What to do if you just can't win
- Thread starter Jake
- Start date
- Replies 322
- Views 175K
Fm matewill never ever play FMC
Phew, just you had the FMC skin - was just making sure you wasn't testing your tactics on FMC (which is 10x easier)
Phew, just you had the FMC skin - was just making sure you wasn't testing your tactics on FMC (which is 10x easier)
hahahaa
don't stress mate I have been around long enough, have a good evening!Yeah Raikan I'm going to sit down tonight take a deep breathe and get my season finished. Work out tow base tactics for home and away then also add instructions and roles for specific teams.
If this is how demanding the full career is alot of people are going to get very frustrated very quickly and drop the game. People don't manage teams like City and United etc to have to sit down for 5-10 mins post match to work out how to beat Wigan lol.
I'm 50/50 at the second i do like depth but i also think you shouldn't have to change multiply things per game to counter the opponent when that opponent is much weaker. Having far superior players should do the trick for the most part obviously you should lose to smaller teams but some of the swings have been beyond a joke.
Meh getting huge urges to play FM sat in work not good, Reallllyyy not good only 7 hours to go
If this is how demanding the full career is alot of people are going to get very frustrated very quickly and drop the game. People don't manage teams like City and United etc to have to sit down for 5-10 mins post match to work out how to beat Wigan lol.
I'm 50/50 at the second i do like depth but i also think you shouldn't have to change multiply things per game to counter the opponent when that opponent is much weaker. Having far superior players should do the trick for the most part obviously you should lose to smaller teams but some of the swings have been beyond a joke.
Meh getting huge urges to play FM sat in work not good, Reallllyyy not good only 7 hours to go
Yeah Raikan I'm going to sit down tonight take a deep breathe and get my season finished. Work out tow base tactics for home and away then also add instructions and roles for specific teams.
If this is how demanding the full career is alot of people are going to get very frustrated very quickly and drop the game. People don't manage teams like City and United etc to have to sit down for 5-10 mins post match to work out how to beat Wigan lol.
I'm 50/50 at the second i do like depth but i also think you shouldn't have to change multiply things per game to counter the opponent when that opponent is much weaker. Having far superior players should do the trick for the most part obviously you should lose to smaller teams but some of the swings have been beyond a joke.
Meh getting huge urges to play FM sat in work not good, Reallllyyy not good only 7 hours to go
then maybe consider playing FMC till the patch comes out and mess around in there.. no point in making a proper save now with any team..
The quicker you and everyone realises that this is not Fm12 the better
it took me a while! after doing a bit of research on my next opponent Siena a made a few (very few little tweaks) to my M&M tactic
FMC is garbage. I do relaise this isn't FM 12 but the leap in attention needed to be invested is huge, I don't mind struggling with a save afterall that's the challenge now to succeed with it now being difficult.
I'm quickly coming to terms with the added intensity doesn't mean i agree with it as the game stands it's too far to the hardcore indepth aspect of the game.
Like i said tonight i will sit down and will add a detailed manually scouting of my next opposition and make some changes. Do you make your changes in the pre-match screen or do you do it before the game comes around.
I change my match prep directly after a game. If i can get into my second season with City qualifing for the CL i'll be happy considering new signings seems to make quite a impact I've had Maicon, Garcia, Sinclair, Nasatsic, Rodwell, Bale and Felliani settling into the team.
Quit and play FMC pssssshhhhh i don't ****** think so
I'm quickly coming to terms with the added intensity doesn't mean i agree with it as the game stands it's too far to the hardcore indepth aspect of the game.
Like i said tonight i will sit down and will add a detailed manually scouting of my next opposition and make some changes. Do you make your changes in the pre-match screen or do you do it before the game comes around.
I change my match prep directly after a game. If i can get into my second season with City qualifing for the CL i'll be happy considering new signings seems to make quite a impact I've had Maicon, Garcia, Sinclair, Nasatsic, Rodwell, Bale and Felliani settling into the team.
