Are Some Games Simply Unwinnable?

[catafan]

Where are you getting 3/6 from? You drive me crazy!

I am not proposing that you swap your 10/25 for 3/6!

I propose that you change your tactics and create better chances. I didn't say anything about reducing the quantity of them.

I prefer to get more shots on target. I want quality and quantity. I want to shoot a lot of times and get them on target.

I prefer to put the ball in the back of the net not keep missing the goal!

10/25 and 3/6 are just two examples, don't be so emotional.

I use that example to say I prefer more SoT to less, no matter what the ratio of SoT/Shots is, because my tactic does generate good chances for those SoTs.

Given two tactics, one produces 10/25 and the other produces 3/6, and assuming that all the SoT are in equally good chances, which one do you prefer? So it is the value of SoT * Chance quality that matters, not only SoT or good quality of chance alone. Do you agree?

Will you send me the tactic you played that game against Everton with? I would like to see it.

Just the tactic file? That's no problem, could you ps me your email or some other way?

Of course it is a macro situation! Provide better chances for your strikers in better positions by being more attacking, playing with more width &etc., and you will see your striker score more goals!

I was not asking for more one-on-one chances or better positions, I am simply ask when a strike faces a goalkeep alone in a good position, what kind of instructions grant him a higher chance to beat the goalkeeper?

Cheers

[crouchaldinho]

Given two tactics, one produces 10/25 and the other produces 3/6, and assuming that all the SoT are in equally good chances, which one do you prefer?

I prefer the one that scores the goals.

No, seriously, it depends on context.

If I am a defensive team, I'm looking for a few great chances, probably on the break.

If I am an attacking team, I'm looking for lots of great chances.

What I am saying is that I would prefer a tactic that is more like 10/20 or even 10/18.

So it is the value of SoT * Chance quality that matters, not only SoT or good quality of chance alone. Do you agree?

Totally agree. You want SoT to be of high quality.

Let's turn the focus away from your attack and to your defence. You put a lot of emphasis on your attack but your defence is equally the problem here. Perhaps it is even more the problem.

Would you agree that Everton have too many of their shots on your goal?

Just the tactic file? That's no problem, could you ps me your email or some other way?

I have sent you a PM.

I was not asking for more one-on-one chances or better positions, I am simply ask when a strike faces a goalkeep alone in a good position, what kind of instructions grant him a higher chance to beat the goalkeeper?

You can't give instructions to increase his chance of scoring a goal in a given situation.

This is more a matter of player attributes like composure, finishing, decisions &etc.

What you can do is provide him with better opportunities by looking at your team tactics as a whole.

C.

[catafan]

Would you agree that Everton have too many of their shots on your goal?

I don't think 56 SoT in 20 games (2.8 per game) is too much, especially I have much more than that. I played an very offensive tactic which produces more than 15 shots and 5.8 SoT per match, it is acceptable that the opponents to have SoT less than half of mine.

You can't give instructions to increase his chance of scoring a goal in a given situation.

This is more a matter of player attributes like composure, finishing, decisions &etc.

That's why I feel confused my striker with better attributes scored less in more clearcut chances.

[crouchaldinho]

Catafan - I have received the tactic that you used in this game.

I can tell you some things about your tactic which may be causing you problems if you would like me to?

I can explain tactically why I believe this is causing a problem for you in this game.

Would you prefer me to write to you about this privately or on this thread?

C.

[catafan]

I can tell you some things about your tactic which may be causing you problems if you would like me to?

You are certainly welcome to point out the flaws in my tactic (here is ok). I would like to improve it also and listening suggestions won't hurt anything.

I can explain tactically why I believe this is causing a problem for you in this game.

How could you do that without knowing what tactic Everton used in that game?

Whether the flaws (if there are any) results in a negative ΔT in that match depends on the opponent tactic, right?

Cheers.

[crouchaldinho]

You are certainly welcome to point out the flaws in my tactic (here is ok). I would like to improve it also and listening suggestions won't hurt anything.

I will not say that your tactic is flawed, which is rude and would not necessarily be correct.

However, I will say that I think I can understand why it fails some times in certain situations.

I have found exactly what I expected to find.

How could you do that without knowing what tactic Everton used in that game?

Whether the flaws (if there are any) results in a negative ΔT in that match depends on the opponent tactic, right?

The AI isn't that advanced. It is pretty easy to predict what the AI is doing.

Everton will be playing defensive, counter-attacking football.

First of all, I look at the team instructions.

Your tactic is quite attacking in terms of mentality, which is excellent.

However, you play without much width and you play 'through the middle'.

Everton are sitting back behind the ball, staying compact and narrow. You are not spreading your play and trying to pull them out of position or get in behind them. Everything is through the middle.

Your defensive line is quite deep for an attacking team. I notice that your mentalities are split up quite a lot as well. Does your assistant ever give you warnings about gaps?

Anyway, what I see from this low defensive line and wide mentalities is that your team might not be compact enough. This is pretty much what I expected to find. Everton are taking advantage of the gaps and space. This is why they are having few shots but scoring often.

In addition to this, I notice you play very low closing down on your defenders. This will see them backing off players and giving them the time and space to shoot or make a chance.

You also play counter-attacking, which invites the opponent on to you so that you can break quickly and catch them out on the break. This is really a defensive option.

From an attacking point of view, you have very few forward runs. Both of your midfielders are on forward runs rarely. Same with your fullbacks. Only one player in the team makes forward runs often and that is your AMC. So this is probably the reason why you are not scoring often with the chances you do have. Your forwards don't have good support and the opposition are probably able to defend because you don't come forward in numbers.

