Idea: mentoring people with regards to tactics

[HUNT3R]

Just now, jc577 said:

Alright mate not trying to rile you up, thought it was just a debate. 

I'm not riled up, but we're going in circles. Counter Mentality is just what it is. If that's not what you want, then select something else.

[Rashidi]

10 minutes ago, jc577 said:

 Long story short is that when setting up a counter attacking system I'd want my team to attempt a counter every time the ball is won.

This is where I feel people get caught up too much in the terminology of the game and not stop and think in terms of simply asking themselves what happens when when they play on different mentalities. 

You can create a specific style of play but this will be based on the combination of mentality/shape/ Roles and Duties and Team Instructions. Its the combination that creates the style that you want. 

When I use the words Counter/defensive in the next few sentences, disregard their associated meanings in the Tactical Creator.

One can create a defensive system using counter mentality, to produce a defensive system which sits back and soaks pressure, allowing the AI some leeway to exploit the flanks. In order to create the counter attacks I need to choose the right shape and the right roles and duties. This will in turn influence who is more likely to bomb forward when a suitable break happens. Now I can also give myself the chance to do this quickly without really using my defenders and just back sure its a 4 pass move to a chance on goal. This is done by choosing the right combination of shouts, here I would want to avoid WBIB, Retain Possession and Work Ball out of defence, since they all contribute in slowing down play. If I choose the right shape I could influence which attack duties are more likely to bomb off early,

I could also create a counter attacking style of football using an attacking mentality. Here my team doesn't use measured passes most of the time, most of my players are likely to try and get the ball up quickly. Now in order for me to control who does this I could once again choose the right roles to mitigate against this, or choose there right PIs. I could also select players very carefully, opting to use players with specific traits combined with specific attributes. Here a player with the comes deep to get the ball PPM on an attack duty could easily ignore the fast transitions I am hoping to achieve. Finally choosing the right roles and duties is paramount to the way I want to play. When GCFC first played in the premiership and when we won the Champions League in our debut season we used a counter attacking style of football, that can only be described as 'hard rock', we stayed deep, defended deep but when we won the ball, were lightning fast on transitions. 

The style of football you want to achieve requires that you take the time to understand what each component does,  the only reason why I am good at this stuff is cos unlike other people, I have played exactly the same way for the last 20 years. Nothing has changed. Even when they change the engine, I play the same way. What it requires is understanding the simple logic that lies in mentality and shape. One acts to influence behaviour, the other acts to create uniformity or divergence. You can always submit your tactics to me via youtube if you need help and I can show you the different ways I would play it. I do that now on the FM tactics show.

[herne79]

@Bunkerossian

I'm a simple kinda guy and I tend to (rightly or wrongly) view things in what I think are fairly simplistic terms.  When building a tactic, this is (basically) how I view it:

1)  Player roles and duties define player behaviour.

2)  Everything else then modifies that behaviour.

So far so simple.  But:

1)  How do I know what the defined player behaviour will be? 

By reading the in game descriptions and (perhaps more importantly) by looking at their default Player Instructions.  You mentioned above the difference between an RPM and a Regista.  Well, below are all 4 types of "playmaker" - write down what the differences are between each one.  Not much right?  Still important though.  So now you know what the differences are, you can think about what type of player you need to compliment the role.  They all need good Passing and Vision (they are all playmakers after all), but someone that is going to "Roam from Position" may need good off the ball movement.  Or someone who is going to "Dribble More" could probably use some dribbling skills.

Still sound simple?  Or at least logical anyway?

2)  And how are things going to modify behaviour?  Or, worse, how do you know what to change especially during matches?

Kind of the million dollar question, and some of it will come from experience of watching matches.  But lets try to break it down:

a)  Player attributes.  Different players with different attributes will play the same role in different ways.  So immediately you are modifying behaviour simply by having a different player in the same role.  For example the Trequartista.  If you read the in game description, he's a glory hunter and lazy.  The rest of the team have to carry him when defending.  And that's fine if you have a player in that role with very low Work Rate.  But put a different player into that same role who has a very high Work Rate and perhaps also with the PPM to "Comes Deep to Get the Ball" and suddenly you have a totally different animal on your hands.  That same theory applies to pretty much all roles and duties anywhere on the pitch: different players will carry out the same role in different ways according to their profiles.  That modifies role behaviour.

b)  Tactical settings.  This can get pretty involved because there are so many of them.  But I'm a simple kind of guy remember?  So here's what I think about:

(i) Mentality - defines how much risk I want my players to take.  Do I want them to be passive or aggressive?  Or something in between?

(ii) Team Shape - so much has been written on this it's mind blowing.  If I want my team to play as a compact (vertical) unit with lots of creative freedom, I go with Fluid.  If I don't mind the spacing and want them to stick to their roles, I go with Structured.  That's pretty much it.  Yes I know about transitions, player mentality vs team mentality and so on, but the aforementioned is pretty much all I pay attention to.  This is personal choice and others (very rightly) view things differently, so you need to go with whatever you are comfortable with here.

(iii) Team Instructions - before you go mucking about with TIs you need to understand 2 things:

- Setting a Mentality sets a whole bunch of TIs by default.  Understand what those default settings are before you mess about with them.

- The basic idea of using TIs is to set or refine a style of play.  But again, understand what the default settings are once you've chosen your mentality before messing with them.

But here's the important thing - don't use a TI unless you know you need to and not because you think you need to.  In other words, don't just throw a bunch of TIs at a tactic just because you think that's what you want your players to do because you might find they'll do it by default anyway.

Further, if you use loads of TIs and something is going wrong on the pitch, how do you know what's at fault?  If you're using 14 different TIs and you're losing the midfield battle, how will you know what to change?

(iv) Player Instructions - are the icing on the cake.  The final refinement.  Use to make targeted instructions.  Alternatively you can use to target specific players or groups of players rather than overloading your entire team with a TI.  eg., Perhaps you just want a really heavy press in midfield and up front, but not your defenders - then tell those players individually to close down more, not your entire team.

