice]

On 29 aprilie 2017 at 09:28, nightwalker22 said:

Hi there good thread, this is pretty much very nicely written the stuff I've been trying to figure out in the last month so it's a great article, wish it would have been released quicker.

 

Anyway when you say that Team Shape tells a player to prioritize his individual mentality over collective, is that their individual mentality taken in consideration totally separated from the Team Mentality or within it? Like say, an AM-A, with Defensive - Highly Structured is the same as AM-A, with Control - Highly Structured in terms of what they do on the pitch or there are still differences? Like is Team Mentality in this case just a base of passing style, width etc and it doesn't affect individual mentality much?

 

@summatsupeer

@Ö-zil to the Arsenal!

If anyone could explain this, would be perfect, also what do Fluid/Structured do? It works the same as their more extreme versions, but in a less obvious way?

[summatsupeer]

On 4/29/2017 at 19:26, jjtile said:

I'm not sure that different from what I said - other than the exact order in which modifiers are applied - but interesting nonetheless.

You never mentioned duty once and finished your post with "thats it?" but whatever, if thats what your saying you understand.

On 4/29/2017 at 07:28, nightwalker22 said:

Hi there good thread, this is pretty much very nicely written the stuff I've been trying to figure out in the last month so it's a great article, wish it would have been released quicker.

 

Anyway when you say that Team Shape tells a player to prioritize his individual mentality over collective, is that their individual mentality taken in consideration totally separated from the Team Mentality or within it? Like say, an AM-A, with Defensive - Highly Structured is the same as AM-A, with Control - Highly Structured in terms of what they do on the pitch or there are still differences? Like is Team Mentality in this case just a base of passing style, width etc and it doesn't affect individual mentality much?

 

@summatsupeer

@Ö-zil to the Arsenal!

I think I get what your saying, i think the terminology of "individual mentality" vs "team mentality" might be confusing things.

Earlier I posted the following:

1. Team Shape adjusts the starting mentality applied to a player using the team mentality.  
2. The players duty (defend/support/attack) will then be applied to the players mentality.
3. The more structured the shape, the larger the effect the duty has on the players mentality (regardless of position), the more fluid the shape, the lower the effect

Point 3 is the "individual vs team" thing, which I would say is "how big the effect the duty has on the players mentality".  In your example the amount of risk taking by the player would change dramatically due to the above process.  Structured shapes result in a wider spread of mentalities whilst fluid shapes keep the spread narrower.  You can apply many labels to what this creates, individuals vs teams etc but I don't like that, I just think of it as different levels of depth from front to back.

[Armistice]

58 minutes ago, summatsupeer said:

You never mentioned duty once and finished your post with "thats it?" but whatever, if thats what your saying you understand.

I think I get what your saying, i think the terminology of "individual mentality" vs "team mentality" might be confusing things.

Earlier I posted the following:

1. Team Shape adjusts the starting mentality applied to a player using the team mentality.  
2. The players duty (defend/support/attack) will then be applied to the players mentality.
3. The more structured the shape, the larger the effect the duty has on the players mentality (regardless of position), the more fluid the shape, the lower the effect

Point 3 is the "individual vs team" thing, which I would say is "how big the effect the duty has on the players mentality".  In your example the amount of risk taking by the player would change dramatically due to the above process.  Structured shapes result in a wider spread of mentalities whilst fluid shapes keep the spread narrower.  You can apply many labels to what this creates, individuals vs teams etc but I don't like that, I just think of it as different levels of depth from front to back.

So let me know if I got this, Team Mentality comes first, then Team Shape, then duties in terms of priority? I mean, if you pick Control - Structured, it is going to set a starting mentality base for each player (Control), Structured distributing it from back to front, then duties further adjusts this, with a little more emphasis on the duty set up since it's structured? Is this the process of how it works?

[Ö-zil to the Arsenal!]

20 minutes ago, nightwalker22 said:

So let me know if I got this, Team Mentality comes first, then Team Shape, then duties in terms of priority? I mean, if you pick Control - Structured, it is going to set a starting mentality base for each player (Control), Structured distributing it from back to front, then duties further adjusts this, with a little more emphasis on the duty set up since it's structured? Is this the process of how it works?

Close, but not quite.

You've got Team Mentality and Individual Duty as the two primary factors influencing an individual player's mentality.

