I'm a tinkerer when it comes to tactics, and I need some serious guidance

[Whiterun Guard]

Hello all.

I'm a pretty average FM player, however I have done a LOT of reading up on tactics and formations and everything else. My problems come down to tactic-creation confidence. I have little to none. And the reason why this becomes a problem (beyond the obvious) is that I'm not sure whether I should have a "match prep" or if I should create say... 1, 2, or 3 tactics that I want my team to learn to use in any scenario I might face. OR if I should create one or two static tactics (so my team learns how to play in those ways) and then have one match prep tactic that changes according to who I play, each week. Does anyone else have this problem? I mean I think this notion that you can only create three tactics at a time is rubbish.

Think of it this way.. I'm playing as Milan right now. We're a huge club. Let's say I want us to be attacking.. So my tactic for Milan might look like... Fluid, Attacking, Direct passing, pressing more, aggressive tackling, etc. etc. Then my second tactic for Milan might look like (for use against clubs like Juve or Barca or whoever) Balanced, Standard, Default, stand off, cautious, etc. etc. But then I'm only left with one more tactic to make, therefore my team can't learn more than just what's being prepared. So if I need to play with my team closing down at "default" I can't have them learn this unless I create a 3rd tactic using default closing down.
Does that make any sense?

I'm probably making this more complicated than it is.. But essentially I can't figure out how to balance between making one or two tactics, or having match preparation, or having my team learn how to play different styles just in case the way we're playing isn't working. Another example.. Let's say I want my team to play very fluid controlling soccer (ala barca) with great short passing, a high press, etc you know the drill. Well, what happens when we go up against a team that is countering this really well? I wouldn't want to make changes that cause my team to be playing football that they don't know / aren't prepared for, right?

Any help would be lovely.

Thanks

 

[herne79]

Have a read of this http://www.fm-base.co.uk/forum/foot...dys-understanding-odds-playing-right-way.html

Essentially it suggests playing in one of 3 different styles depending on whether you are the favourite to win a match or not. As it is based on one of 3 styles, you can simply set up 3 tactics so you are covered for all eventualities.

Whilst there are tactics included in the thread, it's really about the theory to encourage your own tactic creation and adaptability.

 

[Whiterun Guard]

Ah, okay. I have read that, but I never really took much from it honestly. I will have to go back and give it another go.
I think the reason why I didn't take much from it is because I felt like after reading numerous other articles/guides I came to the conclusion that match odds didn't necessarily have to dictate how we play. But I'm sure JP Woody is on to something here.
Thanks for the tip!

 

[TheBetterHalf]

Basically, when using shouts and it makes your team less familiar with the approach you are using, the same goes for th CPU so it evens out

 

[Whiterun Guard]

Basically, when using shouts and it makes your team less familiar with the approach you are using, the same goes for th CPU so it evens out

TBH, thanks for the reply. Are you saying that I shouldn't worry about my team being less familiar with an approach? Secondly, I have re-read JP Woody's understanding the odds thread, and I came away thinking "I don't agree". The reason being, is that A.) he doesn't use shouts or OI's (which makes no sense, why else would SI put them into the game?) and B.) the game changes constantly, as in real life, changes must be made to counter the opposition, etc. etc. What do you think of this? I mean am I better off tinkering and adapting to each match, or just setting a few tactics and praying for the best?

 

[TheBetterHalf]

TBH, thanks for the reply. Are you saying that I shouldn't worry about my team being less familiar with an approach? Secondly, I have re-read JP Woody's understanding the odds thread, and I came away thinking "I don't agree". The reason being, is that A.) he doesn't use shouts or OI's (which makes no sense, why else would SI put them into the game?) and B.) the game changes constantly, as in real life, changes must be made to counter the opposition, etc. etc. What do you think of this? I mean am I better off tinkering and adapting to each match, or just setting a few tactics and praying for the best?

Shouts:

Well, if using 1-3 of them at the same time, then your approach wont be that different than the one you are already familiar with so the CPU wont have an advantage over you. If you on the other hand always inmplement 5-7 shouts form the start, like hassle, push up, get ball forward, play wider etc, then your team will suffer.

JP.Woody:

His approach works as its a middleway of playing. The matchodds can be used this way. As always, if reading the flow of the game correctly and making the right ingame changes, then nothing beats it. If one the other hand is not being good at this ( or not wanting to pay that amount of attention), then its better to use JP´s approach than constantly making the wrong ingame decisions or not making any changes at all.

 

[Whiterun Guard]

Shouts:

Well, if using 1-3 of them at the same time, then your approach wont be that different than the one you are already familiar with so the CPU wont have an advantage over you. If you on the other hand always inmplement 5-7 shouts form the start, like hassle, push up, get ball forward, play wider etc, then your team will suffer.

