Need Tactical Advice For Extremely Lower League Teams

[theHDTreatment]

Like some of you, I like to start my career down in the dirt, usually starting a save a couple of leagues below the Conference North/South.

To that end I'd like to pick your brains for some styles and general tips that have served you well on these journeys.

I find that once I get up the leagues a bit, I can attract the kind of players who have the stats to carry out more specific tactical styles but down in the proper low leagues there is almost a generic-ness to the type of player you can get.

[ajsr1982]

I understand what you mean in terms of the players, but you should always look for marginal gains. There was an excellent thread a while back that experimented with complex player roles in the lower leagues. I can't remember the outcome of that, but given that it was done by one of the tactical gurus on here, it likely bore fruit. Maybe someone can dig it out for you.

I recently decided to try a Catenaccio system for a bit of fun in Vanarama North (an asymettrical 5-2-3 with a CWB, IWB, Regista, Treq and a Libero!), which shows promise. I'll post my results at some point, for better or worse.

All I can really say is: figure out how you want to play, reason it out, give it a chance, and tweak things that aren't working. And by all means, post your thinking here - that sort of thing is well received, and you'll get some good feedback.

[johnnyyakuza78]

I think the point is that player skills are comparative to those in the league in which they play. Therefore you should be able to play any way you want if the players you have are better at the right things than the opposition players.

What I will say is that lower league players often lack in mental and technical skills, but have ok physical stats, so creating a tactic which takes advantage of those attributes might be helpful.

[Dr. Hook]

I like simplicity- I always start low league. In 13 and 14 I did Uncle Ron/Magic Mastermind's EEE, in 15 is was a start in Highland League- as the more complex the tactic the less it works;the players can't pull it off consistently. The big driver for me is the decisions stat. I tend to prioritize that one over everything else at the very low level, as it gives better overall performances, and what little benefit is gained from team training at Semi-Pro I put into Tactics. Get players that can think the game and you give yourself a huge advantage at that level, where AI teams do seem to prioritize pace.

[theHDTreatment]

@ajsr1982 Thank you, I'll have a look and see what I can find. Lower down the leagues, I tend to keep the inherited squad and build round them rather than find players to fit a particular system. I have no real preference as to a system type, as long as I can win games and climb the leagues.

@johnnyy I've found also that technical stats are thin on the ground, though physicality can be as well. I suppose What I was trying to get across is that with stats of 15 and 17, players can be expected to 'be goo'd at their roles and therefore contribute to a team job, whereas stats at 5 and 7 would struggle. So where do you set the bar?

@DrHook Already an admirer of your posts and philosophies. Indeed I read your highland league thread and it inspired me to removed a ******** of TI's resulting in a much more readable (if not entirely successful) way of playing. The decisions idea is solid though. Definitely the kind of thing I'm looking for ie when player stats are so low, do you play 'moneyball' in effect and get a whole team built around 2-3 stats?

[Dr. Hook]

@DrHook Already an admirer of your posts and philosophies. Indeed I read your highland league thread and it inspired me to removed a ******** of TI's resulting in a much more readable (if not entirely successful) way of playing. The decisions idea is solid though. Definitely the kind of thing I'm looking for ie when player stats are so low, do you play 'moneyball' in effect and get a whole team built around 2-3 stats?

Glad you like the Buckie Thistle thread So yeah, "moneyball" I guess in that at those lower levels, it is hard to find complete players, even calibrated to the standard. So my approach is to really go for the mental stats as much as I can. Obviously, a guy with 1 pace 1 acceleration etc. is not going to be what I want, but aside from decisions, I like anticipation, positioning/off the ball, concentration, composure. Determination is always a plus. Basically, my view is that if you are looking at the differences in skill at say an Isthmian South level, how much worse is a 5 passing from a 7, versus how much worse is a 10 decisions versus a 3. The mentals can be trained, they tend to rise with age and they are separate from CA and so you can have some really good (for the level) thinking players to choose from. So in effect, if a player has a 4 passing, but an 11 for decisions, I'd want him every time over the 8 passer with the 4 decisions. The 4 passer is crap, but let's be honest, so is the 8 passer, and the player that makes the right decision will have the better overall success rate.

[herne79]

The mentals can be trained, they tend to rise with age and they are separate from CA.

