***THE BETTER HALFS TACTIC UPLOAD & DISCUSSION

The Gyroscope
I have uploaded one more version called " More Cautious" version, one that is to be used when wanting to sit deeper and be more defensive. As always, its up to you to actually know when this is a good call
 
Which out of your "Deep 424, High Risk & High Reward" and "FLAT 442, The Compact Box" tactics do you think is best? I have players able to play both and want to know which you think is best. I'm currently playing with a side expected to come around 10th-15th in the Premier League. I know it's not as simple as just plugging a tactic in and hoping for the best - but which approach do you think is best for a team like this trying to gradually improve? Thanks for any help, it's appreciated :)
 
ZeCarlos said:
Which out of your "Deep 424, High Risk & High Reward" and "FLAT 442, The Compact Box" tactics do you think is best? I have players able to play both and want to know which you think is best. I'm currently playing with a side expected to come around 10th-15th in the Premier League. I know it's not as simple as just plugging a tactic in and hoping for the best - but which approach do you think is best for a team like this trying to gradually improve? Thanks for any help, it's appreciated :)
Click to expand...

It depends where your strengths lies. If you feel that your AMR/L and DMCs are of "top 5" quality, then use the High Risk.. but if they are not, then the Compact one would be a better one this season.

As an example, think about that underdog team that has really pacey players bu tthat lacks the understanding of football. If trying to play the same kind of football as the rest of your opponenst, then yhou will see many draws and late losses. Better then to actually try to win matches, even if that measn some heavy losses (i.e use the HIgh Risk..)

If you have players that are smart but lacks in the physic, then use the Compact flat 442


EDIT: You could also consider the 451 for UNDERDOGS
 
Last edited:
TheBetterHalf said:
It depends where your strengths lies. If you feel that your AMR/L and DMCs are of "top 5" quality, then use the High Risk.. but if they are not, then the Compact one would be a better one this season.

As an example, think about that underdog team that has really pacey players bu tthat lacks the understanding of football. If trying to play the same kind of football as the rest of your opponenst, then yhou will see many draws and late losses. Better then to actually try to win matches, even if that measn some heavy losses (i.e use the HIgh Risk..)

If you have players that are smart but lacks in the physic, then use the Compact flat 442


EDIT: You could also consider the 451 for UNDERDOGS
Click to expand...

Thanks for the response! My wingers are Johnson and Giaccherini and my CM's are Cabral and Larsson/Praet. As you say, it's probably best to at least try and play different and win games and suffer heavy defeats than play the same and draw very often so I'll try the high risk - thanks!
 
ZeCarlos said:
Thanks for the response! My wingers are Johnson and Giaccherini and my CM's are Cabral and Larsson/Praet. As you say, it's probably best to at least try and play different and win games and suffer heavy defeats than play the same and draw very often so I'll try the high risk - thanks!
Click to expand...

Have a look at this as a backup tactic if.. wanting to/having injuries.

Its the same tactic but with one Forward moving wide and holding onto the ball and one AMC inside FC behind him looking for free space.

Regarding your approach, think about where you want to be in 3 years and what kind of football you want to play then. Then, set up a goal for the coming season on the structure of the squad, the tactics, the resulst.

If you want to dominate the prem in 3 years, then on the way, you need to adapt your squad to the approach needed in then already. What are your goals and how do you want the flow of the game to look like in 3 years
( The HIGH risk & high reward...or The Gyroscope( more controlling) ? These are just examples of my tactics, but my point is in generall.
 
TheBetterHalf said:
Have a look at this as a backup tactic if.. wanting to/having injuries.

Its the same tactic but with one Forward moving wide and holding onto the ball and one AMC inside FC behind him looking for free space.

Regarding your approach, think about where you want to be in 3 years and what kind of football you want to play then. Then, set up a goal for the coming season on the structure of the squad, the tactics, the resulst.

