Are Tactic 'Sets' the future?

[Silky]

One question, are tactic 'sets' the future? i reckon the answers yes.

It seems the fm developers are determined to stop plug n play tactics. Every time an exploit is found, it is plugged next patch. (understandably as it's so unrealistic)

There is the option to train your team in 3 separate tactics. Coincidence?! Looking through the various threads many people are saying the way forward is to have 2-3 alternate tactics.

Say, Defend, Control & Attack. Or 2 or 3 central defenders (depending on strikers to mark) Bielsa style. Or if you're Barcelona, Controlled Possession, Attacking Possession or 3-4-3 kitchen-sink-possession.

Instead of people trying to develop the perfect tactic why aren't they developing a 'set'? A set of systems?

I'm pretty sure the lazy players (I include myself) would lap up the 'experts' tactic sets, especially if they state which teams they may work with...

Thanks (if you got this far) for listening. I'm a little drunk but still think I got my point across.

And of course, any shared tactic sets from 'cleon', 'tommonufc', 'taktikzz', etc would be proper ace.

[Cleon]

Reading the threads on here 90% of people do use tactic sets already and have done for a good 3 years or so.

I wont ever take that route though because it doesn't suit my play style and wouldn't be beneficial. I change stuff based on what I see happening in a game, I'm quite the reactive manager. So having a set of tactics isn't really a viable option for me. I like to play the same shape all the time and just tweak that based on ingame events or scenarios.

[Rashidi]

Plus it keeps training and scouting simple :-)

[furiousuk]

Before the TC made tweaking much more intuitive and easy I use to have vast 'sets' of tactics, all with different mentalities and passing instructions and stuff. I didn't go the full hog of having 20 (one for each mentality) but I think I probably had 7-8, which isn't too far from the 7 which the TC currently gives you (strategies).

I use to quite enjoy designing systems but it was as much a mathematical exercise as it was a sporting one, hence why I'm a big fan of the TC.

I don't see the point in having the exact same tactic loaded in 3 times, but one Defend, one Normal and one Control. It's the same tactic, you're just changing the emphasis. You should probably be changing this several times during the game anyway. The TC allows you to do this with 2 clicks and if you do it regularly enough during pre-season then your chaps learn how to do it so there is no fluidity hit. The TC also allows far more tweaks with just a few clicks, such as going wider or limiting long shots.

I generally have my go-to tactic loaded top (lets say, 433, the 41221 type). Each tactic has inherent strengths and weaknesses so I'll try and get a contrasting tactic to use when I think my go-to tactic will naturally struggle - a 4231 contrasts a 41221 quite well. If I can't find a contrasting tactic, or think that it just won't suit my team, then I'll just use a different tactic that does suit my squad and style. The 3rd tactic slot I tend to not use very much but it's generally for something I want to develop. In my old save I was gradually changing my squad and style to a 4312 so that was my 3rd tactic and as the squad developed I used it more and more.

[RTHerringbone]

I generally have my go-to tactic loaded top (lets say, 433, the 41221 type). Each tactic has inherent strengths and weaknesses so I'll try and get a contrasting tactic to use when I think my go-to tactic will naturally struggle - a 4231 contrasts a 41221 quite well. If I can't find a contrasting tactic, or think that it just won't suit my team, then I'll just use a different tactic that does suit my squad and style. The 3rd tactic slot I tend to not use very much but it's generally for something I want to develop. In my old save I was gradually changing my squad and style to a 4312 so that was my 3rd tactic and as the squad developed I used it more and more.

I'm very much of the same opinion, both in terms of how you switched to TC, and how you use it. I have the same default team instructions (albeit I play more directly with a wider formation) applied to 3 different formations. I can then quickly match or counter the shape of my opponents, and react to further tactical changes by changing strategy. Simple in concept, easier to diagnose where problems occur, easier for the team to get used to the team instructions etc. etc.

[Shakes]

I don't see the point in having the exact same tactic loaded in 3 times, but one Defend, one Normal and one Control. It's the same tactic, you're just changing the emphasis. You should probably be changing this several times during the game anyway.

