How to win away games when your players forgot their feet at home?

[skyzekaizo]

Hi,

once in a while (maybe 60% of away games), your players forget how a ball looks like, how to make a simple pass or simply bypass both their player and team instructions.

When that happens and you start loosing against a team from a sunday league playing like prime barca, what do you do?

Are there instructions you can use to salvage the game?

How do you deal with your opponnents targetting your wingers and pressing them into loosing the ball as soon as they receive it?

 

[El Payaso]

I tend to use well-balanced or even defensive systems which means that there isn't much need for changes when playing away from home. 

In games against bigger clubs I tend to change one of my wing-backs to a defend duty and use a clear holding midfielder. I also tend to start with a cautious mentality instead of balanced. This in five defender formations. 

To be able to give you some ideas, we would need to see your tactical approach first. 

[Lira95]

That's one of the most unbalaced features on FM in my opinion. The game just decides you're gonna be smashed playing away whether you use an offensive or defensive tactic. I'm at the point that depending on the match, I don't even waste my time and leave it to the assistant. He's gonna lose by less at least

[skyzekaizo]

 

12 minutes ago, Lira95 said:

That's one of the most unbalaced features on FM in my opinion. The game just decides you're gonna be smashed playing away whether you use an offensive or defensive tactic. I'm at the point that depending on the match, I don't even waste my time and leave it to the assistant. He's gonna lose by less at least

Yeah this is my feeling also, the game simply decides you're going to loose that one and no matter what you change in your tactic, there are really good chances that you're going to loose it.

I've seen 3rd league sides play like prime barca against me, I've seen my midfielders loosing all their composure and make the worst passes against lower sides. I've seen my wingers loose the ball as soon as they receive it, again and again and again.

I've seen a player with 12 agression and quite good mentals (~15-16) and 15 tackling getting sent off for a tackle while playing anchorman.

I've seen my wingers, my midfielders, and my centre backs passing the ball to the opposition, and I've also seen my players colliding one with another and therefore loose the ball so stupidly.

I can't count how much shots went straight to the woodwork again and again.

I could put the whole team in the midfield, like 2 IWBs, 1 anchor and 2 CMs and still see my players getting their passes cut out by the opposition.

And by some magic, if you simulate the game instead of playing it your players tend to do wayyyyyy less dumb mistakes if any.

I'm almost certain that there is a mechanism that drops the attributes of your players when playing certain away games if not all.

Just now I've simulated a game and somehow my striker which got 2 goals dropped 2 points of CA after the game, not sure it's related but the guy has been scoring and assisting left and right since the start of the season but yet his CA drops.

 

[Lira95]

En 26/5/2024 a las 12:22, skyzekaizo dijo:

 

Yeah this is my feeling also, the game simply decides you're going to loose that one and no matter what you change in your tactic, there are really good chances that you're going to loose it.

I've seen 3rd league sides play like prime barca against me, I've seen my midfielders loosing all their composure and make the worst passes against lower sides. I've seen my wingers loose the ball as soon as they receive it, again and again and again.

I've seen a player with 12 agression and quite good mentals (~15-16) and 15 tackling getting sent off for a tackle while playing anchorman.

I've seen my wingers, my midfielders, and my centre backs passing the ball to the opposition, and I've also seen my players colliding one with another and therefore loose the ball so stupidly.

I can't count how much shots went straight to the woodwork again and again.

I could put the whole team in the midfield, like 2 IWBs, 1 anchor and 2 CMs and still see my players getting their passes cut out by the opposition.

And by some magic, if you simulate the game instead of playing it your players tend to do wayyyyyy less dumb mistakes if any.

I'm almost certain that there is a mechanism that drops the attributes of your players when playing certain away games if not all.

Just now I've simulated a game and somehow my striker which got 2 goals dropped 2 points of CA after the game, not sure it's related but the guy has been scoring and assisting left and right since the start of the season but yet his CA drops.

 

That sucks, man. Unfortunately if you want to have some fun you either manage a big club or use the editor (which a lot of people claim not to use but we know they do)

[Cloud9]

On 26/05/2024 at 10:22, skyzekaizo said:

Yeah this is my feeling also, the game simply decides you're going to loose that one and no matter what you change in your tactic, there are really good chances that you're going to loose it.

 

Games are not predetermined in football manager.

If you're experiencing this I'd check for attributes like consistency. Inconsistent players will be...inconsistent. You may also look at how your tactic does when opposition take the game to you (which happens more when you're away from home). Shaky defensive foundations can be exposed in these matches in particular. 

On 26/05/2024 at 09:54, Lira95 said:

That's one of the most unbalaced features on FM in my opinion. The game just decides you're gonna be smashed playing away whether you use an offensive or defensive tactic. I'm at the point that depending on the match, I don't even waste my time and leave it to the assistant. He's gonna lose by less at least

There is no anti player bias in FM either. If your assistant is able to get better results than you, then perhaps look at how he's setting up the team.

Hope that clears up some confusion for you both.  

[santy001]

There are a lot of factors, in the Premier League the away game thing never really registered for me. I've had a lot more difficult away games playing in Spain with Barcelona and I started to delve into why. One of the issues is very different pitch sizes, typically the teams I struggle against away are playing with very wide, very long or both long & wide pitches. Since I play a hyper-attacking set-up if I aren't wary of this I can be victim to devastating counters either through a long ball over the top or by my team condensing too narrow and leaving space out wide. 

I've had to come up with tweaks specifically to counter those (and make use of the wider pitches when teams have them) so that is something to consider when reviewing matches after the fact and what you can do right next time. A particular stumbling block of mine is still the opponents who use a low block/defend at all costs approach at home. I managed an unbeaten season in the league last year (and still didn't win the title), but 5 draws were all away games and 0-0 or 1-1 where I had to equalise late. 

It does require close attention to figure it out but a big problem is often times you might only get 3-6 games per season where it plays out like this. 

[skyzekaizo]

On 30/05/2024 at 22:53, Cloud9 said:

Games are not predetermined in football manager.

If you're experiencing this I'd check for attributes like consistency. Inconsistent players will be...inconsistent. You may also look at how your tactic does when opposition take the game to you (which happens more when you're away from home). Shaky defensive foundations can be exposed in these matches in particular. 

There is no anti player bias in FM either. If your assistant is able to get better results than you, then perhaps look at how he's setting up the team.

Hope that clears up some confusion for you both.  

it's such a blatant lie though, the game clearly favors the AI during away games. I edited my IF to have 17 in technique, finishing and composure, with the trait places shots, and 19 in  consistency, then I simulated the same game again and again against some mid table team, and my bloke barely put it on target once per game.

[FrazT]

If you are going to throw accusations like that around, you do need to be sure of your facts before doing so.  SI have indicated on these forums multiple times that there is no imbalance between the AI and the human manager.

If you are looking for help in the Tactics forum and other users offer their opinions, there is no issue with disagreeing with their input.  Saying that they are telling lies is not acceptable and will mean that others will just refuse to assist.

You also have not posted a tactic so others are not able to help without a lot more information from you.

 

[XaW]

7 hours ago, skyzekaizo said:

it's such a blatant lie though, the game clearly favors the AI during away games. I edited my IF to have 17 in technique, finishing and composure, with the trait places shots, and 19 in  consistency, then I simulated the same game again and again against some mid table team, and my bloke barely put it on target once per game.

As has been said, SI have been clear that the match engine does not distinguish between human and AI managers. If you chose to not believe them, then fine, you are entitled to your own opinion, but you will still be wrong.

If you see you are losing away every time, why don't change things? If you don't know how or what, then post your tactic and also explain why you think you are losing, and someone might be able to help you.

And, just to be clear, drop the entitled attitude you've shown so far. No one owe you anything, but we might be able to help out with your issues if you present them in a better way. If you don't and just prattle on, this topic will be closed.

