Is this the best way to learn how to create tactics?

[TheFalseNine]

Although I have been playing FM for a number of years I find myself still confused when it comes to creating tactics and what to look out for when deciding to make changes. 

After watching a recent YouTuber I decided to do the following:

Choose a formation with roles and duties ONLY 
No team instructions or player instructions
Watch a game in full match
Lower the speed of game to MEDIUM

It was quite painful to sit there for an hour just to play one game but it was also quite interesting. I only changed one thing at a time. For example, one role change or one duty change or one team instruction.

My question to those who are tactically aware........is this the most effective way of learning how roles/duties/team instructions work in FM?

Edited June 28 by TheFalseNine

[Cloud9]

4 hours ago, TheFalseNine said:

Although I have been playing FM for a number of years I find myself still confused when it comes to creating tactics and what to look out for when deciding to make changes. 

After watching a recent YouTuber I decided to do the following:

Choose a formation with roles and duties ONLY 
No team instructions or player instructions
Watch a game in full match
Lower the speed of game to MEDIUM

It was quite painful to sit there for an hour just to play one game but it was also quite interesting. I only changed one thing at a time. For example, one role change or one duty change or one team instruction.

My question to those who are tactically aware........is this the most effective way of learning how roles/duties/team instructions work in FM?

Hmm playing too much is a good way  Mostly the roles + the PIs will tell you what's going on for the basic ideas, but there is hard coding under the hood. I would play on data analysis view so you can see what's happening and then switch back and forth between comprehensive highlights and full match on a higher speed. That approach sounds like a good way to see what's going on with a specific TI or role.

• Just keep in mind that the mentality you're playing on will impact everything in your setup.

Mostly when you're putting together a tactic I would just look at:

1. Space on the pitch
2. Who Provides Width
3. Who stretches the pitch vertically
4. How do you score goals
5. How do you progress the ball through the thirds
6. How do you stop the opposition from scoring goals

You can also do searches on the forum for how things work as there are years of experience on here. It's probably easier to learn from others to start off rather than attempting to draw your own conclusions from watching the games. 

Here are the stickied threads where you can see how others approach things:

Here's a link to the manual:

Edited June 28 by Cloud9

[Delicate Dave]

4 hours ago, TheFalseNine said:

Although I have been playing FM for a number of years I find myself still confused when it comes to creating tactics and what to look out for when deciding to make changes. 

After watching a recent YouTuber I decided to do the following:

Choose a formation with roles and duties ONLY 
No team instructions or player instructions
Watch a game in full match
Lower the speed of game to MEDIUM

It was quite painful to sit there for an hour just to play one game but it was also quite interesting. I only changed one thing at a time. For example, one role change or one duty change or one team instruction.

My question to those who are tactically aware........is this the most effective way of learning how roles/duties/team instructions work in FM?

The absolutely number one thing to do when designing tactics is to understand what that word means in FM, and it has little to do with real-world tactics.

That might surprise a few but let me explain - Let's take a look at Wing-Backs - If you want them to cross the ball from the byline you'll need them on ATTACKING. If you have them on attacking I absolutely guarantee your team will concede more goals. It seems fair enough I suppose, the WB is caught high up the pitch but in FM that hardly ever is the way goals are conceded. What will happen is your CBs will suddenly forget how to jump. This type of thing can be applied to all positions, so you need to adjust your thinking to how FM works.

The number two thing is to decide where you want to start - Do you want a tactic that more or less suits the squad you have or are you like me decide you want to try to invent a new one and buy new players to suit that. If it's the first, drop all your best players in the tactics page as subs - then count the positions - if you have 4 CBs perhaps you go for 5 at the back. If you have 2 CFs perhaps 2 upfront  and then see if you have WBs or can buy them. Of course, if you don't have any of that you'll adjust to a different formation., most inherited squads are full of wingers I've found - I hate wingers, they are always trouble :-) My current tactic has CF, AM, DM, WB, CD & Keeper only.  

Then Third when you have players & formations sort the team on the squad page and look at their abilities like speed, passing, strength etc. If you have a strong fast players perhaps a pressing game will suit you. If you have a strong slow players that can't pass then a long ball game. There are endless things in between.

Finally perhaps is adjusting the tactic and knowing the cost of those changes. For example, PASS INTO SPACE simply means in FM your team will have less of the ball so you need the players with pace and the work rate to beat the other team. Also, remember the more of these adjustments in your tactics the more effort your players need to put in. I try to remove as many as possible, but I'm a bit odd because I also like to set timewaster halfway :-)

Hope that helps, perhaps not but remember whatever you do, you are not doing it wrong. The is no wrong with FM just useless players :-)

[Hoofenballen]

I dont think it has to be all that complicated. Just ask simple questions.

To play the style you want, do you want the left and right back to overlap their wide man? underlap their wide man? make a back 3 with the centre backs? that decides the roles you put on them.

What are your midfielders supposed to do? sit and form a pivot? get forward to create or attack space, score maybe? determines the roles

What kind of striker do you need? one who drops deep? one who runs behind? maybe you play 2 forwards and a combination of both

 

Then just watch the games and tweak things until they play the way you visualise, regardless of whether it makes "sense" or was what you had in mind at first.

 

Dont go too aggressive on the team mentality, it doesnt have to always be positive and above to score goals

And likewise, support duties dont mean players dont attack.

 

Some roles naturally compliment each other, so look to buld around those. An easy one would be deepl lying forward (s) compliments an advanced forward (a) in a two man strike partnership etc, so build on those

[warlock]

5 hours ago, Delicate Dave said:

Let's take a look at Wing-Backs - If you want them to cross the ball from the byline you'll need them on ATTACKING

But that isn't true. You can have them on support and still tell them to cross from the byline, if that's what you want.