Quit and play FMC pssssshhhhh i don't ****** think so
This could just be me being jammy, but I am having some brilliant results with Newcastle in my first season just playing a fairly standard 4-4-1-1, short passing, through the middle, balanced, set to counter. For home games/games that could be considered 'easier' I play Cabeye and Anita in CM, with Cabeye set as a deep playmaker on support and Anita a CM set to defend. With Ben Arfa as the one behind Cisse this gives us a large amount of creativity, all 3 have high passing and creativity stats, and Anita as good tackling, positioning and anitcipation so does. Having Cisse up top as a poacher really helps, 20 finishing and all
For trickier away days Tiote comes in, usually for Anita and gets set to ball winning, though for the away legs of the knockout stages in the Europa League I take out Cabeye and focus on keeping a clean sheet. So far with 10 league games left we sit in 3rd, 10 points clear of 5th, and with a couple of games in hand on Man Utd who currently top the league, with Man City in 2nd. I think the key to the tactic is its general simpilicity, when we dont have the ball we generally have 2 banks of four sitting infront of the opposition, we concede very few goals, and with the creativity of the Cabeye, Anita and Ben Arfa, and the finishing of Cisse, we are fairly lethal on the break.
For trickier away days Tiote comes in, usually for Anita and gets set to ball winning, though for the away legs of the knockout stages in the Europa League I take out Cabeye and focus on keeping a clean sheet. So far with 10 league games left we sit in 3rd, 10 points clear of 5th, and with a couple of games in hand on Man Utd who currently top the league, with Man City in 2nd. I think the key to the tactic is its general simpilicity, when we dont have the ball we generally have 2 banks of four sitting infront of the opposition, we concede very few goals, and with the creativity of the Cabeye, Anita and Ben Arfa, and the finishing of Cisse, we are fairly lethal on the break.
You're cute you know that? But i was playing wolves until december only lost 1 and 2 decisions, I beat Man United in the Capitol one cup and after i beat Man U I love 14 games straight. No goals scored, I have multiple tactics i use and I also train correctly, I didnt bring in anyone big especially since i am in the championship league, so wheres the answer to that one smart one?
Last edited:
epic terrorist
Member
- Joined
- Jul 7, 2010
- Messages
- 5,010
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 0
the default 442 works well when you ae looking to mix things up and surprise opponents
supermatt1978
Member
- Joined
- May 4, 2010
- Messages
- 989
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 16
I'm loving the new game much more of a real game , ur not going to win ever game and if u did somethings not rite.
Chelsea don't have any wingers?
Based on the start to the season; 3 man midfields and fergies plethora of wingers largely on the bench or out of the squad, i dont think anyone truly believed that a 442 (maybe 4411 if you include rooneys role) was going to be the starting line up against arguably the best midfield in the league.
Last edited:
Chelsea play a 4-2-3-1 with Oscar/Mata and Hazard playing pretty wide. I consider them wingers or inside forwards, the point is they play wide and Uniteds diamond would of suffered big time.
Youre right,I think people are going to love this version once theyve ironed out all the bugs(Arteta hitting indirect freekicks into the CROWD...being completely outplayed at home by tiki-taka Stoke...yet more instant equalizers...makes me wanna scream!).but at the moment,yes,I dont love it but i'll give it time
This could just be me being jammy, but I am having some brilliant results with Newcastle in my first season just playing a fairly standard 4-4-1-1, short passing, through the middle, balanced, set to counter. For home games/games that could be considered 'easier' I play Cabeye and Anita in CM, with Cabeye set as a deep playmaker on support and Anita a CM set to defend. With Ben Arfa as the one behind Cisse this gives us a large amount of creativity, all 3 have high passing and creativity stats, and Anita as good tackling, positioning and anitcipation so does. Having Cisse up top as a poacher really helps, 20 finishing and all
For trickier away days Tiote comes in, usually for Anita and gets set to ball winning, though for the away legs of the knockout stages in the Europa League I take out Cabeye and focus on keeping a clean sheet. So far with 10 league games left we sit in 3rd, 10 points clear of 5th, and with a couple of games in hand on Man Utd who currently top the league, with Man City in 2nd. I think the key to the tactic is its general simpilicity, when we dont have the ball we generally have 2 banks of four sitting infront of the opposition, we concede very few goals, and with the creativity of the Cabeye, Anita and Ben Arfa, and the finishing of Cisse, we are fairly lethal on the break.
I play 4 - 5 - 1 with the toon, Cisse through middle with HBA and BA on the wings and I've had loads of success and it is fairly easy with my beloved Toon. I hate to admit but Krul, Colo, Stevie T, Cabaye, Tiote, BA, Cisse, Ben Arfa and Santon have outstanding attributes and whilst I believe they are a special group of players I was shocked to see their stats. 20 for finishing is mental. I'm running 49 leagues and only Huntelaar has 20 for finishing like Cisse. I thought RVP and Aguerro would be on par with Cisse and Huntelaar for finishing.
I think what Jake said is pretty much it. And I'd say a second and third reason why you get bad results after a string of (really) good ones is complacency and disappointment. And I'm not just talking about your players, but about you as a manager as well.