[skyzekaizo]

I apologize if I sound entitled, I don't expect anyone to owe me anything, I simply got frustrated by the game, this is my tactic:

I generally drop down to balanced when away, I change tempo a lot during matches, sometimes I change the width or the passing directness.

I'm not sure yet about the duties of the IF on the left and the CWB, as well as the role of my CMs, still trying it out, and I generally change the IFB to FB-s, IWB-s or WB-au depending on the opposition front line.

The instructions are:

CD-d: take more risks, stay wider

BPD-d: dribble more

IFB-d: cross more often

CWB-s: cross aim center, cross from byline

DM-s: hold position

CM-s: stay wider, take more risks

CM-a: move into channels, roam from position, take more risks

IF-a left: sit narrower, cross aim center, shoot more often

IF-a right: stay wider, cross aim center, shoot more often

F9-s: move into channels, shoot more often

 

[NineCloudNine]

On 07/06/2024 at 16:06, skyzekaizo said:

I apologize if I sound entitled, I don't expect anyone to owe me anything, I simply got frustrated by the game, this is my tactic:

I generally drop down to balanced when away, I change tempo a lot during matches, sometimes I change the width or the passing directness.

I'm not sure yet about the duties of the IF on the left and the CWB, as well as the role of my CMs, still trying it out, and I generally change the IFB to FB-s, IWB-s or WB-au depending on the opposition front line.

The instructions are:

CD-d: take more risks, stay wider

BPD-d: dribble more

IFB-d: cross more often

CWB-s: cross aim center, cross from byline

DM-s: hold position

CM-s: stay wider, take more risks

CM-a: move into channels, roam from position, take more risks

IF-a left: sit narrower, cross aim center, shoot more often

IF-a right: stay wider, cross aim center, shoot more often

F9-s: move into channels, shoot more often

 

Fun tactic but very aggressive. IFs on attack are all-out attackers doing basically no defending. Your DM on support will have a higher mentality even if you tell them to hold position. CWB is a gung-ho role. I suspect your IFs, F9 and CM-A are all tripping over each other on the edge of the box. You have no width on the right and are vulnerable to counters down both flanks and behind your midfield.

Having that many PIs also greatly restricts your players’ ability to react to what is happening. They will do the same things over and over. Your front three shooting more often will mean lots of low quality attempts at goal rather than waiting for a better opportunity. I bet this is why it looks like you’re dominating games (high cumulative xG) but still losing.

[santy001]

So you're actually playing in an aggressive manner similar to what I do (and most FM players lets be real). As you become stronger and stronger with your team in away games the opposition will just invariably be pushed back even though they're playing with a bit more impetus than they do in an away game. While it's a 'false' dominance in statistics as @NineCloudNine mentions I expect you're seeing on the heatmaps etc your team seemingly pinning them back. 

Here's a quick look from one of my matches: 

Given that the shape the home team were playing is a naturally good containing line up to counter my own 4-2-3-1 I go even further into the attempt to push harder. It's riskier for sure, but it does pay-off more often. The Segundo Volante & Libero add 2 more players who are in/around the box for attacks creating even more carnage. 

There are times when the opposition counters and it's all on Yoro to try and slow it down enough for very athletic wingbacks to get back. When teams are really digging in you have to look at things that can help slow down the attacks a bit more and get more passing/movement. How best to achieve that in part varies on your players as some PPM's can help, sometimes its team instructions. Even the right blend of attributes, even though Wirtz doesn't necessarily score high ratings like in this match the movement and passing creates space for the others around him. 

[jcafcwbb]

I think the problem is that the games over-values tactics and under-values the ability of players which can make it seem that the game is scripted. Hopefully this can be addressed in the next engine.

An example of this is in my save with AFC Wimbledon. They are a League Two side and we comfortably beat a Newcastle side in the League Cup 2-0 at home because the game engine decided my tactics were correct. The fact is in reality even if the tactics were correct AFC Wimbledon would probably win that game one time in ten and it would not be comfortably. I am also sure that whether you are home or away does come into the calculations because the game would factor that in - as teams generally win more home games than away.

Then a few days later I played Eastleigh away in the FA Cup - they were a National League South team in the save. They dominated at first because the engine determined that their tactic was superior to mine and they were at home. Once again the difference in player quality was not an consideration. A League Two side can play badly against a NLS side in reality but what happens is that the NLS will miss more chances than the L2 side and they do not pass the ball around. Even in L2 the pattern is they try to play it out the back, then they get pressured, they panic and whack up the ball up the pitch - you do not see 20 pass moves below the Championship. Adjustments in my tactics put a 2-0 deficit into a 2-2 draw and we easily won the replay.

The balance between tactics and player quality is not right and we hopefully see it adjusted in FM25.

[jcafcwbb]

In answer to the question - and apologies as I play on console I cannot give screenshots - I play this way with Man Utd

For All Games: TIs - Fairly Narrow/Balanced/Shorter/High Temp/Dist to FBs and CBs/Higher&Standard Def Lines/TriggerPress more often. Everything else is turned off/default

At Home and Favourite: WB(s), CB(d), CB(d), WB(s)/CM(s),CM(s)/IF(a),AP(s),IF(a)/CF(a)

At Home against Rivals - the same with my CMs moved to DM(s)

Away: FB(s),CB(d),CB(d),FB(s)/DM(d),DM(d)/W(a),AP(s),W(a)/Cf(a) or DLP(s) if we are under pressure and not getting highlights.

I have found changing roles can lead to better away outcomes. If an opposition has a DM then I ask my CF to mark him. My FB/WBs and CM/DMs have the PIs Take Fewer Shots and Take Fewer Risks. That cuts down on the terrible shots and poor passes to the opposition.

[skyzekaizo]

8 hours ago, jcafcwbb said:

I think the problem is that the games over-values tactics and under-values the ability of players which can make it seem that the game is scripted. Hopefully this can be addressed in the next engine.

An example of this is in my save with AFC Wimbledon. They are a League Two side and we comfortably beat a Newcastle side in the League Cup 2-0 at home because the game engine decided my tactics were correct. The fact is in reality even if the tactics were correct AFC Wimbledon would probably win that game one time in ten and it would not be comfortably. I am also sure that whether you are home or away does come into the calculations because the game would factor that in - as teams generally win more home games than away.

Then a few days later I played Eastleigh away in the FA Cup - they were a National League South team in the save. They dominated at first because the engine determined that their tactic was superior to mine and they were at home. Once again the difference in player quality was not an consideration. A League Two side can play badly against a NLS side in reality but what happens is that the NLS will miss more chances than the L2 side and they do not pass the ball around. Even in L2 the pattern is they try to play it out the back, then they get pressured, they panic and whack up the ball up the pitch - you do not see 20 pass moves below the Championship. Adjustments in my tactics put a 2-0 deficit into a 2-2 draw and we easily won the replay.

The balance between tactics and player quality is not right and we hopefully see it adjusted in FM25.

This actually makes a lot of sense, it would explain quite a few things people have noticed in the ME this year.

 

Also I dialed it back a bit, I put the CWB on WB-s, the DM-s on DM-d and the IFB-d on FB-s, as well as taking away the stay wider on the left IF-a, although I'm not sure what I could do to improve it further.

[Cloud9]

11 hours ago, jcafcwbb said:

because the game engine decided my tactics were correct. 

They dominated at first because the engine determined that their tactic was superior to mine and they were at home. Once again the difference in player quality was not an consideration.

This is down the rabbit hole thinking again I'm afraid.

Success on the pitch is a combination of players to fit your tactic, the tactic itself, squad morale/dynamics, pre-season fitness and squad rotation. And yes you as a human player can outperform the AI in all these aspects.