 

All of the above you can do before or during matches.  The during matches part is what comes with experience and you need to experiment with that.  Just remember:

- Changing Mentality changes your risk and all of those default TIs.

- Changing TIs will affect everyone in your team.

If you want to see more about how I play matches and how I change things during matches, read my 4-4-2 thread from FM16 (pinned in the stickies) or my Tactical Journey thread I've been writing recently.  But - don't just try to copy people.  Find your own way and your own style of playing the game that you are comfortable with.

[jc577]

@Rashidi Essentially what you're saying is that there are two ways to skin a cat (correct me if i'm wrong) which is what i'm trying to argue. 

[Bunkerossian]

5 minutes ago, Rashidi said:

This is where I feel people get caught up too much in the terminology of the game and not stop and think in terms of simply asking themselves what happens when when they play on different mentalities. 

You can create a specific style of play but this will be based on the combination of mentality/shape/ Roles and Duties and Team Instructions. Its the combination that creates the style that you want. 

When I use the words Counter/defensive in the next few sentences, disregard their associated meanings in the Tactical Creator.

One can create a defensive system using counter mentality, to produce a defensive system which sits back and soaks pressure, allowing the AI some leeway to exploit the flanks. In order to create the counter attacks I need to choose the right shape and the right roles and duties. This will in turn influence who is more likely to bomb forward when a suitable break happens. Now I can also give myself the chance to do this quickly without really using my defenders and just back sure its a 4 pass move to a chance on goal. This is done by choosing the right combination of shouts, here I would want to avoid WBIB, Retain Possession and Work Ball out of defence, since they all contribute in slowing down play. If I choose the right shape I could influence which attack duties are more likely to bomb off early,

I could also create a counter attacking style of football using an attacking mentality. Here my team doesn't use measured passes most of the time, most of my players are likely to try and get the ball up quickly. Now in order for me to control who does this I could once again choose the right roles to mitigate against this, or choose there right PIs. I could also select players very carefully, opting to use players with specific traits combined with specific attributes. Here a player with the comes deep to get the ball PPM on an attack duty could easily ignore the fast transitions I am hoping to achieve. Finally choosing the right roles and duties is paramount to the way I want to play. When GCFC first played in the premiership and when we won the Champions League in our debut season we used a counter attacking style of football, that can only be described as 'hard rock', we stayed deep, defended deep but when we won the ball, were lightning fast on transitions. 

The style of football you want to achieve requires that you take the time to understand what each component does,  the only reason why I am good at this stuff is cos unlike other people, I have played exactly the same way for the last 20 years. Nothing has changed. Even when they change the engine, I play the same way. What it requires is understanding the simple logic that lies in mentality and shape. One acts to influence behaviour, the other acts to create uniformity or divergence. You can always submit your tactics to me via youtube if you need help and I can show you the different ways I would play it. I do that now on the FM tactics show.

Do you just take the tactic, and play it with your team of choice, or would you also take up the team that the tactic sender tried to play with?

[Atarin]

37 minutes ago, Bunkerossian said:

Do you just take the tactic, and play it with your team of choice, or would you also take up the team that the tactic sender tried to play with?

He plays it in his long term Gloucester City save, so he'll use his team.

[Bunkerossian]

5 minutes ago, Atarin said:

He plays it in his long term Gloucester City save, so he'll use his team.

Feared as much- I am not sure if he has a Target Man. Also, his players might be better than mine, so my overly cautious role choices may be unfounded.

@herne79 What to do when one doesn't know what mentality or shape setting he wants? This is true for me with many of my recent saves. When speaking of the tactic from  the original post, I only know I want a lot of crosses to a target man.

[Atarin]

We're definitely going round in circles @Bunkerossian

You want someone to tell you what to do, but no on can. You have to learn the skills to plan, carry out that plan and adapt that plan for yourself.

You've been told that what you're lacking is the fundamentals. You've been told how to understand those fundamentals is to either put in years of trial and error or read one or both of the excellent books available on the subject. You could also read through the excellent recommended threads at the top of the forum.

What you want, you can't have, which is a silver bullet where someone can tell you a simple little formula where your tactic will always work the way it did in your head.

Someone could hear what you want, give you exactly that in a way that worked for a couple of games but in will inevitably stop working.

Why?

Because this is a game designed to keep you challenged for years on end. Its not meant to be easy.

You've just got to put the time in. Read the books.

[jc577]

3 minutes ago, Bunkerossian said:

Feared as much- I am not sure if he has a Target Man. Also, his players might be better than mine, so my overly cautious role choices may be unfounded.

@herne79 What to do when one doesn't know what mentality or shape setting he wants? This is true for me with many of my recent saves. When speaking of the tactic from  the original post, I only know I want a lot of crosses to a target man.

I think it's still worth sending in your tactic in to Rashidi, the series is very good and may give you some ideas.

If you don't know what mentality to use then always use standard, you can always alter tempo, closing down etc as you wish. 

I think you should think a bit more about how you want to play - you don't have to have a particular style in mind but just ask yourself a few questions: how do you want to defend? low block? high pressing? What about attacks - you want crosses to the target man but where's the supply coming from? Is there variation if crossing isn't working? That sort of thing should help as a starting base.

[Bunkerossian]

29 minutes ago, jc577 said:

I think it's still worth sending in your tactic in to Rashidi, the series is very good and may give you some ideas.

If you don't know what mentality to use then always use standard, you can always alter tempo, closing down etc as you wish. 

I think you should think a bit more about how you want to play - you don't have to have a particular style in mind but just ask yourself a few questions: how do you want to defend? low block? high pressing? What about attacks - you want crosses to the target man but where's the supply coming from? Is there variation if crossing isn't working? That sort of thing should help as a starting base.

Don't see a clear way to send him the tactic. Regarding the supply- it's the 4 wide players. In the HSV team, all full backs can cross well. One winger is also a specialist at it. On the block height- I have no idea. I have one fast defender, the other CB-s are slow. Need to buy more of them.