You play with a lop-sided formation, which I'm not that worried about, but that means there is space down the left side to be potentially exploited. Your fullback is closing down very little and so I would be worried about this.

You have man marking for your defenders and I also wonder if Everton were playing a non-442 formation against you, which could have caused you some additional problems?

I think that it is these things that cause you a problem with your chances.

Hope some of this helps.

C.

[catafan]

I will not say that your tactic is flawed, which is rude and would not necessarily be correct.

However, I will say that I think I can understand why it fails some times in certain situations.

If it fails sometimes it does have flaws. Not rude to say that at all (especially compared to our previous bickering...)

Regarding all you have said about the problems in my tactic, one can easily find these general ideas in the game manual booklet or TT&F. But on the pitch it is the different story. Don't you have the feeling that when the M.E. is tweaked somewhere in a patch, the same tactic behaves differently although all the generally ideas of tactic setting is not changed?

First of all, in 9.3.0 player crossing from the touchline is flawed. The winger has a tendency to dribble into the box as deep as possible and not cross the ball when it is a good time to do so. (I've reported this bug. it's agreed by other guys and is under SI's review). That's why I choose "Through the middle" as focused passing with a default width.

About the mentality gap between my DCs and MCs, I compensate for it with "Never forward run" one of my MCs. And this works very well on-pitch.

If you use this tactic you will find that the positions of the two MCs and the AMC are too compact, they often congest together. Often forward run on AMC and never forward run on MCs aim to solve this problem and result in a better positioning for these three. MCs have maximum closing down which defends the opponents very well. DCs have tight man-marking and 0 closing down to make sure freezing the opponent strikers as much as possible (Everton uses traditional 442 formation, otherwise I will change the instructions).

And the blank left side, which is obviously the weak part of this tactic. I do use another tactic featuring a ML to cope with strong opponent right wingers. But for normal wingers a top-class left-back with low mentality (I tweak FB's mantality to defensive for away matches, which is different from the one you have) works very well. The AI-teams rarely beat me on the left flank, if they have chances they often achieve that through the middle killer ball.

Cheers

[crouchaldinho]

Regarding all you have said about the problems in my tactic, one can easily find these general ideas in the game manual booklet or TT&F.

Yes, they are simple ideas.

But on the pitch it is the different story. Don't you have the feeling that when the M.E. is tweaked somewhere in a patch, the same tactic behaves differently although all the generally ideas of tactic setting is not changed?

I notice sometimes things look a little different, of course.

But a good tactic does not just stop working. A logical tactic will work all of the time.

First of all, in 9.3.0 player crossing from the touchline is flawed. The winger has a tendency to dribble into the box as deep as possible and not cross the ball when it is a good time to do so. (I've reported this bug. it's agreed by other guys and is under SI's review).

I'll be honest and say that I haven't noticed this.

But why not just set your wide players to 'mixed' instead of byline? Or not cross at all and just play through balls.

The 'through the middle bit' isn't even necessarily the problem. It's the width. There is not enough width to your tactic, so you are operating in a very small area laterally. If Everton stay narrow and deep, how do you propose to draw them out and create good chances?

About the mentality gap between my DCs and MCs, I compensate for it with "Never forward run" one of my MCs. And this works very well on-pitch.

Both of your MCs are on forward runs rarely.

Mentality gaps are bad and will see your players not staying tight as a unit and compact.

MCs have maximum closing down which defends the opponents very well.

You close down heavily in the forward positions and that is part of the reason that you see so much of the ball. However, when Everton do manage to break successfully, they have all the time in the world in your half.

I make a list of the main things I am really suggesting here to help you win this kind of game:

1) More width.

2) More forward runs.

3) Make the team more compact (mentality and defensive line).

4) Push up on your opponents. Deny them any easy time and space on the ball in your half.

5) Higher closing down.

6) No counter-attack.

If you do this, then it will be harder for Everton to score goals and easier for you to break them down. You will get better statistics and, dare I say it, you will win this game.

C.

[catafan]

The 'through the middle bit' isn't even necessarily the problem. It's the width. There is not enough width to your tactic, so you are operating in a very small area laterally. If Everton stay narrow and deep, how do you propose to draw them out and create good chances?

Firstly I have only one winger and all the rest are in the middle. And that winger works worse than before due to the 9.3.0 winger bug.

So I give more balls to the middle players.

Secondly 442 has two wingers who seldom run into the middle, and my theory is to exploit this lack of man in their middle. So I put more players in the middle to beat their two MCs. Except for the match I've posted, this tactic reaches my expectation very well when playing against traditional 442. Whenever I scored, the AI often changes its formation to 451 with one DMC added subsequently.

Both of your MCs are on forward runs rarely.

Mentality gaps are bad and will see your players not staying tight as a unit and compact.

Yes both.

Mentality is not the only factor determining the positioning of a player. Rare forward run and original postition also do a job to that point. My DCs rarely have trouble to pass a ball to MCs.

1) More width.

2) More forward runs.

3) Make the team more compact (mentality and defensive line).

4) Push up on your opponents. Deny them any easy time and space on the ball in your half.

5) Higher closing down.

6) No counter-attack.

I tried (1) (2) (3) (5) before making this tactic, which has been based on a match-to-match full-process observation. I believe to these 4 points it's better to reamains as the current set unless I change the whole formation. For (4) and (6) I will give a try later. Thanks very much.

[crouchaldinho]

Well, I can see I have been helpful to a point.

I will leave it there and wish you the best for your future games away to Everton.