When you set up a tactic defensively with a lesser team, the game doesn't "decide your tactics are correct." You just restrict space and give them the opportunity to win if they have a good day and it sounds like your boys had a good day I would recommend reading through this article by @crusadertsar on the importance of the attributes to fit your system:

2 hours ago, skyzekaizo said:

although I'm not sure what I could do to improve it further.

I would address the issue of lack of natural width in the setup you posted. It will make space for the inside runners who are your primary goal scorers. At the moment they don't have space to operate within. This is easily fixed just by running the right IF(a) as a winger(s) (but only with the right profile of player). 

As @NineCloudNine mentions, it's a high risk high reward tactic.

This can be solved in two ways:

• Commit to the style (see Big Ange at Tottenham) and get player profiles who prevent counter attacks w/the attributes they have as @santy001 mentions. You say you're not sure what else you can do and that player profiles don't matter...that's because the player profiles matter a great deal. The profile of the DM(s) will be particularly important to your setup as will pace on the backline to name two key areas. 
  • The width issue will also help your buildup play which will see less wasted possession --> less turnovers ---> less counter attacks.
• Alternatively: have a second tactic with different TIs. You're fundamentally trying to do the same things with less aggressive roles (which isn't a bad first step as they will help to restrict space) but with the same win/loss conditions (ie. you win through dominating the opposition and preventing counter attacks). 

Edited June 9 by Cloud9

[skyzekaizo]

9 minutes ago, Cloud9 said:

This is down the rabbit hole thinking again I'm afraid.

Success on the pitch is a combination of the players to fit your tactic, the tactic itself, squad morale/dynamics, pre-season fitness and squad rotation. And yes you as a human player can outperform the AI in all these aspects.

When you set up a tactic defensively with a lesser team, the game doesn't "decide your tactics are correct." You just restrict space and give them the opportunity to win if they have a good day and it sounds like your boys had a good day I would recommend reading through this article by @crusadertsar on the importance of the attributes to fit your system:

I would address the issue of lack of natural width in the setup you posted. It will make space for the inside runners who are your primary goal scorers. At the moment they don't have space to operate within. This is easily fixed just by running the right IF(a) as a winger(s) (but only with the right profile of player). 

As @NineCloudNine mentions, it's a high risk high reward tactic.

This can be solved in two ways:

• Commit to the style (see Big Ange at Tottenham) and get player profiles who prevent counter attacks w/the attributes they have as @santy001 mentions. You say you're not sure what else you can do and that player profiles don't matter...that's because the player profiles matter a great deal. The profile of the DM(s) will be particularly important to your setup as will pace on the backline to name two key areas. 
• Alternatively: have a second tactic with different TIs. You're fundamentally trying to do the same things with less aggressive roles (which isn't a bad step as they will help to restrict space) but the fundamental issues are still there (ie. you only win through dominating the match). 

There is this lad which attacks FM questions by the statistics angle, EBFM.

About 6 months ago he went and made a test to see whether homeground advantage is a thing, and he proved that without a doubt homeground advantage exists in this ME.

He also made a test using 2 tactics which work well in the ME, a defensive one and an attacking one, and on average when faced against any of the two tactics, the away side has better chances playing attacking than defensive.

He also looked at different statistics which show that on average the players at home manage to attack more succesfully than the away side by a margin.

Here is the video:

What's your take on this?

[Cloud9]

2 hours ago, skyzekaizo said:

There is this lad which attacks FM questions by the statistics angle, EBFM.

About 6 months ago he went and made a test to see whether homeground advantage is a thing, and he proved that without a doubt homeground advantage exists in this ME.

He also made a test using 2 tactics which work well in the ME, a defensive one and an attacking one, and on average when faced against any of the two tactics, the away side has better chances playing attacking than defensive.

He also looked at different statistics which show that on average the players at home manage to attack more succesfully than the away side by a margin.

Here is the video:

What's your take on this?

This is an old discussion, but I would reference this response by @HUNT3R on the subject. I'd imagine a game that factors in everything from the weather to the intensity of pre-season training would also consider the impact of playing in your town stadium with home fans, lack of needing to travel etc. The games intent is to mimic real life and IRL there is a home advantage.

However that is all a separate conversation to the game playing against you inherently or treating you any differently than it does to the AI. Whatever the extent of the "slight advantage," the main factor on away games is how you and the AI are approaching the match. 

As for this YouTuber...unfortunately he is not a credible source of information. Here is another "test" he has posted, the replies from informed community members will go into detail on how these results are misleading and do not take into account key variables to reach their conclusions.

This has been repeated many times with EBFM and simply perpetuate myths like you can't counter attack successfully on FM. All tactics are possible in game, but high pressing tactics are fairly user friendly and less punishing in terms of tactical setup/player profiles etc. If you only know how to set up/squad build an attacking high press you will struggle when attempting other styles of play, home or away. 

Sweeping statements like, "you can only attack on FM" are inherently untrue and will take away from your enjoyment of the game. I have gone into detail in this thread in how you can set up to counter attack successfully and overachieve plenty  I frequently find away games easier for my style of play as the opposition will bring the game to me...which plays into my hands. 

I've linked the FM24 manual published by SI which is a far better source than relying on YouTubers looking for clicks:

https://community.sports-interactive.com/sigames-manual/football-manager-2024/

Edited June 10 by Cloud9

[skyzekaizo]

I'll look into it, thanks.

Although I have concerns about playing with only 2 attack duties, and the fact that a W-s would look to attack the space less than a W-a.

I tried only one game with a W-s and it's true that it gives way more lateral space for my F9 to drop in, and it also looks like the W-s could help dragging the opposition full back with him, which would create space to attack for the CM-a or the F9 and that results in nice plays.

But wouldn't a W-a with good work rate enable even more space for the F9 to shine?

Another option I thought of was to have 2 IF-a and rethink the way I attack space, maybe something like having 2 WB-s to provide width with cross from byline, a HB-d to have more options at the back, and 2 balanced midfielders who would play as pivots in the build up and offer passing options to the flanks once we get into the opposition's third. Maybe a combination of CAR-s + AP-s?

Or, have a FB-s to tuck inside (or an IWB-s) and rely on a MEZ or a CAR (with get further forward) to provide width?

[NineCloudNine]

1 hour ago, skyzekaizo said:

I'll look into it, thanks.

Although I have concerns about playing with only 2 attack duties, and the fact that a W-s would look to attack the space less than a W-a.

I tried only one game with a W-s and it's true that it gives way more lateral space for my F9 to drop in, and it also looks like the W-s could help dragging the opposition full back with him, which would create space to attack for the CM-a or the F9 and that results in nice plays.

But wouldn't a W-a with good work rate enable even more space for the F9 to shine?

Another option I thought of was to have 2 IF-a and rethink the way I attack space, maybe something like having 2 WB-s to provide width with cross from byline, a HB-d to have more options at the back, and 2 balanced midfielders who would play as pivots in the build up and offer passing options to the flanks once we get into the opposition's third. Maybe a combination of CAR-s + AP-s?

Or, have a FB-s to tuck inside (or an IWB-s) and rely on a MEZ or a CAR (with get further forward) to provide width?

I rarely play with any attack duties apart from my striker. I don’t find that this impedes goal scoring. My experience is that too many attack duties mean players running into dead-ends and trying low-quality chances.

Wingers on attack are especially bad at this. They are supposed to be creators, but on attack tend to cut in, shoot more and dribble more. That might sound fun, but means they pass up good passing opportunities and run into dead ends.

My second most used attack duty is for a central AP, as this makes them aggressively drive forward and try killer balls.

I never put WB, FB or CWB on attack as the different behaviours you want can be achieved by changing the role.

I love the HB. The movement dropping into a back three is great. It makes for a stable back line allowing WBs to push forward. The HB can be a great quarterback, constantly recycling the ball like peak Busquets.

