If you register for free, you will be able to post threads, vote on polls and lots more. If you have problems with the registration or logging in, please contact the administrator.
Im relatively new to this forum but in relation to my experiences of the game and some of the interesting discussions I have seen within tactical discussions on here it seems that many people like to complicate when it just isnt necessary....
Now im not saying I am any sort of Brian Clough at this game but in my experiences the simple common sense approach tends to work better. I have always felt that the 4-4-2 as in real life, is the best way to go. This is mainly due to te fact that it is easier to strike the right balance between attack and defence....
I always try to keep mentalities close together but admittedly am unsure as to whether I would be more consistent with a different approach setting mentalities. I try to keep my tactics as simple but as defined as possible (see my mentalities below) comments would be appreciated....
1st of all your mentalities seem about right secondly people over complicate things becuase some of them think that there is a way to 'crack' the AI using a formula based on attributes and stats etc. although my tactic seems complicated to me sometimes it's becuase of how much i have advanced it. I currently have 8 versions lol.
and last of all you hit the nail on the head; for a tactic to work at its best it must be simple
Thanks for the aston martin, ive been hoping to get a positive opinion on my approach to player mentalities. I thought as much about the formulas issue. I suppose if you understand your own methods and tactics then there is nothing wrong with having 8 versions, as you have developed it from an original idea.
So do you play a 4-4-2 yourself or have you developed it to something more exotic (for want of a better word)?
Do you find varying passing approaches around your team works?
no i dont play a 4-4-2 i play a 4-2-3-1 that has come on leaps and bounds since making a thread about it(thanks to everyone who has put their ideas in btw) it consists of normal back 4, 2 cm's barrowed 1 (more attacking than the other), 2 wingers an AMC and a striker. if you want to check out my tactic it is on this forum under 4-2-3-1 development and i post on it every day usually so it should be near the top most of the time. and by the way my 1st post is about the original tactic and now with V7 and the underdog version mentalities are all closer together.
cheers:thup:
p.s. if only i had the money to buy an aston martin ( then again id probably spend the money on a completely futuristic computer so i could process FM to its full ability lol sad i know:p) by the way thats a joke im sad and addicted when it comes to FM but im not that sad lol
Originally posted by aston_martin:
no i dont play a 4-4-2 i play a 4-2-3-1 that has come on leaps and bounds since making a thread about it(thanks to everyone who has put their ideas in btw) it consists of normal back 4, 2 cm's barrowed 1 (more attacking than the other) , 2 wingers an AMC and a striker. if you want to check out my tactic it is on this forum under 4-2-3-1 development and i post on it every day usually so it should be near the top most of the time. and by the way my 1st post is about the original tactic and now with V7 and the underdog version mentalities are all closer together.
cheers:thup:
p.s. if only i had the money to buy an aston martin ( then again id probably spend the money on a completely futuristic computer so i could process FM to its full ability lol sad i know:p) by the way thats a joke im sad and addicted when it comes to FM but im not that sad lol
sorry for the triple post:p but no i don't really vary passing around the team becuase i think it leaves you disjointed and your team play more as individuals than a unit. the only players i ever change the passing with is CB's and their also the only players that don't have a normal mentality
Keeping tactics simple 
Linear Mode