I've found myself (managing Everton) wanting to speed things up a bit, try and get a season done. The results had been good, but then we had to play Man City. I knew this was gonna be a tough game, but instead of studying my opponent closely, I kept continuing the game whilst going back and forth between formations I could choose from. I did take a look at the tactics they were most likely going to use and spent some time deciding my own tactics, but I definately could have done more. In my defence, it was really tough deciding what to do: would our great form of late and the home advantage be enough to justify a more attacking approach along the lines of what we had been doing before? Or should we acknowledge their superior quality and adopt a slightly more conservative strategy? If so, how conservative exactly? I went for a 4-5-1 Counter strategy. The game was quite evenly matched until some poor defending on a low cross in the 36th minute saw us 0-1 down. As I said, we weren't getting overrun by City, but we didn't seem to be able to score and I attributed that lack of a goal to the 1-striker tactics and the counter-attacking strategy. So around the 60th minute we changed shape to our previously successful Attacking 4-3-1-2.
That led to a few opportunities and if I recall correctly City didn't get any chances for the rest of the game. Unfortunately, we didn't score, so the final result was a 0-1 loss. Not really that bad, considering it was Manchester City and they were also doing well. But I was a bit disheartened since I somehow felt like I made the wrong decision on tactics, looking at our display after the shape change.
And then came Arsenal, away from home. In retrospect, I was a fool to think I could afford to adopt the Attacking 4-3-1-2 strategy in this game, but Arsenal were only 11th in the league and I was hoping to surprise them with high pressure and a forward mentality. It's not unheard of that this does work, the shock in the opposing team reinforcing itself if you get a goal. But it's probably too much of a risk away from home, especially coming out of a (narrow) defeat. I realized this less than a minute into the game: Cazorla scored the very first chance for Arsenal, before the end of the first minute. My own **** fault, although Cazorla outjumping Baines was unexpected and unacceptable. Did I change my tactics immediately? No, I was sure that wasn't going to do us any good either. And it probably wasn't going to do us any good, but I should have done SOMETHING. Instead, I thought: well, we were already on an attacking mentality and now we have a good reason to be. Alas, things only got worse. We were unable to create chances (5 shots in total versus 19 for Arsenal) and we conceded 3 more goals. I did change the tactics and the formation at half-time and we only conceded one of the 4 Arsenal goals in the second half, but I'm sure that had more to do with Arsenal settling for what they had than with my changes. Anyway, 4-0 defeat, for which I blame mostly me (and Baines a bit, if he hadn't lost that aerial duel to Cazorla, MAYBE (!) we could have stunned them and we wouldn't have been so demoralized from the start). Possession and all other stats were good, only the balance of chances created and conceded was very poor. That's a tell-tale sign of adopting the wrong strategy to my eyes. So I do take responsibility there.
Unfortunately, I was a bit down after that. Two defeats in a row, one being a 4-0 domination, that needed rectification. But instead of tediously studying my next opponent, I thought: Norwich at home, that game is just what we need, an easy win. I was too eager to get that win after the disappointment of the past two games, that I didn't put the necessary time into my tactical plan. We would win that game and all would be well again. I stuck with the Attacking 4-3-1-2 but we were poor. I reckon this is what Jake was saying about the opposition coming up with ways to counter your tactics. Norwich weren't great either, but they did keep us from scoring and we only got a goalless draw from that game. Not good enough.
Then came Chelsea, away, a game we should have lost by far more than 1-2 and Reading, away, a game where we might have adopted the wrong strategy but would probably have deserved a point (0-2, a quickfire double from Le Fondre). Finally, we just got a deserved but narrow 1-0 home win over Sunderland. I changed things up and went for the third formation we were training, a 4-3-3 with two center mids, an attacking mid, two high wingers and a sole striker. We dominated Sunderland in every aspect of the game and should have scored more goals. So it was a success, but I'm thinking it was mainly because the opposition were not expecting that particular formation and were unable to adjust. Because I didn't really have that much of a well-reasoned argument for it, except that it would be a surprise to the opposition and it allowed me to try and see if a few players performed better in a different position.
Anyway, the moral of this (long) story (I do apologize) is that you have to be wary of complacency and disappointment in your own thinking. You can get drawn into a negative spiral before you know it, just because you stop putting enough time in tactics.