[Atarin]

I don't know how it works in the game because, personally, I've never got a TM to work but in real life TMs were traditionally a hallmark of an attacking system. The reason for this is that the Target Man was no the most mobile player in the side and would usually rely on heading the ball on to a smaller, quicker player. In order for that headed pass to put a player in on goal the team had to be fairly high up the pitch. This is why the traditional counter to a TM was to play quite high yourself and force the TM back towards his midfield, this meant that even if he won the header the strike partner was miles from goal and the defending team would have the opportunity to catch him. Defending high also meant that if the TM brought the ball down he wasn't in a position to have a crack at goal himself.

Conclusion, generally speaking the Target Man was an option for Attacking systems not Counter systems. If you have a Target Man with pace then you probably don't have a TM, you've probably got yourself a Complete Forward. If your TM is adept at receiving the ball at his feet and playing passes onto a smaller, quicker player then you don't have a TM, you probably have yourself a DLF.

[Bunkerossian]

1 minute ago, Atarin said:

I don't know how it works in the game because, personally, I've never got a TM to work but in real life TMs were traditionally a hallmark of an attacking system. The reason for this is that the Target Man was no the most mobile player in the side and would usually rely on heading the ball on to a smaller, quicker player. In order for that headed pass to put a player in on goal the team had to be fairly high up the pitch. This is why the traditional counter to a TM was to play quite high yourself and force the TM back towards his midfield, this meant that even if he won the header the strike partner was miles from goal and could the defending team would have the opportunity to catch him. Defending high also meant that if the TM brought the ball down he wasn't in a position to have a crack at goal himself.

Conclusion, generally speaking the Target Man was an option for Attacking systems not Counter systems. If you have a Target Man with pace then you probably don't have a TM, you've probably got yourself a Complete Forward. If your TM is adept at receiving the ball at his feet and playing passes onto a smaller, quicker player then you don't have a TM, you probably have yourself a DLF.

Mine is a slow, tall, composed finisher with low Teamwork and Passing. Can't dribble, good off the ball, brave, can jump and head the ball well.

[Atarin]

Just now, Bunkerossian said:

Mine is a slow, tall, composed finisher with low Teamwork and Passing. Can't dribble, good off the ball, brave, can jump and head the ball well.

That is definitely a Target Man.

[Bunkerossian]

4 minutes ago, Atarin said:

That is definitely a Target Man.

And this is the only idea of sorts I've settled upon- that I would use him as a target for crosses. Now, if I use him with an Attack duty, I have no idea how to set up roles of other players near him. A guide which would list viable role combinations would be the most help I could get, outwith tutoring.

[jc577]

4 minutes ago, Bunkerossian said:

And this is the only idea of sorts I've settled upon- that I would use him as a target for crosses. Now, if I use him with an Attack duty, I have no idea how to set up roles of other players near him. A guide which would list viable role combinations would be the most help I could get, outwith tutoring.

Have you looked at the pairs and combinations guide?

[Atarin]

Remember a Target Man attracts the ball, his teammates will get it to him early. Defenders will bypass simpler more obvious passes. This will apply to your goalkeeper, your back four and any DMs that you have. Playing a TM is an indicator to your team that you want to go direct and early. The question is if its really early is the TM capable of doing anything with it himself, because he won't have a lot of help around him, because remember the ball travels a lot faster than players. If he requires players running off of him then you will need to surround him with players that can do that but then you are risking being top heavy on an already attacking system, that isn't camping and can't camp, that is playing low percentage passes likely to be unsuccessful. So....consider the ramifications.

If you play too deep with a TM up top he'll have to come so deep to pick up the ball that you'll lose your threat in behind or you'll need to play fairly high risk in order to get players up around your TM in order that he can do damage.

[Bunkerossian]

4 minutes ago, jc577 said:

Have you looked at the pairs and combinations guide?

Yes, but after trying to use the formation listed in it (442), I ran into issues. Modifications were needed, because I didn't have a proper B2B midfielder. Also, I'm at a crossroads as to what Duty to assign my TM. I can't put both him and the Poacher on Attack. I tried TM-Su, and it doesn't get the essence of what I want. His guide says anyway that those are examples that may need to be adjusted. I suck at making proper adjustments.

[Atarin]

Which is what?

[Bunkerossian]

1 minute ago, Atarin said:

Which is what?

What I want? Hold up the ball until the wingers and one of the CM-s can show up to organize an attack. Said attack pattern is simple: run down the wing, and then cross. By the time of the cross, the TM should anchor himself in the penalty box and get ready to joust for the cross. If it's a 2 man attack, he'll have company. If not, an extra MF will be somewhere. I have no idea how to set-up in that other instance. 4-4-1-1?

[Atarin]

The TM(s) doesn't link up with player's in the box, at least not initially. He drops deep into the AM strata where he lays it off the midfielders. Again, its all there in the description in the game. The TM(a) will push further forward looking to push the defenders back towards their own goal, he might be more what your're looking for.

[Atarin]

You might be able to push the TM(s) up higher but it will require a more aggressive system and a much high defensive line.

[Bunkerossian]

I had tried to apply some of the principles from the Pairs&Combinations guide in selecting Duties, but i had mucked it up by playing a Fb-A and a W-S initially. Role and Duty selection is a minefield.

[Atarin]

When something is overwhelming you you need to break it down it to small manageable chunks.

Its often recommended, when learning the game, to start at a big club like Juve because they have really good players that that are fairly versatile and can handle most systems. The other piece of advice is to start out on FM-Touch because it strips the game back and gets rid of loads of stuff that can overwhelm the player. Plus tactics are automatically familiar.

You could try out some of your ideas like that.

Hamburg aren't a great side and that could be presenting you with some issues.

So, break it down.

1. Remember, start with a realistic assessment of your squad's quality in relation to the division. i.e - are you a challenger, mid-table or a struggler?

2. Decide on a style of play that will win you the games that you think you should win. (i.e -  a struggler might decide that to win a quarter of its games it'll need to play very conservatively and hit teams on the break and rely on set picees.)

3. Think of a defensive formation that will enable you to both defend and transition to your imagined attacking shape.

4. Think about who within that formation will be leading the hunt for goals, these are your Attack duties.

5. Think about your foundation players. Those that hold the fort when the opposition break on you with 3, 4, 5 players.

6. Then look at who's left. These are your support players. Depending on your Mentality and Shape these guys will aid the transition between attack and defend.