[XaW]

On 07/06/2024 at 17:06, skyzekaizo said:

I apologize if I sound entitled, I don't expect anyone to owe me anything, I simply got frustrated by the game, this is my tactic:

I generally drop down to balanced when away, I change tempo a lot during matches, sometimes I change the width or the passing directness.

I'm not sure yet about the duties of the IF on the left and the CWB, as well as the role of my CMs, still trying it out, and I generally change the IFB to FB-s, IWB-s or WB-au depending on the opposition front line.

The instructions are:

CD-d: take more risks, stay wider

BPD-d: dribble more

IFB-d: cross more often

CWB-s: cross aim center, cross from byline

DM-s: hold position

CM-s: stay wider, take more risks

CM-a: move into channels, roam from position, take more risks

IF-a left: sit narrower, cross aim center, shoot more often

IF-a right: stay wider, cross aim center, shoot more often

F9-s: move into channels, shoot more often

Thanks for this reaction, it's what I hoped you would do.

As for this tactic, I think you've gotten a lot of good advise, but I will add my current tactic is not that far off what you have.

And the more secured alternative version when we face really good teams, or if I want to control the game more.

As you can see, we are close, but I want my right winger to keep the width on the right, and the attacking fullback on the left to keep the width there. I've found an W-A and a IF-S both contribute well defensively, as IF-A are more akin to a striker really, so I would end  up being 1v2 on the left side unless my BBM/BWM can pick up. I often use the BWM if I find the opponent are looking to exploit my left side.

The idea is to have the HB drop between the defenders, so they will be more like Wide Centre backs at times, and other times the HB can go forward. It creates more uncertainty for the opponent and my left central defender often scores long shots if the opponent drop very deep as he is very often free outside the box! The left back, the CM-A, and the IF-S all drift between the lines while the AF keep the defenders pinned back. So any tactic that doesn't play a DM against me will struggle. And even with a DM, we play rather wide so we stretch the opponent both horizontally and vertically. So doing both, and also movement between lines very often lead to an opponent player being dragged out of position and space opens up.

Of course, I lose matches like anyone else, both deserved and not, but my team usually concede less than expected, and I can go long stretches without conceding goals. Now, I'm playing in Andorra, but we only conceded 17 goals in 27 league matches last season where we are one of two teams that are far better than the rest.

[-Jef-]

Also re: attacking duties..you can (and I did that myself) score 100+ goals a season whilst not having a single attacking duty in a team. Of course that means playing on higher mentality to compensate for lower natural mentality that each role/duty will have but higher team mentality means each player will take more risks in terms of play decision and their movements.

 

Something like this on Positive/Attacking mentality

 

Though maybe left central mid could be RPM or BBM to make those runs in behind the opposition defense. CM-S might be too static.

Positional play really disrupted some of the previous concepts. For example WB-A and W-A will not be close to each other but rather stand at a certain distance from each other vertically to create space for passing options. And only when W-A wanders about will WB-A position himself higher up the pitch. WB-A will still be highly risky option on the side due to his duty being Attack but he will operate from a deeper position.

[skyzekaizo]

15 minutes ago, XaW said:

Thanks for this reaction, it's what I hoped you would do.

As for this tactic, I think you've gotten a lot of good advise, but I will add my current tactic is not that far off what you have.

And the more secured alternative version when we face really good teams, or if I want to control the game more.

As you can see, we are close, but I want my right winger to keep the width on the right, and the attacking fullback on the left to keep the width there. I've found an W-A and a IF-S both contribute well defensively, as IF-A are more akin to a striker really, so I would end  up being 1v2 on the left side unless my BBM/BWM can pick up. I often use the BWM if I find the opponent are looking to exploit my left side.

The idea is to have the HB drop between the defenders, so they will be more like Wide Centre backs at times, and other times the HB can go forward. It creates more uncertainty for the opponent and my left central defender often scores long shots if the opponent drop very deep as he is very often free outside the box! The left back, the CM-A, and the IF-S all drift between the lines while the AF keep the defenders pinned back. So any tactic that doesn't play a DM against me will struggle. And even with a DM, we play rather wide so we stretch the opponent both horizontally and vertically. So doing both, and also movement between lines very often lead to an opponent player being dragged out of position and space opens up.

Of course, I lose matches like anyone else, both deserved and not, but my team usually concede less than expected, and I can go long stretches without conceding goals. Now, I'm playing in Andorra, but we only conceded 17 goals in 27 league matches last season where we are one of two teams that are far better than the rest.

I have a few questions about your tactic, first what's the impact of having a structured team fluidity over a flexible/fluid team fluidity?

Is it ok to play positive with few supports and 4 defensive duties?

While playing fairly wide, I had the following problems:

- passes from the flank to my CMs are too easy to intercept, and are rare because they'd rather attack the flanks.

- wingers get too easily pressed down (happens a lot during away games if coupled with slightly higher tempo), maybe because they don't have short passing options?

- counter pressing is harder because everyone is spread across the field

- wing backs generally have no room to shine because the wingers are wide

- the striker is even more isolated, has no options for a short pass or one two and if on support duty he gets bypassed too often

Did you notice the same issues? Or maybe it boils down to passing directness?

When your HB-d drops your BBM is your only pivot and he's not staying there for long, what happens when you get into the opposition third? Who's dictating plays from midfield?

About the tempo, how do you decide which tempo is right during the match?

I'm generally using the opposition's OPPDA to understand whether the tempo is right or not (and even with that I'm not sure what I'm doing really), but are there other metrics or hints to look for when deciding which tempo to play with?

Do you feel like the instruction POOD hinders your tactic sometimes? In FM23, even with POOD you'd get early crosses from your fullbacks or long balls from your BPD or DM to the wingers or the striker when the timing was right. In this ME I feel like the POOD instruction severely prohibits these plays.

For example, I almost never see a through ball from my DM unless I instruct him to take more risks, and these balls are definitely less frequent than in FM23.

Finally, I'm quite stubborn and I want to have a F9 in a 433 and make him shine. It might be a bad idea tbh and maybe I should try a 4231 with a SS-a but I'm too committed to this to give up here, so I thought that, in this ME central midfielders really don't like dropping as deep as before, and they're really easy to press down for some reason, even with astounding mentals and technicals, so what about having a setup like this:

SK-s

IFB-d L-s CD-d CWB-s

HB-d

MEZ-a BBM-s

W-s F9-s IF-a

 

The rational behind this would be that the libero should have the space to dribble into the pivot position during build up, the BBM will not have to drop as deep and therefore is not the only option to progress the ball from the back, the right side of the tactic should allow the F9 to have space to thrive in (maybe I'll try a W-a) to make sure the opposition's defence is pushed back enough. I might have a CM-a instead to make sure he doesn't go too wide and frequently swap positions with the F9. Although, would the BBM leave a hole in the midfield when entering the final third? Will I have enough options to recycle the ball from the flanks?

 

[skyzekaizo]

14 minutes ago, -Jef- said:

Also re: attacking duties..you can (and I did that myself) score 100+ goals a season whilst not having a single attacking duty in a team. Of course that means playing on higher mentality to compensate for lower natural mentality that each role/duty will have but higher team mentality means each player will take more risks in terms of play decision and their movements.

 

Something like this on Positive/Attacking mentality

 

Though maybe left central mid could be RPM or BBM to make those runs in behind the opposition defense. CM-S might be too static.

Positional play really disrupted some of the previous concepts. For example WB-A and W-A will not be close to each other but rather stand at a certain distance from each other vertically to create space for passing options. And only when W-A wanders about will WB-A position himself higher up the pitch. WB-A will still be highly risky option on the side due to his duty being Attack but he will operate from a deeper position.

It looks neat but my striker is a young Messi, so I'm not sure about playing him as a CF or a DLF.

