Are complex tactics always needed?

[craiigman]

What I mean by that is using lots of team instructions. I find that a lot of the options have negatives that you then need to adjust somewhere else. I have read a few guides and I will get to lines and diamonds, although what I have read so far you either stick to a philosophy, or you adapt to your opposition. Is it not possible to do both?

I have just loaded up a new game with Arsenal, the team I support. But I've been looking at the tactics screen for ages, unsure on what I want to do. Do I want a possession team or a more direct one? Well why can't I have a bit of both? I've played FM15 quite a bit, not as much as previous years, but a fair amount. As soon as you makes changes like play shorter or retain possession, you get into stages of the game where you could have a 2 on 1 attack, defender in no mans land, and since you have shorter passing on they won't make the pass and instead mess up the opportunity. It's also rare to see switch of play from one winger to another.

Same goes for changing the tempo, sometimes you need to do a quick counter, put setting it to low and short passing, good luck with that.

At the moment I have just set 3 team instructions. Work ball into box, play out of defence, and be more expressive. I have control mentality and structured team shape. 4231 with this:

Szczesny

GK - D

Debuchy -- Mertesacker -- Koscielny -- Gibbs

FB - S CD - D BPD - D FB - A

Ramsey -- Arteta

B2B - S CM - D

Walcott -- Ozil -- Sanchez

W - A T - A IF - S

Giroud

CF - S

Of course those instructions vs certain teams won't work. Either that won't break them down, or it'll just invite pressure. Which is when I would add/remove instructions as the game goes. The only issue with this style for me is the way tactic familiarity works. What I don't want to do is stop the players making the decisions.

Is it possible to maintain this kind of setup? I know the Arsenal board want attacking, possession football, but from experience if you can bring success they soon turn around.

Thoughts on this? Maybe I do need to read the lines and diamonds first? I don't want one style of football, but I want a basic philosophy. For example other than Barcelona under Pep I don't think I've ever seen a team stick 100% to a style. Swansea for example, are known for attacking football. However if you watch a Swansea game, they don't attack the same way all game. Sometimes they'll play direct passes into Gomis, other times it's using the width, other times in the middle. The basic philosophy is there, but ultimately it's the players who make the decisions. Well in my opinion.

[RTHerringbone]

Perhaps you just want to use a few of the TIs detailed in section 4.10 of Lines and Diamonds, and then use a Fluid or Very Fluid Team Shape (or just Standard, with Be More Expressive). In my opinion, the key is knowing what you want, and then only selecting the TIs / PIs you need to recreate that vision. You don't need complexity unless you have a clear (but complex!) plan in mind. Don't muddy the water unnecessarily, but you must have a vision in the first place.

[craiigman]

Perhaps you just want to use a few of the TIs detailed in section 4.10 of Lines and Diamonds, and then use a Fluid or Very Fluid Team Shape (or just Standard, with Be More Expressive). In my opinion, the key is knowing what you want, and then only selecting the TIs / PIs you need to recreate that vision. You don't need complexity unless you have a clear (but complex!) plan in mind. Don't muddy the water unnecessarily, but you must have a vision in the first place.

Fluid/Very fluid requires less individual creativity does it not? It's about continuos rotation of play. Ideally I don't want my less creative players in those positions that a fluid system would have them in.

I want a system that uses the creative players, which is what a more structured system provides. I want a passing side, but I don't want to restrict the type of passes they can play, or the speed they have to play them. Surely by selecting the right kind of players who have good stats in the areas required, you wouldn't need to set a lot of instructions as their style of play will already have the desired effect?

I guess my vision is to build from the back, play expressive football, work the ball around the field. which is what the 3 instructions give. I want to control the game, but not limit passing opportunities or speed in which they attack. Sure these things will need to change in different times of games (if I see a team concedes early, high tempo from the start, or if I am holding onto a lead, make the necessary changes there).

edit: I may be making no sense btw, please tell me if I am wrong.