If you want to dominate the prem in 3 years, then on the way, you need to adapt your squad to the approach needed in then already. What are your goals and how do you want the flow of the game to look like in 3 years
( The HIGH risk & high reward...or The Gyroscope( more controlling) ? These are just examples of my tactics, but my point is in generall.
Click to expand...

After looking at your "The Gyroscope" tactic, that's about what I want to be playing next season/the season after. At the moment I'm in mid-September of the first season so would you suggest changing now and taking a hit on a large chunk of the season? If I were to change, I'd say about 8 players in the starting 11 would be capable of playing that shape but there may be 2-3 out of their comfort zone. Or do you think I should stick to a more 4-4-2/4-4-1-1 shape until at least January or the end of the season when I can sign more suited players to the shape/approach I want?
 
ZeCarlos said:
After looking at your "The Gyroscope" tactic, that's about what I want to be playing next season/the season after. At the moment I'm in mid-September of the first season so would you suggest changing now and taking a hit on a large chunk of the season? If I were to change, I'd say about 8 players in the starting 11 would be capable of playing that shape but there may be 2-3 out of their comfort zone. Or do you think I should stick to a more 4-4-2/4-4-1-1 shape until at least January or the end of the season when I can sign more suited players to the shape/approach I want?
Click to expand...

Dont change now. Not only will the team be ufamiliar with the approach, buut you as a manager will have hard time spotting where the problems lies ( is its the players, them not knowing the approach etc). You will simply put not be able to evaluate things properly. If you had used this approach for 2 seasons with a different team in a different save, then I my call would perhaps have been different. YOu are to be looking at this as YOUR approach, not my uploaded tacticfiles :D

On the " Gyro" Topic. I, THAT OP, there are now 2 tactics. There is the normal one but also a " more cautious". I am plannning to make one more that is a more overloading, trying to get a goal approach. If you should decide to use this 361 approach, then just give me a shout and I will send you the tactic. Using these kind of approaches is the most fun part for me. Sctually trying to have a philosophy rather than a plug & play tactic you dont really understand, With this said, feel free to ask any questions about the subject as not everything van be covered in the OP ( then nobody would read it )
 
TheBetterHalf said:
Dont change now. Not only will the team be ufamiliar with the approach, buut you as a manager will have hard time spotting where the problems lies ( is its the players, them not knowing the approach etc). You will simply put not be able to evaluate things properly. If you had used this approach for 2 seasons with a different team in a different save, then I my call would perhaps have been different. YOu are to be looking at this as YOUR approach, not my uploaded tacticfiles :D

On the " Gyro" Topic. I, THAT OP, there are now 2 tactics. There is the normal one but also a " more cautious". I am plannning to make one more that is a more overloading, trying to get a goal approach. If you should decide to use this 361 approach, then just give me a shout and I will send you the tactic. Using these kind of approaches is the most fun part for me. Sctually trying to have a philosophy rather than a plug & play tactic you dont really understand, With this said, feel free to ask any questions about the subject as not everything van be covered in the OP ( then nobody would read it )
Click to expand...

Yes, I understand what you mean about evaluation. I guess I slowly have to learn my team and gradually get them into an approach and shape I feel is right for them. I think I'm going to slowly build (buy/sell) a team I think is right for my approach and keep some of my current players.

Thanks for the help, I'll be sure to give you a shout about the 3-6-1 or another approach if I feel your insight could help me. Understand that you're busy, but I've never really tried to be one for understanding tactics and what's beneath them. It's really interested me for some time to have an in-depth understanding of this so I hope this is the start of me learning. Again, thanks for the help.
 