[-Jef-]

1 minute ago, skyzekaizo said:

It looks neat but my striker is a young Messi, so I'm not sure about playing him as a CF or a DLF.

Then a classic F9 or even a Treq (tho that does have attacking duty but drops much deeper than a F9 does) will do the trick. DLF is quite a static role. CF might work but there's always the issue with physicality of that player since CF is usually an Ibrahimović type player.

[skyzekaizo]

3 minutes ago, -Jef- said:

Then a classic F9 or even a Treq (tho that does have attacking duty but drops much deeper than a F9 does) will do the trick. DLF is quite a static role. CF might work but there's always the issue with physicality of that player since CF is usually an Ibrahimović type player.

Does the treq drop deeper than a F9? Is it frequent?

Because earlier this year I take a long look at passing maps it always looked like he received the ball higher than any other players on the pitch.

Earlier this year I also tried a quite similar tactic on positive mentality, the problem I had was that my players weren't making enough off the ball runs, so the opposition generally could either slot a DM and eclipse my F9, or play a much higher defensive line with high intensity pressing and make my whole front 3 useless.

[-Jef-]

Just now, skyzekaizo said:

Does the treq drop deeper than a F9? Is it frequent?

Because earlier this year I take a long look at passing maps it always looked like he received the ball higher than any other players on the pitch.

Earlier this year I also tried a quite similar tactic on positive mentality, the problem I had was that my players weren't making enough off the ball runs, so the opposition generally could either slot a DM and eclipse my F9, or play a much higher defensive line with high intensity pressing and make my whole front 3 useless.

He can drop deeper, at least that's what I observed in my saves. But he also makes more movements going forward and is more of a threat. Trequartista is a heartbeat and the main focus of your squad. He has free reigns to do whatever he wants. It's a very powerful role. He will move wide, drop deep, make runs into channel, assist, score...everything but press.   They are very similar roles tho

 

If your F9 is getting marked out of the game that just means there is space for runs behind the F9. MEZ-A, CM-A, IF-A, RMD are all viable options.

I often make slight changes to roles to something similar if I see I can exploit something. 

[XaW]

12 minutes ago, skyzekaizo said:

I have a few questions about your tactic, first what's the impact of having a structured team fluidity over a flexible/fluid team fluidity?

Is it ok to play positive with few supports and 4 defensive duties?

While playing fairly wide, I had the following problems:

- passes from the flank to my CMs are too easy to intercept, and are rare because they'd rather attack the flanks.

- wingers get too easily pressed down (happens a lot during away games if coupled with slightly higher tempo), maybe because they don't have short passing options?

- counter pressing is harder because everyone is spread across the field

- wing backs generally have no room to shine because the wingers are wide

- the striker is even more isolated, has no options for a short pass or one two and if on support duty he gets bypassed too often

Did you notice the same issues? Or maybe it boils down to passing directness?

When your HB-d drops your BBM is your only pivot and he's not staying there for long, what happens when you get into the opposition third? Who's dictating plays from midfield?

About the tempo, how do you decide which tempo is right during the match?

I'm generally using the opposition's OPPDA to understand whether the tempo is right or not (and even with that I'm not sure what I'm doing really), but are there other metrics or hints to look for when deciding which tempo to play with?

Do you feel like the instruction POOD hinders your tactic sometimes? In FM23, even with POOD you'd get early crosses from your fullbacks or long balls from your BPD or DM to the wingers or the striker when the timing was right. In this ME I feel like the POOD instruction severely prohibits these plays.

For example, I almost never see a through ball from my DM unless I instruct him to take more risks, and these balls are definitely less frequent than in FM23.

Finally, I'm quite stubborn and I want to have a F9 in a 433 and make him shine. It might be a bad idea tbh and maybe I should try a 4231 with a SS-a but I'm too committed to this to give up here, so I thought that, in this ME central midfielders really don't like dropping as deep as before, and they're really easy to press down for some reason, even with astounding mentals and technicals, so what about having a setup like this:

SK-s

IFB-d L-s CD-d CWB-s

HB-d

MEZ-a BBM-s

W-s F9-s IF-a

 

The rational behind this would be that the libero should have the space to dribble into the pivot position during build up, the BBM will not have to drop as deep and therefore is not the only option to progress the ball from the back, the right side of the tactic should allow the F9 to have space to thrive in (maybe I'll try a W-a) to make sure the opposition's defence is pushed back enough. I might have a CM-a instead to make sure he doesn't go too wide and frequently swap positions with the F9. Although, would the BBM leave a hole in the midfield when entering the final third? Will I have enough options to recycle the ball from the flanks?

 

Honestly, I'm not that good at tactics, but I found that my setup works, even if I'm sure it could be improved by someone better at the tactical stuff than me.

But it answer one question at a time

1. Structured or fluid are based on your roles and instructions, so while it says structured, I'm still seeing a lot of fluid movements in my team, it's just that I have more fixed roles around the fluid movement, if that makes sense. If I chance the W-A to a W-S it turns to fluid, so I think I'm just on the edge of the categorisation.

2. I've found it works fine with the 3 supporting roles in this setup.

3. Playing wide is only WITH the ball, off the ball, I have a normal defensive width, so no issues there. With a IF-S, my left WB has a lot of room, and the right back works well since the W-A is very high up the pitch. But the left back is more often at the touch line crossing, while the right one crosses more from deeper, usually by the box. The CM-A works almost like a shadow striker, and the W-A is also scoring a lot of goals. The IF-S is more a creator, but will most seasons reach double digits in goals too.

4. That's why I'm switching between the B2B and a BWM. The B2B is great against teams I can push back, but the BWM is better against teams that go toe to toe with us. So that role changes a lot. If we are SUPER dominant, I even change the HB to a Regista to become more of a pivot, but often a BWM can work as a pivot too. I take it game to game. But often if we attack enough, the HB (or either centre back) will naturally move forward into a pivot role, depending on rest attackers by the opposition of course. So I often just have a B2B work horse who can deal with the demands.

5. I like higher tempo being on the front foot, because it also leads to quicker crosses. This tactic works wonders with a targetman type player in the striker role too (still playing as an AF though). It's also why I don't use the "work ball into box" as that causes way too many "safe passes" around the box rather than a risky killer pass or a cross.

6. I like to play out of defence, as I feel the BWM/B2B are very good at offering a pass into midfield, especially as the HB often works as an even deeper playmaker in the transition out of the defensive 3rd. The angles just work well with playing out.

7. The DM-S is a very "safe" role. A DPL or a HB are more playmaking roles, but if you want the DM to play risky passes, I think you need to remove the POOD instruction. I don't want that other than in the attacking 3rd, so I'm happy with how it works.

As I said, I'm not that good at tactics, other than my own, so if you want help with that, I think you should open a thread in the tactics forum showing the screenshots and outlining what you want and what you see, and get some suggestions from the really good tactical users.

[jcafcwbb]

In response to a couple of comments I do not think the game treats the human players any differently from an AI manager but I think it over-values tactics/formations over player ability regardless of whether it is a human v ai or ai v ai. 

BTW one thing tactically I have noticed is that as I play a 4-2-3-1 if I play against any formation against 1 DM if I set my CF to mark that DM my opponent will have less of the game than if I don't. 

[Cloud9]

8 hours ago, skyzekaizo said:

I'll look into it, thanks.

Although I have concerns about playing with only 2 attack duties, and the fact that a W-s would look to attack the space less than a W-a.

I tried only one game with a W-s and it's true that it gives way more lateral space for my F9 to drop in, and it also looks like the W-s could help dragging the opposition full back with him, which would create space to attack for the CM-a or the F9 and that results in nice plays.

But wouldn't a W-a with good work rate enable even more space for the F9 to shine?