For any given cat, there's a hundred ways to skin it in FM.

[Hoofenballen]

41 minutes ago, warlock said:

But that isn't true. You can have them on support and still tell them to cross from the byline, if that's what you want.

For any given cat, there's a hundred ways to skin it in FM.

Id kind of contest when it comes to FM, not even the people who write here or spend hours on youtube (which would make me hate my life if i was playing this game all day every day but thats entirely different) know how FM works.

There are that many variables going on at the same time that all you can do is make adjustments and hope they work on a particular given day, or develop an overally philosophy around the tweaks youve made.

It should be like that, or else we would all be going on a plug and play quest where we just search for the most game breaking role cobimations and instructions instead of playying properly

[warlock]

24 minutes ago, Hoofenballen said:

or else we would all be going on a plug and play quest where we just search for the most game breaking role cobimations and instructions instead of playying properly

That would be 90% of the player base, wouldn't it [(not judging... play the game how you want]?  Some of us spend a great deal of time and effort not doing that.

[Hoofenballen]

2 minutes ago, warlock said:

That would be 90% of the player base, wouldn't it [(not judging... play the game how you want]?  Some of us spend a great deal of time and effort not doing that.

Im probably in a minority but i never want to know what breaks the game, because then ill rely on breaking the game, as opposed to managing a football team. If i know for example that a certain set up is inherently better than the other, regardless of the situation its played in, that takes all the fun away for me.

[El Payaso]

@TheFalseNine I salute anyone who approaches things in your way. It might be time consuming but a way more logical why than just trying your luck.

I wouldn't personally start with a clean slate though as I would instead create a basic framework to begin with. 

For example if I want my team to play defensive minded counter-attacking football, the basic fundamentals would probably include adding the counter attacking team instruction, have either low or mid-block, higher tempo and pass into space activated. Those would be the things that I think are necessary things to include in my desired style of play. 

In terms of players, 1-2 attacking duties would be the maximum while I would also make sure that we would always have enough players under the ball. 

I would then start watching the game and seeing how I can improve things and troubleshoot if something doesn't work in a desired way. 

[TheFalseNine]

22 hours ago, Cloud9 said:

Hmm playing too much is a good way  Mostly the roles + the PIs will tell you what's going on for the basic ideas, but there is hard coding under the hood. I would play on data analysis view so you can see what's happening and then switch back and forth between comprehensive highlights and full match on a higher speed. That approach sounds like a good way to see what's going on with a specific TI or role.

• Just keep in mind that the mentality you're playing on will impact everything in your setup.

Mostly when you're putting together a tactic I would just look at:

1. Space on the pitch
2. Who Provides Width
3. Who stretches the pitch vertically
4. How do you score goals
5. How do you progress the ball through the thirds
6. How do you stop the opposition from scoring goals

You can also do searches on the forum for how things work as there are years of experience on here. It's probably easier to learn from others to start off rather than attempting to draw your own conclusions from watching the games. 

Here are the stickied threads where you can see how others approach things:

Here's a link to the manual:

Thank you for your response and advice. I think you are right when you say it's best to learn from other people. There was a thread about defending in a 442 that I liked and have chosen that as my base. I'm actually playing a 424 so it's not exactly a 442 but I have taken inspiration from that thread. To make it realistic as possible I want to stick to the club vision. One of those is to be defensively solid so that matches the style I am going for. 

The tactics manual has really helped so thank you for linking that. I've won things on previous FM's but this year has gotten the better of me. I am currently managing Man U and have finished 4th, 2nd and 4th. Currently in 4th season and the only things I have won are the community shield twice and one FA cup 

[TheFalseNine]

21 hours ago, Delicate Dave said:

The absolutely number one thing to do when designing tactics is to understand what that word means in FM, and it has little to do with real-world tactics.

That might surprise a few but let me explain - Let's take a look at Wing-Backs - If you want them to cross the ball from the byline you'll need them on ATTACKING. If you have them on attacking I absolutely guarantee your team will concede more goals. It seems fair enough I suppose, the WB is caught high up the pitch but in FM that hardly ever is the way goals are conceded. What will happen is your CBs will suddenly forget how to jump. This type of thing can be applied to all positions, so you need to adjust your thinking to how FM works.

The number two thing is to decide where you want to start - Do you want a tactic that more or less suits the squad you have or are you like me decide you want to try to invent a new one and buy new players to suit that. If it's the first, drop all your best players in the tactics page as subs - then count the positions - if you have 4 CBs perhaps you go for 5 at the back. If you have 2 CFs perhaps 2 upfront  and then see if you have WBs or can buy them. Of course, if you don't have any of that you'll adjust to a different formation., most inherited squads are full of wingers I've found - I hate wingers, they are always trouble :-) My current tactic has CF, AM, DM, WB, CD & Keeper only.  

Then Third when you have players & formations sort the team on the squad page and look at their abilities like speed, passing, strength etc. If you have a strong fast players perhaps a pressing game will suit you. If you have a strong slow players that can't pass then a long ball game. There are endless things in between.

Finally perhaps is adjusting the tactic and knowing the cost of those changes. For example, PASS INTO SPACE simply means in FM your team will have less of the ball so you need the players with pace and the work rate to beat the other team. Also, remember the more of these adjustments in your tactics the more effort your players need to put in. I try to remove as many as possible, but I'm a bit odd because I also like to set timewaster halfway :-)

Hope that helps, perhaps not but remember whatever you do, you are not doing it wrong. The is no wrong with FM just useless players :-)

I used guidetofm website to determine which style would best suit my players and the conclusion I came to was attacking direct football in possession and aggressive defending out of possession. If I upload the player comparison pages maybe might help with my current squad. 

