facman
-
Posts
518 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Forums
Articles
FAQs
Online Manual
Support: Blocks
Support: Games
Bug Tracker
SIGames Manual (beta)
Profiles
Posts posted by facman
-
-
56 minutes ago, Mr_Demus said:
The high press and the libero, I think, was what made me not look too closely. I have never played a libero, and playing high press as a poor team is not a good idea, I think
The libero option is just a good way to get your most talented centre half to come forward more with the ball. It doesn't work properly in FM (never has), but still allows you to not have 3 centre backs sitting deep constantly. With regard to the press, there's no secret that pressing is generally better than not pressing in recent iterations of FM. Again, I would give it a go.
0 -
3 minutes ago, Mr_Demus said:
I have read that thread, but as I remember it was based around a playing style, that wasn't really for my players. But a) I didn't read all of it thoroughly b) it was a while ago, so I might have missed something
What makes you think it won’t work with your players? I have used it with Bolton in FM20 and Everton in FM21 and it worked out both times - a more disparate group of players you couldn’t get!
0 -
here’s a link to a discussion I was involved in for FM20 regarding a 5-3-2 WB formation. It’s a really good discussion that goes into decent tactical detail and might be of help. I used the formation with Everton in season 2 in European games in FM21 when I was expecting to be under the cosh and I went unbeaten with it until the semi final so it can still work in this version of the game.
The midfield three (Car-DLP-Car) are the key to the formation I’ve found, but a decent wingback can be one of your main creators. I’m not sold on using a Carrilero in a 2 man midfield as I don’t think they properly protect the wide spaces without giving up too much in the middle.
1 -
Not too dissimilar to my system with Everton and I’ve just won the EPL and got to the semis of the CL. My midfield trio are setup differently but the outcome is the same. The main changes that I would make are:
Attacking -> Positive
Drop the Underlaps and let your players make their own decisions
Drop Play through the middle
add WBIB if necessary to control the ball better in the final third
add Pass Into Space for away games and home games as underdog
edit- don’t worry too much about possession so long as the opposition don’t have too much in your 1/3 of the pitch
0 -
Sneaky Pete has given some great advice. Regarding TIs I would drop the Play Narrower and keep that as standard width. Changing width is something I do in match to react to what I’m seeing on the pitch, rather than as a permanent instruction. Also, you might not want to counterpress all the time, particularly as an underdog.
0 -
-
this is a thread from FM20 that might help. The final tactic we discussed still works well in FM21, is defensively stable and creates some nice overloads in the midfield.
0 -
4 hours ago, ThunderCelt said:
@Christopher S and @MessiMessiMessi thank you for your advice. I think you're both telling me to be more aggressive which is working, a lot of draws have become wins, and only a few have become losses so I've climbed from 6th to 4th (predicted 4th, board wants Euro qualifcation which is 5th) and my fans are also happy with the better entertainment.
@facman that looks logical thank you and I'll try it, although as its a change of roles and duties I'll wait till pre-season to experiment rather than mid way through.
I'm used to my team now and a big factor has been my lone striker who will either get a hit trick or have trouble finding a barn door, so presumably has consistency problems and needs replacing.
Glad things are working better for you. It’s not a bad idea to do major changes in the off-season, although I usually use my 3rd tactic as an experimental one that I change around during the season.
Don’t forget that morale and motivation can affect a striker’s output as much as the opposition players. Joshua King was my backup striker last season and he came into the starting 11 due to injury having gone 9 hours without a goal. Eventually after much psychological ‘bigging-up’ he got a tap-in, and then proceeded to bang in a goal in 5 consecutive games. Using the correct shout in a game can work wonders
1 -
10 hours ago, trueblue9877 said:
I thought that by adding an AP that the striker wouldn't get isolated
I think you may be misunderstanding what an Advanced Playmaker on support does. The AP(S) is hard coded to sit in the hole, collect the ball and spray passes around, not drive forward with the ball or get into the box. If you want to support the striker then you need to either go with an IF(A) or IW(A) in one of your flank roles, or change your CM(S) to be someone who gets much more adventurous in attack, such as a Mezzala or BBM.