[thomit]

Control mentality makes your defenders and defensive duty mids play short passing. By adding "play out of defence", you ask the same players to play very short indeed. That may result in them rarely take the chance of starting a counter attack when a good opportunity arise. Are you sure you want that? Because that TI certainly limits passing choice. Control also gives the players - and particularly midfield and attacking players - lots of creative freedom already; by using "be more expresive", it can be overkill. Watch out for that.

If you want to emulate the rl Arsenal as much as possible, in my opinion all you need to do is to play Control (or Attacking when needed) + "work ball", and probably "push higher" and "close down more", a bit dependent on what formation and roles/duties you use. I'd use "push higher" in any formation without a player in the DM strata. You also want a fluid shape - how fluid is a matter of preference, nothing is wrong as such, but personally I feel it gets more Arsenal-like the more fluid it is. Personally I alternate between Very Fluid and Fluid.

The rest is all about your choice of formation - there are more options than the 4231 - and player roles/duties.

[craiigman]

Control mentality makes your defenders and defensive duty mids play short passing. By adding "play out of defence", you ask the same players to play very short indeed. That may result in them rarely take the opportunity of starting a counter attack. Are you sure you want that? Because that TI certainly limits passing choice. Controlr also gives the players - and particularly certain creative roles in midfield and attack - lots of creative freedom already; by using "be more expresive", it can be overkill.

If you want to emulate the rl Arsenal as much as possible, in my opinion all you need is to play Counter (or Attacking when needed) + "work ball", and probably "push higher" and "close down more", a bit dependent on what formation and roles/duties you use. You also want a fluid shape - how fluid is a matter of preference, nothing is wrong as such. Personally I feel it gets more Arsenal-like the more fluid it is. Personally I alternate between Very Fluid and Fluid.

I swear all I hear is you need to play push higher up and close down more, I don't want to do this. I am not trying to replicate Arsenal IRL, why would I want to do that, I'd finish 4th every year.

I've played against just the under 21's so far. While control was on and play out of the back, the defenders were also playing long walls into Giroud when he was available or into the midfielders when they were available. I created 9 CCC's, although didn't score enough of them, that's a lot more than I normally create even vs the under 21's.

[thomit]

I swear all I hear is you need to play push higher up and close down more, I don't want to do this. I am not trying to replicate Arsenal IRL, why would I want to do that, I'd finish 4th every year.

I've played against just the under 21's so far. While control was on and play out of the back, the defenders were also playing long walls into Giroud when he was available or into the midfielders when they were available. I created 9 CCC's, although didn't score enough of them, that's a lot more than I normally create even vs the under 21's.

Edited a few typos in my post; where it said counter it should say control.

From what you say you want, it sounds very much like the Arsenal from real life to me. And Control + work ball + push higher + close down more + very fluid or fluid certainly gives me just that; posession, flair, pass and move, attacking football, while attempting to win the ball back quickly when it's lost. And it's not a particularly complex set of instructions either, quite the contrary, I'd say. Formation, shape, mentality, and 3 team instructions.

Your roles/duties looks well balanced for a 4231 to me, btw.

[rninejr]

Fluid/Very fluid requires less individual creativity does it not? It's about continuos rotation of play. Ideally I don't want my less creative players in those positions that a fluid system would have them in.

I want a system that uses the creative players, which is what a more structured system provides. I want a passing side, but I don't want to restrict the type of passes they can play, or the speed they have to play them. Surely by selecting the right kind of players who have good stats in the areas required, you wouldn't need to set a lot of instructions as their style of play will already have the desired effect?