[Delicate Dave]

22 hours ago, warlock said:

But that isn't true. You can have them on support and still tell them to cross from the byline, if that's what you want.

For any given cat, there's a hundred ways to skin it in FM.

Tis true but not in my experience.

[Cloud9]

55 minutes ago, Delicate Dave said:

Tis true but not in my experience.

Perhaps what you're experiencing is that a WB(s) has reduced mentality to a WB(a).

Attack roles are a good way of indicating to players who you want to surge forward when possession is won back. However, what @warlock is saying is correct...it is all down to the play style you want to achieve. Utilizing support roles can help you achieve a more even buildup phase of play   

6 hours ago, TheFalseNine said:

Thank you for your response and advice. I think you are right when you say it's best to learn from other people. There was a thread about defending in a 442 that I liked and have chosen that as my base. I'm actually playing a 424 so it's not exactly a 442 but I have taken inspiration from that thread. To make it realistic as possible I want to stick to the club vision. One of those is to be defensively solid so that matches the style I am going for. 

The tactics manual has really helped so thank you for linking that. I've won things on previous FM's but this year has gotten the better of me. I am currently managing Man U and have finished 4th, 2nd and 4th. Currently in 4th season and the only things I have won are the community shield twice and one FA cup 

That sounds like a great starting point  Learning with good players is an excellent way to do it. That way if things aren't working you know it's the tactical setup itself and not the personnel. 

One thing I would remember when watching how roles play is that a player uses all his attributes to execute the role (not just the highlighted). The profile of player you put in the role is just as important as the role itself when figuring out your tactical setup. 

If you're struggling to get things to work I would start with your striker profile and figure out how you'll get him into positions to score goals. The physical profile is particularly of note of a striker. That's usually the first thing I do when I take over a club and look at how I'm going to set up a tactic to fit the squad. 

[Delicate Dave]

9 hours ago, Cloud9 said:

Perhaps what you're experiencing is that a WB(s) has reduced mentality to a WB(a).

Attack roles are a good way of indicating to players who you want to surge forward when possession is won back. However, what @warlock is saying is correct...it is all down to the play style you want to achieve. Utilizing support roles can help you achieve a more even buildup phase of play   

 

I guess I better expand on what I mean by not in my experience.

WB on ATTACK is not the same as WB with the instruction to get to the byline before crossing - well it is but a hell of a lot depends on the quality of the player.

When you play a player in a position & role you are also training them. So if you have WB on SUPPORT he should, depending on his potential, get better as a WB on SUPPORT - I think we all understand that. BUT ! This does not happen with instructions - They are on a match-by-match basis. So your WB on support is training to cross when suitable but mainly pass diagonally and be more defense-minded. Then on matchday, you are asking them to do something different. What does this mean?  if the player already has attributes to do that job you are ok but if they don't all you'll end up with is a less productive player.

BTW I wasn't saying it wouldn't help in general, I'm just saying if you want crosses from the byline SUPPORT is not the way to go in my experience. But it all depends on what levels you play at, I tend to play lower leagues where matchday instruction are very risky because players are very unlikely to be good at more than one or two things. Another example is putting a CB who is slow with low anticipation & positioning on STOPPER OR COVER it just causes problems.

[Cloud9]

6 hours ago, Delicate Dave said:

When you play a player in a position & role you are also training them. So if you have WB on SUPPORT he should, depending on his potential, get better as a WB on SUPPORT - I think we all understand that. BUT ! This does not happen with instructions - They are on a match-by-match basis. So your WB on support is training to cross when suitable but mainly pass diagonally and be more defense-minded. Then on matchday, you are asking them to do something different. What does this mean?  if the player already has attributes to do that job you are ok but if they don't all you'll end up with is a less productive player.

This is not really how the game works and would be especially unhelpful for a newer player.

Tactical familiarity is important but role suitability as recommended by the game is just a guideline. You are not going to hamper the development or effectiveness of your players by playing them as a WB(s). Here are factors to consider if you'd like to micromanage the training on a player:

1. Training schedules, click individual schedules to see which unit will train which attributes.

2. Training unit the player is put in, you could put an aggressive wingback in the attacking unit to focus on his development going forward (working on his crossing for example). 

3. Individualized training.

You can train them on whatever role or attribute you'd like them to develop attributes toward. For example, you might train a midfielder as a BWM to work on his aggression, tackling etc. which are more difficult to train...even though he will play as MEZ. 

Note that the green circles indicate their ability to play a position, such as DR. A player adept at playing DR can play any role in that position just fine (given he has the attributes you want to do so). 

Utilizing PIs is a great addition to any tactic and shouldn't be avoided due to concerns over role suitability or development. You won't have less productive players on the match day by using them either. 

6 hours ago, Delicate Dave said:

 But it all depends on what levels you play at, I tend to play lower leagues where matchday instruction are very risky because players are very unlikely to be good at more than one or two things. 

The opposite is again true. If the players are only good at one or two things utilizing PIs over TIs has an increased importance as you can work around your players deficiencies. 

It sounds like a WB(a) suits your individual tactic well, but that doesn't mean others should avoid utilizing a WB(s) with "get to the byline" in theirs. 

Edited June 30 by Cloud9

[Delicate Dave]

2 hours ago, Cloud9 said:

This is not really how the game works and would be especially unhelpful for a newer player.

Tactical familiarity is important but role suitability as recommended by the game is just a guideline. You are not going to hamper the development or effectiveness of your players by playing them as a WB(s). Here are factors to consider if you'd like to micromanage the training on a player:

1. Training schedules, click individual schedules to see which unit will train which attributes.

2. Training unit the player is put in, you could put an aggressive wingback in the attacking unit to focus on his development going forward (working on his crossing for example). 

