Team Shape Help

[Romers]

I need some advice regarding team shape. If I am trying to build a team that press relentlessly as a unit and when they get on the ball I want them to play in an attacking manner with lots of creative freedom and a high tempo then I would assume the more fluid I make my team shape the better?

However, having read the various posts regarding team shape around the forums I'm doubting myself, would I be better off structured so each player knows his job and doesn't deviate from the pressing? 

Or do I need neither and I'd actually benefit from a standard shape?

[Rashidi]

If you are in doubt, go flexible. Just remember a few simple things about shape, if you seek more discipline during transitions then go with structured or even flexible.  If you want more more risk and want more players involved in transitions go fluid or very fluid. The most important thing to note here is how it affects your team up when they move with the ball, and to consider that within your formation.

Lets say you are playing with a 442, and you go structured, then note where your attacking duties are placed, these chaps will prob do well if they are good players who are able to take players on to stretch them cos on structured you tend to see more spaces. When you are playing on fluid they may be closer together but if you lose the ball then the compactness could see you crumble to a ball over the top.

Most people aren't sure when they start building the tactic how well their teams can play on ANY shape, and that includes me when I playing for the first time. So go flexible. Once you can tell by your formation and duty allocation how they play...just remember how shape affects you when you change it during attack.

I used to use the "Kumbaya" analogy...or metaphor...but i have been over-using it...need ot come up with something different for FM18

[Atarin]

I'll leave the "theory" of shape to someone else, I don't know if anyone knows what SI intended shape to do. What I see shape doing, and the way I use it in my tactics is twofold. The first one is very simple. It creates space between your players and lines of players or reduces that space. That can be helpful but its not the be-all-and end all. To understand the second use of shape I have to first describe how I see the different layers of instructions working. When you choose a formation you are creating certain responsibilities, The way I've describe it before is if you imagine your team can have an attacking intent of 1-20. When you choose a Mentality you are setting a baseline. Let's say you go for Standard then we can say that that might be a score of 10. From this all of your players will get adjusted. So your CMs might get 10, the FBs & might get 8, your CDs & keeper might get 5, your WMs might get 12 and your strikers might get 14. From here you overlay Duties which adds and subtracts buffs (slight increases), so for example a strike given a Defend duty (like DF-d) might get dropped back down to 12, a Winger on Attack might get bumped up to 13. This begins to distribute risk and responsibility across your team. Finally you choose a shape which adds a final layer across the whole team which either drags everyone closer together or stretches everyone further apart. So for example a Very Structured shape might push your forward 16+ and your CDs down to 3. A Very Fluid shape will squad all of those scores closer together, so the CDs will get a slight boost but the Attack duties will get dragged back a bit - which is what creates the impression of compactness. Hope that explains it, well, the way I see it anyway.

[Gorstak]

You should look at fluidity as a way to close down gaps in your formation. If you change fluidity in team instructions screen, you will notice your players close down more with more fluid fluidity and less with more structured. So, you should use more fluid fluidities in formations that have more gaps. I'd use very fluid in a flat formation since you are missing both attacking and defensive midfield. But, your player roles and duties also must adjust. Your players must close down more, move further away from their position to close down in such a flat formation, so I'd give them more demanding roles and duties.

[Atarin]

10 hours ago, Gorstak said:

You should look at fluidity as a way to close down gaps in your formation. If you change fluidity in team instructions screen, you will notice your players close down more with more fluid fluidity and less with more structured. So, you should use more fluid fluidities in formations that have more gaps. I'd use very fluid in a flat formation since you are missing both attacking and defensive midfield. But, your player roles and duties also must adjust. Your players must close down more, move further away from their position to close down in such a flat formation, so I'd give them more demanding roles and duties.

I'd be very reluctant to use Very Fluid and a flat formation like 4-4-2 for the simple reason that you'd be insanely compact, you'd cover far less of the pitch - you're already only covering 3 lines. There's far too much danger of exposing space behind you or in front. There might be occasions where you'd use a Fluid shape with a flat formation but I'd be very nervous using it on a consistent basis.

[Gorstak]

1 hour ago, Atarin said:

I'd be very reluctant to use Very Fluid and a flat formation like 4-4-2 for the simple reason that you'd be insanely compact, you'd cover far less of the pitch - you're already only covering 3 lines. There's far too much danger of exposing space behind you or in front. There might be occasions where you'd use a Fluid shape with a flat formation but I'd be very nervous using it on a consistent basis.

Well, if you wont use it in a flat formation, you will be leaving gaps opposition can exploit. Even your assistant will warn you of that...

[herne79]

43 minutes ago, Gorstak said:

Well, if you wont use it in a flat formation, you will be leaving gaps opposition can exploit. Even your assistant will warn you of that...

Not necessarily, I quite happily play 4-4-2 Structured.  It's all about balance and is overly simplistic (and misleading) to say flat formations = Fluid.