Common misconceptions faced when building tactics

[pheelf]

I thought I'd share with the community some of the issues that I've encountered myself while trying to learn how to improve my understanding of the tactical side of the game. I've composed a list of some of the most commonly held ideas which regularly show up in some guise or another when members post seeking help with tactics. The list is most definitely not exhaustive and I would appreciate if others more experienced and knowledgeable than me contributed to create a more comprehensive list as well as perhaps mentioning details I've overlooked that I could add to the ones already posted.

#1 The names of mentalities denote precisely the type of football that a team will play

Attacking mentality =/= Attacking football, instead I think it's better to view mentalities as styles of play.

Mentality is shaped by the following factors: tempo, passing risk, roaming, width, pressing intensity, defensive line height, line of engagement, frequency of forward runs. Generally, it determines the amount of risks your players will be willing to take.

Therefore it's perfectly possible to be good defensively on a higher mentality and vice versa.

#2 The more TIs and PIs you use within a tactic the more 'advanced' it is 

This is one which I see very often and is usually symbolized by an overkill of instructions within a tactic.

In my view, if you are having to select a lot of instructions then the base tactic isn't right. Another issue is what happens when you get into difficulty? How do you begin to unravel what is the cause with so many different variables?

You should be able to get close to a desired style of play without the need for a whole bunch of instructions with the formation, mentality and player roles and duties able to define the tactic.

#3 Selecting 'X' instruction guarantees my team perform 'X'

The best example I can give of this is when teams want to play out of defence and think that simply selecting the TI will make them play that way.

There is a lot more that goes into fulfilling an instruction than just selecting it. You need to have the right players and to have the correct base (formation, mentality, roles and duties) to consistently perform the action.

For e.g. If trying to play out from the back you need midfielders which position themselves deep enough to transition the ball from defence into the midfield.

#4 The descriptions given for the roles should be taken at face value

The problem with doing that is that there is no context given which can be misleading.

For e.g. A Poacher in a system with a cautious team mentality is going to behave very differently than one in a positive team mentality. Also, a lone Poacher is again going to behave completely different than one flanked with a Target Man.

This is where watching matches in detail from time to time can be very helpful as instead of judging a player on what you think they should be doing you are actually assessing what they are doing.

#5 Player role and positional familiarity dictates how I should utilize a player

The familiarity a player has in a role can be a useful bit of knowledge to have but it also must be contextualized.

A favoured role of a player might not necessarily fit into the approach you want your team to play and can actually disrupt it if it's completely wrong.

Football is a team game, you'll get far more out of player in a role which they aren't particularly suited to that fits the tactic than trying to play a player in a favoured role which doesn't suit the tactic.

#6 The analysis tab on the tactic always gives correct information

Another one of those issues where the tactical creator itself presents misleading information.

For e.g. I'm playing a 4-4-2, I have my central midfield pair setup with one on the defend duty and the other on the support duty. According to the analysis you will see an orange patch in front of the central midfielder on the defend duty. Now if I change his duty to support that patch will become green which logically will bring the conclusion that is a better way to setup the tactic.

That is completely wrong as it would mean you have no holding midfielder and much like many other aspects of tactical analysis offered by the game lacks any form of context.

#7 Formation should be an after thought when it comes to deciding on a style of play

This sort of thinking is perhaps encouraged by the preset tactical styles which have a set of 3 formations you can use for each.

The way I see it the formation you choose is the single most important decision you will make when deciding how you want your team to play as it defines the starting point for the majority of your attacks and sets the base for where and how your team defends.

For e.g. You decide you want to play a short passing possession based style but then you pick a formation which has players spread all over the pitch, the two won't work well with each other.

#8 The way to get around defences is to pile players forward

I'm not sure where this idea originates from but is deeply flawed.

To break down a defence you need good width, good depth and good movement in front of the ball in order to create space for your attacking players by pulling the oppositions defenders out of position.

That is why I don't understand why so many tactics seek to flood the central areas and compress the pitch as that works entirely contrary to what you need.

#9 The profile of players is irrelevant when deciding how I want the team to play

Once you have decided on a style of play you must also ensure that the players you have can actually pull it off.

For e.g. Playing a gegenpressing style with lazy players is a recipe for disaster.