3. Individualized training.

You can train them on whatever role or attribute you'd like them to develop attributes toward. For example, you might train a midfielder as a BWM to work on his aggression, tackling etc. which are more difficult to train...even though he will play as MEZ. 

Note that the green circles indicate their ability to play a position, such as DR. A player adept at playing DR can play any role in that position just fine (given he has the attributes you want to do so). 

Utilizing PIs is a great addition to any tactic and shouldn't be avoided due to concerns over role suitability or development. You won't have less productive players on the match day by using them either. 

The opposite is again true. If the players are only good at one or two things utilizing PIs over TIs has an increased importance as you can work around your players deficiencies. 

It sounds like a WB(a) suits your individual tactic well, but that doesn't mean others should avoid utilizing a WB(s) with "get to the byline" in theirs. 

We'll have to agree to disagree and as I said from the start IN MY EXPERIENCE putting WB on SUPPORT and enabling Cross from byline creates more problems.  I mean you wouldn't want your keeper to go up for corners all the time but if the was a setting for that someone would say it's fine to do. I maintain these settings are risky because they often contradict the roles your player plays best at and trains at. They are meant to be used on a game-by-game basis to take advantage of weaknesses in teams. Surely you can see that.

Edited June 30 by Delicate Dave

[Cloud9]

2 hours ago, Delicate Dave said:

We'll have to agree to disagree and as I said from the start IN MY EXPERIENCE putting WB on SUPPORT and enabling Cross from byline creates more problems.  I mean you wouldn't want your keeper to go up for corners all the time but if the was a setting for that someone would say it's fine to do. I maintain these settings are risky because they often contradict the roles your player plays best at and trains at. They are meant to be used on a game-by-game basis to take advantage of weaknesses in teams. Surely you can see that.

This is a post by a player asking how to learn the game so in this case I will be clear:

• This is not a subjective issue: what you are saying is not reflective of how the game works. 

2 hours ago, Delicate Dave said:

I maintain these settings are risky because they often contradict the roles your player plays best at and trains at

They are meant to be used on a game-by-game basis to take advantage of weaknesses in teams.

These statements are simply not true.

PIs are not meant to be used in any specific way, as @warlock has tried to explain to you above. For instance I use a fairly blank TI slate and then go into the PIs of each player to create my systems of play, these are just as ingrained into the tactic as the TIs are. 

A player will use all of the attributes in his profile to execute the role, not just the highlighted ones. I think this misunderstanding is a core issue in what you're saying. A roles performance is dependent on the tactic and roles around him and highlighted attributes don't take into account if you're playing high up the pitch or in a low block etc. 

• Therefore the attributes that are important for the role are often not the ones the game suggests...but the ones that fit your style of play. You can develop a player to fit your style of play as I have detailed above, but this idea of training in an optimal role only is fundamentally flawed and again misleading. 
• As I already mentioned above, playing a wingback(s) actually has decreased risk compared to a wingback(a)...as it has a reduced mentality. A lower mentality will directly impact the amount of risks a player takes. Similarly a PI like pass it shorter on a technically lacking wingback will again reduce risk by instructing him to lay the ball off short, not increase it.

When you're constructing your TIs and PIs you're impacting the tendency of your players to do something on the pitch. There is no other magic to it than that. 

A wingback + PIs that work or don't work for your system are entirely dependent to your system alone. 

Edited June 30 by Cloud9

[Delicate Dave]

45 minutes ago, Cloud9 said:

This is a post by a player asking how to learn the game so in this case I will be clear:

• This is not a subjective issue: what you are saying is not reflective of how the game works. 

These statements are simply not true.

PIs are not meant to be used in any specific way, as @warlock has tried to explain to you above. For instance I use a fairly blank TI slate and then go into the PIs of each player to create my systems of play, these are just as ingrained into the tactic as the TIs are. 

A player will use all of the attributes in his profile to execute the role, not just the highlighted ones. I think this misunderstanding is a core issue in what you're saying. A roles performance is dependent on the tactic and roles around him and highlighted attributes don't take into account if you're playing high up the pitch or in a low block etc. 

• Therefore the attributes that are important for the role are often not the ones the game suggests...but the ones that fit your style of play. You can develop a player to fit your style of play as I have detailed above, but this idea of training in an optimal role only is fundamentally flawed and again misleading. 
• As I already mentioned above, playing a wingback(s) actually has decreased risk compared to a wingback(a)...as it has a reduced mentality. A lower mentality will directly impact the amount of risks a player takes. Similarly a PI like pass it shorter on a technically lacking wingback will again reduce risk by instructing him to lay the ball off short, not increase it.

When you're constructing your TIs and PIs you're impacting the tendency of your players to do something on the pitch. There is no other magic to it than that. 

A wingback + PIs that work or don't work for your system are entirely dependent to your system alone. 

With respect, I don't claim to know how FM works,  unlike you, but I do know how computer code works and how databases work so I stand by what I said. If that puts me on the naughty step fair enough, I was just contributing my own experience, I won't bother again as I'm wrong on so many things.

[Cloud9]

34 minutes ago, Delicate Dave said:

With respect, I don't claim to know how FM works,  unlike you, but I do know how computer code works and how databases work so I stand by what I said. If that puts me on the naughty step fair enough, I was just contributing my own experience, I won't bother again as I'm wrong on so many things.

I'm not sure what the coding has to do with anything but everyone has a right to share the opinions on the forum  I am not trying to have a go at you here, but to simply clarify the issues in the above statements. 