You've then got Team Shape which determines which is prioritised.
→ More Structured team shapes instruct players prioritise their individual duty over the team mentality.
→ Flexible team shape means players balance team mentality and individual duty equally.
→ More Fluid team shapes mean players prioritise the team mentality over their individual duty, hence why we talk about "compactness".

Using your example, if you pick Control as a mentality and Structured as a team shape then your teams overall play - width, tempo, defensive block - will be as expected in a control mentality however they would be more inclined to priorities their individual duty - defend, support, attack etc.

Is that clear?

[Armistice]

42 minutes ago, Ö-zil to the Arsenal! said:

Close, but not quite.

You've got Team Mentality and Individual Duty as the two primary factors influencing an individual player's mentality.

You've then got Team Shape which determines which is prioritised.
→ More Structured team shapes instruct players prioritise their individual duty over the team mentality.
→ Flexible team shape means players balance team mentality and individual duty equally.
→ More Fluid team shapes mean players prioritise the team mentality over their individual duty, hence why we talk about "compactness".

Using your example, if you pick Control as a mentality and Structured as a team shape then your teams overall play - width, tempo, defensive block - will be as expected in a control mentality however they would be more inclined to priorities their individual duty - defend, support, attack etc.

Is that clear?

Yep, cheers for that mate.

[summatsupeer]

47 minutes ago, nightwalker22 said:

So let me know if I got this, Team Mentality comes first, then Team Shape, then duties in terms of priority? I mean, if you pick Control - Structured, it is going to set a starting mentality base for each player (Control), Structured distributing it from back to front, then duties further adjusts this, with a little more emphasis on the duty set up since it's structured? Is this the process of how it works?

Pretty much, just don't think of it as "priority", that is just how I (as a programmer) would do the calculations, it is not an order of importance.  

The reason so many of us on here say "use Flexible if you aren't sure" is because its impact is less than Team Mentality and Player Duty.

[VV Bal op de Lat]

Hi ozil, thanks for this thread. I think it got me a little bit closer to really understand how the tc works.

I'm noticing however a very frustrating pattern in my mind when trying to form a tactic: when I read threads like this I think: wow, this is great, I finally understand the tc! But then, when I want to adapt this new knowledge into the game, I get even more confused again about how I should use this in my tactics. I guess the whole concept of team shape is just way too theoretical for me to make it click to a practical solution. So my solution has been ignorance: I'm just not using team shape anymore and leave it on standard, or how it may be called.

I think what I'm missing as a final piece of the puzzle to really be able to adapt this knowledge into my tactics is: 

Which real life managers use which combination of team shape and mentality? What are the best and most clear real life examples of every single combination of team shape and mentality?

I know this is a huuuuge question to answer and I'm not even sure there's an answer to it, because I really fear that team shape is such a theoretical thing and that its just not really replicated in real life football. I don't see it in real life, but could be me..

[PonjaConRulos]

I always see people choosing Very Fluid when they want a lot of player movement (I assume Barcelona 2011), like an extreme Roam from position. So, are they wrong? Can you achieve that movement with a Structured shape?

[Kcinnay]

17 hours ago, VV Bal op de Lat said:

I think what I'm missing as a final piece of the puzzle to really be able to adapt this knowledge into my tactics is: 

Which real life managers use which combination of team shape and mentality? What are the best and most clear real life examples of every single combination of team shape and mentality?

I know this is a huuuuge question to answer and I'm not even sure there's an answer to it, because I really fear that team shape is such a theoretical thing and that its just not really replicated in real life football. I don't see it in real life, but could be me..

I actually opened a thread with the same question a couple of months ago, but unfortunately, the response was in general limited to 'that's a matter of personal interpretation'.

[kandersson]

13 minutes ago, Kcinnay said:

I actually opened a thread with the same question a couple of months ago, but unfortunately, the response was in general limited to 'that's a matter of personal interpretation'.

it would be interesting to know SI interpretation though, because it's clearly relevant within their game and AI managers are a result of that interpretation. Personally I'd like to know what is SI intepretation of default team shape+mentality for most popular managers in the game. That would be much more helpful to me than 1000 pages of explanations - usually written by people not working at SI (not a knock on this thread that is actually extremely well written and explained, as any other written by @Ö-zil to the Arsenal!)

[VV Bal op de Lat]

15 hours ago, Kcinnay said:

I actually opened a thread with the same question a couple of months ago, but unfortunately, the response was in general limited to 'that's a matter of personal interpretation'.