7: Next think about Shape. Sticking with the Attacking Mentality example, the higher the Shape the more non-Attack duties get dragged into helping with the Attack. (i.e - if you're playing on Attacking and your Shape is Structured, your Attack duties will get on with the Attack whilst the Defenders defend and the Supporters support. If you bump it up to Flexible then that drags your more attacking Support duties into the Attack phase as well. If you bump it up to Fluid now your Defend duties start to get involved in the attacking transitions, carrying the ball forward, making riskier passes.etc If you understand this then you can see what you use Shape for.

[Bunkerossian]

Rashidi suggests going with midtable clubs for beginners- the expectations are easier to manage than top sides, while teams are generally better than relegation sides. Regarding the Shape: there is just not any practical tip in the guides that would pair a certain style of play with a specific Shape setting. Does FM Touch get rid of Shape?

[Atarin]

1 minute ago, Bunkerossian said:

Rashidi suggests going with midtable clubs for beginners- the expectations are easier to manage than top sides, while teams are generally better than relegation sides. Regarding the Shape: there is just not any practical tip in the guides that would pair a certain style of play with a specific Shape setting. Does FM Touch get rid of Shape?

For career saves, sure. But when you're trying out tactical concepts it can help to be working with players that you can trust to deliver. I'm just talking about developing your tactical know how. If you want to experiment with TMs and TM tactics its sometimes useful to choose a club like Juve because they will have excellent players in all the key positions, not least Mandzukic up front.

At the end of the day, its all up to you how you want to play the game.

[Bunkerossian]

1 minute ago, Atarin said:

For career saves, sure. But when you're trying out tactical concepts it can help to be working with players that you can trust to deliver. I'm just talking about developing your tactical know how. If you want to experiment with TMs and TM tactics its sometimes useful to choose a club like Juve because they will have excellent players in all the key positions, not least Mandzukic up front.

At the end of the day, its all up to you how you want to play the game.

I get your point. However, wouldn't having world-class players mask deficiencies in my tactics by the virtue of the players being so good that the flaws would only come to light later? On the other hand, I'd feel how it's like to win, for once...my morale goes up. What does FM Touch remove from the full game?

[Atarin]

4 minutes ago, Bunkerossian said:

I get your point. However, wouldn't having world-class players mask deficiencies in my tactics by the virtue of the players being so good that the flaws would only come to light later? On the other hand, I'd feel how it's like to win, for once...my morale goes up. What does FM Touch remove from the full game?

I've barely ever used it so I don't know for sure, but I'm pretty sure it removes youth development, possibly training, you can press an instant result button that skips the match, I think there's a few other things that are paired down as well. Basically it makes the game about tactics and transfers and very little else.

[Bunkerossian]

Could leaving Shape on Flexible have any negative consequences tactically? Even if I knew how to distribute duties (the striker(s) are the issue), I still have no idea if I should touch Shape at all.

[Atarin]

Try and look at like this.

You've got 11 players who have no formation, no roles, nothing. They're sat there in the meeting room waiting to be told what to do.

You walk in. You place 11 counters on the white board. That's how you want them to organise themselves when in defence. Its all still neutral. You've not given them any instructions yet. Just where to run to or stand.

Next you tell them how safe you want them to play it. That's mentality. So...you've given them their first instruction. Everyone thinks, "right, the boss wants us to keep it tight" so all of them are thinking you want them to play defensive and conservative, goalkeeper through to strikers.

Next you give them a Shape. If you go structured this is basically you saying to a couple of them, "right, you're our attacking boys. I know we're defending, but I want you focusing on nicking us a goal", to others you're saying, "remember we're keeping it tight, we're playing on Defensive Mentality! Whatever else I tell you to do, your goal is to keep it tight."

If you go more fluid then its basically you saying to everyone, "First priority is our Mentality. Above everything else you keep it tight. If you're on Attack I still want to see you doing the defensive stuff first. Everyone else, Keep. It. Tight."

So now you have two levels of instructions overlapping. The first have them 1 picture, now you've added a little more complexity.

Next you can add in your Duties, you already know, because of your Shape whether you want specialised Attacking and Defending groups or not. So, you give out your Attack duties based on that. Your Defend duties are those who Defend all of the time. Your support duties are those best positioned to assist the other two groups.

Lastly you take each player one by one and give them Roles. This is your way of telling each player exactly how you want him to do the job that you've just given him.

So an Attack Duty in a Structured Shape playing up front sits down in front of you and you tell him, "Right, I told you I want you focused more on nicking us a goal. As a team we're keeping it tight but you're focused on being our release ball and counter threat so be dangerous. In order to do this I want you to..." and this is where you given him the specific Role that you want him to play. Poacher or AF or CF of whatever.

[Bunkerossian]

It would be easier for me to do it in real life than with FM instructions. I don't ever think of the FM concept of ˝shape˝ in real life. Also, each setting other than Flexible has things I don't want. Fluid implies creativity, while Structured leaves gaps that might hinder the defensive effectiveness. I look at things in terms of numbers. A sound principle I think is- if both wingers have joined the attack, at least one full back must be together with the CB-s. One central midfielder as well. But I think these things are dictated by roles?

[Atarin]

33 minutes ago, Bunkerossian said:

It would be easier for me to do it in real life than with FM instructions. I don't ever think of the FM concept of ˝shape˝ in real life. Also, each setting other than Flexible has things I don't want. Fluid implies creativity, while Structured leaves gaps that might hinder the defensive effectiveness. I look at things in terms of numbers. A sound principle I think is- if both wingers have joined the attack, at least one full back must be together with the CB-s. One central midfielder as well. But I think these things are dictated by roles?