0 -
On 06/07/2021 at 07:41, Christopher S said:
Your two attacking roles in the last third are both very direct (Advanced Forward + Winger on attack)
This is the big issue for me, espceically as you are one of the top teams in your division. My way of overcoming it would be to change the roles around on your front 4, rather than going to a more direct system. I would change the winger and lone striker to support duty, and put the AML to an Attack duty, with the AMC operating as a Shadow Striker. This would mean that the striker would drop away from the opposition centre halves, either pulling them out of position to create space for the IF(A) and SS(A) making runs into the box, or the DCs would let the striker go at which point he is in space to receive the ball.
0 -
The Sweeper Keeper with support or attack duty has "Take More Risks" hard coded in. This is a passing instruction that encourages low percentage passing and through balls. You would need to go to SK(D) or GK(D) to remove that hard coded element.
2 -
A WB(A) will look to ‘cross from the byline’, whilst a FB(S) won’t be as aggressive at crossing as a wingback. You could swap to a WB(S) and FB(A) who would both look to ‘Cross More Often’ but wouldn’t be coded to take it all the way to the byline. Adding the TI ‘Hit Early Crosses’ might also help.
0 -
53 minutes ago, wazzaflow10 said:
That's where the luck v tactical debate is difficult to pull apart imo. It appears your tactic has the ability to snuff out quality chances from opponents. I'd expect over the course of the season though some of those less valuable shots to go in as they did v Soton. After a game like that I think there's many players including myself that would look to change up a successful tactic because of a game like that. We're never quite sure what went wrong. Was it the roles/duties/formation? Did the players just have a bad game/moment? Did the other team just have an amazing day at the office?
The game takes a lot of practice and patience.
It does take practice, and I’ve been playing since CM01/02, so have quite a lot of it!
One thing I would mention is that when it comes to tactics, I don’t have ‘a tactic’. I have 3 tactical setups with different formations, roles and duties, and team instructions. These are broadly interchangeable and I will use some or all of them in a match as I watch the action unfold, depending on what I would like my team to do to either reduce the effectiveness of what the opponent is doing or to improve the effectiveness of my team. Sometimes I won’t need to change anything, but against Man U several changes in TIs were made by me after 10 minutes to directly counter what I was seeing to shore up my defence (eg reduce pressing intensity by a notch to stop my midfield from getting pulled out of position) and create counter attacking opportunities (eg Pass into Space).
As the game has developed over the years what happens in the 3D match engine more closely mirrors what happens in real games (although it isn’t perfect), allowing the player to see what is going on in real time. I firmly believe that if you can watch and analyse a real football match then you can do the same in game.
0 -
The first thing I would notice is that your tactic isn’t a 4-2-3-1, it’s a 4-4-1-1 DM. This means it’s a variant of a 4-4-2, and the 4-4-2 thrives on width and overloading the flanks. If I was trying your tactic (and I might in an upcoming FA cup game as my main striker is injured so I’m low on forwards and flush with midfielders) I would lose the ‘focus play’ and ‘narrow’ instructions, and change the DR to a WB(A) to get an overload on the right flank. I would also consider either making the passing slightly more direct or going to a higher tempo (or both).
1 -
Looks really interesting. Don’t be afraid to increase the tempo which will help to increase the attacking intent. Also, I like the idea of the Mezzala on the left; you should get some interesting interplay between him, the inverted winger and the wingback. Changing one of those three to an attack duty will help if they are congesting each other.
I often start with a complete forward with a support duty upfront, then change it to an AF(A) if I think there is space behind the defensive line to play into.
I’ll be interested to see how the preseason goes!
