What is Team Shape?

[cregan]

On 5/13/2017 at 15:28, zinedinezidane10 said:

 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?

Creative freedom - as I understand it - is the tendency for individual players to deviate from "the norm" (whatever PIs they have - and roles are just collections of PIs; a BBM is just a CM(s) + Roam From Position) for their assigned duty and position, and is almost entirely assigned by Team Shape, possibly mentality too (in so much as you'd expect to see more risk-taking in Overload, for instance), and relies on the player's own Decisions, Anticipation and, IIRC, Vision to determine whether they do so sensibly or not.

For example, a CM(d) will hold position, meaning he won't generally make forward runs or wander from his post. If the team plays Structured, his creative freedom will be limited and he'll pretty much always do do what the hold position PI tells him to and what his own duty (defend) gives him by way of mentality as a function of the team's (a CM(d) on Overload will generally wander higher, a CM(d) on Contain will generally sit in front of the back line). If the team plays Fluid, his creative freedom will be greater, and while he'll still often stay put, at times he'll decide to ignore hold position or the constrictions of his defend duty and get himself involved in attacks. His individual mentality will also be slightly higher (because in fluid/very fluid, duties tend to cluster in their mentality around the average for the team as a whole, with less individual deviation between defend duty and attack duty than under structured systems).

With the exception of playmakers and target men both attracting more of the ball, there are no hard-coded differences in the roles, AFAIK; they're just set collections of PIs. So in your example, while the AP(s) will tend to receive the ball more, both players should have the exact same creative freedom. When they're not ignoring their PIs to do their own thing, though, they may behave differently because they'll be following a different instruction set.

On 5/13/2017 at 15:28, zinedinezidane10 said:

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?

In the first case, yes, exactly. In the second case, More/Less Risky Passes as I recall affects likelihood of attempting a 50/50 long through ball if there's one on. Neither More/Less affect creative freedom as such, because creative freedom is the ability of a player to ignore their instructions to do their own thing.

For example, I'm playing on Very Fluid - so high freedom - with an AM set to Get Forward and Make More Risky Passes and a DM set to Hold Position and Make Fewer Risky Passes. Let's say that in any given move, their high freedom means there's a 20% chance of them doing their own thing. That means that there's a 20% chance that my DM might decide to venture up the pitch and ping a delightful 30-yard lob over the defence for my striker. It also means that there's a 20% chance my AM will hold back, maybe even slotting into the DM's vacated position, and playing a safe possession game if the ball comes to him.

Or some combination of both - the DM charges forward, but still doesn't fancy a risky through ball; the DM holds station, but floats a 70-yard Hollywood pass across the pitch; the AM breaks forward, but then plays tiki-taka on the edge of the box because he doesn't fancy chancing a ball to the striker; or the AM holds where he is, but still tries defence-splitting passes at distance.

Creative freedom, as I understand it, means players deciding to ignore their instructions - any of their instructions - to do something else because they think it'll work out better.

[Argonaut]

3 hours ago, cregan said:

(whatever PIs they have - and roles are just collections of PIs; a BBM is just a CM(s) + Roam From Position)

This has been brought up several times, and I still think this is just speculation based on the interface or previous FMs or whatever. Part of me I guess just "wants to believe" that a role has more going on under the hood, that a Box-to-Box Midfielder will bust a gut to get involved in play at both ends of the pitch more than a CM(S) with roaming.

Take the case in point of the Sweeper Keeper (Defend) and the Goalkeeper (Defend). Both of them have no PIs selected, so are they the same role? If yes, that would be silly and redundant. If no, there's something going on under the hood for the Sweeper Keepers to come out and sweep more. Maybe, one would say, that this is just a special case. But then take the Half-Back, all of the Playmakers, and the Target Men, which also do something unique with their roles. Altogether that is a good chunk of the roles that have something else going on besides their PIs. Why not more, or all of the roles then?

I'm reminded of statistics in this case, where for me there is not enough evidence to reject the null hypothesis.

[Armistice]

@Ö-zil to the Arsenal! - Can you talk more about transitions and Team Shape, how exactly it changes players involved in transitions?

[FootballersWith]

@Ö-zil to the Arsenal! "Select a Formation which sets defensive structure and facilitates your overall strategy."

 

This is the bit I struggle with. An example being Arsenal's new 3-4-3 formation which can drop into a 5-4-1 when defending. No matter what PIs I use it seems impossible to have Alexis and Ozil playing further forward as 10s or in the half spaces in possession then drop to the wings to defend in the block. Is it just not possible in the game?

