Quickfire Questions and Answers Thread (Tactic and Training Questions Only)

[Cal585]

7 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

However, anticipation and other mental attributes tend to develop pretty slowly, so if you have a player with poor anticipation, you can hardly expect any notable improvement (unless he is young enough to learn through both training and experience). 

If Anticipation doesn't grow much, that might explain why it's been left behind by other attributes like Positioning in a couple of my prospects. Thanks for the answer!

Edited August 24, 2020 by Cal585

[Seb Wassell]

On 22/08/2020 at 12:21, GianniM said:

When picking your captain, would you rather pick a teamleader with average Leadership, or a player that's less influential but has a higher rating in Leadership? (all other factors equal - I understand there's character and determination etc as well)

For me at least, Leadership is no good if what they're leading with is poor attributes.

I'd much rather have, for example, a player with high Determination and Teamwork and average Leadership as my captain than a player with high Leadership but nothing else. Of course, I'd then want to encourage them to grow into that leadership position, but that's another story.

[SandBuks]

How does Mentality work with PI ( particularly ' Degree PI' ) ?

For example : ( assuming players 100% follow PI or have same creative freedom)
A : Defensive Mentality & Shoot More Often
B : Attacking Mentality & Shoot Less Often
C : Balanced Mentality & Mixed (Shoot)

1. Can I just say A's frequency to Shoot approximately equal to B&C or these PIs increase/decrease player's Mentality on different options ?
2. What would players do with Mixed PI? They decide on their mentality or intelligence or both?

Thanks!  ;  )

[99]

Match Review (the one AFTER a game): Yes or no?

[Experienced Defender]

5 hours ago, rossenori said:

which one is more inclined to defend and which one is more adventurous going forward FB/a or WB/s? 

All else being equal, FB is a bit more responsible defensively, whereas WB is more likely to offer attacking support a bit earlier and more decisively. 

[wkdsoul]

Just me annoyed at the amount of wingers that can only play the attacking mid role and not the mid? Is it a choice by fm or a researcher thing? 

[herne79]

25 minutes ago, wkdsoul said:

Just me annoyed at the amount of wingers that can only play the attacking mid role and not the mid? Is it a choice by fm or a researcher thing? 

Researchers if you are talking about existing players, game mechanics if you mean newgens.

Either way, what makes you think they can't play in the ML/R position?  If it's just their lack of green positional dots, ignore them.  They're just a starting point and a way for the game to tell you who is "supposed" to play where.  If a player has the attributes you need for the role you want, just play him in the position you need him for.

[wkdsoul]

2 minutes ago, herne79 said:

Researchers if you are talking about existing players, game mechanics if you mean newgens.

Either way, what makes you think they can't play in the ML/R position?  If it's just their lack of green positional dots, ignore them.  They're just a starting point and a way for the game to tell you who is "supposed" to play where.  If a player has the attributes you need for the role you want, just play him in the position you need him for.

ah ok, just seemed odd that players that play aml cant play ml when the tactic is set for the 'defensive' position in the screen.  Sterling for example in a 4141/433 system can only play AML to a good degree.  jsut having a brain freeze.  i'll train whoever up. 

[CaptCanuck]

53 minutes ago, rossenori said:

even if the FB is set to attack? 

A few years old, but I like this description, think it lays it out well:

"The fullback attack will start from deeper and defend deeper than a wingback, but an attack fullback will get further forward than a support wingback on the attack as he has a higher mentality. Both fullbacks and wingbacks have the same mentality with the same duty. A fullback attack has get further forward active, as do wingbacks on all duties.  If you want defense first, fullback is better as he plays deeper on defense, but with an attack duty he is risky. For what you want, a wingback support might do better because his mentality is lower, but he will still take opportunities to get forward maybe more than you'd like. If a safety first thing is what you want, you might try as fullback support, as he won't get caught out near so much. The downside of course, being that he might not be as active offensively as you want. As with all things FM, each option carries with it some risk   "

From here: https://community.sigames.com/topic/378855-wb-s-or-fb-a/

 

[Experienced Defender]

2 hours ago, rossenori said:

even if the FB is set to attack?

Because FB has a slightly lower (deeper) starting position than WB. 

[mouli]

Can the CBs be stopped from counter pressing? I only want my forwards midfielders and full backs to counter press. 

[Experienced Defender]

2 hours ago, mouli said:

Can the CBs be stopped from counter pressing? I only want my forwards midfielders and full backs to counter press. 

CBs do not participate in counter-press. If you are seeing them press a lot, it probably means your team pressing urgency instruction is set to more or extremely urgent or their close down PI is set to maximum.