Another option I thought of was to have 2 IF-a and rethink the way I attack space, maybe something like having 2 WB-s to provide width with cross from byline, a HB-d to have more options at the back, and 2 balanced midfielders who would play as pivots in the build up and offer passing options to the flanks once we get into the opposition's third. Maybe a combination of CAR-s + AP-s?

Or, have a FB-s to tuck inside (or an IWB-s) and rely on a MEZ or a CAR (with get further forward) to provide width?

On different setups, if you're approaching difficult games and want to employ two attack role wide players I would suggest a defensive base like this:

The wingbacks will give you their athleticism defensively and provide the platform for you frontline to go attack. 

This will depend a bit on the type of wingbacks you've been recruiting (not everyone can play as a wingback(d) and be reliable). For reference this is the kind of profile I really like to look for on a WB(d), essentially players you can trust not to get beat in their 1v1 battles.

Spoiler

Personality, Consistency, Big matches are important for these guys too:

He's got the ability to go forward as well...recruiting versatile players like this is really important imo. If the opposition is weak on his side (defensively or just in a lack of threat offensively) I can open his role up and let him go forward.

If you'd like to pursue a winger (a) I'd recommend a setup like this:

Basically this is your original shape but with more role pairings:

• F9 will create space for the onrushing CM(a), you'll look for a profile player on the CM(a) w/strong off the ball + decent height to threaten off his runs into the box. 
• Winger(a) is now supported in part by the FB(s) and will be a bit less isolated. Here you could play a traditional winger or even an off footed winger w/the fullbacks support, either way I would look for a profile on the winger (a) that makes him a 1v1 specialist (dribbling, flair, pace, agi/balance).
  • I would still want the Winger(s) option in my squad for when I need more hard work, again a different profile of player (instead of 1v1 and pace we're looking for teamwork, work rate, aggression). 
• CAR will babysit the CWB(S) when he goes forward and cover that space for you, a bit like Henderson did for Trent at Liverpool. The CAR will also provide that natural width of the left, so the CWB(s) has a bit more freedom to roam where he finds suitable.
• CWB(s) in turn pairs nicely with an IF(s), who is still a goal threat on a supporting role.
• DM(s) will need to be tall, strong mentals, athletic and be able to passs decently...it's always a demanding role for a 4-3-3. 

On your question about only two attack roles... CWB(s), IF(s), and F9 are all very creative or aggressive roles which you want to balance out with hard working roles/profiles. For example: CWB(s) is a supporting role but is actually much more aggressive than a traditional fullback or wingback(a).

• More importantly, we've checked the boxes for what makes a good tactic...we have width, clear ways to progress the ball / score goals and defensive protection out of possession / via turnovers.

Edited June 10 by Cloud9

[skyzekaizo]

2 hours ago, Cloud9 said:

On different setups, if you're approaching difficult games and want to employ two attack role wide players I would suggest a defensive base like this:

The wingbacks will give you their athleticism defensively and provide the platform for you frontline to go attack. 

This will depend a bit on the type of wingbacks you've been recruiting (not everyone can play as a wingback(d) and be reliable). For reference this is the kind of profile I really like to look for on a WB(d), essentially players you can trust not to get beat in their 1v1 battles.

  Hide contents

Personality, Consistency, Big matches are important for these guys too:

He's got the ability to go forward as well...recruiting versatile players like this is really important imo. If the opposition is weak on his side (defensively or just in a lack of threat offensively) I can open his role up and let him go forward.

If you'd like to pursue a winger (a) I'd recommend a setup like this:

Basically this is your original shape but with more role pairings:

• F9 will create space for the onrushing CM(a), you'll look for a profile player on the CM(a) w/strong off the ball + decent height to threaten off his runs into the box. 
• Winger(a) is now supported in part by the FB(s) and will be a bit less isolated. Here you could play a traditional winger or even an off footed winger w/the fullbacks support, either way I would look for a profile on the winger (a) that makes him a 1v1 specialist (dribbling, flair, pace, agi/balance).
  • I would still want the Winger(s) option in my squad for when I need more hard work, again a different profile of player (instead of 1v1 and pace we're looking for teamwork, work rate, aggression). 
• CAR will babysit the CWB(S) when he goes forward and cover that space for you, a bit like Henderson did for Trent at Liverpool. The CAR will also provide that natural width of the left, so the CWB(s) has a bit more freedom to roam where he finds suitable.
• CWB(s) in turn pairs nicely with an IF(s), who is still a goal threat on a supporting role.
• DM(s) will need to be tall, strong mentals, athletic and be able to passs decently...it's always a demanding role for a 4-3-3. 

On your question about only two attack roles... CWB(s), IF(s), and F9 are all very creative or aggressive roles which you want to balance out with hard working roles/profiles. For example: CWB(s) is a supporting role but is actually much more aggressive than a traditional fullback or wingback(a).

• More importantly, we've checked the boxes for what makes a good tactic...we have width, clear ways to progress the ball / score goals and defensive protection out of possession / via turnovers.

Wow this looks good!

I'll try it asap, btw why did you choose a DM-s over a DM-d?

Thanks!

[skyzekaizo]

I've tried it in a few games, the combination CWB-s CAR-s IF-s is quite good tbh but the IF does not challenge the defense line like I would like him to, so I went with the following setup:

SK-s

FB-s BPD-d BPD-d WB-s

DLP-d

CM-a CAR-s

W-a F9-s IF-a

the instructions are POOD, fairly narrow, low crosses, shorter passing

Counter press, slow pace down

high def line, high press, prevent short GK distribution

I also tried something similar when playing away but with counter instead of counter press, mid block standard def line, pass into space and hit early crosses in a balanced mentality. But somehow it works better when simulating than when playing the match.

[coach vahid]

il y a 57 minutes, skyzekaizo a dit :

I've tried it in a few games, the combination CWB-s CAR-s IF-s is quite good tbh but the IF does not challenge the defense line like I would like him to, so I went with the following setup:

SK-s

FB-s BPD-d BPD-d WB-s

DLP-d

CM-a CAR-s

W-a F9-s IF-a

the instructions are POOD, fairly narrow, low crosses, shorter passing

Counter press, slow pace down

high def line, high press, prevent short GK distribution

I also tried something similar when playing away but with counter instead of counter press, mid block standard def line, pass into space and hit early crosses in a balanced mentality. But somehow it works better when simulating than when playing the match.

If i may, it's a setup that i tried a lot.

But i will change the dlp-def with a support duty ( @Cloud9 will explain better than me the reason behind this choice when you play with a cm-at ).

When i played with defensive duty on dm position, i passed the wing black on the left on attack duty.(But my If is on support duty).

Maybe two Bpd are a little too much and one as simply CD on defend can help you too.

[Cloud9]

19 hours ago, skyzekaizo said:

Wow this looks good!

I'll try it asap, btw why did you choose a DM-s over a DM-d?

Thanks!

I prefer a DM(s) on a single pivot for the higher positioning in / out of possession and increased mentality. A single pivot will need to be able to serve as a passing option and to connect to the midfield third of the pitch as well as cutting out opposition transitions. If you want you can add "hold position" onto the DM(s) in the PIs.

A DLP(s) can work in that role as well, as @coach vahid mentions. The main downside to utilizing a playmaker here is that a lot of your play will go through the player, which can be an issue if he is targeted by the opposition.

• I would just make sure the player profile is not overly fancy, the 6 (DM role) in a 4-3-3 needs to be able to do the physical side of the game first and foremost. @XaW setup utilizes the HB, since the team will look to transition the ball forward primarily through the two progressive wingback choices (the HBs movement dropping back between the CB pairing will facilitate this). 
  • HB is an aggressive, ball playing sweeper role which will give you that physicality I mention. A DLP(s) will be primarily a recycler of possession. Both can work well but will significantly influence how you play. In most situations I am happy with what a DM(s) can do in the role, ie. the role is already very demanding for the formation.
• I would keep in mind that reducing the CWB(s) to WB(s) will reduce the roles creativity.
• Running a double BPD can be a fine choice to progress the ball, but I would look to have high quality players to pull it off. Adding dribble more to one of the two can be a nice addition if they're capable. 