Your experiences are important too, but it's also important to listen and not to speak in absolutes when you don't know yourself. It's very different to say, "I have a hard time getting a wingback(s) w/get to the byline in the PIs to work compared to a Wingback(a)" as to say "Wingback(s) with get to the byline is bad." There are so many factors that if you post your tactic in full we could probably diagnosis why that's happening to you, but w/out additional info it's very difficult to say.

The tactical interface is opaque and not very user friendly which is not your fault, again I wouldn't have been so clear cut about it if it was not a topic where a newer player was specifically trying to learn. 

[Delicate Dave]

12 hours ago, Cloud9 said:

I'm not sure what the coding has to do with anything but everyone has a right to share the opinions on the forum  I am not trying to have a go at you here, but to simply clarify the issues in the above statements. 

Your experiences are important too, but it's also important to listen and not to speak in absolutes when you don't know yourself. It's very different to say, "I have a hard time getting a wingback(s) w/get to the byline in the PIs to work compared to a Wingback(a)" as to say "Wingback(s) with get to the byline is bad." There are so many factors that if you post your tactic in full we could probably diagnosis why that's happening to you, but w/out additional info it's very difficult to say.

The tactical interface is opaque and not very user friendly which is not your fault, again I wouldn't have been so clear cut about it if it was not a topic where a newer player was specifically trying to learn. 

This, as far as I understand it, is a peer-to-peer thread. As such no one reading it should think anything other than the poster is relaying their own experiences. But I have to say, you having a go at me is a bit rich. I posted and it was you who came to me to tell me I was wrong in absolutes, you didn't say anything like "Well that is not what I see". you said;

"This is a post by a player asking how to learn the game so in this case I will be clear:

This is not a subjective issue: what you are saying is not reflective of how the game works."

And 

"These statements are simply not true."

And

"When you're constructing your TIs and PIs you're impacting the tendency of your players to do something on the pitch. There is no other magic to it than that. "

It's bad enough being dyslexic using forums (with all the spelling police in them) so if I also have to conform to censorship I won't bother. Have a great life and enjoy the game chap.

[2feet]

In all honesty I don’t think it’s really possible to learn how to make tactics through the game alone.

ive played a few years and still my knowledge is pretty minimal, the game doesn’t really guide or help you.

you look at your team comparison and work out what your players are good at and bad at. You pick a custom formation based off that.

It works for a while, it stops working, you don’t really know why, you try to change get things, you don’t really get anywhere, so you try to use data hub to find out what’s going wrong but it’s just a mass of information and you don’t know what to do about identified data showing where your team is poor.

There is no conclusion from the data eg we see this pattern A is bad, therefore you should do these changes B to address it.

its very much like: ok my shot taking is not accurate but… how can I fix it?

no idea

there are tons of options on the team instructions but it’s not clear or understandable how they relate to the data hub results and which team instruction changes would improve the data hub results 

Eventually you steady the ship but maintain a mediocre run of results.

Therefore you are left to resort to thr randomness of forums to find answers there, but there’s a limit to what people can advise because they can’t see all your players

So its a frustrating game that seems a bit poorly designed, hopefully the new version will improve this kind of experience

Edited July 13 by 2feet

[crusadertsar]

2 hours ago, 2feet said:

In all honesty I don’t think it’s really possible to learn how to make tactics through the game alone.

ive played a few years and still my knowledge is pretty minimal, the game doesn’t really guide or help you.

you look at your team comparison and work out what your players are good at and bad at. You pick a custom formation based off that.

It works for a while, it stops working, you don’t really know why, you try to change get things, you don’t really get anywhere, so you try to use data hub to find out what’s going wrong but it’s just a mass of information and you don’t know what to do about identified data showing where your team is poor.

There is no conclusion from the data eg we see this pattern A is bad, therefore you should do these changes B to address it.

its very much like: ok my shot taking is not accurate but… how can I fix it?

no idea

there are tons of options on the team instructions but it’s not clear or understandable how they relate to the data hub results and which team instruction changes would improve the data hub results 

Eventually you steady the ship but maintain a mediocre run of results.

Therefore you are left to resort to thr randomness of forums to find answers there, but there’s a limit to what people can advise because they can’t see all your players

So its a frustrating game that seems a bit poorly designed, hopefully the new version will improve this kind of experience

It's also a game simulation of a team sport, and not something like chess. As in a sport where even in real life, with no matter how much statistic analysis you get, you can never predict results surely. Otherwise football wouldn't be much fun to watch, now would it?

Edited July 13 by crusadertsar

[Cloud9]

8 hours ago, 2feet said:

There is no conclusion from the data eg we see this pattern A is bad, therefore you should do these changes B to address it.

its very much like: ok my shot taking is not accurate but… how can I fix it?

The data hub's way of showing numbers isn't the best (ie. it doesn't give raw statistics but percentiles). I would look at the underlying numbers of individual players instead in their profile, where you can see how they're actually performing for you. In this way it's a poor reflection of how data is actually used IRL.

Just keeping things really simple should help you. It sounds like you're getting overwhelmed by what is an intentionally ambiguous UI. This is a design decision by SI. A lot of games are just "figured out" through data mining and stuff like this, the ambiguity can be nice as well. 

Focus on how roles work, run a fairly blank TI slate and go from there. Building an understanding of how roles move alone should be enough for you to make effective changes to how your team plays. 

Edited July 13 by Cloud9

[2feet]

Thanks

One of my dilemmas when trying to make a good tactic is:

1) the player roles should function together cohesively and complement eachother

versus

2) give your best players their best roles, so maybe 6 of the roles in your tactic should be those that your best players are strongest in

 

If Im a championship team like hull, and my three best players are Liam Delap (Pressing forward), Tyler Morton (DeepL Playm), and Carvalho (Inside Forward), then the tactic I create should have those three roles in them. Right?