Sometimes you have to be willing to compromise in the present until you can reshape the team and have it playing the way you want in the future.

#10 The match stats are in my favour so therefore I must be dominating the other team

Don't allow yourself to be fooled by statistics as they can be very misleading.

The only statistic that matters is the scoreline and if you are under performing in that respect that should be the only vector which you use to determine whether you are dominating the opposition or not.

The other aspect of statistics is that any context behind them is lost. Yeah, you might be peppering the opposition goal with shots but how many of them are of genuine quality?

#11 The only contradictions that exist are ones where TIs conflict so aren't select-able

It is very easy to believe this but in reality isn't correct.

Sometimes the contradiction that exists doesn't even need to be one based on a particular TI. For e.g. Trying to play out of defence while on the Very Attacking mentality in itself is a contradiction.

Another is trying to prevent the GK from distributing the ball short with a lone striker in a flat 4-1-4-1 for example.

#12 TIs and PIs override existing instructions

All TIs and PIs are additive to the base settings of mentality.

This can be problematic to deal with as everything in the tactical creator tends to be kind of vague.

For e.g. instructions telling players to play a higher tempo than they would on the Positive mentality but what does that actually mean? That's why I think it's better to avoid that minefield altogether by selecting minimal TIs.

#13 Any difficulty I encounter with my teams performances must be a result of a tactical issue

This is where sometimes players can become stuck and get frustrated and end up in a vicious circle of constantly making tactical changes in the hope it improves things when it doesn't.

There is more to a teams performances on the pitch than tactics. Squad management has to be good, playing the right players in the right roles is also important.

Also there are some occasions where you can't tactic your way out of a situation which is actually fairly realistic when you think about it.

#14 Using theory alone will allow me to build good tactics

It's always a good thing when players seek to increase their knowledge of the game by reading guides and watching videos but you also need to know when to stop.

Otherwise, you can end up with information overload and actually end up being unable to assimilate all the knowledge you have gained.

Once you've read or seen something which you want to try, go into the game and test it out, that way you can see if you have fully understood the concepts.

#15 You need to use 'exploit' tactics to consistently overachieve

Nope, it is perfectly possible to overachieve with basic but balanced tactics.

Improving other aspects of your game such as squad building and man management can have as powerful an impact.

There is no doubt that there will always be some exploitable area of the ME which you can use to gain an advantage but you don't need to use it to do well.

#16 I can ignore hidden attributes and PPMs as their impact is minimal

This couldn't be further from the truth as the impact of PPMs especially has dramatic impacts on the way your players perform the roles you set for them.

I learnt this the hard way as I was left wondering why my team could perform so well domestically but regularly capitulated in Europe.

The answer was that a lot of my players dreaded playing in big matches. Once I moved a lot of those players on and brought in players more comfortable playing in big matches I saw a dramatic improvement.

#17 I should always take my assistants advice

I don't trust my assistants advice at all and don't allow him to select a team without perusing it myself.

I see a lot of players going with the assistants advice on oppositions instructions which again is a very risky ploy.

My advice would be to look at what your assistant is telling you but always make the final decision and base it on what you are seeing.

#18 The only players which can be playmakers are designated playmakers

The truth is that any player can perform the act of creating plays for their team mates.

When deciding to utilize a playmaker it should always be done considering how funneling play though a particular player impacts your attacks.

It's also very important to give your playmakers options when they receive the ball. You also need to ensure you have the right sort of player in the role.

#19 The only attributes I should consider for a role are the ones which are highlighted as being key

There is where context becomes important.

For e.g. You have decided to play a gegenpress 4-4-2 and have a Target Man and Poacher partnership upfront. If you were to go solely on what the game tells you then attributes such as work rate and stamina aren't considered important. However, it's very important in a gegenpress for them to have these attributes to be able to consistently press hard and high up the pitch.

Therefore you need to look at how you have set your team up as a whole when deciding what attributes you need from your players.

#20 All the aspects of creating tactics should be considered disparate

If there is anything which provides the biggest stumbling block for a lot of players it is this and is something which I've also struggled with in the past.

Viewing things in isolation is never a good thing and while it can be difficult to coalesce a bunch of different concepts to form a coherent whole it is a fundamental building block of creating solid tactics.