This is the kind of profile I would look for on a solo 6. A physical profile is fundamental but mostly I'd look for someone capable of reading the game well w/strong defensive mentals. 

Spoiler

If you're going to play on fairy narrow width, I would consider upping the tempo. However, I would suggest something like this to start off:

You can then add in a TI or two as you watch your team play, which will give you a better feel for their impact.

Dropping back to a mid block adds another level of complication which may not suit your players. if you're a particularly strong team or don't have the players to execute a block I would consider just running a slightly more conservative version of your main tactic in difficult matches. 

Edited June 11 by Cloud9

[XaW]

2 hours ago, Cloud9 said:

I would just make sure the player profile is not overly fancy, the 6 (DM role) in a 4-3-3 needs to be able to do the physical side of the game first and foremost. @XaW setup utilizes the HB, since the team will look to transition the ball forward primarily through the two progressive wingback choices (the HBs movement dropping back between the CB pairing will facilitate this). 

• HB is an aggressive, ball playing sweeper role which will give you that physicality I mention. A DLP(s) will be primarily a recycler of possession. Both can work well but will significantly influence how you play. In most situations I am happy with what a DM(s) can do in the role, ie. the role is already very demanding for the formation.

That's the biggest reason I like the HB role, it turns him into a 3rd centre back when building up from the back, but when we enter the final 3rd the HB (or in some cases either DC on the side) will push up into the DM strata. It means my tactics goes from this defensive shape:

Into this transitional shape or just for quick attacks:

Into finally a sustained attacking shape:

Where it turns into the now often normal 2-3-5 attacking formation.

And while this can be exploited out wide on a counter, it rarely happens in sustained attacks, because the opponent wide players usually have to follow the WBs at that point. As I've said before, I'm certain some tactical gurus could improve this, but it's something I've created and just enjoy watching. And slightly overachieving most of the time (if I have the players for it!) helps me focus on other things than tactics, since those are the things I enjoy more in my saves.

[crusadertsar]

3 hours ago, XaW said:

That's the biggest reason I like the HB role, it turns him into a 3rd centre back when building up from the back, but when we enter the final 3rd the HB (or in some cases either DC on the side) will push up into the DM strata. It means my tactics goes from this defensive shape:

Into this transitional shape or just for quick attacks:

Into finally a sustained attacking shape:

Where it turns into the now often normal 2-3-5 attacking formation.

And while this can be exploited out wide on a counter, it rarely happens in sustained attacks, because the opponent wide players usually have to follow the WBs at that point. As I've said before, I'm certain some tactical gurus could improve this, but it's something I've created and just enjoy watching. And slightly overachieving most of the time (if I have the players for it!) helps me focus on other things than tactics, since those are the things I enjoy more in my saves.

In that shape, what role would you play right wingback in? To me it looks like movement of IWB(s) or IWB(d) with overlap right instruction. 

[XaW]

4 minutes ago, crusadertsar said:

In that shape, what role would you play right wingback in? To me it looks like movement of IWB(s) or IWB(d) with overlap right instruction. 

I've experimented a lot with various roles for that one, but so far found that WB-S or FB-S are the ones that behave like I want. Might work with something else, but the player gets too far inside when I make it a IWB and struggle to get back if we lose the ball. So I decided to stick with what I found worked well enough, but it's certainly something that might work if one would tinker enough, I think.

[skyzekaizo]

So I tried a few variations, I edited the players to give them the traits I wanted and good attributes where it matters (15 to 17) and 19 consistency, and yet I haven't found what I'd like to see on the pitch.

The W-a looses the ball in average 26 times per game, either because he can't cross early, or he gets closed down as soon as he receives the ball and make the bad decision of trying to dribble instead of passing to the FB-s or the CM-a, he also can't make a single succesful run in behind the defense to save his lofe, even with the trait, the acceleration and the DLP-d which regularly feeds him through balls.

The IF, when on support, is wonderful in order to progress the ball, rarely looses the ball when closed down, but isn't making enough threatening runs in behind and that's not really good given I need someone to pin the defensive line back. When on attack though, he makes really good runs in the channel and when he receives the ball in the channel, generally I know there's a goal or a good chance coming, but as soon as he receives the ball wide during progress, he's behaving just like the winger and gets closed down too easily.

The CM-a and the F9 generally don't have enough space to shine, and they don't swap positions that often, generally there's a gap created by the CM-a going up which the F9 has trouble occupying, and generally the opposition can play a higher to much higher defensive line without being punished for it, because the wingers fail at pinning them back.

One of the biggest gripe I have with the game so far has to be with the left midfielder, no matter which role I play him on (CAR-s, BBM-s, CM-s, DLP-s). During build up he's generally always a bit too high, so the play goes through the right side instead of through him. And the few times he receives the ball during build up, this is what happens:
 

 

I'm the blue side, The number 7 is my CWB, and the 6 is my CAR-s in the left half space, the CWB is both too high to give a recycling option to my CAR, and too deep to make the IF tuck in and create space for the CAR-s. This lack of space is generally made worse by the fact that the CAR does not drop enough, so he gets closed down by the opposition's winger, striker and right midfielder. If he indeed dropped down to a pivot position, he would have enough time and space to pick up a pass, but I think that this ME pushes the midfielders into the half space too often. I could maybe use a defensive duty instead, but I'm not sure he would be available as an option for the CWB or IF to recycle once we get to the byline. Also, during the final third, even as a DLP-s he sits way too high the left channel instead of chilling with the DM.

Finally, I'm not fond of the meta in this edition, you cannot really play a slightly lower tempo or even standard tempo without getting butchered.

So I think I'll go back to FM23 and see if it's any better.

 

 

[skyzekaizo]

yeah the ME in FM23 is definitely better when it comes to player's positionning and decisions both with and off the ball, the IF tucks in during build up, the LCM drops deep to act as a pivot, the WB actually pushes up the flank and even with shorter passing there are still some good through balls here and there from the defensive unit when there's a good opportunity.

Also its possible to actually play without counter and/or with a lower tempo.

 

[Cloud9]

20 hours ago, skyzekaizo said:

yeah the ME in FM23 is definitely better when it comes to player's positionning and decisions both with and off the ball, the IF tucks in during build up, the LCM drops deep to act as a pivot, the WB actually pushes up the flank and even with shorter passing there are still some good through balls here and there from the defensive unit when there's a good opportunity.

Also its possible to actually play without counter and/or with a lower tempo.

 

That's a disappointing take away, the big changes from FM23 to FM24 are:

1. Positional Play
2. A more reactive AI (in matches and over the course of the season).

The FM24 ME is objectively better, although it is more tinker heavy.

I would recommend going back to basics after taking a break if you're feeling frustrated. Perhaps you could run a formation with a simple spearheading forward or w/a strike partnership, both are far less nuanced approaches than running a solo 9 on support.

A simple 4-4-2 will always be a solid user friendly formation to fall back on if you're struggling to understand a fairly opaque tactical interface. 

Edited June 14 by Cloud9

[crusadertsar]

45 minutes ago, Cloud9 said:

That's a disappointing take away, the big changes from FM23 to FM24 are:

1. Positional Play
2. A more reactive AI (in matches and over the course of the season).

The FM24 ME is objectively better, although it is more tinker heavy.

I would recommend going back to basics after taking a break if you're feeling frustrated. Perhaps you could run a formation with a simple spearheading forward or w/a strike partnership, both are far less nuanced approaches than running a solo 9 on support.