But what if the best tactic would mean I should amend Carvalhos Inside Forward role to Inverted winger? Despite him not being as good at that role?

And besides all that, how do I practise and work out a good tactic? Just play a season and keep adjusting team instructions and roles until you luck across something that seems to work?

Edited July 15 by 2feet

[crusadertsar]

6 hours ago, 2feet said:

1) the player roles should function together cohesively and complement eachother

versus

2) give your best players their best roles, so maybe 6 of the roles in your tactic should be those that your best players are strongest in

 

If Im a championship team like hull, and my three best players are Liam Delap (Pressing forward), Tyler Morton (DeepL Playm), and Carvalho (Inside Forward), then the tactic I create should have those three roles in them. Right?

But what if the best tactic would mean I should amend Carvalhos Inside Forward role to Inverted winger? Despite him not being as good at that role?

And besides all that, how do I practise and work out a good tactic? Just play a season and keep adjusting team instructions and roles until you luck across something that seems to work?

NEVER never do this. It's not a good practice when making tactics. Your role choices should only be dictated by what make sense for the tactic you are trying to create. The only exception being if you are trying to build a tactic around your best player or two. Then I would look at their clear best roles. Like if the player is clearly an amazing Poacher or Targetman (based on his attributes NOT what the game suggests), ect then the tactic could be build around your star, provided your other players would suit this tactic. It's not very practical to build a Targetman tactic in a team that has no good crossers on the wings. BUT you should never just look at what game suggests as the top roles for your players and just plomp the roles down into tactic like that. Sometimes the games makes some weird suggestion based on attribute combinations, ect. The number of times I have seen the game think that my player would be amazing Deeplying Playmaker only because a few of key attributes (like Balance, ect) are high while the Passing (essential for a playmaker) was very poor. It's a bit like listening to your Assistant for tactical advise (also, should never be done).

What you should do when creating tactics is to study the attributes and player traits for each of your First Team players and based on what you see try to figure out what roles and tactics they would be suitable for. Example: I have a couple of fast wingers who can also dribble and have a trait to cut inside, and my striker is of the False 9 mold. Oh okay maybe a classic 433 would work, provided my fullbacks are not half-bad. So hopefully you get the idea. 

Edited July 16 by crusadertsar

[kopfan1977]

On 15/07/2024 at 18:53, 2feet said:

Thanks

One of my dilemmas when trying to make a good tactic is:

1) the player roles should function together cohesively and complement eachother

versus

2) give your best players their best roles, so maybe 6 of the roles in your tactic should be those that your best players are strongest in

 

If Im a championship team like hull, and my three best players are Liam Delap (Pressing forward), Tyler Morton (DeepL Playm), and Carvalho (Inside Forward), then the tactic I create should have those three roles in them. Right?

But what if the best tactic would mean I should amend Carvalhos Inside Forward role to Inverted winger? Despite him not being as good at that role?

And besides all that, how do I practise and work out a good tactic? Just play a season and keep adjusting team instructions and roles until you luck across something that seems to work?

 

On 15/07/2024 at 19:38, crusadertsar said:

NEVER never do this. It's not a good practice when making tactics. Your role choices should only be dictated by what make sense for the tactic you are trying to create. The only exception being if you are trying to build a tactic around your best player or two. Then I would look at their clear best roles. Like if the player is clearly an amazing Poacher or Targetman (based on his attributes NOT what the game suggests), ect then the tactic could be build around your star, provided your other players would suit this tactic. It's not very practical to build a Targetman tactic in a team that has no good crossers on the wings. BUT you should never just look at what game suggests as the top roles for your players and just plomp the roles down into tactic like that. Sometimes the games makes some weird suggestion based on attribute combinations, ect. The number of times I have seen the game think that my player would be amazing Deeplying Playmaker only because a few of key attributes (like Balance, ect) are high while the Passing (essential for a playmaker) was very poor. It's a bit like listening to your Assistant for tactical advise (also, should never be done).

What you should do when creating tactics is to study the attributes and player traits for each of your First Team players and based on what you see try to figure out what roles and tactics they would be suitable for. Example: I have a couple of fast wingers who can also dribble and have a trait to cut inside, and my striker is of the False 9 mold. Oh okay maybe a classic 433 would work, provided my fullbacks are not half-bad. So hopefully you get the idea. 

 

I was middle of a minor slump, Players that were previously banging in goals, providing assists, defending well etc suddenly became a team of Harry Maguires.

I used the option after setting up a formation to choose player roles for that tactic, then provided it with some basic instructions. Worked well enough to get my players out of their mini slump. Quite whether it would be sufficient enough over the course of a season, I've no idea. But can't see why it wouldn't work.

[crusadertsar]

9 minutes ago, kopfan1977 said:

 

 

I was middle of a minor slump, Players that were previously banging in goals, providing assists, defending well etc suddenly became a team of Harry Maguires.

I used the option after setting up a formation to choose player roles for that tactic, then provided it with some basic instructions. Worked well enough to get my players out of their mini slump. Quite whether it would be sufficient enough over the course of a season, I've no idea. But can't see why it wouldn't work.

Roles are only as good as how they interact with each other so selecting roles in this way is not the way to create a good tactic. It might work if you have good players. Like playing with a strong team after a while you will just be able to win based on how much stronger they are compared to the opposition, irrespective of roles. 

Edited July 20 by crusadertsar

[Delicate Dave]

On 20/07/2024 at 15:00, kopfan1977 said:

 

 

I was middle of a minor slump, Players that were previously banging in goals, providing assists, defending well etc suddenly became a team of Harry Maguires.