[Experienced Defender]

@Karnack Your question requires analysis of your tactic and therefore cannot be asked or answered in this quickfire thread. Therefore, you need to start your own separate thread and ask the question again there (preferably with a screenshot of your tactic). 

Please do so and you'll surely get some feedback 

[Karnack]

1 minute ago, Experienced Defender said:

@Karnack Your question requires analysis of your tactic and therefore cannot be asked or answered in this quickfire thread. Therefore, you need to start your own separate thread, ask the question again there (preferably with a screenshot of your tactic). 

Please do so and you'll surely get some feedback 

Yeah, I wasn't sure if it deserved it's own thread or not, thanks! Any chance you could pm me the post so I don't have to rewrite it? :P I'm lazy like that

[mouli]

1 hour ago, Experienced Defender said:

CBs do not participate in counter-press. If you are seeing them press a lot, it probably means your team pressing urgency instruction is set to more or extremely urgent or their close down PI is set to maximum.

Their pressing PI is standard and the overall TI is also set to standard. I play on balanced mentality. Should I start a new thread for this topic? 

[_Daniel_]

8 minutes ago, mouli said:

Their pressing PI is standard and the overall TI is also set to standard. I play on balanced mentality. Should I start a new thread for this topic? 

Do they have high aggression? This can have an effect on how keen they are to press. 

[mouli]

50 minutes ago, _Daniel_ said:

Do they have high aggression? This can have an effect on how keen they are to press. 

Yeah I think so, I'll check next time i play. 

[Marabak]

Is there any in-game advantage of using players on the near and far post for a corner? In real life, players positioned here can be effective in blocking shots on target that the GK can't reach, but I've conceded quite a few in my first half a season as Bournemouth (only bought FM20 a few weeks ago) which the match engine visualisation suggests a player on the line should have been able to clear easily but made no attempt. Is it just poor representation of what's going on under the hood, or are players on the post null and void in this version of the game? Should I ditch them and have more men in the box to stop the initial headers?

[Experienced Defender]

3 hours ago, mouli said:

Their pressing PI is standard and the overall TI is also set to standard. I play on balanced mentality. Should I start a new thread for this topic? 

Yes 

[Experienced Defender]

1 hour ago, Marabak said:

Is there any in-game advantage of using players on the near and far post for a corner? In real life, players positioned here can be effective in blocking shots on target that the GK can't reach, but I've conceded quite a few in my first half a season as Bournemouth (only bought FM20 a few weeks ago) which the match engine visualisation suggests a player on the line should have been able to clear easily but made no attempt. Is it just poor representation of what's going on under the hood, or are players on the post null and void in this version of the game? Should I ditch them and have more men in the box to stop the initial headers?

More important is to have players zonally marking respective near and far post areas than the posts themselves. Player selection also matters.

[Fieldsy]

Does direct passing mean more long balls or can it be used to break down defensive teams and still play good looking football (nice passing etc)

[Experienced Defender]

39 minutes ago, Fieldsy said:

Does direct passing mean more long balls or can it be used to break down defensive teams and still play good looking football (nice passing etc)

It can. But if you want to discuss it in more detail, you'll have to start a separate thread. 

[CaptCanuck]

Does the context of a match change the way the AI opponent sets up for it or does the AI size you up in isolation based on your rep and the rest of it?

ie. whether it's a preseason match, a league match they must win to finish top 4/relegation, a draw needed to qualify for the knock out round of a tourney... will you see different tactics from Team A in those instances

[plcarlos]

Do one-two's and slightly higher tempo = higher over all (Positive Mentality), os is it best to drop tempo in that mentality?

[Experienced Defender]

12 hours ago, plcarlos said:

Do one-two's and slightly higher tempo = higher over all (Positive Mentality), os is it best to drop tempo in that mentality?

Not sure I understood your question correctly, but such things depend on the style of football you want to play and hence the tactic as a whole. Which means that you need to start a separate thread, explain what exactly you want and post a screenshot of your tactic there if you want really proper advice.

[Novem9]

Is it a rule that if you have IF(a) you need deep striker? Or IF(a) could be useful with AF for example?

[Tom14]

Does the team instruction 'focus play down right/left' alter any of the team settings, i.e. team will play slightly wider? The same question for if it alters any player instructions, i.e. tells wide players to 'hug touchline'.

[Experienced Defender]

1 hour ago, Novem9 said:

Is it a rule that if you have IF(a) you need deep striker? Or IF(a) could be useful with AF for example?