JP.Woody:

His approach works as its a middleway of playing. The matchodds can be used this way. As always, if reading the flow of the game correctly and making the right ingame changes, then nothing beats it. If one the other hand is not being good at this ( or not wanting to pay that amount of attention), then its better to use JP´s approach than constantly making the wrong ingame decisions or not making any changes at all.

Okay, I see what you're saying. That definitely makes sense to me. Sometimes I do end up using more shouts than just 1-3. Definitely can cause problems if my team isn't familiar with that style. As far as JP goes, I get that too. I think I'm better off at analyzing the match than just going based on the odds. I find it's a more fun way to play, analyzing the opposition!

Finally, what do you think about creating 3 tactics that train my team to learn all different settings? For example.. Attack, Control, Counter.. So under attack we would learn things like: "Direct passing, press more, etc." then for Control "default everything" and Counter "short pass, stand off, etc." ? Basically, I want my team to be able to adapt, and be flexible because I'm not sure that I am tactically astute enough to create 1 or 2 tactics that dominate without making changes..

 

[TheBetterHalf]

Okay, I see what you're saying. That definitely makes sense to me. Sometimes I do end up using more shouts than just 1-3. Definitely can cause problems if my team isn't familiar with that style. As far as JP goes, I get that too. I think I'm better off at analyzing the match than just going based on the odds. I find it's a more fun way to play, analyzing the opposition!

Finally, what do you think about creating 3 tactics that train my team to learn all different settings? For example.. Attack, Control, Counter.. So under attack we would learn things like: "Direct passing, press more, etc." then for Control "default everything" and Counter "short pass, stand off, etc." ? Basically, I want my team to be able to adapt, and be flexible because I'm not sure that I am tactically astute enough to create 1 or 2 tactics that dominate without making changes..

Sounds like a good idea, but insetad of Counter, Control, attack, why not use the 3 approaches that you are most likekly to use with the team at hand.

- Your normal approach ( perhaps a flat 442)

- One approach that is more compact and cautious, perhaps using one more central mid ( perhaps a flat 451. 4141 or 4411)

- One more approach using more width and playing more direct to get more balls into advanced positions, here with a more attacking formation ( like a 424 with AMR/L)

 

[Whiterun Guard]

Sounds like a good idea, but insetad of Counter, Control, attack, why not use the 3 approaches that you are most likekly to use with the team at hand.

- Your normal approach ( perhaps a flat 442)

- One approach that is more compact and cautious, perhaps using one more central mid ( perhaps a flat 451. 4141 or 4411)

- One more approach using more width and playing more direct to get more balls into advanced positions, here with a more attacking formation ( like a 424 with AMR/L)

Just got hired by AC Milan after a pretty successful first season with Everton. Milan are struggling, despite having a great roster. Lots of speed, and good playmakers. I'm thinking we should be playing Attacking (most of the time), Control (against teams like Roma, Lazio, etc.) and then either a standard or counter approach for our tough matches in Europe, or against Juve / Inter away from home. When you say approach do you mean match strategy like what I've just listed? Because I think I'm on to doing exactly that My attacking tactic will be more narrow (to boss the midfield and take advantage of our strength up the middle) (4-3-1-2) direct passing, high tempo, press more, etc. My control tactic will be more "standard" or "default" in terms of settings, and player positioning (a simple 4-5-1 V ala Barca) with short passing and med-high def line. And the counter or standard tactic would be self explanatory.

 

[TheBetterHalf]

Just got hired by AC Milan after a pretty successful first season with Everton. Milan are struggling, despite having a great roster. Lots of speed, and good playmakers. I'm thinking we should be playing Attacking (most of the time), Control (against teams like Roma, Lazio, etc.) and then either a standard or counter approach for our tough matches in Europe, or against Juve / Inter away from home. When you say approach do you mean match strategy like what I've just listed? Because I think I'm on to doing exactly that My attacking tactic will be more narrow (to boss the midfield and take advantage of our strength up the middle) (4-3-1-2) direct passing, high tempo, press more, etc. My control tactic will be more "standard" or "default" in terms of settings, and player positioning (a simple 4-5-1 V ala Barca) with short passing and med-high def line. And the counter or standard tactic would be self explanatory.

I meant your tactical approach in general. Some people like to play like Barca, some like R.Madrid etc.

 

[Whiterun Guard]

Ah okay. That's how I've set this up

 

[Mr Langvatn]

Or you could make classic tactics and forget about shouts Seems like classic tactics have the most potential in the current patch. And in my opinion, there is no need to make three different tactics for different scenarios. A great tactic is strong both when favoured and not.