Football Manager is a game, its a simulator, yes. But its still a game. For your own sake, forget what you think you know and learn what the game does and how it works. Believe me, it will save you so much frustration. You're clearly muddling different things up and it just confusing you. Remember its just pixels on a screen backed up by 1s and 0s. Some football knowledge is definitely helpful (although I'm not sure you're as clear on basic football concepts as you think you are) but I've known people do well at this game without any knowledge of football what so ever. Their secret? They don't have to forget anything, or unlearn any bad habits. They don't bring any prejudices, biases or expectations to the game. They just treat it like any other game. It has certain concepts that must be understood in order to overcome the simplistic AI. If you understand those concepts then the game can be enjoyed. If you stubbornly refuse to meet the game where it is and just stick to what you think the game is, and what you think it should do then the only one wasting their time and expending energy screaming at their screen is you. Understand the games' concepts with no pre-judgements. Its the only way.

[Atarin]

I wanted to post this highlight video of Leyton Orient's last game against Guiseley because, although brief, it does illustrate the play of a TM.

Orient signed "big man" Matt Harrold from Crawley to add a different option to David Mooney who plays as a F9/DLF(s), Macauley Bonne who plays as an AF/P/DF(s) and youngsters Josh Koroma who plays as a winger or P/AF and Sam Dalby who plays a a F9/DLF(s).

The first two goals are penalties and can be ignored, skip to 27 seconds.

The third goal is from a period where Guiseley were under intense pressure. Orient were camped in their half and desperately trying to break Guiseley down to make it a more comfortable 3-1. The movements of Mooney and Bonne weren't managing to unpick a very stubborn defence so manager Steve Davis took Mooney off and threw Harrold on. The idea was that given that Orient were playing high and stretching the play Harrold would be able to take up position in the Guiseley box and finish one of the many crosses that fullbacks Joe Widdowson and Jake Caprice were pinging in with regularity. This was not hail mary stuff. This was controlled. Orient would patiently work the ball from one flank to the other trying to free up a fullback to put in a "quality" delivery. The switching of the play and clever movement of Harrold would aim to catch Guiseley in a moment of inbalance. Finally Widdowson gets a bit of room on the left and floats over a lovely cross. Guiseley's defence has been drawn towards the near post and Harrold, using his experience has drifted to the back post where he is able to get behind and over the CB and direct a lovely powerful header into the net. This is an example of a TM goal. The team plays high with the fullbacks stretching play in an effort to create space for a quality cross. We can see how high the team are by the fact that when the cross comes in we can make out six Leyton Orient plays in and around the box with a seventh just at the edge of the shot and an 8th (right back Jake Caprice) out of shot down on the right flank.

The last goal in the rout is the 2nd kind of goal a TM can be involved in. This goal is not necessarily a completely typical, or very pretty, example but it illustrates how deep a TM will drop if the side is not pushed up. Guiseley had pushed forward looking for a goal to make the score respectable when Orient hit it forward. Harrold is the target, but is also aiming to stop the defender from sending the ball back towards the Orient goal. Harrold wins the flick in and sends it goalwards, the ball is miles from goal and the entire chance rests solely on the stamina (this is late in the game) and pace of Macauley Bonne (who's legs were cramping  up, as seen from his hop and skip after applying the finish) who wasn't going to let anything stop him claiming his hat-trick. You can see from this chance the low percentage of such an opportunity. 

The most efficient use of the TM is the first example. It has the highest percentage chance of creating/scoring a goal but it rules out playing deep. The 2nd chance illustrates the low probability of securing a goal scoring opportunity from a TM in a deep set up.  

[Bunkerossian]

Very nice, thanks. For my own mental health's sake, I started a less intense save: international management. But even though I have not lost either of my 2 first games, my attack isn't working, and I have no idea why. Even though I wasn't using a TM in those games, I might try it when the actual qualifiers come up...

[alanschu14]

On 9/2/2017 at 04:35, Bunkerossian said:

Could leaving Shape on Flexible have any negative consequences tactically? Even if I knew how to distribute duties (the striker(s) are the issue), I still have no idea if I should touch Shape at all.

I almost never change away from Flexible since I find I like its balance.  I wouldn't worry too much about this setting as I find it's very possible to have successful tactics without changing this.

[Atarin]

If you're struggling with tactics its always best to go Standard-Flexible, no TIs or PIs. As long as you have a decent set of players then you should be able to make most systems work.

There are two general directions that I can work from.

(1) If I'm not planning on making many signings then I look at my squad, isolate my best players, place them in their best positions and that'll give me my defensive shape. if its bottom heavy then I know a camping or high press tactic isn't suitable but we should be able to play most other styles. If my defensive shape is top heavy then a counter or containment style might not be very effective but a pressing or camping style comes into play. This will heavily suggest a Team Mentality and to some extent Roles. If my shape is fairly balanced then most things are possible, to a degree. From there I think about where my attack duties might be. Then who I want staying back to offer balance in cover. This'll tell me who my supporting group are. Try and compromise where imbalances appear. Defend duties will need covering support and Attack duties will need late arriving support. From here I might think about Team Shape. The lower the team shape the simpler everyone keeps it, the higher the shape the more liberties everyone takes. Flexible is a middle ground where Defend duties keep it a bit simpler, Support duties rely on their judgement (mental attributes) and Attack duties are given a little bump in creative freedom, nothing extreme just a general balanced approach. From here you have something that should work most of the time. That doesn't mean you'll win everything all the time but you will find that the system holds together and stands or falls based on things like morale, general squad ability and system match ups. i.e - a system can still come along that exploits your weaknesses and nullifies your strengths. No system is perfect.

(2) I start of with an idea in mind and a willingness to make major changes to my squad if necessary. I already know the style that I want so I know what defensive shape I want. I know what style I want so that locks in a Mentality. It will probably also mean I have certain patterns of play in mind so I know my Attack duties, my Support duties in attack, my Defend duties and my Support duties in defence. Roles then because very much just a matter of giving the players the best chance of pulling off the tactical role that I want them to play. Shape then becomes a question of the liberties I want my side to take. The more improv I'm willing my defenders and Support players to make will give me a general idea. If I want them to do their defensive job with no frills then higher shapes are out of the question. If I don't mind a bit of risk taking from those Duties then I can get the benefit of letting my Attacking duties really off the leash. Just always consider the impact the Team Shape will have on the over all objective.