I've found myself (managing Everton) wanting to speed things up a bit, try and get a season done. The results had been good, but then we had to play Man City. I knew this was gonna be a tough game, but instead of studying my opponent closely, I kept continuing the game whilst going back and forth between formations I could choose from. I did take a look at the tactics they were most likely going to use and spent some time deciding my own tactics, but I definately could have done more. In my defence, it was really tough deciding what to do: would our great form of late and the home advantage be enough to justify a more attacking approach along the lines of what we had been doing before? Or should we acknowledge their superior quality and adopt a slightly more conservative strategy? If so, how conservative exactly? I went for a 4-5-1 Counter strategy. The game was quite evenly matched until some poor defending on a low cross in the 36th minute saw us 0-1 down. As I said, we weren't getting overrun by City, but we didn't seem to be able to score and I attributed that lack of a goal to the 1-striker tactics and the counter-attacking strategy. So around the 60th minute we changed shape to our previously successful Attacking 4-3-1-2.
That led to a few opportunities and if I recall correctly City didn't get any chances for the rest of the game. Unfortunately, we didn't score, so the final result was a 0-1 loss. Not really that bad, considering it was Manchester City and they were also doing well. But I was a bit disheartened since I somehow felt like I made the wrong decision on tactics, looking at our display after the shape change.
And then came Arsenal, away from home. In retrospect, I was a fool to think I could afford to adopt the Attacking 4-3-1-2 strategy in this game, but Arsenal were only 11th in the league and I was hoping to surprise them with high pressure and a forward mentality. It's not unheard of that this does work, the shock in the opposing team reinforcing itself if you get a goal. But it's probably too much of a risk away from home, especially coming out of a (narrow) defeat. I realized this less than a minute into the game: Cazorla scored the very first chance for Arsenal, before the end of the first minute. My own **** fault, although Cazorla outjumping Baines was unexpected and unacceptable. Did I change my tactics immediately? No, I was sure that wasn't going to do us any good either. And it probably wasn't going to do us any good, but I should have done SOMETHING. Instead, I thought: well, we were already on an attacking mentality and now we have a good reason to be. Alas, things only got worse. We were unable to create chances (5 shots in total versus 19 for Arsenal) and we conceded 3 more goals. I did change the tactics and the formation at half-time and we only conceded one of the 4 Arsenal goals in the second half, but I'm sure that had more to do with Arsenal settling for what they had than with my changes. Anyway, 4-0 defeat, for which I blame mostly me (and Baines a bit, if he hadn't lost that aerial duel to Cazorla, MAYBE (!) we could have stunned them and we wouldn't have been so demoralized from the start). Possession and all other stats were good, only the balance of chances created and conceded was very poor. That's a tell-tale sign of adopting the wrong strategy to my eyes. So I do take responsibility there.
Unfortunately, I was a bit down after that. Two defeats in a row, one being a 4-0 domination, that needed rectification. But instead of tediously studying my next opponent, I thought: Norwich at home, that game is just what we need, an easy win. I was too eager to get that win after the disappointment of the past two games, that I didn't put the necessary time into my tactical plan. We would win that game and all would be well again. I stuck with the Attacking 4-3-1-2 but we were poor. I reckon this is what Jake was saying about the opposition coming up with ways to counter your tactics. Norwich weren't great either, but they did keep us from scoring and we only got a goalless draw from that game. Not good enough.
Then came Chelsea, away, a game we should have lost by far more than 1-2 and Reading, away, a game where we might have adopted the wrong strategy but would probably have deserved a point (0-2, a quickfire double from Le Fondre). Finally, we just got a deserved but narrow 1-0 home win over Sunderland. I changed things up and went for the third formation we were training, a 4-3-3 with two center mids, an attacking mid, two high wingers and a sole striker. We dominated Sunderland in every aspect of the game and should have scored more goals. So it was a success, but I'm thinking it was mainly because the opposition were not expecting that particular formation and were unable to adjust. Because I didn't really have that much of a well-reasoned argument for it, except that it would be a surprise to the opposition and it allowed me to try and see if a few players performed better in a different position.
Anyway, the moral of this (long) story (I do apologize) is that you have to be wary of complacency and disappointment in your own thinking. You can get drawn into a negative spiral before you know it, just because you stop putting enough time in tactics.
Last edited:
supermatt1978
Member
- Joined
- May 4, 2010
- Messages
- 989
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 16
im having good results with my brendon rogers tactic ive tryed uploading but hasn't gone on 2 DC'S, 2 WB'S, 1 DM, 2 MC, 2 IF, 1 FW.
They position wide, they actually play incredibly narrow, its how Shaktar tore them apart down the flanks.