The point is that your players become familiar with all three strategies so theoretically perform better when you switch between them due to familiarity. Same goes for the other settings on the team page. For example if you normally use default passing, having the 2nd tactic use short passing and the third use direct passing means you can shout "get ball forward" or "retain possession" without losing familiarity (or at least as much, since settings are interdependent).

I think there's merit in having multiple formations too, but it really depends on your squad. If you have the luxury of players that can play well in multiple positions/roles, then it makes sense. If your players are more one dimensional (as is often the case lower down) then I think you're better off using the backup tactics just as a familiarity tool, and stick to a single game plan + strategy & shout changes.

[RTHerringbone]

It's all about how you pronounce potato.

In my view, I vary strategy enough within the same formation in a match for my players to become proficient across a range of strategies.

By setting up 3 different formations in your tactics set, you also ensure that they gain familiarity with different formations as well as different strategies.

I am convinced that you need to match the shape of a similarly rated opponent in order to match or beat them. If I play in the Premier League against Man City (usually a standard 4-2-3-1) and I'm Spurs, Arsenal, Man U etc., I would only ever consider playing a similarly narrow formation.

By having a tactics set with diverse formations, you give yourself more opportunity to match the opposition shape, and therefore increase your chances of success.

[furiousuk]

The point is that your players become familiar with all three strategies so theoretically perform better when you switch between them due to familiarity. Same goes for the other settings on the team page. For example if you normally use default passing, having the 2nd tactic use short passing and the third use direct passing means you can shout "get ball forward" or "retain possession" without losing familiarity (or at least as much, since settings are interdependent).

I think there's merit in having multiple formations too, but it really depends on your squad. If you have the luxury of players that can play well in multiple positions/roles, then it makes sense. If your players are more one dimensional (as is often the case lower down) then I think you're better off using the backup tactics just as a familiarity tool, and stick to a single game plan + strategy & shout changes.

I've never noticed any problem switching strategies, maybe in pre-season it looks a bit shaky but it quickly resolves itself just by playing, never found the need to use up a tactic training slot. The loss of fluidity when making such a fundamental change as changing formation can be a problem however, and it makes sense to train that. I guess its a question of what you think is more important but given that the former can be easily rectified and the latter can't I see it a waste to have basically 3 identical tactics loaded in with just minor diffs.

Same with the smaller tweaks. I've never noticed any loss of fluidity caused by switching my usual default passing style to short or long. Certainly, if there is a slight hit then it is rectified very quickly as it's only a tiny change.

I have heard mooted the idea of having 3 different tactics loaded that are all totally different so that your team learns all the familiarities. Then you can just stick with 1 or 2 formations and tweak all you like. I don't know whether it works or not, it's a bit too metagaming for me and I'm not convinced it works like that anyway.

[itsallaboutthierry]

If you change the strategy on the tactics screen then your team's familiarity with your tactic takes a big hit. For instance, if your starting strategy in say, a 4-4-2, is 'standard' and you're accomplished in terms of familiarity with that strategy, changing it to 'defensive' will cause the mentality familiarity to drop from accomplished to awkward. This is why I think it's worth using those tactic training slots to train the strategies you may want to use in a match.

If the game's telling me it makes a difference, I'm going to listen to it.

[RTHerringbone]

If you change the strategy on the tactics screen then your team's familiarity with your tactic takes a big hit. For instance, if your starting strategy in say, a 4-4-2, is 'standard' and you're accomplished in terms of familiarity with that strategy, changing it to 'defensive' will cause the mentality familiarity to drop from accomplished to awkward. This is why I think it's worth using those tactic training slots to train the strategies you may want to use in a match.

If the game's telling me it makes a difference, I'm going to listen to it.

My point, and I think that of furiousuk, is that is you change strategy enough anyway, there is no need to train it by having alternative strategies loaded as backup tactics. A hit on mentality will only be seen early on in the first season, but a team learns quickly if you change strategy often enough.