[Jean0987654321]

7 hours ago, antbonc said:

@Ö-zil to the Arsenal! "Select a Formation which sets defensive structure and facilitates your overall strategy."

 

This is the bit I struggle with. An example being Arsenal's new 3-4-3 formation which can drop into a 5-4-1 when defending. No matter what PIs I use it seems impossible to have Alexis and Ozil playing further forward as 10s or in the half spaces in possession then drop to the wings to defend in the block. Is it just not possible in the game?

You can say the same about Conte's Chelsea. The only way really is through PPMs. Maybe give Ozil and Alexis WM (a) with the PIs of an Inside Forward and then teach them "Cuts Inside" and "Gets Into Opposition Area"

[A_BVB_D]

This has got to be one of the best explanations for a tactic I've ever seen. Also like someone said above regarding your explanations for team shape vs FM, something that needs to be added (this just me) is, for instance, an example for mentality and team shape - Use Structured with Attacking or Standard with Very Fluid and so on, sort of like a percentage of how well a shape can be used with a certain mentality (it would benefit the guys who are basically starting to play the game and already have a lot on their mind with FM's descriptions).

[Barbosa04]

In my experience when choosing shape it comes down how much goalscoring responsibility you want to be shared among all your players.

wb on attack duty in highly structured/control mentality fares worse goalscoring wise then wb on support duty in very fluid/ even counter mentality. In very fluid shape with even lower team mentality wb are always eager to participate in attack and make runs for through balls. I find structured/flexible are best shape to design a tactic where your striker scores on average more than a goal a game. And highly structured is hard to maintain long term as all offensive players on aml/r am st strata give little defensive input and all the rest of players less inclined to make forward runs and making risky stuff. Highly structured can be used as specialist tactic for one of two-legged cup games when closing the shop is required.

So shape has more influence then  team mentality and TI in player behaviour.

[Jean0987654321]

6 hours ago, Barbosa04 said:

In my experience when choosing shape it comes down how much goalscoring responsibility you want to be shared among all your players.

wb on attack duty in highly structured/control mentality fares worse goalscoring wise then wb on support duty in very fluid/ even counter mentality. In very fluid shape with even lower team mentality wb are always eager to participate in attack and make runs for through balls. I find structured/flexible are best shape to design a tactic where your striker scores on average more than a goal a game. And highly structured is hard to maintain long term as all offensive players on aml/r am st strata give little defensive input and all the rest of players less inclined to make forward runs and making risky stuff. Highly structured can be used as specialist tactic for one of two-legged cup games when closing the shop is required.

So shape has more influence then  team mentality and TI in player behaviour.

Umm...I have strikers score a goal a game using fluid. Anything can work if it makes sense and you build to the shape and system...

[Fosse]

9 hours ago, Barbosa04 said:

In my experience when choosing shape it comes down how much goalscoring responsibility you want to be shared among all your players.

wb on attack duty in highly structured/control mentality fares worse goalscoring wise then wb on support duty in very fluid/ even counter mentality. In very fluid shape with even lower team mentality wb are always eager to participate in attack and make runs for through balls. I find structured/flexible are best shape to design a tactic where your striker scores on average more than a goal a game. And highly structured is hard to maintain long term as all offensive players on aml/r am st strata give little defensive input and all the rest of players less inclined to make forward runs and making risky stuff. Highly structured can be used as specialist tactic for one of two-legged cup games when closing the shop is required.

So shape has more influence then  team mentality and TI in player behaviour.

A WB-A on highly structured control will have a much higher mentality than very fluid and counter

[Barbosa04]

2 hours ago, Fosse said:

A WB-A on highly structured control will have a much higher mentality than very fluid and counter

 

 

It seems so. But my iwb-s in very fluid/counter scores 20+ a season between them. Getting one on ones is quite usual occurence with them, but not so much with wb-a on highly structured/control. They are more reserved in making runs for through balls. Or maybe it's my perception bias, I need to run a full season on highly structured.

[PonjaConRulos]

@Ö-zil to the Arsenal! Hi, I translated this post to Spanish, I hope you don't mind. I posted a link to this article and your profile.

https://www.fmsite.net/forums/topic/83255-¿qué-es-el-dibujo-táctico-estructurado-flexible-fluido/

[Gorstak]

I see team shape, or fluidity if you wish, as a focus. You rely more on your wide players the more fluid you go, or you rely more on your central players the more structured you go. Usually it is best to play flexible and use your whole team and every area of the pitch.

