Fed up with positionnal play

[Delial]

Hi guys,

I might put a cat among the pigeons by saying this but I feel like the FM24 positionnal play changes sometimes (most of the times?) forces us to play as a team with the intent of having a very structured team, such as having a 3-2-5 in position...
I mean that I feel like we should be able to chose whenever we want some roles to move in order to have that kind of structure, or not. For example, what I liked about roles like Segundo Volante or B2B, is that they could start deep but break lines thanks to their ability to dribble. Same with the RPM. Now, I feel like if I want to use those roles, I can't really play a fluid system where those roaming players will sit wherever they feel they need to be on the pitch. They automatically go upfront, in the half spaces and, you can't really have a double pivot in possession if you play with a Volante, or you need to play with a Libero or an inverted wingback. 

We should be able to tick on or off if we want our team to use positionnal play, or not. I tried asking a DM(s) to dribble more and not to hold position to encourage him as make those breaking-lines runs, but they don't do it with the same velocity as a Volante in previous FM. 

Am I alone to feel this way?

[LukeSavo]

You are definitely not alone!

Everything you've said is how I've been feeling for a few months. Its great if you want to use the positional play feature but definitely needs an option turn it off if you'd like to. 

 

[Cloud9]

4 hours ago, Delial said:

Hi guys,

I might put a cat among the pigeons by saying this but I feel like the FM24 positionnal play changes sometimes (most of the times?) forces us to play as a team with the intent of having a very structured team, such as having a 3-2-5 in position...
I mean that I feel like we should be able to chose whenever we want some roles to move in order to have that kind of structure, or not. For example, what I liked about roles like Segundo Volante or B2B, is that they could start deep but break lines thanks to their ability to dribble. Same with the RPM. Now, I feel like if I want to use those roles, I can't really play a fluid system where those roaming players will sit wherever they feel they need to be on the pitch. They automatically go upfront, in the half spaces and, you can't really have a double pivot in possession if you play with a Volante, or you need to play with a Libero or an inverted wingback. 

We should be able to tick on or off if we want our team to use positionnal play, or not. I tried asking a DM(s) to dribble more and not to hold position to encourage him as make those breaking-lines runs, but they don't do it with the same velocity as a Volante in previous FM. 

Am I alone to feel this way?

I'm a fan of the Positional Play changes as it means your team can start in it's base formation out of possession and morph into a different one on the ball which is what we see teams doing IRL. I can create more interesting/dyanmic styles of play than previously with it and it provides more synergy/partnerships between roles which I think is a positive addition.

I agree that it's a system that needs work still...it remains a little overturned for the human manager and it would have been nice to have a ME patch at some point over the year to build on what is a fairly comprehensive rework to how the game plays. 

[Delial]

Il y a 17 heures, Cloud9 a dit :

I'm a fan of the Positional Play changes as it means your team can start in it's base formation out of possession and morph into a different one on the ball which is what we see teams doing IRL. I can create more interesting/dyanmic styles of play than previously with it and it provides more synergy/partnerships between roles which I think is a positive addition.

I agree that it's a system that needs work still...it remains a little overturned for the human manager and it would have been nice to have a ME patch at some point over the year to build on what is a fairly comprehensive rework to how the game plays. 

Don't get me wrong, I love what they done with the positionnal play, and the large amount of possibilities it offers. But for now, I find it way to systematic and if you don't want to play that way, it makes things more complicated with using some of the roles that are concerned by the setting. The only fun thing I found is using a RPM in the central defensive midfield slot. That way, the player moves all around the pitch but not systematically in the upper half space ahead of him. 

If you want to play a pretty simple 433, I'd probably use a B2B paired with a CM(A) in order to layered my midfield. But now, the B2B is fixed as high on the pitch as the CM(A) and I don't really get the point to have to distinct roles and above all, all the build-up responsibility is on the DM... Frustrating

[crusadertsar]

5 hours ago, Delial said:

Don't get me wrong, I love what they done with the positionnal play, and the large amount of possibilities it offers. But for now, I find it way to systematic and if you don't want to play that way, it makes things more complicated with using some of the roles that are concerned by the setting. The only fun thing I found is using a RPM in the central defensive midfield slot. That way, the player moves all around the pitch but not systematically in the upper half space ahead of him. 

If you want to play a pretty simple 433, I'd probably use a B2B paired with a CM(A) in order to layered my midfield. But now, the B2B is fixed as high on the pitch as the CM(A) and I don't really get the point to have to distinct roles and above all, all the build-up responsibility is on the DM... Frustrating

I totally understand where you are coming from. I think toggle on off for positional play features would be a fair request for those who like the way old roles behaved. But I can't agree with your second paragraph. You have to be careful when making assertions like that. I don't know how many games you watched to conclude that about BBM but that's not exactly how it behaves. When i was using 433 for the longest part of FM24, I noted my BBM players as still arriving late in area. Sure they will be more likely to get into the AMC strata during FINAL part of buildup but their movement is very different from CM(a) or Mez for example. You can still rely on them to linger longer in CM strata and make late runs into AMC strata when safe to as dictated by your team mentality.

[Delial]

il y a 44 minutes, crusadertsar a dit :

I totally understand where you are coming from. I think toggle on off for positional play features would be a fair request for those who like the way old roles behaved. But I can't agree with your second paragraph. You have to be careful when making assertions like that. I don't know how many games you watched to conclude that about BBM but that's not exactly how it behaves. When i was using 433 for the longest part of FM24, I noted my BBM players as still arriving late in area. Sure they will be more likely to get into the AMC strata during FINAL part of buildup but their movement is very different from CM(a) or Mez for example. You can still rely on them to linger longer in CM strata and make late runs into AMC strata when safe to as dictated by your team mentality.