There are no perfect systems bar the ME breaking 3-5-2-0's of this world. But where's the fun in that.

[Bunkerossian]

28 minutes ago, Atarin said:

If you're struggling with tactics its always best to go Standard-Flexible, no TIs or PIs. As long as you have a decent set of players then you should be able to make most systems work.

There are two general directions that I can work from.

(1) If I'm not planning on making many signings then I look at my squad, isolate my best players, place them in their best positions and that'll give me my defensive shape. if its bottom heavy then I know a camping or high press tactic isn't suitable but we should be able to play most other styles. If my defensive shape is top heavy then a counter or containment style might not be very effective but a pressing or camping style comes into play. This will heavily suggest a Team Mentality and to some extent Roles. If my shape is fairly balanced then most things are possible, to a degree. From there I think about where my attack duties might be. Then who I want staying back to offer balance in cover. This'll tell me who my supporting group are. Try and compromise where imbalances appear. Defend duties will need covering support and Attack duties will need late arriving support. From here I might think about Team Shape. The lower the team shape the simpler everyone keeps it, the higher the shape the more liberties everyone takes. Flexible is a middle ground where Defend duties keep it a bit simpler, Support duties rely on their judgement (mental attributes) and Attack duties are given a little bump in creative freedom, nothing extreme just a general balanced approach. From here you have something that should work most of the time. That doesn't mean you'll win everything all the time but you will find that the system holds together and stands or falls based on things like morale, general squad ability and system match ups. i.e - a system can still come along that exploits your weaknesses and nullifies your strengths. No system is perfect.

(2) I start of with an idea in mind and a willingness to make major changes to my squad if necessary. I already know the style that I want so I know what defensive shape I want. I know what style I want so that locks in a Mentality. It will probably also mean I have certain patterns of play in mind so I know my Attack duties, my Support duties in attack, my Defend duties and my Support duties in defence. Roles then because very much just a matter of giving the players the best chance of pulling off the tactical role that I want them to play. Shape then becomes a question of the liberties I want my side to take. The more improv I'm willing my defenders and Support players to make will give me a general idea. If I want them to do their defensive job with no frills then higher shapes are out of the question. If I don't mind a bit of risk taking from those Duties then I can get the benefit of letting my Attacking duties really off the leash. Just always consider the impact the Team Shape will have on the over all objective.

There are no perfect systems bar the ME breaking 3-5-2-0's of this world. But where's the fun in that.

Do particular formations fit better with specific Shape settings?

[Atarin]

Yes and no.

For every rule there is a way of breaking it successfully.

Generally you'll be discouraged from using higher shapes on lower mentalities and you'll usually be discouraged from using higher mentalities with bottom heavy shapes. Not always obviously, if you know what you're doing then you can create some very interesting effects by mixing things up but when you're stating out and unsure of what everything does I would explain it like this.

Formation is your Shape in the defensive phase, what you look like when you've consolidated behind the ball. From this you can work out what you'll be naturally strong at, deep containment and counter styles will suit bottom heavy formations for obvious reasons - more bodies behind the ball, between your goal and the opposition. The opposition will be forced to push up leaving room behind them for you to exploit, thus playing into the hands of your counters. To play containment and counter you're going to want Defend duties that don't mess up the compact, defensive part of the plan by needlessly dribbling or playing high risk passes. You don't want your Support group charging forward at the first opportunity so, again, high levels of creative licence would be inadvisable. A high Shape would allow for your players to do that so should be avoided. The other problem with higher Shapes is that they have the effect of compressing your team into a fairly tight unit. Playing too high, like you would in a higher Mentality, would make it far too easy for the opposition to either camp in front of your goal and hold you there or knock the ball over your defenders heads. Higher shapes greatly reduce depth (the vertical spread of players along the pitch).

So, if you think about it, Mentality, Shape, Roles, Duties and Formation are all intimately linked. Each one suggests another, at least for the beginner. As I say, like anything else rules are made to be broken. But not until you have a solid understanding of why the "rules" are the rules. With enough cunning you make nearly anything work but keeping it simple works best of all.

Every decision you make at every stage is just to compliment and enhance the one before. Start somewhere and understand what foundation that setting has set in place. If you start with formation then you've started with your defensive shape. If you start with Mentality then you've started with your team's style of play. If you start with Shape then you've opted for tactical and creative freedom for the different units (with separation at the lower end and unity at the higher end). If you start with Roles then you've begun with individual style settings. If you start with with Duties then you've begun with your team's various units of responsibility (the consolidators, the helpers and the exploiters). Wherever you start lays down a certain foundation that everything else is trying to compliment and facilitate.

[Bunkerossian]

5 minutes ago, Atarin said:

Yes and no.

For every rule there is a way of breaking it successfully.

Generally you'll be discouraged from using higher shapes on lower mentalities and you'll usually be discouraged from using higher mentalities with bottom heavy shapes. Not always obviously, if you know what you're doing then you can create some very interesting effects by mixing things up but when you're stating out and unsure of what everything does I would explain it like this.

Formation is your Shape in the defensive phase, what you look like when you've consolidated behind the ball. From this you can work out what you'll be naturally strong at, deep containment and counter styles will suit bottom heavy formations for obvious reasons - more bodies behind the ball, between your goal and the opposition. The opposition will be forced to push up leaving room behind them for you to exploit, thus playing into the hands of your counters. To play containment and counter you're going to want Defend duties that don't mess up the compact, defensive part of the plan by needlessly dribbling or playing high risk passes. You don't want your Support group charging forward at the first opportunity so, again, high levels of creative licence would be inadvisable. A high Shape would allow for your players to do that so should be avoided. The other problem with higher Shapes is that they have the effect of compressing your team into a fairly tight unit. Playing too high, like you would in a higher Mentality, would make it far too easy for the opposition to either camp in front of your goal and hold you there or knock the ball over your defenders heads. Higher shapes greatly reduce depth (the vertical spread of players along the pitch).

So, if you think about it, Mentality, Shape, Roles, Duties and Formation are all intimately linked. Each one suggests another, at least for the beginner. As I say, like anything else rules are made to be broken. But not until you have a solid understanding of why the "rules" are the rules. With enough cunning you make nearly anything work but keeping it simple works best of all.