[Armistice]

40 minutes ago, Gorstak said:

I see team shape, or fluidity if you wish, as a focus. You rely more on your wide players the more fluid you go, or you rely more on your central players the more structured you go. Usually it is best to play flexible and use your whole team and every area of the pitch.

That's not true, I'm afraid.

[Gorstak]

19 hours ago, Armistice said:

That's not true, I'm afraid.

 

Think about it. If you play more structured plus more agressive, it's play to target man style, so therefore middle....if you play more structured plus less agressive, its pure counter, so again middle....if, on the other hand, you play more fluid plus less agressive, its play through defence style which basically relies on utilising width to approach the goal, and if you play more fluid and more agressive, its run to defence or play with creative wingers style, which again focuses on wide players...flexible relies on both...

[Armistice]

2 hours ago, Gorstak said:

 

Think about it. If you play more structured plus more agressive, it's play to target man style, so therefore middle....if you play more structured plus less agressive, its pure counter, so again middle....if, on the other hand, you play more fluid plus less agressive, its play through defence style which basically relies on utilising width to approach the goal, and if you play more fluid and more agressive, its run to defence or play with creative wingers style, which again focuses on wide players...flexible relies on both...

Urmm no? Shape affects how team moves in transitions, has nothing to do with how you play.

[herne79]

@Gorstak  Team Shape encourages or discourages vertical space, it has little (if anything) to do with focussing play through the centre or down the wings.  You can certainly create different styles of play and if you have done so then great, but "play to target man style" or "pure counter" can be via wing play just as it can go through the middle.  It just depends on how you set things up.

[Gorstak]

Well, simply pick a formation and watch how much your wide players are being utilised in a fluid and how much in a structured style, you should be able to see that your team exploits wide players more often with a fluid style, regardless of mentality...

[GazGJ]

I understand there is a relationship with team shape and creative freedom i.e More fluidity = More Creative freedom.

What I'm still not sure on, is if there relationship between team shape and creative freedom with positional roaming, therefore does more fluidity = more creativity = more roaming?

[kingjericho]

11 minutes ago, GazGJ said:

I understand there is a relationship with team shape and creative freedom i.e More fluidity = More Creative freedom.

What I'm still not sure on, is if there relationship between team shape and creative freedom with positional roaming, therefore does more fluidity = more creativity = more roaming?

I wouldn't say "roaming", but certainly there are less worries regarding positioning rigidness if you play with a lot of creative freedom, as the players feel encouraged to try something different, which can mean make a big run with ball, potentially leaving gaps in the back.

[yonko]

6 hours ago, kingjericho said:

I wouldn't say "roaming", but certainly there are less worries regarding positioning rigidness if you play with a lot of creative freedom, as the players feel encouraged to try something different, which can mean make a big run with ball, potentially leaving gaps in the back.

But because the shape is more compact, there is a teammate near by to feel the gap.

[kingjericho]

Just now, yonko said:

But because the shape is more compact, there is a teammate near by to feel the gap.

Yes... but you can risk 2v1 situations. It's called freedom for a reason  it's beneficial, given your players know what to do with it.

[yonko]

3 hours ago, kingjericho said:

Yes... but you can risk 2v1 situations. It's called freedom for a reason  it's beneficial, given your players know what to do with it.

I didn't say it wasn't beneficial. And I know why is called freedom. You missed the point.

[Pablo Sanchez]

Love this. Really helped me with knowing when to play certain ways. Loving structured with counter mentality

[westy8chimp]



@howard moon as if by miracle this thread has been bumped today. Here is the table I briefly mentioned last night, putting a bit more meat on the bone in terms of how shape affects mentality. The thread is probably of some interest to you as well.

[Pablo Sanchez]

what annoys me is in game it says very fluid  gives plays high levels of creative freedom. But that is not the case as proved in the opening post. That very fluid makes playerws play more as a team then individuals 

[westy8chimp]

2 minutes ago, Pablo Sanchez said:

what annoys me is in game it says very fluid  gives plays high levels of creative freedom. But that is not the case as proved in the opening post. That very fluid makes playerws play more as a team then individuals 

Its perhaps ambiguous. Its more of a shift from the role and duty you give them...so that can be deemed as creative freedome. I.e you assign a cm on attack duty... But then play contain and very fluid... He is going to play more in line with his team so not the role you have given him. 

Also... And possibly unknown/unquantifiable... I think it also gives a boost to 'be more creative' in line with the TI creative vs disciplined. 

