Boden Posted June 10, 2016 Share Posted June 10, 2016 Does the compactness of team shapes only come into effect when in-possession? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ö-zil to the Arsenal! Posted November 9, 2016 Share Posted November 9, 2016 On 17 November 2015 at 16:48, THOG said: The mentality of the player still matters, so on the same setting, you should see a difference between a Structured set-up with an attack duty up top and a Structured set-up with a support duty up top. Right now, team shape works like this: Very Fluid = Most Compact Fluid = Compact Flexible = Default Structured = More Depth Highly Structured = Much More Depth However, within that, you also have the effect of duties so the ST's role/duty in particular will have a big influence on how stretched you become in build-up play. So, for example, an F9 is still going to be an F9 on Highly Structured whilst a Poacher will still tend to hang on the last defender on Very Fluid. The underlying design philosophy seems to be that Role/Duty are primary, at least in terms of build-up play, with everything else being a smaller modification. This is an open question to anyone who may have an answer - if this is the case for Team Shape, then why have the Tactics Creator descriptions not been updated accordingly? I'm experimenting using a counter attacking system and deciding on my shape between Structured and Highly Structured. Very Structured Summary: Divides your team into 3-units: Defenders Defence Midfielders Transition Attackers Attack Structured Summary: Divides your team into 4-units: Defenders Defend Wingbacks & Defensive Midfielders Defence & Transition Wingers & Attacking Midfielders Transition & Attack Strikers Attack By my logic, a Structured shape should cause a wider deviation in mentality between your midfield in a Highly Structured shape - as Defend/Transition & Attack/Transition is a much broader responsibility than simply Transition. As per THOG's explanation above - and contrary to the Tactics Creator descriptions - I am finding a wider deviation in mentalities in a Highly Structured system (particularly in midfield) than I am in Structured. Using a Control mentality. Thoughts, anyone? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
samuelawachie Posted February 17, 2017 Share Posted February 17, 2017 On Tuesday, November 17, 2015 at 17:30, THOG said: One more big change: The Play Wider and Play Narrower TIs now only affect player positioning, not passing focus. Thus, you can now tell your team to try to stretch play without worrying about the ball getting glued to the touchline. Similarly, Playing Narrower doesn't mean your overlapping fullbacks will get ignored. If this is indeed the case, then they should change the names to Stay Wider and Stay Narrower. In other words, the tags Play Wider and Play Narrower are doing what they are supposed to be doing, at least on FM 14. i.e. Affecting both positioning and passing focus Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
THOG Posted February 18, 2017 Author Share Posted February 18, 2017 17 hours ago, samuelawachie said: If this is indeed the case, then they should change the names to Stay Wider and Stay Narrower. In other words, the tags Play Wider and Play Narrower are doing what they are supposed to be doing, at least on FM 14. i.e. Affecting both positioning and passing focus The problem before this change was that passing focus caused unnatural decision making. For example, "Play Wider" could cause teams to try to force a ball down one flank instead of using the full width of the team's shape to facilitate switching play and actually getting around the defence, thus defeating the entire point of creating width. Now, the instructions will still affect where the ball goes, but it will occur as a more natural knock-on of the positioning of the players. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.