RDF Tactics

But how do you mean not setting them up to do so? Kind of ignore the tackling. That's throwing people off here (including me). It was just a stat I wasn't happy with so was looking for reasons why. The shape is the most important thing. Getting Wingers and FBs narrow off the ball is what I want at this moment. When the opposition has the ball, I want my RB, LB, RM and LM to be narrow, and packed in central areas leaving the flanks free. But when the opposition have the ball in deep areas, my two backs of 4 are spread out, covering the width of the pitch. so here we can see it perfectly. Look where my RM is. Why is he there and not in the middle? My number 92, he's already defending the wide area rather than starting central and then moving out wide. In this game I did put Lukaku as PF which he pressed more intensely of course. He harried them more but wide players left spaces in the middle. Number 90 for Hellas Verona is completely open - one reason for me is because of how wide my 92 is choosing to be

This is where we are currently at. The main reason for not posting the full system was the constant tweaking to fix the "issue". I also have no issue with the tackles and tackles won % in the majority of the systems I use (I mostly go for more intense off-the-ball systems). Especially in 4-2-3-1s I have no PIs and set no OIs (I've tried never tight marking wingers). The main issue I have is the starting positions and just general defensive positions. My wingers mark the wide areas rather than being in the middle forcing play wide. My wide players fail to be compact regardless which is what I'm trying to achieve mostly. I like how it's set up, apart from where the wingers are choosing to defend which is what I want to be changed (if possible). In the FM screenshot, Spinazzola is looking to only defend the wide area. He's not pressing towards the ball, neither is he joining the midfield to guide play wide. He's gone to mark the wingback. I will try DMs, though. I do wonder if having two players in the CM position naturally spreads out the midfield 4?

I'm sorry but how do you compare different teams within the gameworld when the difference between teams with their OPPDA isn't larger than one. You can't possibly establish a difference between teams if the most intense team OPPDA is 4.35 and the least intense is at 5.53. Just about a difference of one pass. So everyone in the league is high intense? If OPPDA is a great example of a stat that can be interpreted and implemented in a hundred different ways, why is there then no glossary of how FM are recording the data? It's all good having your own way of recording it but not telling the people who are using the data just doesn't make sense IMO. Every football data platform would have a glossary so you can understand their interpretation. And still, nobody has or will tell us how OPPDA is being recorded (not that I've seen). From the graph below, you can't possibly conclude anything about a team's defending style here. Barca defend high and high OPPDA. Girona defend deep, and has more intense press than Barca. Getafe, whose manager plays wing-play and has less often pressing has a more intense press than Barca. Without being told what OPPDA is FM, it's impossible to then actually understand and comparing different teams within the gameworld.

Even here. Ignore Spinazzola because actually, I feel Dybala/Parades are initially at fault here. Look at Angelino and look where his LCB is. The RB and RCB as well. They are narrow, as a unit, shifting over and looking to guide play. In these examples, we're covering the whole field rather than covering the centre and leaving the space out wide. Naturally, can just use a narrow formation to achieve that. What happened here was a pass to the Fiorentina player and he just ran unchallenged between the LB and LCB. But this should be narrow and compact, forcing wide. We've actually forced them centrally here. Getting this shape narrow and compact would certainly increase my tackles won as we can then pick up the 2nd ball.

I think you are missing the point in the post a little. The lines are compressed - we've used force-wide, step up, very high defence line. This doesn't make the LM and closer to the LCM and narrow. the issue isn't that we don't make the tackles. We do. The system issue is the distance between the players. Regardless who I put in midfield. Put 20 tackling and everything, he'll initially win the ball but the ball will then fall to the opposition because the players are too far from each other. So ignore the tackling for a moment (though its the point), the system when we're defending is the issue. They aren't in a narrow block (like the example below). They are spread out. So, LM is far from LCM. Regardless of who the Ball winner is, the LM and other players are too far away to collect the 2nd ball therefore counts as a tackle loss. There's example in the comments above. Pellegrini wins the ball but players are far from the ball. My team simply don't defend narrow and compact like the image and guide play. Rather than forcing wide, my wide players are already wide. Other screenshots are here where you can see where my wide players are defending. Then the space between wide players and central players. They aren't narrow and compact - this is the main issue with the tackling. Win the ball but players are far away.

This is why I have question marks over tempo and how much control it has over your team. Or what exactly it affects. Is it just passing from back to front quicker - or does it also mean your players are looking to be quick with everything down to taking throw-ins and taking goal kicks etc. I feel using an attacking mentality, you defo experience a high tempo not many passing sequences. Then you add a BPD and AF to that mix, you start seeing those direct balls and not much recycling. But by using control, you defo still see patient football regardless if you put your tempo to high. I don't think there's a passing sequence in FM but I guess you can just add up your passing, opposition passes allowed per defensive action (even though we discovered that is questionable lol) to see if you're operating with a high tempo.