Hi! TBH, I am trying to understand your logic in tight marking (yes/no) in player's instructions. There are some of your tactics where the central defenders are set to tight marking yes and in the rest of the tactics the defenders are set to tight marking no. I understand that the tactic (the formation and the mentality) itself defines the marking but how exactly in your opinion do this tight marking player's instruction interacts with the type of marking personal instructions? For example:

man marking + tight marking yes -> our player will challenge any enemy player, entering his zone, and stick to him, wherever the enemy player goes, until another enemy player enters his zone
man marking + tight marking no -> our player will rarely challenge (depends on pressing instruction, work rate and aggression) an enemy player, entering his zone, and stick to him wherever the enemy player goes; our player makes himself more easily available for a pass
zonal marking + tight marking yes -> our player will challenge any enemy player, entering his zone, and stick to him until he leaves the zone or another enemy player enters his zone
zonal marking + tight marking no -> our player will rarely challenge (depends on pressing instruction, work rate and aggression) an enemy player, entering his zone, and stick to him until he leaves the zone; our player makes himself more easily available for a pass

Are these considerations correct? Moreover, what type of marking (and defending instructions in general for all players) should one set for the following 4-4-2 (Balanced+Standard+Shorter passing):
AF(At) DLF(S)
WM(S) DLP(D) B2B(S) W(At)
FB(At) CB(Defend) BLPD(Stopper) WB(D)
GK(D)

I have the players' instructions as created by the Tactic creator except that the B2B midfielder has slightly lowered mentality (nearly as low as the DLP on defend duty) and the left full-back is hugging the line. However I am still wondering whether CB(Defend) and BLPD(Stopper) (the wing-back on defend duty should be helping the BLPD in theory but in practice enemy strikers find it easy to get behind the stopper) is the best partnership for a 4-4-2 or the simple 2 x CB(Defend) works better?
 
Last edited:
Dantes7 said:
Hi TBF can you say which is your most favorite tactic?
Click to expand...
It totally depends on what team I am managing and what players I have at my disposal. In generall, I would say the Gyroscope and the 41221Box and 451 for underdogs.
 
OsmosisJones said:
Hi! TBH, I am trying to understand your logic in tight marking (yes/no) in player's instructions. There are some of your tactics where the central defenders are set to tight marking yes and in the rest of the tactics the defenders are set to tight marking no. I understand that the tactic (the formation and the mentality) itself defines the marking but how exactly in your opinion do this tight marking player's instruction interacts with the type of marking personal instructions? For example:

man marking + tight marking yes -> our player will challenge any enemy player, entering his zone, and stick to him, wherever the enemy player goes, until another enemy player enters his zone
man marking + tight marking no -> our player will rarely challenge (depends on pressing instruction, work rate and aggression) an enemy player, entering his zone, and stick to him wherever the enemy player goes; our player makes himself more easily available for a pass
zonal marking + tight marking yes -> our player will challenge any enemy player, entering his zone, and stick to him until he leaves the zone or another enemy player enters his zone
zonal marking + tight marking no -> our player will rarely challenge (depends on pressing instruction, work rate and aggression) an enemy player, entering his zone, and stick to him until he leaves the zone; our player makes himself more easily available for a pass

Are these considerations correct? Moreover, what type of marking (and defending instructions in general for all players) should one set for the following 4-4-2 (Balanced+Standard+Shorter passing):
AF(At) DLF(S)
WM(S) DLP(D) B2B(S) W(At)
FB(At) CB(Defend) BLPD(Stopper) WB(D)
GK(D)

I have the players' instructions as created by the Tactic creator except that the B2B midfielder has slightly lowered mentality (nearly as low as the DLP on defend duty) and the left full-back is hugging the line. However I am still wondering whether CB(Defend) and BLPD(Stopper) (the wing-back on defend duty should be helping the BLPD in theory but in practice enemy strikers find it easy to get behind the stopper) is the best partnership for a 4-4-2 or the simple 2 x CB(Defend) works better?
Click to expand...

The thing about the man marking in FM13 is that its slightly flawed and to a point, so is Zonal. Here. I basiclly have to use what is working.

In some approaches, I like to do the following.