There are no fixed and definite "rules" in FM. But it is generally more advisable to pair an attacking IF with a lone striker that is either on support duty or has more of a creator role (as opposed to a simple runner or scorer), regardless of duty. Which does not mean that a combo of an IF on attack and AF (for example) can never work. It certainly can, but you will more often find people struggling with such a combo compared to IFat and DLF (for example). 

[Experienced Defender]

19 minutes ago, brookie1402 said:

Does the team instruction 'focus play down right/left' alter any of the team settings, i.e. team will play slightly wider?

It does not alter the width, but does encourage a greater use of the flank(s) when attacking. 

 

20 minutes ago, brookie1402 said:

The same question for if it alters any player instructions, i.e. tells wide players to 'hug touchline'

No. but like any other instruction - can indirectly affect players' general behavior in different situations. 

What the focus play down a flank TI does affect is the individual mentality of the fullback/wing-back on that flank. 

[lfc7]

If i was to come up with a playing style for a new team based on strengths and weakness in the team report, am i right in thinking anything not mentioned the team is basically average at ? for e.g my Eibar team is poor (orange) at flair, teamwork, acceleration, strength, crossing, pace, balance, determination, composure, anticipation, vision, passing, off the ball, marking, dribbling, stamina. On the good side it lists partnerships, good throwing, kicking, fk takers and long shots. As i said above so if the likes of tackling, decisions, natural fitness, jumping reach etc are not listed in either column does that mean the team is basically average in these attributes as a whole ? thanks

Edited September 16, 2020 by lfc7

[KillieDIV]

Can someone explain the basics of DLFs v DLFa v AFa please? I always struggle when choosing between these roles as I don't think I understand the difference between them. I usually end up going for DLFa without really understanding why, as it is a sort of middle ground between them. 

[Johnny Ace]

38 minutes ago, KillieDIV said:

Can someone explain the basics of DLFs v DLFa v AFa please? I always struggle when choosing between these roles as I don't think I understand the difference between them. I usually end up going for DLFa without really understanding why, as it is a sort of middle ground between them. 

Read the in-game information on each role & think how they fit into your system 

Like a DLF(S) is a great partner for AF(A) in a two up top formation - DLF(S) drops deeper, looks to support 

I DLF(A) is a good lone striker option with no AMC - DLF (A) drops deep, looks to attack

AF(A) is a good lone striker or in a pairing with a strike partner or a supporting AMC - AF(A) pushes high, leads the front line, looks to get in the channels 

That's about as simplistic as it gets, then you have factor in the roles on the flanks. A DLF (S or A) will partner well with an IF(A), an AF(A) partners well with a W(A) & so on     

[ElJefe4]

From attacking corners, is there a way to have more than 1 player 'Lurking Outside Area', but actually having them be spread out across the width of the box? I wanted to have 2 or 3 players outside the box from attacking corners to prevent counters and recycle possession, but they just stand in the exact same place.

[Keyzer Soze]

Hi,

Quick question regarding the Inside Forward mentality.

Why is that the IF(s) has a "very attacking" mentality on Positive, or above, team mentality? 

It's a bit strange, because on those team mentality, the Inside Forward has always the same mentality, despite the duty (support or attack). Is this a bug?

[Experienced Defender]

1 hour ago, Keyzer Soze said:

Hi,

Quick question regarding the Inside Forward mentality.

Why is that the IF(s) has a "very attacking" mentality on Positive, or above, team mentality? 

It's a bit strange, because on those team mentality, the Inside Forward has always the same mentality, despite the duty (support or attack). Is this a bug?

Because there is no higher mentality than Very Attacking in the game. So if he has very attacking mentality under the positive team mentality, when you up the team mentality to attacking or very attacking, his individual will still be labelled as "very attacking", simply because there is no higher mentality label in FM. 

Basically, his actual mentality will be different under different team mentalities, but you cannot see it on the screen because the old slider system is no longer available in FM. So any mentality now actually involves several scale values (e.g. very attacking probably involves the mentalities from 18 to 20, attacikng from 15 to 17, positive from 12 to 14 and so on). 

[Hanan96]

On 12/09/2020 at 21:31, Experienced Defender said:

There are no fixed and definite "rules" in FM. But it is generally more advisable to pair an attacking IF with a lone striker that is either on support duty or has more of a creator role (as opposed to a simple runner or scorer), regardless of duty. Which does not mean that a combo of an IF on attack and AF (for example) can never work. It certainly can, but you will more often find people struggling with such a combo compared to IFat and DLF (for example). 