A simple 4-4-2 will always be a solid user friendly formation to fall back on if you're struggling to understand a fairly opaque tactical interface. 

@skyzekaizo I would also recommend a good old simple 442. If you are looking for a less "maintenance-heavy" formation. A 4-2-3-1 DM is another one in my opinion, that's very easy to use and be successful with in FM24.

Edited June 14 by crusadertsar

[Falahk]

On 13/06/2024 at 13:12, skyzekaizo said:

Finally, I'm not fond of the meta in this edition, you cannot really play a slightly lower tempo or even standard tempo without getting butchered.

Not sure what makes you think that, I have only used standard tempo/coutious mentality on fm24 and done just fine

First season I used this 3-5-2 and finished 5th on 74pts (got promoted via playoffs):

I'm about halfway into the secound season and if the secound half is anything like the first bit then I will probably secure a safe midtable finish with 40 something points, this season I have mostly used the tactic above, but have also experimented a bit with a 4-3-3 against big teams or when I have a a result to play on, the 4-3-3 look like this:

 

[Falahk]

To add to the above, in the old days on fm11-fm12 I used to play low tempo possession football, I'm convinced that it should be possible to do something similar on fm24, but I don't really have the time (since it would require a fair bit of tinkering to make everything click perfectly and many of the roles had changed individual instructions) or the players in my squad to replicate it now 

[Hoofenballen]

Ive not read through the entire thread, but i get the gist of the thread.

 

Away games for sure are harder than home games and ive fallen into the rabbit hole before of wondering why I was so dominant at home and yet so rubbish away with certain teams. The more ive played the game, the more the results have become more balanced for me.

 

Id say there are some general things that ive found help (they might not be correct, or it might just be anecdotal)

 

• When playing away, its logical to drop the mentality down, the line of engagement and the defensive line. Pretty much goes without saying.

 

• If you feel like you are conceding shots from the 18 yard range, i find it helps to ask your defenders to "step up" as a team instruction, and close down more as player instructions. Essentially telling them defend from defensive line position X, but when theres a threat, block it like your life depends on it!!

 

• If you are looking for quicker transitions, RAISING the tempo and passing directness a notch above middle helps. So rather than a patient "craft out a chance" type approach, players will look to work if forward quickly to try and take advantage of any gaps left behind by the home team

 

• Trapping I see it as a two fold thing: If you trap INSIDE its a riskier strategy, but forcing an opposition player inside into a ball winning midfielder for example could result in a transition opportunity to expose the gap where the opposition player was forced inside from. A lower risk strategy is to trap outside; I see this as a way of ensuring you are slightly more compact and defending from the "inside out"..... so your players will sit in a narrower formation and push the opposition away from the goal. Coupled with "inviting crosses" i always think this is a "block the goal by putting everyone across the 18 yard box" type strategy.

 

• Because you are likely to win the ball in deeper positions, i feel its advantageous to as certain players to DRIBBLE you up the pitch by running with the ball from their position forwards before they offload a pass. Ive used the "run with the ball" option as a team instruction on occasions, but ill often just select players like the wide players (full backs and wingers) plus perhaps one slightly more proactive midfielder to carry us up the field with dribbles. Dribbles are also good as the opposition might foul you and winning a free kick helps you regroup.

 

• Use a striker that is going to push the opposition backwards. "give them something to think about".... like an advanced forward. this gives your team a chance to put a ball forwards for the striker to chase onto, or better still an opportunity for a through ball in behind. If your striker keeps coming towards the ball all day then its hard to get up the pitch

 

• Ride out the storm..... if you set up with a solid formation and the opposition is struggling to break you down, as they start to tire it can be a good time to make some subs and press them a little harder at the back if their defensive players are tired. This is more of a.... i sense we can nick something last 15-20 mins type thing. Use cautiously though.

 

• Unless using an exploit type tactic, sometimes accepting a point can be a good result helps. If playing real tactics sometimes the opposition IS going to batter you, it happens for real. Taking a point can be a great result....even a narrow defeat in a two legged knockout tie can be ok. Dont get in the mindset that youll find a way to win every single game over and over, its not realistic. There WILL be days theres nothing you can do but its not to say its scripted, its just to say on that particular day you couldnt get the better of the opponent.

Edited June 16 by Hoofenballen

[skyzekaizo]

On 14/06/2024 at 23:40, Cloud9 said:

That's a disappointing take away, the big changes from FM23 to FM24 are:

1. Positional Play
2. A more reactive AI (in matches and over the course of the season).

The FM24 ME is objectively better, although it is more tinker heavy.

I would recommend going back to basics after taking a break if you're feeling frustrated. Perhaps you could run a formation with a simple spearheading forward or w/a strike partnership, both are far less nuanced approaches than running a solo 9 on support.

A simple 4-4-2 will always be a solid user friendly formation to fall back on if you're struggling to understand a fairly opaque tactical interface. 

It is indeed disappointing, but I learned a few things from this exchange so it's still nice.

Although I disagree with you on this ME being objectively better, it is way too rigid and way too one dimensional.

For example, if you play a 433 with an IWB-s and IFB-d, the ME recognizes where the players needs to be to reconstruct the 3-box-3, and more often than not the ME rewards you for playing like this, you'll be having plenty of possession and create a lot of chances and you'll have fun in the game.

However if you play a 433 which does not translate directly into the 3-box-3 like the one I'm trying to play, you're in for a lot of trouble because the ME does not recognize this pattern and it results in the team having trouble circulating the ball, mostly because midfielders are way too inclined to move into the channels and they don't drop enough, the AML/Rs are way too inclined to stay on the wings during build up, and WBs and FBs don't push high enough during build up. I remember some games in FM24 where I played a WB-a BBM-s IF-s on the left side, and saw my WB-a being on the same horizontal line as my DM, my BBM-s (with the PPM to come deep) sit in the channel and he dropped occasionally, and my IF-s sitting on the wing above my WB-a, which means I can't progress the ball on the left side. However the same setup on FM23 gives a completely different picture, the BBM-s drops into a pivot role, the WB-a pushes up and replace the IF-s which tucks in into the channel, this is the kind of player rotation that lacks in FM24.

This rigidity I think, is the main reason why some players tend to play asymmetric tactics, simply because the ME does not allow players to rotate position fluidly, which is ironic given that positional play was supposed to allow just that.

 

On 15/06/2024 at 21:12, Falahk said:

Not sure what makes you think that, I have only used standard tempo/coutious mentality on fm24 and done just fine

I'm about halfway into the secound season and if the secound half is anything like the first bit then I will probably secure a safe midtable finish with 40 something points, this season I have mostly used the tactic above, but have also experimented a bit with a 4-3-3 against big teams or when I have a a result to play on, the 4-3-3 look like this:

 

The way you set up your 433 is exactly what I dislike about this ME. Every AI manager which favors a 433 tends to use this 3-2 shape during build up, even when they have nowhere near the players to make it work, but it does not matter because the game rewards it more than it punishes them for using players that don't fit the roles.

 

On 15/06/2024 at 22:10, Falahk said:

To add to the above, in the old days on fm11-fm12 I used to play low tempo possession football, I'm convinced that it should be possible to do something similar on fm24, but I don't really have the time (since it would require a fair bit of tinkering to make everything click perfectly and many of the roles had changed individual instructions) or the players in my squad to replicate it now 

You say you're convinced it should be possible but you didn't try it yet, try it and see for yourself, slower tempo and playing out of defense generally gets you murdered by any team that presses with some intensity.

[Falahk]

5 hours ago, skyzekaizo said:

You say you're convinced it should be possible but you didn't try it yet, try it and see for yourself, slower tempo and playing out of defense generally gets you murdered by any team that presses with some intensity.

Ok I will give it a go, but I'm having a hard time picking a team, Brentford maybe? Or would that be to easy? Suggestions would be appreciated