Everything in a tactic should harmonize and work together. The formation, the mentality, the player roles and duties, the TIs and PIs, the OIs and the players themselves should be geared towards the vision of how you want your team to play. Having any of those aspects working against that vision will cause problems so it's vital that it's done right.

 

I think I'll leave it there for now, hopefully, what I've written helps other players of the game to avoid some of the traps and pitfalls I've experienced while playing FM and at least gives them some pause for thought when it comes to how they go about designing tactics. If I've done that then I'll consider it a job well done.

All the best

Edited November 8, 2019 by pheelf

[sporadicsmiles]

Nice post, a lot of useful information there to spark some discussion. I will start!

6 hours ago, pheelf said:

#8 The way to get around defences is to pile players forward

This is not always flawed. I will often flood a specific area of the pitch with attacking players to force the AI out of shape if they are stubbornly holding position rather than trying to close players down and being drawn out of position. For example in my last match I was facing a very defensive and stubborn Norwich side. They were simply blocking the middle of the park, and playing with a very low block. I could not draw them out, because they were not biting on players until they were in their packed defence. 

So I decided to flood the right hand side of the pitch with players. CM(A), W(A), IWB(A) all on the right hand side. I could have alternatively done IF(A), WB(A), MEZ(A), for example. This forced them to over commit defenders to this side, and gave my IF(A) and FB(A) on the opposite side of the pitch the space we needed. I scored 2 of my 3 goals from players using this space (the third was a corner). 

The key is not that you cannot beat teams by piling players forward. The key is to pile them forward in a sensible and well thought-out manner. Flood a specific area of the pitch, not all areas. 

Not to say you are wrong. Another tactic I use is to drop my players back and give the AI space in front of me to actually advance and attack. Then I look to catch them over committing a little when they lose the ball, and being able to launch quick attacks before they can regain their shape. In football, there are many ways to skin a cat (which is a horrible phrase, why are we skinning a cat?).

[pheelf]

Thanks @sporadicsmiles that's exactly the kind of feedback I was looking for.

I think I perhaps worded that one incorrectly and will revisit it. I was trying to shine a light on the situations where I see tactics which have the highest mentality settings and the majority of the players attacking the central areas with no width or depth to the attacks. I see it as flawed as that plays into the hands of the opposition which if set out to defend will pack those areas with players which leads to a lack of space for your team to operate in given that they will hardly move out of their defensive positions.

I agree with what you wrote that overloads with a purpose in the right areas can create space and force the opposition to break its defensive shape. I use them all the time and they can work very well.

I think you may have also hit upon another couple of common misconceptions in your post.

The first being that changes made to a tactic during a match should be based on nothing but blind hope and speculation rather than actual observations. I watch YouTubers and I see some of them when in losing positions respond by just whacking the mentality up to Very Attacking. There doesn't appear to be any logical reasoning behind it and appears to be a conditioned response rather than being based on what is actually happening in the game. The difference in what you did was that you spotted something about how Norwich was playing and reacted with a well thought out response to it which worked a treat.

Another misconception is that you must have a set amount of a certain duty for a particular mentality which is a fallacy encouraged by some of the pre-game tactical advice from assistants. There has to be a degree of fluidity in the approach and an ability to adjust to the circumstances a player finds themselves in during a match. For e.g. there are times when I'm trying to protect a lead late in the game and will change the duty of my fullback from attack to defend to react to a change in formation from the opposition to 3 up front.

If you have any more suggestions please feel free to post.

Cheers

Edited November 9, 2019 by pheelf

[sporadicsmiles]

49 minutes ago, pheelf said:

I think I perhaps worded that one incorrectly and will revisit it.

I wouldn't. You already noted that these are things you noticed when playing the game. As you do not present them as the ultimate truth, it is fine to have some caveats!

 

50 minutes ago, pheelf said:

The first being that changes made to a tactic during a match should be based on nothing but blind hope and speculation rather than actual observations.

Very much so! I do not watch people play FM myself (well I try to keep up to date with Rashidi), but you are correct. This is a hard skill to learn though. I will admit sometimes in my desperation I go to very attacking when nothing else has worked. It usually does not help. 