So, Deep lying forward (Attack), or Trequarista (Attack) as a lone striker might not too isolated then?

[Experienced Defender]

1 minute ago, Hanan96 said:

So, Deep lying forward (Attack), or Trequarista (Attack) as a lone striker might not too isolated then?

As always, depends on the system as a whole. but both TQ and DLF on attack are less likely to get isolated than AF for example, because both roles tend to drop deeper during transitions. 

[Keyzer Soze]

Just now, Experienced Defender said:

As always, depends on the system as a whole. but both TQ and DLF on attack are less likely to get isolated than AF for example, because both roles tend to drop deeper during transitions. 

what if the IF is on support duty? Then would it make more sence to have a forward like a AF(a)?

[Experienced Defender]

1 minute ago, Keyzer Soze said:

what if the IF is on support duty? Then would it make more sence to have a forward like a AF(a)?

As I already said, it always depends on your tactical system as a whole and can therefore vary from case to case. The worst thing you can do is viewing roles and duties - or any other element of a tactic - in isolation from its other parts.

Of course, it also depends on the quality of your player(s) playing a role. Some players are good enough to play as a lone AF, others need more support. But when it comes specifically to the IF/AF combo, I would rather have the IF on support duty than on attack. 

[Keyzer Soze]

32 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

As I already said, it always depends on your tactical system as a whole and can therefore vary from case to case. The worst thing you can do is viewing roles and duties - or any other element of a tactic - in isolation from its other parts.

Of course, it also depends on the quality of your player(s) playing a role. Some players are good enough to play as a lone AF, others need more support. But when it comes specifically to the IF/AF combo, I would rather have the IF on support duty than on attack. 

Just to make sure i understand the logic.... the IF(s) would be a better combo when compare with the IF(a) because, probably because the IF(a) will attack the same channel that the AF(a) will go to. Is that right?

The same way, when in compare with the IF(s)+AF(a) vs IW(s)+AF(a) combo, the IF(s)+AF(a) in theory would work better, because the movement of the IF(s) is slightly more vertical than the IW(s) and because of that will give a better support to the AF(a).

Am i right to assume this?

PS: i know that roles and duties shouldn't be analyze isolated from the tactic as a whole and with the quality and attributes of the players, but sometimes i wish there was a thread  in someway in the line of the old pairs and combinations made by @llama3 where people just ask this simple questions related with paring roles because, despite of the whole setup there are some combos that will always work better and be more effective when in compare to others.

[Experienced Defender]

20 minutes ago, Keyzer Soze said:

Just to make sure i understand the logic.... the IF(s) would be a better combo when compare with the IF(a) because, probably because the IF(a) will attack the same channel that the AF(a) will go to. Is that right?

Yes. Although it does not mean that such a combo can never work. It's just not optimal. But IW on attack and AF can be a good combination. Again, depending on how you set up the rest. 

 

22 minutes ago, Keyzer Soze said:

The same way, when in compare with the IF(s)+AF(a) vs IW(s)+AF(a) combo, the IF(s)+AF(a) in theory would work better, because the movement of the IF(s) is slightly more vertical than the IW(s) and because of that will give a better support to the AF(a).

Am i right to assume this?

Basically, both IF on support and IW on support can be a good match for an AF. 

 

24 minutes ago, Keyzer Soze said:

PS: i know that roles and duties shouldn't be analyze isolated from the tactic as a whole and with the quality and attributes of the players, but sometimes i wish there was a thread  in someway in the line of the old pairs and combinations made by @llama3 where people just ask this simple questions related with paring roles because, despite of the whole setup there are some combos that will always work better and be more effective when in compare to others

Sounds like a good idea 

 In fact, I may create such a thread 

[Keyzer Soze]

3 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

 

Sounds like a good idea 

 In fact, I may create such a thread 

That sir, would be fantastic. 

[Halbraum]

Does it make sense to play direct-attacking football (positive mentality) while using high defensive line? What i see is that vast majority of direct tactics play deeper and less urgent pressing. I am pretty sure Mourinho's Madrid was playing with a high d-line and pressing high (although it was like split block). Isn't it contradicting with that playstyle? 

Is there any benefit of playing direct with a high d-line and pressing?

[Dr. Hook]

2 hours ago, Halbraum said:

Does it make sense to play direct-attacking football (positive mentality) while using high defensive line? What i see is that vast majority of direct tactics play deeper and less urgent pressing. I am pretty sure Mourinho's Madrid was playing with a high d-line and pressing high (although it was like split block). Isn't it contradicting with that playstyle? 