Every decision you make at every stage is just to compliment and enhance the one before. Start somewhere and understand what foundation that setting has set in place. If you start with formation then you've started with your defensive shape. If you start with Mentality then you've started with your team's style of play. If you start with Shape then you've opted for tactical and creative freedom for the different units (with separation at the lower end and unity at the higher end). If you start with Roles then you've begun with individual style settings. If you start with with Duties then you've begun with your team's various units of responsibility (the consolidators, the helpers and the exploiters). Wherever you start lays down a certain foundation that everything else is trying to compliment and facilitate.

How to avoid the problems of separated lines that comes with Structured and VS?

[Atarin]

VS?

[Bunkerossian]

9 minutes ago, Atarin said:

VS?

Very Structured

[Scrench]

One thing that helped me a lot was reading real life football analysis(I mean professional football analysis, not the one those poor pundits are trying to put together in studios), although of course football manager is limited in regard of complex tactics, but I try to implement as many real life ideas as possible, and so far it is a surprisingly rewarding experience. Some matches were won only because i understood what is happening on the pitch, and adjusted my tactic according to that, but i lost a few because i was a tryhard, and forced some things that the match engine is currently not capable of, and of course because my knowledge is still to be expanded on tactical matters. But even than I could realise my mistakes and i was able to understand what is going wrong, and improve day by day. 

One side effect is you start to overcomplicate things, because real life tactics are much more detailed than what is possible in FM, and end up doing more harm than good, so be prepared to be frustrated .

[Bunkerossian]

I see Rashidi has started a series where he actually takes a save of a user and tries to fix tactical problems. It's only for Patreons though.

[Atarin]

@Bunkerossian Separation of lines is mitigated by Mentality, for me, anyway. If I'm on Defensive Mentality then I'm already narrow and compact so a little separation is not that problematic.

[bosque]

I think the problem is people don't know what is going on during games. That is my biggest problem. I don't know if my team is playing good or bad because I'm bad at reading games. I would like to read or watch a guide that teach me how to read games.

[yonko]

I think there has been enough help from more knowledgeable FMers for every edition of FM. I personally have learned plenty from others and on my own (I've been playing every edition, every year, since CM Italia 1993 - some weren't even born then ). 

The problem is that some people keep repeating the same mistakes over and over again, and fail to understand some very simplistic explanations. For example, how many times it has to be explained that Mentality is a risk factor? What is so hard to understand about that? Or that team shape is how many players get involved in transitions and how much creative freedom your players have?

Don't argue what the game should be like or about - there are other sections of the forum for that. Instead, focus to understand some basic elements of the Tactics Creator and how to use them to make a usable tactic. There is no perfect or unbeatable tactic. And every tactic requires logical thinking and refinement. 

EDIT: I also wanted to add that one of the biggest aspects of coaching/managing is the ability to observe and make improvements. And every more experienced FMer who offers advice here, always advices to observe what is going on in the game. 

 

[Rashidi]

12 hours ago, yonko said:

I also wanted to add that one of the biggest aspects of coaching/managing is the ability to observe and make improvements. And every more experienced FMer who offers advice here, always advices to observe what is going on in the game.

Absolutely true

[Bunkerossian]

It seems like I'm also failing to exploit formation weaknesses in opponents. Against a 4-3-1-2, I tried to focus play down the flanks, but my 4-1-2-2-1 simply conceded a goal from the opposition wing back going forward and crossing. To be fair, I'm unsure if my failings could simply be due to the superior quality of the opposition.

[Atarin]

1 hour ago, Bunkerossian said:

It seems like I'm also failing to exploit formation weaknesses in opponents. Against a 4-3-1-2, I tried to focus play down the flanks, but my 4-1-2-2-1 simply conceded a goal from the opposition wing back going forward and crossing. To be fair, I'm unsure if my failings could simply be due to the superior quality of the opposition.

It can be difficult to work out.

There are some ways to get a pretty good idea though. Every now and then check your Team Report section, within that you'll find a comparison between you and the rest of the league. You'll get a reasonable idea about how you rate from that screen.

Another place to just see how you fare is your Media Expectation, if you're considering relegation fodder then it's a fair bet that the game (having considered your club reputation & squad strength) doesn't think you should be beating most teams in the league.

Another thing you can do is have a very clear idea about what the requirements of your system are. Where the exploitable gaps will be.etc Wherever there are exploitable gaps you will find one of your players who has a big job, because it'll be their responsibility to deal with the opposition's overloads there. Have a look at the Roles and Duties that you've selected for a big player, do you think the player has the requisite attributes?

What about general personality? Do they have solid Aggression, Bravery, Determination, Team Work, Work Rate? These will dictate the player's application on the field. Do they have problems with big games or inconsistency? Check the assistant's Player Report to find out.

Always look around a struggling player, as well. Are they being let down by someone else? If you're playing in a 4-4-2 for example and one of your fullbacks is having a mare have a quick check of the Wide Midfielder ahead of him. Is the WM tracking opposition players back? Is the WM dropping in to provide cover when the FB is dealing with a threat? Is the WM in position to offer a passing option should the FB win the ball? What about the nearest CM? Are they close? Are they following opposition players supporting the main opposition player on the ball? Are they cutting off passing lanes? What about the FB's nearest CD? Is the CD close? Are they applying pressure where needed? Are they leaving opposition support players free to offer a passing option to the player on the ball? All of these dynamics could be responsible for a player's low rating. And then there is the often overlooked; is the player that the FB is up against just that damned good? If its a total mismatch then it might just be time to go back to the drawing board. If you can't stop a certain player then you have to stop the ball getting to them in the first place. Find out who plays the most passes to the big threat and close them down and tackle the harder. Stop the ball going to the dangerous player in the first place. Or you could always sacrifice another player's forward play by sticking them on Man Mark to assist in the shacking of said dangerous player.