[Pablo Sanchez]

Very true. so complex lol

[howard moon]

1 hour ago, westy8chimp said:



@howard moon as if by miracle this thread has been bumped today. Here is the table I briefly mentioned last night, putting a bit more meat on the bone in terms of how shape affects mentality. The thread is probably of some interest to you as well.

Awesome, thanks!

[wixxi]

On 17/05/2017 at 12:54, cregan said:

With the exception of playmakers and target men both attracting more of the ball, there are no hard-coded differences in the roles, AFAIK; they're just set collections of PIs.

What about the carrilero?

[westy8chimp]

1 hour ago, wixxi said:

What about the carrilero?

 and SV and MEZ and others...

[facman]

To be fair, I don't think the Carrilero, Segundo Volante and Mezzala existed in the game in May 2017, when the post was made!

[herne79]

10 minutes ago, facman said:

To be fair, I don't think the Carrilero, Segundo Volante and Mezzala existed in the game in May 2017, when the post was made!

True, although there are differences beyond just PIs to other roles in FM17 (and before) as well.

For example, you can't replicate a Halfback's movement; Fullbacks and Wingbacks differ beyond just their PIs; a Box to Box Midfielder is more than just a CM(s) with fancy PIs; you can't turn a Sweeper into a Libero; Sweeper Keepers aren't just Goalkeepers; and so on.  Not always massive differences, but differences nonetheless.

The original post from last year is inaccurate and something that should have been picked up on.

[Sayersi]

Can someone explain what the numbers stand for on that table?

[westy8chimp]

18 minutes ago, Sayersi said:

Can someone explain what the numbers stand for on that table?

Attacking mentality of the player on a scale of 1-20. 20 being very attack minded 1 being very defence minded. 

What this means in terms of tangibles is harder to define, but attacking mentality will increase, risky passes... Attacking runs... 

@herne79 @Cleon @Rashidi

Attacking mentality =? 

 

[herne79]

11 minutes ago, westy8chimp said:

Attacking mentality =? 

More risk taking.

[westy8chimp]

4 minutes ago, herne79 said:

More risk taking.

runs, shots, passing... safe to say? more closing down? more advanced positional sense? higher tempo?

I'm thinking words like attacking/risk taking are a little general.

 

[wixxi]

10 minutes ago, westy8chimp said:

runs, shots, passing... safe to say? more closing down? more advanced positional sense? higher tempo?

I'm thinking words like attacking/risk taking are a little general.

 

Not one of the fm gurus but I see it as how forward thinking players are. How aggressively they position themselves, how often they try forward (more direct/risky) passes, how often they try to close someone down etc.

[herne79]

17 minutes ago, westy8chimp said:

runs, shots, passing... safe to say? more closing down? more advanced positional sense? higher tempo?

I'm thinking words like attacking/risk taking are a little general.

 

lol ok.  Basically 2 things:

1) Lots of Team Instructions change.  Expect to see more closing down, teams going about attacks with greater urgency (Tempo), more direct passing especially in the final third, a higher defensive line, more lateral spreading out of players (width) and so on.  In a nutshell, open the TI screen in game and watch how TIs change as you change Mentality.  It helps if you ignore the word (the "label") attached to the TI, such as "Sometimes" as that doesn't always change, but rather watch the extent of the bars and how they grow.  There is a massive difference between "Sometimes" closing down with the Attacking mentality and the Defensive mentality for example.  Anyway, as these TIs increase so does your risk taking.  It's riskier to close down more because your players could get caught out of position if the press is beaten.  It's riskier to have a high def line because a simple ball over the top to a pacey forward and you're screwed.  It's riskier to play longer passes because they may be more easily intercepted.  TL;DR, there's more risk and thus it's usually an idea to try to mitigate such risks via other tactical settings and using complimentary players.

2) Player mentality alters.  Open a player's PI screen and note the position of the bar labelled "mentality".  That essentially charts a player's propensity to get forward.  Change the Mentality setting and these bars (all else being equal) will change.  So a player may be more willing to advance in riskier situations.

There may also be one or two other not so obvious changes as well which some may remember from the old days of the Sliders but I'm kind of reticent to bring that up as it's not mentioned in the game and bringing such things into the discussion can lead to more confusion, especially for new or inexperienced managers.  And such things only make a small difference anyway.  Concentrate on things you can see, don't worry about stuff you can't .

[westy8chimp]

@Sayersi see above for a more detailed answer than I gave

[herne79]

If you want to discuss the upcoming change in FM19, please start a new thread.

This thread is still useful for people playing FM18 and earlier.

Cheers.