 

52 minutes ago, pheelf said:

Another misconception is that you must have a set amount of a certain duty for a particular mentality which is a fallacy encouraged by some of the pre-game tactical advice from assistants.

That is an older one, that came about when roles and duties first came into the game. The game also perpetuates this itself, or it did in FM19. The tactics help you get in the inbox used to tell you to change attack/support duties. At the same time, I see people complaining they cannot score often, but have all their advanced roles on support. I would like someone to make a post about this in more depth sometime, because I think it confuses a lot of people!

[Spiegel]

Nice post! Only thing I disagree with is; 

20 hours ago, pheelf said:

For e.g. I'm playing a 4-4-2, I have my central midfield pair setup with one on the defend duty and the other on the support duty. According to the analysis you will see an orange patch in front of the central midfielder on the defend duty. Now if I change his duty to support that patch will become green which logically will bring the conclusion that is a better way to setup the tactic.

That is completely wrong as it would mean you have no holding midfielder and much like many other aspects of tactical analysis offered by the game lacks any form of context.

I actually think having a defend duty in a four man midfield is a bit conservative. You can definitely have two support roles providing your players occupy the correct defensive areas. DLP(S), BWM(S), CAR(S) will still occupy good defensive positions, while CM(S), RPM(S) and B2B(S) offer a bit more going forward without sacrificing your shape. It's all about finding a good combination.

MEZ and AP are possibilities, but maybe too offensive to play in a two man midfield without a dedicated holding player. 

I'm running a DLP(S) and CAR(S) combination at the minute and are sufficient both defensively and going forward. 

[Bakiano]

Nice and useful post, would like to see more of this. Just a one question, what is the best combination in a two striker partnership for e.g. in a gegenpressing play?

[pheelf]

20 hours ago, Spiegel said:

Nice post! Only thing I disagree with is; 

I actually think having a defend duty in a four man midfield is a bit conservative. You can definitely have two support roles providing your players occupy the correct defensive areas. DLP(S), BWM(S), CAR(S) will still occupy good defensive positions, while CM(S), RPM(S) and B2B(S) offer a bit more going forward without sacrificing your shape. It's all about finding a good combination.

MEZ and AP are possibilities, but maybe too offensive to play in a two man midfield without a dedicated holding player. 

I'm running a DLP(S) and CAR(S) combination at the minute and are sufficient both defensively and going forward. 

Thanks for commenting.

I don't doubt that has been your experience with the game in that you can play without a dedicated holding player and still be successful.

I wasn't trying to make the point that it couldn't work, instead my view was that what the game presents to you as something which should be better in reality shouldn't be. Playing without a dedicated holding midfielder in a 2 man central midfield shouldn't be stronger than playing with one.

I know of no team IRL that starts games without a central midfielder which sits when the team attacks. I think the fact it works in FM probably says more about the state of the ME than it does about the validity of the approach. A competent AI would see the lack of cover for your central defenders and allow you to commit your central midfielders forward, win the ball and counter you through the middle. It seems the AI is incapable of punishing such setups which is quite worrying.

Mind you, the ability to pull off such a risky strategy depends on the overall approach of the tactic and the quality of player you have in comparison with the opposition which can in effect mask issues.

Best Regards

[pheelf]

20 hours ago, Bakiano said:

Nice and useful post, would like to see more of this. Just a one question, what is the best combination in a two striker partnership for e.g. in a gegenpressing play?

Cheers, I don't think there is a 'best' combination that I can provide you with.

I could end up making a suggestion to you that is completely wrong for your setup as the choice depends on a number of different factors. I would advise that you try out different combinations and watch your matches to see if the players are giving you what you are looking for. In effect what you want is a pair of hardworking players off the ball that have the ability to maintain a hard press for the whole game. In this instance, the profile of the player may be a more important factor than the role that you play them in. You could play them in a 'perfect' role for the tactical style but if they aren't physically fit and don't work hard enough you won't get the best out of them.

All the best

[Robson 07]

Good post.  The type of threads on here, and the answers given, are often monotonous so I simply like the fact you've taken a different approach.

I almost think there should be a 'sticky' at the top of this forum that deals with a) how do you move a parked bus, and b) how do you build a counterattack tactic.  These two things answer about 50% of the posts in this forum every time.