Is there any benefit of playing direct with a high d-line and pressing?

It would be a  high risk approach, but sure you could do that. You have to have fast defenders though. The idea that I would have about it is to get the ball forward quickly and then keep it there till I got a scoring chance, so your high line and high pressing is to keep the game in their end as much as you can. 

[Halbraum]

7 minutes ago, Dr. Hook said:

It would be a  high risk approach, but sure you could do that. You have to have fast defenders though. The idea that I would have about it is to get the ball forward quickly and then keep it there till I got a scoring chance, so your high line and high pressing is to keep the game in their end as much as you can. 

Thanks for the answer. Your reasoning sounds like creating havoc and chaos at the opposition half with tempo and press then finding the net. Probably one would need all-around great players. They must have high speed,technique,intelligence,physicality. 

Then i give up my desire to play like that 

[EnigMattic1]

How much of an impact does it make if your assistant/coaches have the same preferred formation/playing style as you? Secondly, How would you go about finding staff with the same/similar tactical preferences if you were to play an asymmetrical formation or created a playing style from scratch?

[Hanan96]

Hi. I would like my fullback to often Run From Deep, but Rarely dribble. Just either quick, early crosses, or pass to anyone. But fill the wing area

With FB (Support), or WB (Support/Defend) duty, often times, my wing area are empty, that my playmaker hardly able to switch sides.

But FB (Attack) or WB (Attack) or even CWB, they are too often dribble the ball, which often lost it, especially when my best fullbacks aren't good dribblers.

Any Ideas?

[CaptCanuck]

^Think this goes beyond a quick yes/no - but WB(s) should absolutely be taking up positions on the wing in the attacking zone when you are in possession in the opposition's half. How they make their way there - trailing the play a bit, in possession themselves dribbling down the flank, or other ways - once you have parked up outside the oppositions 18yd box, all things being equal a WB(s) should be available as an outlet on the wing.

I cannot speak to FBs as I do not use them. Might be worth a separate thread on how to get WBs involved, but not too involved, or do a search and maybe it's answered already or there is a thread you can bump.

[Experienced Defender]

2 hours ago, Hanan96 said:

Hi. I would like my fullback to often Run From Deep, but Rarely dribble. Just either quick, early crosses, or pass to anyone. But fill the wing area

With FB (Support), or WB (Support/Defend) duty, often times, my wing area are empty, that my playmaker hardly able to switch sides.

But FB (Attack) or WB (Attack) or even CWB, they are too often dribble the ball, which often lost it, especially when my best fullbacks aren't good dribblers.

Any Ideas?

Yes. The best idea is to start your own separate thread, post a screenshot of your tactic there (i.e. in that separate thread) and then explain again what your issue is. Because otherwise you are hardly going to get any proper answer/advice on your question. 

[zlatanera]

7 hours ago, EnigMattic1 said:

How much of an impact does it make if your assistant/coaches have the same preferred formation/playing style as you? Secondly, How would you go about finding staff with the same/similar tactical preferences if you were to play an asymmetrical formation or created a playing style from scratch?

Depends on how much you lean on them. Personally, unless I get one with 20 Motivating to do team talks, my assistant is on Tunnel Interviews and nothing else. I mute all advice. But if you want advice that might be helpful, as well as their overall quality I'd make sure their tendencies are close to yours. For example if your custom playing style includes a high press I wouldn't have an assistant whose Pressing Style is Less Urgent, and if I generally used Play Out Of Defence then I wouldn't defer to an assistant whose Passing Style is Long (but might with one who is Direct if I was also using Shorter Passing as standard as he might tell me when to switch it up and kill a team). That's personal preferences though, hope at least showing my logic is helpful.

6 hours ago, Hanan96 said:

Hi. I would like my fullback to often Run From Deep, but Rarely dribble. Just either quick, early crosses, or pass to anyone. But fill the wing area

With FB (Support), or WB (Support/Defend) duty, often times, my wing area are empty, that my playmaker hardly able to switch sides.

But FB (Attack) or WB (Attack) or even CWB, they are too often dribble the ball, which often lost it, especially when my best fullbacks aren't good dribblers.

Any Ideas?

The Gets Forward Whenever Possible trait can help out here in encouraging a play on a lower duty to, well, Get Forward. Depending on the team mentality you're using the Full Back / Wing Back on Automatic duty might also be useful as they have 0 and 1 (2?) PIs hard-selected, respectively, so could be customised to get forward, but not to dribble more (perhaps even to dribble less). But make sure to check their individual mentality as it changes more drastically with team mentality than others.