Another thing you can try is to watch the game in 2D and have your cursor hovering over the pause button. Its difficult, I know, but try to not get wrapped up in the game for a few matches. Just watch, no emotion. Every time you win the ball, pause. Where is everyone? Does the player on the ball have passing options? How many? Where are the gaps in the opposition shape? Do you think your players are in the right areas to exploit those? If not, have a think about why not? Could it be that because of the starting formation? Could it be their Roles and Duties haven't instructed them to gravitate to certain areas? If the space isn't out wide then a Winger might struggle to get into the game but if the opposition are playing a flat back four with no DM then there's a good bit of space directly in front of their CD pair. So...maybe with a little tweak you could do something with that. If you can't get your central AM into the game have a look at whether the opposition formation is packing that area with a DM or two? If they are then you might have to rethink the Role, Duty or system as a whole.

The same works in reverse. If one of their players is tearing you up but doesn't have killer attributes then how are they getting that much space? Who is it that keeps giving them the ball? How are they getting so much space and time? All of this is possible by making a cup of tea, relaxing, letting your emotion and ego take a break for half an hour, watching the game on 2D, pausing often and just having a look for things that you don't think look right. You won't get it right a 100% of the time no one does but the sooner you start to teach yourself how to quickly and simply spot problems and opportunities the sooner you'll start to feel a bit more in control.

Personally, my biggest enemy is complacency, laziness and ego. If I start to get carried away, if I start to invest too much emotion, ego and pride in proceedings then I'm no longer paying attention to what I should be paying attention to. If I start multi-tasking and checking the internet then I stop concentrating, I take short cuts and miss things. If I'm sulking because its not going my way I miss things. The only way I've ever got the game somewhat under my control is to take it slow and be thorough.

[Bunkerossian]

1 minute ago, Atarin said:

It can be difficult to work out.

There are some ways to get a pretty good idea though. Every now and then check your Team Report section, within that you'll find a comparison between you and the rest of the league. You'll get a reasonable idea about how you rate from that screen.

Another place to just see how you fare is your Media Expectation, if you're considering relegation fodder then it's a fair bet that the game (having considered your club reputation & squad strength) doesn't think you should be beating most teams in the league.

Another thing you can do is have a very clear idea about what the requirements of your system are. Where the exploitable gaps will be.etc Wherever there are exploitable gaps you will find one of your players who has a big job, because it'll be their responsibility to deal with the opposition's overloads there. Have a look at the Roles and Duties that you've selected for a big player, do you think the player has the requisite attributes?

What about general personality? Do they have solid Aggression, Bravery, Determination, Team Work, Work Rate? These will dictate the player's application on the field. Do they have problems with big games or inconsistency? Check the assistant's Player Report to find out.

Always look around a struggling player, as well. Are they being let down by someone else? If you're playing in a 4-4-2 for example and one of your fullbacks is having a mare have a quick check of the Wide Midfielder ahead of him. Is the WM tracking opposition players back? Is the WM dropping in to provide cover when the FB is dealing with a threat? Is the WM in position to offer a passing option should the FB win the ball? What about the nearest CM? Are they close? Are they following opposition players supporting the main opposition player on the ball? Are they cutting off passing lanes? What about the FB's nearest CD? Is the CD close? Are they applying pressure where needed? Are they leaving opposition support players free to offer a passing option to the player on the ball? All of these dynamics could be responsible for a player's low rating. And then there is the often overlooked; is the player that the FB is up against just that damned good? If its a total mismatch then it might just be time to go back to the drawing board. If you can't stop a certain player then you have to stop the ball getting to them in the first place. Find out who plays the most passes to the big threat and close them down and tackle the harder. Stop the ball going to the dangerous player in the first place. Or you could always sacrifice another player's forward play by sticking them on Man Mark to assist in the shacking of said dangerous player.

Another thing you can try is to watch the game in 2D and have your cursor hovering over the pause button. Its difficult, I know, but try to not get wrapped up in the game for a few matches. Just watch, no emotion. Every time you win the ball, pause. Where is everyone? Does the player on the ball have passing options? How many? Where are the gaps in the opposition shape? Do you think your players are in the right areas to exploit those? If not, have a think about why not? Could it be that because of the starting formation? Could it be their Roles and Duties haven't instructed them to gravitate to certain areas? If the space isn't out wide then a Winger might struggle to get into the game but if the opposition are playing a flat back four with no DM then there's a good bit of space directly in front of their CD pair. So...maybe with a little tweak you could do something with that. If you can't get your central AM into the game have a look at whether the opposition formation is packing that area with a DM or two? If they are then you might have to rethink the Role, Duty or system as a whole.

The same works in reverse. If one of their players is tearing you up but doesn't have killer attributes then how are they getting that much space? Who is it that keeps giving them the ball? How are they getting so much space and time? All of this is possible by making a cup of tea, relaxing, letting your emotion and ego take a break for half an hour, watching the game on 2D, pausing often and just having a look for things that you don't think look right. You won't get it right a 100% of the time no one does but the sooner you start to teach yourself how to quickly and simply spot problems and opportunities the sooner you'll start to feel a bit more in control.

Personally, my biggest enemy is complacency, laziness and ego. If I start to get carried away, if I start to invest too much emotion, ego and pride in proceedings then I'm no longer paying attention to what I should be paying attention to. If I start multi-tasking and checking the internet then I stop concentrating, I take short cuts and miss things. If I'm sulking because its not going my way I miss things. The only way I've ever got the game somewhat under my control is to take it slow and be thorough.

I'm playing international football. I know Colombia have good players, but my left full backs are not bad at all. I expected that the one who started, plus the left WM, could make something happen. I never expected anything from the middle, as the 3 behind James were destroyers- good ones.

[HUNT3R]

2 hours ago, Bunkerossian said:

It seems like I'm also failing to exploit formation weaknesses in opponents. Against a 4-3-1-2, I tried to focus play down the flanks, but my 4-1-2-2-1 simply conceded a goal from the opposition wing back going forward and crossing. To be fair, I'm unsure if my failings could simply be due to the superior quality of the opposition.

What do you mean you tried to focus play down the flanks? Did you just add the TI? If yes, why? And do you know what it does?