- If playing with a top team and want to hassle( not the shout, just high press) the opponent, I need to make sure that the players in advanced positions actually stick to a player rather than a zone, hence tight man makring. In the stratas beneath, I want them to follow a person, but not mark him so tghtly as they dont press as high. When looking at the next strata ( now in M), the players that are on high press use Tight zonal as I dont want them to be dragged out wide and in the next strata,( D or DMC), I want the players to be more carefull, pulling away a bit from the person so they dont get dragged out wide.

IN some approaches, I actually use man marking as a base out wide and zonal in the center according to the system above.

With this said, I cant really go more indepth as the marking dont work as intended.
 
TheBetterHalf said:
The thing about the man marking in FM13 is that its slightly flawed and to a point, so is Zonal. Here. I basiclly have to use what is working.

In some approaches, I like to do the following.

- If playing with a top team and want to hassle( not the shout, just high press) the opponent, I need to make sure that the players in advanced positions actually stick to a player rather than a zone, hence tight man makring. In the stratas beneath, I want them to follow a person, but not mark him so tghtly as they dont press as high. When looking at the next strata ( now in M), the players that are on high press use Tight zonal as I dont want them to be dragged out wide and in the next strata,( D or DMC), I want the players to be more carefull, pulling away a bit from the person so they dont get dragged out wide.

IN some approaches, I actually use man marking as a base out wide and zonal in the center according to the system above.

With this said, I cant really go more indepth as the marking dont work as intended.
Click to expand...

Thank you for the clarification!
 
OsmosisJones said:
Thank you for the clarification!
Click to expand...
No problem. I wish I could have given a better answer but the settings one have to use are sometime contradictive to have I would set it up in real life.

I am currently playing around with various defensive formations and here, the marking system using specific man marking is more logical.
 
hey TBH I am playing with your split 451 (with an AML) and also your 4-2-3-1 set. I just broke the bank to bring in this player but want your view on where to play him. He is a natural striker, but only has 13 finishing. as such i am thinking of retraining him as an AML (takes 20-30 games in that position in FMC) so he will cut and score on his strong right foot (left is reasonable). he has done this once already.

the other reason i am thinking of not playing him up front is because of this young striker who needs game time. he has the ppm shoots from distance (cant untrain in FMC) and is only strong on left foot so dont want him at AML. i dont want him to miss out on first team football if Eizmendi will work on the left.

Interested in your view on this one, i cant make my mind up!! Eizmendi is 27 so a year (it takes this in FMC) retraining seems a waste, but may be worth it in the end.
 
beardeye said:
hey TBH I am playing with your split 451 (with an AML) and also your 4-2-3-1 set. I just broke the bank to bring in this player but want your view on where to play him. He is a natural striker, but only has 13 finishing. as such i am thinking of retraining him as an AML (takes 20-30 games in that position in FMC) so he will cut and score on his strong right foot (left is reasonable). he has done this once already.

the other reason i am thinking of not playing him up front is because of this young striker who needs game time. he has the ppm shoots from distance (cant untrain in FMC) and is only strong on left foot so dont want him at AML. i dont want him to miss out on first team football if Eizmendi will work on the left.

Interested in your view on this one, i cant make my mind up!! Eizmendi is 27 so a year (it takes this in FMC) retraining seems a waste, but may be worth it in the end.
Click to expand...


Is it possible to train Eizmendi in th DMC role? He looks like a really complete DMC-box2box ? Otherwise, train him in AML. The young blokes ppm is a tricky one.
 
TheBetterHalf said:
Is it possible to train Eizmendi in th DMC role? He looks like a really complete DMC-box2box ? Otherwise, train him in AML. The young blokes ppm is a tricky one.
Click to expand...

it would probably take at least 2 seasons to get him natural at DMC, so not an option (one of the annoyances of FMC, alongside no tutoring or specific training). I guess AML it is. do you think 13 is too low for finishing to have him as ST in these tactics? im sure he will score goals but may be better at AML and leave the young gun to play up front and finish.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

FMBase

Beta

Resources

Back
Top