I think team shape is by far the most difficult thing in FM tactics. For example, I have never been able to spot which team shape the AI uses so how can I learn more about team shape if it is so difficult to spot? I've come to a point that I really hope team shape will be taken out of the game next year, or get a total revamp which would make it easier to understand, hopefully..

14 hours ago, kandersson said:

it would be interesting to know SI interpretation though, because it's clearly relevant within their game and AI managers are a result of that interpretation. Personally I'd like to know what is SI intepretation of default team shape+mentality for most popular managers in the game. That would be much more helpful to me than 1000 pages of explanations - usually written by people not working at SI (not a knock on this thread that is actually extremely well written and explained, as any other written by @Ö-zil to the Arsenal!)

kandersson, I think that is a fantastic idea! I think it could maybe be implemented in the manager profile within the manager tactics spot.
In order to not de-focus this topic from it's original subject I've opened up a new topic to discuss the meaning and interpretation of AI manager tactical preferences. Maybe if we understand those preferences better we can already learn about how SI interprets popular managers tactics. you can join the discussion here: https://community.sigames.com/topic/401809-what-do-the-ai-manager-tactical-preferences-really-mean/

 

[avfcmatthew]

I would like to create a tactic where its kind of counter attack, but more of an attacking style. I want to remain tight at the back, but press the opposition and play fast, direct balls to the front line who I'd like to be very creative. 

1) I'd choose the attacking mentality because it fits all of the criteria of how I want to play.

2) Slight deeper defensive line - so my defence doesn't get caught out by long balls and also gives the forwards more space to be creative. Pass into space - to enhance the counter attack and pass to forward players in space. Be more expressive - I will be playing with Man United, so I want to exploit the creativity of my talented forward players.

3) 4-1-2-3 DM Wide - to remain solid at the back but have my attacking 3 remain forward. 

4) My striker and left winger are on attack, and the right winger on support to link my midfield to the attack. My two center-midfielders are on support and attack, to support my attack, and my DM is on defend too. My fullbacks are going to support to help link defence to midfield.

5) I will play structured because I want my players to play strictly within their duties. Especially I would like my striker and LW to keep attacking.

6)  

--------GK---------

FB--CB--CB--FB

--------DM--------

---DLP--CM-----

W---------------W

--------DLF-------

So have I followed these instructions correctly based on the type of football I want to play? Is there any way I could improved or could have misinterpreted the instructions? Thanks in advance.

 

[Armistice]

If you want to play Structured it means your player will put his individual mentality over team mentality. So in case you want to select your wingers on attack duty, you've got to consider your formation as your wingers could be too high up the pitch to pick up a pass.

[coach vahid]

Hi Ozil 

Can you develop the thread ( I imagine this is the simeones thread 😊) how you play when you favorite or not attributes needed ect...I can imagine that is not your favorite football.

Thanks for all your contributions.

[cregan]

On 11/05/2017 at 17:16, PonjaConRulos said:

I always see people choosing Very Fluid when they want a lot of player movement (I assume Barcelona 2011), like an extreme Roam from position. So, are they wrong? Can you achieve that movement with a Structured shape?

To an extent. More Roaming + More Expressive would both bump players' individual freedom. However, they'll still be doing so from the basis of the individual duties rather than the team mentality. So an FB(d) in a team playing Highly Structured/Control might still tend to get forward less even with +Roam +Express than an FB(d) on Very Fluid/Control without. 

[zinedinezidane10]

 Got a few things regarding the discussion about player roles and under the hood mechanics.

Here goes; So what determines a roles creative freedom? Is it the attached indivdual intructions or the role itself? E.g. I use 2 attacking midfielders, one an advanced playmaker on a support duty, the other an attacking midfielder with the exact same player instructions and also on a support duty. Will these 2 attacking midfielders have the same amount of creative freedom?

If so what does each player instruction do? Will the 'Hold Position' player instruction instruct your players to rarely do forward runs? Will More risky passes increase creative freedom for players with the designated player instruction, while fewer risky passes will do the opposite, namely reduce creative freedom for that player?

So basically my question is how is creative freedom and forward runs etc. allocated?

[Armistice]

Could someone with enough knowledge post more examples of how Team Shape affects players individual mentality in different and more sensible positions (say a CM or a fullback)? Especially in Fluid/Structured, because there are still slight differences imo between these and their extremities.