I need to understand what the hell tempo even is on this game. i mentioned in my Thiago Motta tactic. I’m using mid tempo in a heavy possession tactic. But when I boost my tempo, my possession and pass % didn’t drop and results got better. it felt wrong using fast tempo in the Thiago Motta tactic so I said in the video, if you want to get better results then just wack the tempo high. possession football in FM, and I don’t actually disagree, falls down to mostly your roles and formation selection. Just wished the instructions helped complement things better and make things very detrimental. using control with very high tempo, you still often see your team recycling possession and being patient if you’re using a IFB with CBs for example.

It literally makes no difference. Tried never tight mark but what happens is regardless, they run straight to their position when defending. So they run straight to RM and LM. it’s also why you have a massive gap between your full backs and CBs. They focus on defending their position only - they don’t come in narrow and making your back line compact. AI often make runs in between. The marking system I find it just mostly redundant. it gives me the option for my DM to mark the ST position for example. When the match is playing, you never see the DM mark the ST position.

To back to SI/FM a little, isn't that what being a football manager/coach is nowadays? Which manager now does training, controls all of the data, assign scouts and hire/fire staff? You could argue it's more realistic to delegate these things. I see no issue with players delegating but being successful. It's why you hire good staff in the first place. But it can also become a bit gatekeeping. To play FM, you must learn to do some of these things to win trophies. These features are what make the game playable for different FM player types. And there certainly is a difference in delegating and controlling. It's down to you how you want to achieve success. Training for example. I can delegate it. My wonderkid still becomes an elite player. Or, I can control training, control my wonderkids' training and be able to improve certain attributes I want specifically wanted to improve. I may put him on attacking movement. Or final third. I'll then get different results than I would have if I delegated. Both still successful, but one way can be more rewarding.

Well, this is something SI can help with (manual and/or glossary). Force-wide (I believe) is mainly for your advanced players. When opposition are building an attack from deep, force-wide should work with your line of engagement. Your striker should make a curved run and block off the middle forcing play wide while your midfield are narrow. The moment the pass goes out wide, then the press comes. Stop crosses will be when you are now defending deep and how you want to force play away from crossing situations. So you can sort of force them wide, then when they start to look to create wide, delay them by forcing them back inside. I have found a slight worry, though. FM doesn't say that forcing play wide will make your midfield or team narrow. So actually, you *might* just have to play a flat midfield 5 to close off central routes completely.

What added information does this need? Would be really cool if it was looked at.

When people ask "Why does everyone use gegenpress? High lines, max press etc"...This right here is one of those reasons. Results are fine imo (yes you can get better with gegenpress). But it's how it's represented on the ME. It can be a pain to watch. I'm first. Fewest conceded. Fewest shots against. Fewest final 3rd passes against. But then, the lowest tackles won. Poor tackle % and lowest pressing intensity (OPPDA). It just doesn't really add up. We're difficult to beat but actually, we're bad in tackles, don't make much interceptions and are not high with possession won. To try and fix that, I'm now using illogical team instructions just to improve our tackles won. One reason it's a problem is because of how spread out we are rather than narrow and compact like force-wide should do with my set-up. There is a suggestion thread here, right? I didn't know where to put it so I also reported it as a bug. As with these things, a small bit of it is a complaint lol but mostly more of a passionate wish list.

Being able to achieve this in FM, I think would make a mid-block system a lot more fun to use and create. And something possibly that FM could start looking to improve. What do you lot think? I'm not saying you can't achieve success in a mid-block. You can. But whenever I (my experience) attempt to use a 4-4-2 or 4-4-1-1, I don't enjoy watching how we defend. When using "force wide" in FM, this is what I picture in my head. A compact and narrow shape. But in reality, I get a shape when my wide players are already wide - creating space in between my lines between the wide and central players. They don't defend or shift in a block as a unit. I often get the image attached. A spread-out back 4 and a spread-out midfield 4. My front two actually are set up well. AMC joins ST - stops ball being played to pivot. But from there, I'm not happy with my shape. I've opened a tactical thread on here too, trying to see if I'm missing anything or if others have been able to achieve/suggest what I'm looking for. You can see in the GIF. From a dead ball. Our RB and RM are so wide. Frosinone have a player just stood there in between my midfield. Free. How can we force play wide when our players are already standing wide? We can't trap them there because they of course won't pass there. The results have been great, though. Most clean sheets. Fewest conceded. Fewest shots against. Nothing to complain about there. With positional play in the game looking fancy, being able to achieve a solid shape like the tactical example would add to the great game. Not that a mid-block like this should be easy to create and use. but I do believe to an extent, it would get the high-line players to dibble their toes into a different way of playing.

Paredes is actually mostly the BWM, he was rested for the game I just played. Sanchez often plays RM. Sanchez is like a filler - allows me to rotate for cup games etc. And Sanchez isn't losing tackles as in bad tackling. He's winning them. The issue then becomes other players not close enough to pick up the 2nd which then counts as a tackle lost. Pellegrini suffers from the same thing. Tackles but with the opposition close enough and our team spaced out, the ball tends to fall to them. Initially, I had a mid-block with a very high LOE. I then dropped it because teams found a way to recycle possession and lob it over the top. But, since dropping it, my tackles won % has increased whilst tackles won has roughly kept the same around the average. Oddly, I don't think this issue with high pressing (can kind of understand why. With everyone pressing, good chance the 2nd ball finds your player). But I've noticed when we drop into our shape, the spaces horizontally are too wide. They aren't narrow enough and don't shift over as a unit either.