You're right dude. As I mostly play with positive mentality, I presume that my B2B are running to the area much early that if I'd play with a lower mentality. 

[skyzekaizo]

1 hour ago, Delial said:

You're right dude. As I mostly play with positive mentality, I presume that my B2B are running to the area much early that if I'd play with a lower mentality. 

Nope, I think you're spot on about this, but the fact your BBM sits on the CM-A's horizontal line is due to 2 things, first the ME pushes the BBM to occupy the channel, and second it's because this year it's recurrent that the AI plays a high defensive line so it's actually your CM-A that sits on the BBM's horizontal line. Try to play against teams that play a lower or a standard defensive line and you'll notice that your BBM is deeper than your CM-A. The problem is that playing a high defensive line has no drawback in this ME because the number of effective through balls has been drastically reduced in this ME so you see a lot of the AI using it without impunity. Also if you play a high defensive line yourself there are chances that you're squishing the midfield by yourself.

The way to deal with it is to force the AI to use a lower defensive line, for that you need to have runners up front and you might need to tick pass into space, hit early crosses, more direct passing, higher tempo and counter press. Or you can have your defenders do the build up and adopt an IWB+IFB combo which is common to every vertical/original-tiki taka or control possession preset tactic with a back four.

[Cloud9]

36 minutes ago, skyzekaizo said:

the problem is that playing a high defensive line has no drawback in this ME

The drawback is pretty clear, you leave space in behind.

[El Payaso]

33 minutes ago, skyzekaizo said:

The problem is that playing a high defensive line has no drawback in this ME because the number of effective through balls has been drastically reduced in this ME so you see a lot of the AI using it without impunity. Also if you play a high defensive line yourself there are chances that you're squishing the midfield by yourself.

 

I don't agree on this. Through-balls are by far the most reliable source of goals for me and I'm seeing through-on-goal type of chances every game even against lower defensive lines. I also give away these type of chances quote regularly even though I play a lower line myself. 

What I see problematic with the positional play is the difficulty of having players holding their position. I would like my defensive minded wing-back and defensive midfielder to be more of a stay-at-home as I usually combine these roles with either cautious or defensive team mentality and still see them quite active going forward. Even an anchor man is at times at the edge of the opposition penalty area to end attacking moves. 

In general I see players being a bit too adventurous and taking too many risks when applying a cautious style of play. 

[Cloud9]

7 minutes ago, El Payaso said:

What I see problematic with the positional play is the difficulty of having players holding their position. I would like my defensive minded wing-back and defensive midfielder to be more of a stay-at-home as I usually combine these roles with either cautious or defensive team mentality and still see them quite active going forward.

Here are the roles that trigger a rotation in positional play (as per @Rashidi's Positional Play Explained post). You shouldn't have a problem with holding roles holding, maybe the traits on the players can be causing the issue? Similarly adding the, "stay back at all times" trait onto the player could help you get what you're looking for. 

The focus play instruction can see players advance significantly (wingback(d) for example) in that section of the pitch, which might be something else to keep an eye out for.

Rotational Shifts in position/tier

Defenders

Inverted Fullback (From FB to CD)
Inverted Wingback (From FB & WB to DM). 
Libero (From CD to DM)

Midfielders

Halfback ( From DM to CD) Even an offset HB will cause the two central defenders to go wider.
Segundo Volante (From DM to AM)
Roaming Playmaker (From DM, CM, AM)
Box to Box Midfielder (From CM to AM)
Central Midfielder Attack (From CM to AM)
Advanced Playmaker (From CM to AM)
Mezzala (From CM to AM)

Edited July 2 by Cloud9

[El Payaso]

14 minutes ago, Cloud9 said:

Here are the roles that trigger a rotation in positional play (as per @Rashidi's Positional Play Explained post). You shouldn't have a problem with holding roles holding, maybe the traits on the players can be causing the issue? Similarly adding the, "stay back at all times" trait onto the player could help you get what you're looking for. 

The focus play instruction can see players advance significantly (wingback(d) for example) in that section of the pitch, which might be something else to keep an eye out for.

Rotational Shifts in position/tier

Defenders

Inverted Fullback (From FB to CD)
Inverted Wingback (From FB & WB to DM). 
Libero (From CD to DM)

Midfielders

Halfback ( From DM to CD) Even an offset HB will cause the two central defenders to go wider.
Segundo Volante (From DM to AM)
Roaming Playmaker (From DM, CM, AM)
Box to Box Midfielder (From CM to AM)
Central Midfielder Attack (From CM to AM)
Advanced Playmaker (From CM to AM)
Mezzala (From CM to AM)

Okay, I thought it might not have anything to do with this. They are just naturally a bit too adventurous to my liking. 

I honestly haven't played a lot of attention to positional play. But it is a nice feature to see the AI at times for example changing their ring-back to a role that moves to the middle. Certainly creates a taste of something new. 

In general I feel that it is possible to play the game with fairly traditional systems and let the whole positional play flow with it's own weight. 

[Rashidi]

On 03/07/2024 at 01:34, El Payaso said:

In general I feel that it is possible to play the game with fairly traditional systems and let the whole positional play flow with it's own weight. 

Its actually pretty simple to set up tactics now that have some roles not moving as a result of positional play and others that do. I love using DMs, BWMs a DLP, and a BWM in central midfield. Each roles offers something slightly different without being encumbered with positional play either.

[Delial]

il y a 21 minutes, Rashidi a dit :

Its actually pretty simple to set up tactics now that have some roles not moving as a result of positional play and others that do. I love using DMs, BWMs a DLP, and a BWM in central midfield. Each roles offers something slightly different without being encumbered with positional play either.

Which role + PI's + traits would you recommend to have a DM who sits deep, screens the defence, strong at getting the ball back and who regularly makes runs that break the first pressing line ?