Anyway congrats @pheelf I hope you get to enjoy some positive feedback.

Edited November 10, 2019 by Robson 07

[Svenc]

You forgot the most common one by far. edit: Covered by #10, but to spell it out:

- The Goal of any tactic is to have more shots (and/or Possession) on a spreadsheet than the Opposition. 

Following from this:

- If you have more shots than the Opposition, your tactic is working
- If you have fewer shots than the Opposition, your tactic isn't working

 

Additionally:
 

- If you win a few matches, your tactics must be "working"
- If you lose/draw a few matches, your tactics mustn't be "working" / must have stopped "working"

Edited November 10, 2019 by Svenc

[pheelf]

On 10/11/2019 at 10:53, Robson 07 said:

Good post.  The type of threads on here, and the answers given, are often monotonous so I simply like the fact you've taken a different approach.

I almost think there should be a 'sticky' at the top of this forum that deals with a) how do you move a parked bus, and b) how do you build a counterattack tactic.  These two things answer about 50% of the posts in this forum every time.

Anyway congrats @pheelf I hope you get to enjoy some positive feedback.

Thanks, I'd like to see something along those lines too as those two topics appear to be real sources of struggle for a lot of players. I guess the only problem with codifying it is that the solution to both can be rather subjective. Presenting objective truths about the methodology of a team which parks the bus however could be very helpful.

Cheers

On 10/11/2019 at 17:04, Svenc said:

You forgot the most common one by far. edit: Covered by #10, but to spell it out:

- The Goal of any tactic is to have more shots (and/or Possession) on a spreadsheet than the Opposition. 

Following from this:

- If you have more shots than the Opposition, your tactic is working
- If you have fewer shots than the Opposition, your tactic isn't working

 

Additionally:
 

- If you win a few matches, your tactics must be "working"
- If you lose/draw a few matches, your tactics mustn't be "working" / must have stopped "working"

Good one @Svenc, I used to be guilty of the shot count / possession one, nowadays it doesn't bother me in the slightest whether I'm behind in those stats provided I'm ahead in the scoreline. It's very easy to fall into that trap if you don't watch your games properly (only commentary or key highlights), that is why I always suggest that players watch their games in full to gain a greater understanding of how their tactic works (its weaknesses and strengths alongside how to react to specific threats posed by the opposition) then once they have done that they can go back to speeding through.

Best Regards

[lferreira]

On 10/11/2019 at 06:31, pheelf said:

Thanks for commenting.

I don't doubt that has been your experience with the game in that you can play without a dedicated holding player and still be successful.

I wasn't trying to make the point that it couldn't work, instead my view was that what the game presents to you as something which should be better in reality shouldn't be. Playing without a dedicated holding midfielder in a 2 man central midfield shouldn't be stronger than playing with one.

I know of no team IRL that starts games without a central midfielder which sits when the team attacks. I think the fact it works in FM probably says more about the state of the ME than it does about the validity of the approach. A competent AI would see the lack of cover for your central defenders and allow you to commit your central midfielders forward, win the ball and counter you through the middle. It seems the AI is incapable of punishing such setups which is quite worrying.

Mind you, the ability to pull off such a risky strategy depends on the overall approach of the tactic and the quality of player you have in comparison with the opposition which can in effect mask issues.

Best Regards

I believe this also depends on your approach in terms of pressing and getting the ball back. I play a RPM/Mez-Su and a CAR in a 4-4-2, but I have a high d-line and I counter press, so when I lose the ball my players go berserk trying to get it back and it ends up forcing a long ball, which my high line deals with.

However, if I see they have an outlet in the middle of the park I switch to a DLP-De + a CM-Su or a BBM. It's important to notice if the opposition are trying to exploit space or if they are so defensive that they won't, which can make you more willing to take risks.

[Gee_Simpson]

Great OP! I've bookmarked this 

Although I'm guilty of doing number 14. Information overload is an understatement  as I have literally hundreds of bookmarks throughout the years, most of them based on tactical advice, but some unrelated stuff which is okay like graphic mods, database questions etc. 

I'm also guilty of #10, #13 and #20.

Edited November 15, 2019 by Gee_Simpson