Mental attributes are separate from CA? As in they don't count towards it? Has that changed for FM16?

I thought mentals were included in CA calculation - quickly loaded up FM15 Editor, random player, changed some of his mental attributes and the "Recommended CA" goes up accordingly. Or are we comparing apples with pears and I'm being thick (always likely) .

[theHDTreatment]

Glad you like the Buckie Thistle thread So yeah, "moneyball" I guess in that at those lower levels, it is hard to find complete players, even calibrated to the standard. So my approach is to really go for the mental stats as much as I can. Obviously, a guy with 1 pace 1 acceleration etc. is not going to be what I want, but aside from decisions, I like anticipation, positioning/off the ball, concentration, composure. Determination is always a plus. Basically, my view is that if you are looking at the differences in skill at say an Isthmian South level, how much worse is a 5 passing from a 7, versus how much worse is a 10 decisions versus a 3. The mentals can be trained, they tend to rise with age and they are separate from CA and so you can have some really good (for the level) thinking players to choose from. So in effect, if a player has a 4 passing, but an 11 for decisions, I'd want him every time over the 8 passer with the 4 decisions. The 4 passer is crap, but let's be honest, so is the 8 passer, and the player that makes the right decision will have the better overall success rate.

Good stuff. I'm gonna keep a close eye on the mentals of players I bring in, as you say, they can have the technical ability but if they arent in the right place or cant see play around them then all the passing/shooting etc in the world cant help them.

[heyhowie]

Hang on, mentals aren't included in a players CA?

[Cleon]

Mental's do cost CA.

[heyhowie]

phew. My world was rocking for a moment there.

[johnnyyakuza78]

@johnnyy I've found also that technical stats are thin on the ground, though physicality can be as well. I suppose What I was trying to get across is that with stats of 15 and 17, players can be expected to 'be goo'd at their roles and therefore contribute to a team job, whereas stats at 5 and 7 would struggle. So where do you set the bar?

Its surely comparative. Stats at 7-8 are good if everyone else in the league has stats of 4-5. They will still be able to do their jobs, its just not as good as they would be if they were all 20 in attributes.

Personally I prefer to do the opposite of Dr Hook, concentrate on physical stats, and play a physical game that relies on playing percentages and doesn't require players to have to think too hard.

[theHDTreatment]

An old thread but one that may still be relevant - http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php/374737-The-Most-Important-Attributes-for-Lower-Leagues

Graph from the thread displaying the attribute average for the top 20 performing (by av rating) players in the Conference N/S for each position.

Obviously there are issues with this, most notably, picking by av rating, but it still gives a general insight into what makes players tick down at that kind of level. You can see Determination and Natural Fitness feature highly, as well as Teamwork, Work Rate and Stamina.

Basically the type of player, regardless of position, who has

• [DET] strong mental fortitude
  
• [NAT] consistently match fit
  
• [TMW] values the team
  
• [WRK] puts a shift in
  
• [sTA] will last the whole game
  

This list may be true of higher leagues also - but where the premiership can carry lazy, selfish players based purely on their ability, such ability does not exist at these levels, meaning the type of attributes above should be top of anyones list when shopping in the lower leagues.

[Dr. Hook]

Mental's do cost CA.

Have they always done? When I was an EHM HR back years ago the mental attributes were not part of the CA and it was based on the FM system, though with some difference. Unless I am remembering completely wrongly here- in this way the minor league clubs I researched could have players with strong mentals that were not top tier skill players. In fact, I have no idea why they would cost CA

[Greyfriars Bobby]

This topic really interests me, because I love managing in the lower levels, and I think team-building is especially fun. I've gone back and forth on the question of which attributes I look for.

I'm not positive how the game considers the arithmetic concerning the relative effect of attributes. Is the difference between a 20 and a 16 (4 points) in Passing the same as the difference between 8 and 4, or the difference between 6 and 2?

Or, is it like this? In the first comparison, the poorer passer is 80% as good as the better one. In the second, he's half as good, and in the third, he's 33% as good.

[Turkbacca]

Awesome thread this so far and as a fellow LLM it's given me a lot to think about. In all my time playing FM I truly believe I've been overlooking the 'mentals' and going solely for the 'technicals' and quite often wondering why my players are being outperformed by technically lesser players, I've never linked mental attributes to how they perform on the pitch which embarasses me somewhat.