Different formations in attack and defence

[chrismiller1992]

It is not secret that the current iteration of the tactics screen is imperfect and  regardless of how many improvements are made it always will be. FM by necessity must lag a year or two behind the tactical innovations of managers and while I feel the current tactics setup gives you a good amount of control I would like to see one small change.

 

Many teams attack using 5 players following the positional play principles with the rest defence either operating in a 3-2 or 2-3 configuration. I feel that this side of football is currnetly very well applied using the current formation screen with a variety of combinations of roles and positions allowing us to produce fantastic attacking combinations. Where it falls down is when it comes to also providing a defensive shape. Nominally the formation shown on the tactics screen is the defensive shape and then the roles selected determine the attacking shape but limitations on which positions can use the roles makes this occasionally awkward. For example your nominal 4-3-3 shape could be made from a variety of defensive shapes: 4-4-2, 4-4-1-1, and the most natural 4-1-4-1 shifting to an attacking shape such as a 3-2-2-3 (so a 3-2 rest defence behind 2 deeper attacking players and three more advanced players currently even. I see two possible solutions to this.

1. Make it very clear to players that they are selecting a defensive shape on the main tactics screen with the roles selected determining the attacking shape then offer a separate view for attacking shape showing the expected positions of the players in attack based on your currently selected roles.

2. Add the ability to set a defensive shape in the 'Out  of Posession' tab of team instructions, as the screen alreadt shows a formation I would suggest the easiest solution would be to add a dropdown box of defensive shapes above the formation screen and give managers the ability to make smaller adjustments within that swapping players positioning within the block and allowing the defenisive shape to be altered by dragging and dropping as on the formation screen. With this option the main formation screen would be for setting a general shape and using roles to create the desired combination of attackers and rest-defence when in possession.

 

My preference would be for the second option for a couple of reasons: casual and new players want to line teams up using the formations they see on TV asking a player to set up the formation as a 4-4-2 then use roles to create an attacking shape would be asking a lot especially if the player is not a tactics nerd. The second option allows the player to set up their team in the formation they see on TV and create an attacking shape from that base. Then the defensive shape will be a secondary consideration. This should be automatically assigned for them based on their formation so that it doesn't matter if it is missed but more experienced players and tactics nerds can dive in, changing it on the fly to try and aid an attempt to counter the opponent (is their deep lying playmaker causing issues then change to a 4-4-1-1 and set one of your forward players to man-mark him or is a midfielder finding space between the midfield and defence, then a 4-1-4-1 may help). The second is also about newer players, I am very wary about impact that increasing the complexity of the tactics screen will have on new players especially, I feel the second solution induces a much lower cognitive load on them (if this is too stretched then people get overwhelmed, frustrated and will be turned off from the game - I am sure everyone can think of times this has heppened when learning something). Hiding this away in the Out of Posession tab will reduce the cognitive load and allowing it to be ignored means that a new manager can still just go into the game, select a tactic from the sidebar and start playing matches.

 

Despite my preference I think it would be nice to add the 'projected attacking shape' to the tactics screen and allowing managers to alter roles within it. This would help when trying to work out how changing the duty on a role will impact the shape (if I am creating a 2-3 rest defence with inverted wing-backs how does setting one of both to defend impact this). It would also clearly show if certain players may end up stepping on each other's toes too much from your currently selected roles. Having the ability to see this on the tactics screen rather than extrapolating from the pass and heat maps after matches would be a nice addition.

[7Mik]

I second this!

I believe that in the future, the tactics screen should evolve and offer both a simple mode with roles and tasks like it does now, as well as an advanced mode in the style of a tactical board where you can draw defensive and offensive phases, behaviors, movements, and rotations with almost total freedom.

[boey]

On 21/08/2024 at 04:43, 7Mik said:

I second this!

I believe that in the future, the tactics screen should evolve and offer both a simple mode with roles and tasks like it does now, as well as an advanced mode in the style of a tactical board where you can draw defensive and offensive phases, behaviors, movements, and rotations with almost total freedom.

I think the UI aspect of drawing such movements and behaviours wouldn't be too hard to implement? It could come in the form of a list of instructions, where you can add instructions that come like "If <action happens> by "<player/group of players", <player/group of players> does <action taken>"

An example would be "If <Ball held by> <Opposition right back>, <DR, DL, DC> <Drops off more>". This is an instruction that will instruct your backline to drop off when the opp, right back has the ball, which is inspired by the Sean Dyche Coaches' Voice interview, where he explained how they played against Liverpool (the right back being TAA).

Another example is "If <Ball held by> <Own team's right back>, <AMR> <Sits Narrower>". There could be a huge number of possibilities with this sort of implementation, allowing for different behaviours in different game states.

Of course it's still limited, but would provide a lot more creativity when dealing with specific problems