I guess my vision is to build from the back, play expressive football, work the ball around the field. which is what the 3 instructions give. I want to control the game, but not limit passing opportunities or speed in which they attack. Sure these things will need to change in different times of games (if I see a team concedes early, high tempo from the start, or if I am holding onto a lead, make the necessary changes there).

edit: I may be making no sense btw, please tell me if I am wrong.

the correct phrase should be "A more fluid team shape requires less individual specialization".

the fact is a more fluid team shape gives more creative freedom to your players. means everyone is expected to be more expressive, versatile, n focused more on the team's main objectives. therefore each player has a broader range of individual task (thats why they need to be versatile)

a more structured team shape on the other hand, gives less creative freedom to your players, means each player is expected to contribute towards the team's objectives by focusing on individual task, n be more discipline. therefore each player has a narrow range of individual task

some roles are designed to be more expressive by default. if i remember correctly, Trequartista n maybe regista are always get the maximum creative freedom regardless of what team shape is being used. Complete Forward and Complete Wingback, especially with an attack duty, are also granted with more creative freedom compared to other roles. these expressive roles are useful if u want only some specific players to stand out more as the main source of creativity in a structured/highly structured team shape.

also dont forget that team shape determine your team's attacking shape via the mentality distribution on your players.

[craiigman]

I've changed a few things (I've been watching full games so I haven't got very far). This is what I have now:

Control

Structured

Shorter passing

Work into box

Whip crosses

Prevent short GK passes

Higher tempo

Szczesny

GK - D

Debuchy -- Mertesacker -- Koscielny -- Gibbs

FB - S--------CD -D----------BPD - D----WB - A

Sanchez -- Ramsey -- J.Martinez -- Chamberlain

WP - A------B2B - S------CM-D----------W - S

Ozil

AM - A

Giroud

CF - S

I signed J.Martinez from Bayern as I needed an upgrade on Arteta/Flamini. The problem I know have is that I don't have the wingers to do this system. Alexis can play on the left, but I want him on attack, and Gibbs is a much better attacking option on the left than Debuchy would be on the right and in game Bellerin isn't as good as real life.

I changes Ozil to AM as T wasn't working. As AM and a few PI's he works much better, I use roam, move into channels, and press more. I am looking at Jose's Chelsea a little bit more so than Arsenal. So I am setting Giroud, Ozil, Chamberlain, Ramsey, and Sanchez all to Close down more. But Martinez, Kos, and Mert to close down less, so they keep their positions as the core. I leave the full backs as is.

I find that playing a high line you always give the other team chances. I played a friendly vs Derby, all game they had 4 shots all of target all from outside the box, this was with a normal line. I put high line on for 10 minutes, ball over the top, striker in 1on1, luckily he missed. Also since playing deeper I've noticed I let in less crossed goals since my defenders aren't running towards their goal, but are already in position to attack it.

Again not played many games, but I am watching them in full.

[swansongs]

Thoughts on this? Maybe I do need to read the lines and diamonds first? I don't want one style of football, but I want a basic philosophy. For example other than Barcelona under Pep I don't think I've ever seen a team stick 100% to a style. Swansea for example, are known for attacking football. However if you watch a Swansea game, they don't attack the same way all game. Sometimes they'll play direct passes into Gomis, other times it's using the width, other times in the middle. The basic philosophy is there, but ultimately it's the players who make the decisions. Well in my opinion.

The variety of the current Swansea system can easily be represented in the game. Gomis is a Complete Forward who drifts around a lot but has the 'Tries to beat offside trap' PPM (succeeds once per game). The direct passing really only comes from Shelvey and sometimes the centrebacks (Williams more than Fernandez), everyone else focuses on patiently retaining possession (Gylfi has licence to try killer balls in the final third).

Montero hugs the touchline and crosses from the byline. Ayew on the other flank is allowed to roam and get into the box. Naughton pushes up and overlaps, while Taylor is a bit more restrained, offering only the occasional dummy run and otherwise letting Jeff get on with it.

It's not that the system changes through the game. Rather, the team is set up to include multiple avenues of attack, so that if one is defended against in earnest by the opposition (e.g. doubling up on Montero) the team can exploit the space afforded them in other areas. It's not even an especially fluid system, or one that allows much freedom. The roles are actually quite strictly adhered to.