1 -
On 30/06/2021 at 18:40, wazzaflow10 said:
Surely bad luck to give up 2 goals on 2 shots though. It's hard to argue that Sheffield Utd are that clinical. Typical FM! But the rest of the matches he seems to be creating better opportunities than his opponents during the match. Not every goal can be a sitter. Eventually one of the lower xG's should go in for him - it's just probability.
I think one of the hard/frustrating aspects of this game is you can do everything right but so much of the game is just if you got a lucky roll of the dice that match. It often feels like as a human player that luck is not on your side. It becomes hard to separate the "I have a solid tactic that will perform well and over the course of a season there's going to be good and bad games" v the "I lost and my tactic needs a complete overhaul." Speaking as a frustrated player myself of course.
We all have matches where we wonder how we haven’t won, and where we think the AI is somehow cheating. The issue is that if you’re seeing it over and over then there’s something wrong with the way you are playing - either with tactics or team dynamics or team selection, for example. Recognising that there is a problem with ‘me’ and not the game is the first step to take in overcoming it. On the other hand, one of the biggest traps to fall into is confirmation bias, in which everything that goes against you in a match is ‘the computer cheating’.
The OP maintained that he was dominating games, then proceeded to show evidence that didn’t suggest that he was. The Sheffield Utd second goal was an aberration, but the other goal and the other matches weren’t.
I had a game against Man United earlier in the season that I won 2-0 where I’m sure the AI thought I was cheating - I mentioned it in my post above. I also drew with Southampton 2-2 at home after hitting the woodwork multiple times and missing an absolute sitter, whilst they only had about 4 shots in the match.
0 -
I'd worry that it is too conservative in attack, especially on Balanced mentality, rather than seeing too many issues with the defence. With respect to the BPD, it really depends on how good they are. If you are sitting deep and passing into space against better opposition, then having BPD can wreak havoc on the opposition, but if you are trying to keep possession two can be over the top.
The AP on a support duty has hidden instructions to sit between the lines and move laterally, playing passes rather than running with the ball, so won't get too far forward to help the attack unless he has particular PIs that get him forward. The IF combination will open up space for overlapping wingbacks, but you don't have any of those as they are on support duties. I would be tempted to change one of the IF duties to attack, and the other to an IW(S), who will still cut inside, but will also cross the ball for the AF and IF(A). That might provide a little more varied forward play for the playmaker to take advantage of.
Defensively in the middle you will have the BBM roaming around closing people down, the DM holding his position and not pressing too much, whilst the AP will be an extra body that can congest the midfield and make it harder for the opposition to play through the middle. I played with a midfield 3 in my FM20 Everton save with that combination successfully (until I changed the BBM to a Mez(S) in the third season). On the flanks your wingbacks will both look to make runs forward, so if you did make the change suggested above, you could change the fullback behind the IF(A) to a FB(S) if you wanted to keep one of your fullbacks from getting too far forward, but personally I wouldn't worry about it too much.
The thing we don't know is how good your team is compared with the rest of the league!
0 -
I ran with something like this as Bolton in FM20, with pretty good success
Here is the link to the thread where we discussed the tactical style
It's a very malleable setup, and can work with direct football to a Target Man (in place of the PF), with a deep lying playmaker in the middle with shorter passing to control possession, or as a direct counter-attacking style by adjusting one or two TIs and roles.
0 -
1 hour ago, michaeldawson75 said:
Not a massive fan of any to be honest, Rashidi is probably the best. He certainly knows how to play the game, but struggles to communicate his ideas.
Zealander is style over substance, and I sometimes find myself questioning how accurate some of his assertions are or why he made certain decisions.
I'd agree that Rashidi knows more than anyone, but moves from point to point very quickly and often at tangents - his videos are good though if you can follow them. His written work is excellent, however.
Zealand I watch less for tactics and more for the peripheral stuff - maximising transfer negotiations, scouting, morale, stuff like that. Also, his quality of video is excellent, so I also watch them for entertainment purposes.