I used the option after setting up a formation to choose player roles for that tactic, then provided it with some basic instructions. Worked well enough to get my players out of their mini slump. Quite whether it would be sufficient enough over the course of a season, I've no idea. But can't see why it wouldn't work.

In FM24, I'V FOUND - If the players go off the boil it's down to a mental or fitness issue. I would check their happy, check the fitness level esp matches. Failing that look at the indi training - take them off that. Insert game reviews ect into training. On top of that you can discuss with the players, praise them when you can. I've even resorted to putting a player on the transfer list and hoping they moan about it so I can tell them I'll take them off it and they get happy. The last thing I would change is the tatics unless I changed the players. Other things you could do is send them out on loan or holiday or train them in another position and accept that they have reached their potential.

[crusadertsar]

@Delicate Dave Exactly this! I found that in FM24, even more than in previous versions, maintaining high morale and regular rotation is half the battle. It's a lot to micromanage but absolutely essential if you want to be successful. 

Edited July 24 by crusadertsar

[Delicate Dave]

1 hour ago, crusadertsar said:

@Delicate Dave Exactly this! I found that in FM24, even more than in previous versions, maintaining high morale and regular rotation is half the battle. It's a lot to micromanage but absolutely essential if you want to be successful. 

I think SI only get away with it because most buyers play the top teams and are able to buy their way out of trouble. I don't want the game to be easy, these things should be part of the mager experiance but SI need to give managers the tools to deal with far more of them and far fewer of them should have such an effect on the team performance. As for the rotation, FM seem to be in some sort of world where players can't play more than 60 mins a week. That too is nonsense, I can't see any of them teams who won european titles in the 1970-80 ever winning anything in FMworld, can you image using 16 players in a season of 60 games.

[crusadertsar]

3 hours ago, Delicate Dave said:

I think SI only get away with it because most buyers play the top teams and are able to buy their way out of trouble. I don't want the game to be easy, these things should be part of the mager experiance but SI need to give managers the tools to deal with far more of them and far fewer of them should have such an effect on the team performance. As for the rotation, FM seem to be in some sort of world where players can't play more than 60 mins a week. That too is nonsense, I can't see any of them teams who won european titles in the 1970-80 ever winning anything in FMworld, can you image using 16 players in a season of 60 games.

I disagree. Actually I find that rotation system is modeled very well. Especially in respect to preventing injuries. The way it works really encourages you to have a full squad of at least 24 players. Exactly you can't win anything with 16 players. Injuries will start adding up. Especially when involved in both domestic and continental competitions. But most people who play FM "save scumm" like crazy when injuries happen or when "certain" results happen. If anything I find injuries not punishing enough and not as bad as in real world. And morale system is also essential and modeled realistically. You won't be winning any titles when players are not happy playing together or hate the manager. It might be "gamey" the way it's done in FM but I would like to see you think of a better system to model the effect of morale in the game. It's far from negligible in real life football. Just look how psychologists have become regular staff at most clubs these days. 

Edited July 24 by crusadertsar

[Delicate Dave]

2 hours ago, crusadertsar said:

I disagree. Actually I find that rotation system is modeled very well. Especially in respect to preventing injuries. The way it works really encourages you to have a full squad of at least 24 players. Exactly you can't win anything with 16 players. Injuries will start adding up. Especially when in involved in both domestic and continental competitions. But most people who play FM "save scumm" like crazy when injuries happen or when "certain" results happen. If anything I find injuries not punishing enough and not as bad as in real world. And morale system is also essential and modeled realistically. You won't be winning any titles when players are not happy playing together or hate the manager. It might be "gamey" the way it's done in FM but I would like to see you think of a better system to model the effect of moral in the game. It's far from negligible in real life football. Just look how psychologists have become regular staff at most clubs these days. 

What I'm saying is the basic fitness system is all wrong. There may not be a player in the whole football league who can't play 90 mins without getting injured. In FM25 you can't play 2 games in inside 7 day without at least one or more likely 5 or 6 getting injured and they have to come off the pitch. That just does not reflect true life. Most players could play every day of the week and not get injured, yes they would get tired and they that would be reflected in their performances but not very likely to get injured. And BTW in real life if a manager doesn't have another full back on the bench the one playing isn't knacked after 50 mins as in FM25. Have you notice the first to get tired is always they one you can't replace with a sub? :-)

I don't care how many injuries or how bonkers the players get, I can cope if the are tools to help. In FM25 you know the is no answer so often and that spoils the game.

[Cloud9]

9 hours ago, Delicate Dave said:

There may not be a player in the whole football league who can't play 90 mins without getting injured. In FM25 you can't play 2 games in inside 7 day without at least one or more likely 5 or 6 getting injured and they have to come off the pitch.

I think this is down to how you are managing the squad. You can add injury risk, match load, and fatigue to start rotating properly. Good physios and sports scientists go a long way as well. Tailoring a specific training schedule for your two match days in a week is important as well. I usually continue training as normal the day after the game but give a rest day to any player who received a rating.

I believe the general consensus is that injury rates are far below what would be realistic and what is seen IRL.

Edited July 25 by Cloud9

[felley]

5 hours ago, Cloud9 said:

I think this is down to how you are managing the squad. You can add injury risk, match load, and fatigue to start rotating properly. Good physios and sports scientists go a long way as well. Tailoring a specific training schedule for your two match days in a week is important as well. I usually continue training as normal the day after the game but give a rest day to any player who received a rating.

I believe the general consensus is that injury rates are far below what would be realistic and what is seen IRL.