This here is the problem I'm having 85% of the time. We win the ball but our players aren't close enough to each other when defending. No matter how close together I put my defence line and LOE. Attempted to use step up but no improvements. It seems to be the central players. They can win the ball but wide players aren't close enough to pick up possession My RB has to be closer here IMO. He's nowhere near his opposition winger (the player close to the player who's just lost the ball). P.s, sorry for the large screenshots. Don't know how to do it any other way lol

I've never done this before and this can be really cool in helping me, yourself and others (I'm planning on a video to be selfish haha). So, I'm doing a mid-block 4-4-1-1 tactic. We're 1st. The results are fine but the data is making me upset. I expect to be high with tackles won (at least %). As we know, tackles won is winning the ball and keeping possession. A tackle lost can be winning the ball but possession falling back to opposition. I'm looking at how we can improve gaining possession after tackling. Making us a better team OTB. We're excellent in defence, though. 2nd best with final third passes against per game. Most clean sheets and least shots faced.

If that’s the case with how they measure OPPDA, then that’s extremely disappointing (and also could’ve been told that when I brought it up myself lol - stops gimme giving out wrong or bad info In my videos!!!). it makes it hard for you to appreciate all the really good metrics like defence line height because often when you’re adjusting your tactics according to data, you will be pairing metrics. but how or why would SI change how you measure OPPDA? Lool but I know one thing that could’ve skipped all the confusion. Having a glossary haha If none for FM25 then I just know they have no interest in having one. It’s vital for when you are using data.

Yeah it highlights an issue. You and very few have managed to see it whereas majority hasn’t. And even when those who get to see it, don’t see it consistently or how it shows for players. It would’ve been very cool to be told it isn’t working as intended so we can just move on. I think this partly why so many feel they’ve been done over by SI. Just transparency after a promise

So here is the OOPDA from one of my saves. Just a 1.18 difference between the top and bottom. So between me and Las Palmas, there is just 1 opposition pass per defensive action between us. And then gets even more baffling (and frustrating) seeing a manager who uses wing-play, less often pressing, sit back to protect lead trait so high in the pressing table.

Sorry for pulling your comment out of context but just saw your name and we’ve spoken about the Opposition Passes per Defence Action. i don’t know how the data is being recorded. Opposition Passes per Defensive Action is supposed to measure a high press - defence action within the final 60% of the pitch. so why is everyone’s OPPDA numbers in FM so high? There should be teams like LFC with around (4-7) opposition passes per defence action. Then a Palace with 10+ but it’s not just OPPDA. There’s a lot more other skeptical data in FM. and again. Sorry for caps but I’m passionate about this…THIS IS MY 3RD YEAR ASKING FOR A GLOSSARY!!! it’s mental to have so many metrics in game and not have a glossary for what the stats actually mean. There no communication from SI with what most metrics actually mean. Like OPPDA. So you’re left with your own interpretation. i can’t imagine writing a glossary is years of work. It should be writing down what you already know. Heck, I have and will again offer myself to do it voluntarily. how many people know how FM count possession and who knew it changed over the years? Who knows there’s something now called Ball Share? Who knew deflected shots that hit the woodwork doesn’t count as woodwork hit? some of us may know because we had to go looking for it. Rather than being able to hover the metric in game or having a glossary in game/manual. These aren’t things players should be expected to go to forums to find out.

I think there’s some big things that need major improvements. Scouting, and player search to an extent, being one as buying players is a huge part of the game. That area isnt working great imo. Data and the data hub is another. but for me (my comment isn’t to say your post is otherwise, just my opinion), the longevity just isn’t there like previously. I get put off some of the outputs the game gives. for example. The game clearly says Crystal Palace and Hodgson style of play reserved. But when looking at defence actions, Palace end up with the most intense pressing numbers. But this feels like an issue in game as the numbers between all 20 teams is between 1 and 2. So best pressing side can have 4.42 opposition passes per defensive action and the worst can have 5.58. IRL, the difference is way bigger than that. Something is off there. Even in game. I hit the woodwork or miss an 0.45xG shot but it’s offside, the game still counts it. but as someone who loves data and (wants to) use it in their saves for tactical adjustments etc, you can’t fully trust the data FM is presenting you with. And data is another big part of the game

Sorry if this has been responded to after. I’m just going through the thread. yeah attributes always changed for staff. But this year, a new feature was that staff got the attribute arrows. something I was excited for because then can finally track their progress. But realised even then, you can’t because staff don’t have a ‘attribute change’ page which I thought then the attribute arrows are a bit pointless lol I have suggested to also have a attribute change for staff but also raised that the arrows don’t appear

I raised this during the first release. Was told it was being looked at but two updates later or so, still not visible. after years in the game, I know my attribute and staff attributes have changed. So there’s no excuse really to not be able to see the arrows. I have raised it but hey.