0 -
I used a 5-3-2 with Bolton in FM20 pretty effectively which might be of use in retaining possession. Pulling back one of the AMCs into the middle will give more defensive solidity and can tend to overwhelm the opposition centre, meaning more mistakes and more turnovers for your team.
0 -
21 hours ago, Moby_Spurs said:
Thanks Facman. Looking at my tactic, which flank would you have the attacking winger on please? Do you find your attacking fullback on the opposite flank gets done in behind a lot though?
Looking at your original tactic, I would keep the left flank on support duties and change the DR to an attack duty. With an AP(A) on the left of midfield, having a DL as a WB(A) will reduce your defensive cover too much for my liking (you can see this on RateMyTactic, which is a site I use all the time... usually in work where people think I'm working on an extremely difficult issue as I frown endlessly at the computer
).
Looking at your later tactics, you don't always have to worry about the warnings and Forward Movement Scores, but you should be aware of what they are telling you. My current primary tactic (Positive 4-2-3-1) with Everton (1st season) has a low solidity score on the left (and overall) and a low support score on the right. It also tells me I am not stretching the play from central midfield. That's all fine though, because I want my 2 MCs (Allan and Doucoure) to sit deeper and be available for ball recycling, and my most creative fullback (Digne) and AML (Bernard/Iwobi as Inverted winger) play on the left. Richarlison plays as an IFA on the right, with JamRod as a Shadow Striker, both penetrating the box supporting Calvert-Lewin. So my entire gameplan is about creativity on the left and centre, and penetration in the middle and right... and I accept that there are trade-offs (particularly defensively) that I have to monitor during the match.
My secondary tactic is a Positive 4-3-3 wide, with a flat 3 man midfield, with only 2 attack duties in the team (AML is an IFA and ST is a PFA) and 3 defend duties (2 centrebacks and the MC as a BWM(D). Everyone else is on a support duty. This helps to keep the team compact, and denies space to the opposition as they attack. I have the 'Pass Into Space' and 'Counter' TIs ticked, and my PF(A) and IF(A) are always ready to pounce on the ball played over the top of the defence. I beat Man U in this manner 2-0 earlier in the season with both goals coming from long through balls after winning possession due to my compactness. That tactic, however, does get the full 5 stars from RateMyTactic!
The one final thing I would note is that changing from Balanced to Positive will massively alter how a tactic plays out on the field, as the resultant duty applied to a player is a combination of the duty you set (D/S/A) and the overall mentality... something to be aware of!
1 -
With regards to question 3, I almost always have an attack/support balance on each flank. Currently I have a similar tactic to yours (exception is that my DM is pushed up into the MC position) and I have an IFA with FBS one the right flank and an IWS and WBA on the left. I also have 2 support duties and a defend duty in the middle. Finally I’m not a huge fan of the AP role, I prefer a DLP but that’s just me
1 -
Rashidi is great, but can tend to ramble a bit in his videos, which is why they can be long
I watch Zealand's videos quite a lot and this one might be of use to you (it's for FM20 but the basic ideas are relevant)
Out of interest, how much time do you spend watching real life football and analysing the tactics during a match? The BBC runs a tactical camera view live on its website for major tournaments, and it can be fascinating to watch. In the world cup in 2018 I spent the first half of the Germany v Korea game watching the tactical camera, and it was brilliant to look at Korea's defensive organisation and the movement of the players in transition. At half time I went into the room where my workmates (all German!) were watching on the big screen, and nobody watching the normal feed had been able to pick up just how organised the Korean defence was because they weren't able to from the normal camera view.
