I haven't gotten my hands on the beta of the game, nor will I. As time draws close to the game's full release though, my FM-mind gets into motion (as it usually does close to a new FM title).
Seeing how good pressing and good off-the-ball-movement is becoming more and more synonyme to how good teams perform in real life (Dortmund, Bayern, Barca under Guardiola, and most recently, Atletico Madrid, just to name a few), I'd like to know how this transforms into the new game.
I was thinking that the formation and player roles in the formation shouldn't be too depending on the players you posess, but rather of how you want the team performance as a whole to look, and the ability to work as a group. Therefore, the roles I'm suggesting now will sound very unfamiliar and perhaps a bit strange, but like the title suggests, It's just a theory I've been thinking about for some time now. Bare in mind that I've never had very much success in creating my own tactics, and have always relied very much on downloaded tactics from this website. This hasn't changed my urge to come up with new ideas though, and I find it interesting to try them out in the game, and see how they play out.
The never-ending strive to create the ultimate possession tactic in FM-titles is something that amazes me. No matter how much recent game engines have worked against the possibilities of having a successfull and yet beautiful style of possession playstyle, people have kept on trying. As I mentioned, I haven't gotten my hands on the beta, and nor will I. My first question is therefore as follows: How are the game mechanics and match engine treating possession-based playstyles this time around?
Now to my theory. Keeping possession is all about keeping the ball (duh!). When not having the ball, the first priority is to win the ball back. In doing so, the opposition is withdrawn the possibility to score against you, and you get to restart your previous build up play. Winning the ball back though, has been both clumsy and chaotic at times in previous FM-games. Players wouldn't press in groups, or would just passively run besides opponents. Getting certain player roles to collaberate in winning the ball back would often be hard, since their priorities would range from certain different objectives on the pitch.
What I am thinking, is that if you create a team consisting of roles very similar to each other, the team work would be much smoother. Since it's a game, giving different players different roles and assignements, might not work out the way you want it to, since you can't deliver that concrete game plan you want the players to recieve and understand.
What if (and it's really a "what if", since, like I said, this is just a theory from a crappy FM-player) you build a team consisting mainly of defensive roles? I am thinking a 4-1-4-1-formation, with a flat back four, one defensive midfielder, two central midfielders, two wingers (flat next to the CM's) and one striker. Put the DM as a defensive DM (role), the CM's to Ball Winning Midfielders, the wingers to Defensive Wingers, and the striker to Defensive Forward (I'm leaving the defensive line and the goalkeeper out of this for the moment, since I'm all aiming on creating a unified pressing force from the midfield as a first priority).
Wouldn't this create a team of exactly the same priorities? Winning the ball back the second it's lost, and then keeping it as a defensive precaution, while moving it up the field for obvious reasons? Wouldn't it make the players work more as a team? Just because the players have defensive roles, doesn't mean they are completly unable to act offensively. Putting offensive players in the roles shouldn'd be a problem, since it's the team-work I'm after. I'm not completly aware of all the game mechanics of all of the roles, but I know that some roles are not what they seem like judging by their names or descriptions. For example the BWM is not just a midfielder who focuses solely on winning the ball back. He is also a good passer and a creator, if that is what's required of him at a certain point.
Just imagine using this formation with these roles for a team like Bayern. If the theory would work, the team would press hard when not in possession, maintaining a certain shape and organisation. When in possession, the team would then get to make use of all the talented offensive players it possess', regardless of the roles they have been assigned to.
Just to clarify again: I'm not really a experienced tactic creator, nor have I had much success with my few tries and the sparse time I've given it. It usually ends with me getting dissappointed or ****** off at my failures, resulting in me downloading a successfull tactic from this website instead. I'm not a good creator, no. What I am though, is a kind of a dreamer and a philosophist (hah! Gay!
), which is the whole reason why I started this thread. If you, like I, love coming up with theories for philosophies and tactics for this game, but just can't get them to work, please share your thoughts. I don't mind this thread being a forum for discussion of other pressing/possession tactics as well.
It would be nice to hear what people might think of my little theory. Perhaps it has been tested and abolished a long time ago, perhaps not. Perhaps someone with a bit more understanding of the game mechanics will push me back into reality, telling me there is no way for this to work. All this is good! Just don't bash me completly, telling me I'm an idiot, or laughing at me. I prefer getting my criticism in a constructive manner!