This is so important. In my experience, I get many more injuries in lower leagues where the Physios + Sports Scientists are either non-existant or not particularly good. In a recent Sevilla save I had multiple Physios and Sports Scientists with 19/20 in their respective stats, rotated anyone who's match load went beyond "Medium" and barely had any injuries to contend with. I'm also a big fan of keeping all physical work in training to pre-season and the winter break (if there is one). Once you load your players up in training and you've got 2-3 fixtures a week, you're sitting on a time bomb in my experience. In the period January-May, if I'm chasing multiple trophies or at least still in multiple competitions, my training will be reduced to tactical work and set pieces. Your job as a manager in that phase is getting your team over the line so fitness, rotation, set pieces etc. become much more important. I've lost count of the amount of times I've rotated for a fixture against a lesser team and won 1-0 from a corner, only to put my first 11 out against a top team 3 days later and blitz them 4-1 because our players are fit as a fiddle. 

IMO SI have actually done a great job at modelling injuries but making it gamey enough that you can manage them in a way that is actually quite unrealistic. So you get to mostly keep your star players available if you just want to blitz through seasons without much thought.

[Delicate Dave]

8 hours ago, Cloud9 said:

I think this is down to how you are managing the squad. You can add injury risk, match load, and fatigue to start rotating properly. Good physios and sports scientists go a long way as well. Tailoring a specific training schedule for your two match days in a week is important as well. I usually continue training as normal the day after the game but give a rest day to any player who received a rating.

I believe the general consensus is that injury rates are far below what would be realistic and what is seen IRL.

I think maybe long term injury rate are lower than IRL but for me match fitness is all over the place. As I say, IRL I've never seen players get injured if theyplay too often, of course it happens but in FM24 it's all of them. I see no reason why the game can't allow playing the same team game after game and the players performace levels drop, no need for them to fall down injured. I mean if you have 4 game and each game is 5 days apart it's not possible to play the same team and get the same performance levels in in FM24. IRL the games could be 3 days apart and performace levels would be the same for almost all the players.

But injuries are an odd thing in FM24, anyone else notice that when young players are out with a injury for a few weeks they come back better? The seem to put on a "progress" growth.

[Cloud9]

8 hours ago, Delicate Dave said:

As I say, IRL I've never seen players get injured if theyplay too often, of course it happens but in FM24 it's all of them.

Newcastle had 41 separate cases of injury this past season, Man United 45. 

Here's an article that details the level of injuries taking place IRL: https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/articles/cq55wy2qx21o

Edited July 25 by Cloud9

[crusadertsar]

There are are also numerous cases of players playing through minor injuries that we don't even hear about. I guess sort of like in-game equivalent of injection option. 

[Delicate Dave]

1 hour ago, crusadertsar said:

There are are also numerous cases of players playing through minor injuries that we don't even hear about. I guess sort of like in-game equivalent of injection option. 

YES ! that's point I'm making, playing though injuries. Try and do it in FM24.
 

[crusadertsar]

7 minutes ago, Delicate Dave said:

YES ! that's point I'm making, playing though injuries. Try and do it in FM24.
 

Yes except you can do it in FM24 already so I don't get your point. I use players with light "orange" injuries all the time as long as their fitness is in the 90s, but that's what i would do with any uninjured player anyway. Never play anyone with fitness below 90.

Edited July 25 by crusadertsar

[jcafcwbb]

I have found using the Preset tactic (the ones that comes with the game) that suits your team and then using formation, mentality and player duties/roles to tweak works well. You really do not need to adjust the Instructions.

For my Man Utd save I use Control Possession and use the 4-2-3-1. At home I go positive with supporting DMs and away balanced with defensive DMs against the big teams. Against Bournemouth at home they played the Wing tactic and was causing me problems and getting most of the highlights until I adjusted my full backs to Def then I dominated. This is how little you need to tweak to adjust things.

For my AFC Wimbledon save I got promoted to the Championship and was predicted to finish 24th. I used Fluid Counter Attack in the 4-3-3 (2 DM) system. I veer between Balanced and Cautious and in tough away matches substitute the BBM to a BWM. With 2 to games to go I am 17th and have confirmed another season in the Championship despite having the weakest squad in the division.

Using the preset ones and adding the challenge not to adjust them has forced me to really think about formation and mentality.

[Hilly1979]

29 minutes ago, jcafcwbb said:

I have found using the Preset tactic (the ones that comes with the game) that suits your team and then using formation, mentality and player duties/roles to tweak works well. You really do not need to adjust the Instructions.

For my Man Utd save I use Control Possession and use the 4-2-3-1. At home I go positive with supporting DMs and away balanced with defensive DMs against the big teams. Against Bournemouth at home they played the Wing tactic and was causing me problems and getting most of the highlights until I adjusted my full backs to Def then I dominated. This is how little you need to tweak to adjust things.

For my AFC Wimbledon save I got promoted to the Championship and was predicted to finish 24th. I used Fluid Counter Attack in the 4-3-3 (2 DM) system. I veer between Balanced and Cautious and in tough away matches substitute the BBM to a BWM. With 2 to games to go I am 17th and have confirmed another season in the Championship despite having the weakest squad in the division.

Using the preset ones and adding the challenge not to adjust them has forced me to really think about formation and mentality.

You are adjusting them though, if you’re changing mentality you are adjusting them quite a lot 

Edited July 28 by Hilly1979
Spelling

[jcafcwbb]

6 minutes ago, Hilly1979 said:

You are adjusting them though, if you’re changing mentality you are adjusting them quite a lot 

You are right on that. I guess what it does do it to stop the uneducated meddling on the instructions screen which can sometimes makes things worse. I speak from knowledge in frantically adjusting this or that with no benefit where just changing from balanced to positive, for example can change things for the better. It has more structure.

Edited July 28 by jcafcwbb
grammar