Similarly, how many games have you ever played in FM on full match with sideline or top-down view? Many people run games on Extended or Key highlights on the Director camera and I personally find it very difficult to work out what might be going wrong from the few snippets of clips that you see in that mode. I tend to run most games on comprehensive, and if its a new tactic then on full game for the first 20 minutes, to get an idea of what is going on. If you watch on full or comprehensive, you can quickly get a feel for how the opposition is trying to play... is one of their fullbacks overloading a flank? Is there a number imbalance in the middle? etc, and can then try things to counteract that...
Example: In a game last night the opposition (Leeds) had 3 players in central midfield, and after half time had made some changes to their play and were overwhelming my 2 MCs, giving my guys no time on the ball to thread passes to the more advanced players (most balls from my central midfield were going sideways or backwards, or were being intercepted). The game was 3-2 to me, and they were starting to generate a lot of chances from the pressure they were exerting. Rather than change my formation, I decided to try to focus play down the left and right flanks, so that my possession avoided the congested areas of the pitch, and I was able to move the ball in areas they weren't covering in as much depth. I was able to reduce the pressure by retaining possession more, and even extended my lead. That was done not by having a plan B or C in advance, but by simply watching the match engine play the game on comprehensive mode, so I could see most of the play happening. I actually think the game has got to a good enough state that you can just watch the game as if it was a real match, and make changes on the fly from what you are seeing, but you must watch most of the game, and not just Key highlights, for that to work.
With regard to the Cleon article linked above, it is very good and well worth a read. I tend to group things slightly differently to him though. I look at whether or not a player is struggling, or the whole team is struggling. I'll use Team instructions first if I feel that the opposition is just getting the better of me.. such as focusing the play down the flanks in the example above... a couple of clicks and problem solved. Player struggles can be down to a number of factors, and shouts can help, as can substitutions (although I use that as the last resort rather than the first). Role and duty changes I tend not to do very often, as the effects can be unpredictable.
2 -
There could be a whole number of things going wrong, from the morale of the strikers, to the wrong people getting the chances...
Looking at your tactic it seems very lopsided, with a high amount of penetration on the right flank, and a high amount of support on the left flank, so I would imagine that the left flank is creating many of the chances, which are then falling to Nunez and Saka. Saka's composure and finishing aren't that high, however, so maybe he is fluffing some of the chances? Have you tried swapping Depay and Saka, so Saka can create for Depay?
With regard to the screenshots of the matches, there are some things I note. First, xG on its own doesn't really tell you much. You could have 100 long range shots on goal, each adding a little bit of xG to the total, but still lose 1-0 if the opposition creates one really good chance, and yet your xG might be higher than theirs. In the Sheffield Utd game, for instance, yes they got lucky with their 2nd goal, but their first goal had the 2nd highest rated xG in the entire game. All but one of your shots was rated lower than theirs. So whilst it looks like you created loads of pressure, you didn't really appear to create many cast-iron chances. I had an away game the other night against Man U (I'm Everton - 1st season) in which they had an xG of around 2 to my 1.2, but I won 0-2. My finishing was more clinical not because the game was cheating, but because the chances I created were good chances that fell to Calvert-Lewin and Richarlison, my two best finishers. Man U didn't score mostly because their shots were longer ranged efforts that Pickford could easily stop, and my defence and midfield prevented any real penetration into the box - I created the 2 best chances in that game and scored them both.
Against Leicester, if you take away the xG for your 1st goal, which was clearly an absolute sitter that your team created, the xG total for each team is broadly similar. The overall possession levels are roughly 50/50, number of shots on target are similar, and the screenshot even says that you created fewer high quality chances. I'm not sure how you consider that to be a game in which you dominated.
Against Spurs you were unlucky, creating more decent chances than they did, but without further details of who missed the chances I can only guess that they went to the wrong player, indicating the tactic needs adjusting.
Remember, xG is a statistical tool to help you analyse what might be happening in a game, not an objective representation of exactly how many goals you and the opposition will score.
1
).
At my wits end - help for tactics with Parma
in Tactics, Training & Strategies Discussion
Posted
Yes, I was referring to that post.