If you have read my little wall of text, thank you, it's very much appreciated, and please, leave your thoughts.
Seeing how good pressing and good off-the-ball-movement is becoming more and more synonyme to how good teams perform in real life (Dortmund, Bayern, Barca under Guardiola, and most recently, Atletico Madrid, just to name a few), I'd like to know how this transforms into the new game.
I was thinking that the formation and player roles in the formation shouldn't be too depending on the players you posess, but rather of how you want the team performance as a whole to look, and the ability to work as a group. Therefore, the roles I'm suggesting now will sound very unfamiliar and perhaps a bit strange, but like the title suggests, It's just a theory I've been thinking about for some time now. Bare in mind that I've never had very much success in creating my own tactics, and have always relied very much on downloaded tactics from this website. This hasn't changed my urge to come up with new ideas though, and I find it interesting to try them out in the game, and see how they play out.
The never-ending strive to create the ultimate possession tactic in FM-titles is something that amazes me. No matter how much recent game engines have worked against the possibilities of having a successfull and yet beautiful style of possession playstyle, people have kept on trying. As I mentioned, I haven't gotten my hands on the beta, and nor will I. My first question is therefore as follows: How are the game mechanics and match engine treating possession-based playstyles this time around?
Now to my theory. Keeping possession is all about keeping the ball (duh!). When not having the ball, the first priority is to win the ball back. In doing so, the opposition is withdrawn the possibility to score against you, and you get to restart your previous build up play. Winning the ball back though, has been both clumsy and chaotic at times in previous FM-games. Players wouldn't press in groups, or would just passively run besides opponents. Getting certain player roles to collaberate in winning the ball back would often be hard, since their priorities would range from certain different objectives on the pitch.
What I am thinking, is that if you create a team consisting of roles very similar to each other, the team work would be much smoother. Since it's a game, giving different players different roles and assignements, might not work out the way you want it to, since you can't deliver that concrete game plan you want the players to recieve and understand.
What if (and it's really a "what if", since, like I said, this is just a theory from a crappy FM-player) you build a team consisting mainly of defensive roles? I am thinking a 4-1-4-1-formation, with a flat back four, one defensive midfielder, two central midfielders, two wingers (flat next to the CM's) and one striker. Put the DM as a defensive DM (role), the CM's to Ball Winning Midfielders, the wingers to Defensive Wingers, and the striker to Defensive Forward (I'm leaving the defensive line and the goalkeeper out of this for the moment, since I'm all aiming on creating a unified pressing force from the midfield as a first priority).
Wouldn't this create a team of exactly the same priorities? Winning the ball back the second it's lost, and then keeping it as a defensive precaution, while moving it up the field for obvious reasons? Wouldn't it make the players work more as a team? Just because the players have defensive roles, doesn't mean they are completly unable to act offensively. Putting offensive players in the roles shouldn'd be a problem, since it's the team-work I'm after. I'm not completly aware of all the game mechanics of all of the roles, but I know that some roles are not what they seem like judging by their names or descriptions. For example the BWM is not just a midfielder who focuses solely on winning the ball back. He is also a good passer and a creator, if that is what's required of him at a certain point.
Just imagine using this formation with these roles for a team like Bayern. If the theory would work, the team would press hard when not in possession, maintaining a certain shape and organisation. When in possession, the team would then get to make use of all the talented offensive players it possess', regardless of the roles they have been assigned to.
Just to clarify again: I'm not really a experienced tactic creator, nor have I had much success with my few tries and the sparse time I've given it. It usually ends with me getting dissappointed or ****** off at my failures, resulting in me downloading a successfull tactic from this website instead. I'm not a good creator, no. What I am though, is a kind of a dreamer and a philosophist (hah! Gay!
), which is the whole reason why I started this thread. If you, like I, love coming up with theories for philosophies and tactics for this game, but just can't get them to work, please share your thoughts. I don't mind this thread being a forum for discussion of other pressing/possession tactics as well.It would be nice to hear what people might think of my little theory. Perhaps it has been tested and abolished a long time ago, perhaps not. Perhaps someone with a bit more understanding of the game mechanics will push me back into reality, telling me there is no way for this to work. All this is good! Just don't bash me completly, telling me I'm an idiot, or laughing at me. I prefer getting my criticism in a constructive manner!
If you have read my little wall of text, thank you, it's very much appreciated, and please, leave your thoughts.
Last edited:
