retired_dolly67601

Not sure about the switching of positions FMTacticus regarding creative freedom. I think that's if the player was given a free role he'd be like that.

Creative freedom to me would affect how the player listens to instructions for forward runs, through balls, passing style etc... Basically, it would be up to the player to make his own mind up on what to do in all those situations

retired_elpata

Thats exactly what creative freedom is, its allowing the football to use his own brain.

pat555

No I didn't mean it like that, what I meant about moving around their position was for example if you tell your players to spread and be wide, a player with high CF may decide to come inside or may play wide when you tell the team to play narrow.

I didn't mean a player will switch over to the left wing if they are a right sided player.

retired_dolly67601

Sorry, FMTacticus I misread your post. I read it as "then he might take it upon himself to switch to the left wing"

You're totally right in what you said.

retired_janearific

Thats exactly what creative freedom is, its allowing the football to use his own brain. </BLOCKQUOTE>

I have been wondering about creative freedom for a while now, and while I agree with you that more freedom allows the player to use his footballing brain, I wonder if you can use it for defensive players too. An example would be Jamie Carragher or Claude Makalele, whose natural instincts and style of play revolve around defending. By giving them a higher level of creative freedom are you allowing them to play their "natural" game and be defensive minded, or does a higher level of creative freedom just automatically give the player licence to attack ??

retired_sharonverm

With regards to mentality and defensive line:

You may have noticed this in game pop up when the game is loading. It goes something like this:

"If there is a large gap behind your defence, then try either lowering your defender's mentality to ultra defensive or deepen your defensive line."

It's straight from the horses mouth, but I honestly can't deem this true. I put all of my back 4 on 1 mentality and they still played high up the pitch although I did play a high defensive line. I have to believe then that mentality is more linked with players attributes and is entirely positional based.

retired_dolly67601

Thats exactly what creative freedom is, its allowing the football to use his own brain. </BLOCKQUOTE>

I have been wondering about creative freedom for a while now, and while I agree with you that more freedom allows the player to use his footballing brain, I wonder if you can use it for defensive players too. An example would be Jamie Carragher or Claude Makalele, whose natural instincts and style of play revolve around defending. By giving them a higher level of creative freedom are you allowing them to play their "natural" game and be defensive minded, or does a higher level of creative freedom just automatically give the player licence to attack ?? </BLOCKQUOTE>

Without meaning to sound off hand, I doubt that making a defensive players creative freedom higher would make his defensive instincts higher as the whole creative freedom setting is to make a person more creative not defensive.

However jep, it could be very useful for a sweeper giving higher creative freedom, ala Beckenbauer

retired_elpata

Thats exactly what creative freedom is, its allowing the football to use his own brain. </BLOCKQUOTE>

I have been wondering about creative freedom for a while now, and while I agree with you that more freedom allows the player to use his footballing brain, I wonder if you can use it for defensive players too. An example would be Jamie Carragher or Claude Makalele, whose natural instincts and style of play revolve around defending. By giving them a higher level of creative freedom are you allowing them to play their "natural" game and be defensive minded, or does a higher level of creative freedom just automatically give the player licence to attack ?? </BLOCKQUOTE>

Thats good in theory, but CF allows a player to ignore instructions and do what he thinks is right. So on a defensive player it could be costly.

retired_mgavlick

I have had to snip this from TT&F, so I'm sure you have read it before, but this is my take, for what it is worth. As mentality is the guiding light for my tactics, I have thought long and hard about this, so I hope a repeat read of my musings doesn't p*ss you off too much.


[b]Mentality Assumptions[/i]

1: Mentality as a positioning tool. It is primarily concerned with how much a player helps out with attacking or defensive duties. Thus, a DC with mentality of 6 will concentrate on defensive duties 70% of the time and look to join in/start off attacking moves 30% of the time. An FC with mentality of 18 will look to attack 90% of the time. Each player’s position reflects this, with FCs of 18 staying higher up the pitch than those of 12 and DCs of 4 staying deeper than those of 10. However, position type partially overrides mentality positioning as DCs are unlikely to leave their main positional duties and become auxiliary FCs mid-move.

2: Mentality as a risk/reward agent. It is primarily concerned with how likely a player is to make an attacking move. Thus, a DC with mentality of 6 will only make an attacking move if he judges the move as being &gt;70% likely to succeed. An FC with a mentality of 18 will have a go even if he thinks the move has &gt;10% chance of succeeding.

3: Mentality as a pass type indicator. It is primarily concerned with the type of pass a player will make. A DC with mentality of 6 will only play a forward ball 30% of the time. An FC with mentality of 18 will shoot/play a forward pass 90% of the time.


Although I originally planned formation frameworks with Assumption 1 in mind, I now believe Assumption 2 to be most likely. I'll try to explain why.


Mentality as a risk/reward agent has its roots in positional thinking. A player with a high attacking mentality undeniably positions himself higher up the pitch than a player in the same position with a defensive mentality. However, we have other tools to determine positioning (position types, sarrows, farrows, barrows). So, why do we need a third tool to define it? We probably don't. Yet, there is on-screen evidence that a player with a high mentality gets further up the pitch than one with low (and a high mentality FC refuses to defend, whereas a low mentality FC gets back). What is the reason for this?

I believe it is related to how mentality influences other offensive or defensive options. An FC with a mentality of 18 looks to make attacking moves 90% of the time. When he is not in possession of the ball these options will be reduced to off-the-ball moves (forward runs). It is his constant repositioning while looking for chances to make a forward run (which he does 90% of the time) that makes it look like he is further up the pitch than his lower mentality strike partner. Once he is in possession he will have the option of through balls, run with ball, long shot, or basic shot if he is close to goal. His individual instructions inform him of how often he is allowed to try each one. If long shots is rarely but through ball and run with ball high he will attempt to pull off one of those two moves assuming he thinks it has &gt;10% chance of succeeding. If one is often and the other mixed he is 50% more likely to try the often option.

Other attributes are likely to determine his success rate. Decision making plays a major part, but teamwork, dribbling, passing, flair, creativity and finishing all have their roles. Likewise, the qualities of the player he is facing will stop many of his moves. Yet, as he has such a high mentality he will keep on trying them.

Players with low mentalities obviously look at the risk/reward situation in a different way and thus don't play attacking balls unless the reward factor heavily outweighs the risk.

So, how to use this?

It is obviously a bad idea to play DCs with too high a mentality (give away the ball too easily with stupid forward passes) or too low (will dawdle on the ball and refuse to play forward balls until put under pressure from pressing attackers). A striker with low mentality will never take on half-chances. Hence, RoT seems the way to go. it balances the system with DCs only playing forward balls when reward outweighs risk, FCs looking to create/shoot most of the time with the midfield being somewhere in the middle.

In terms of how to combine attacking tools (long shots, through balls, crosses, forward runs, run with ball) with the mentality option logic has to rule. DCs shouldn't cross the ball, make forward runs, run with ball or take many long shots as their primary job is to defend. The position tool overrides other instructions so they will stay back unless forward runs is ticked. If it is they will join attacking moves as long as they believe they have a &gt;70% chance of coming off. That percentage is too dangerous for me (as 3 out of 10 times I will be a man short at the back when counter-attacked) so I restrict their attacking options to through balls. If they have good decision making and passing skills then through balls are a must (combined with mixed/direct passing) as they will hit them only when they believe they have a &gt;70% chance of succeeding. Such a ball can tear a defence apart.

The further up the pitch the player plays (or the wider his role) the more likely he will be able to make attacking chances (less risk of interception, blocks etc). Each level of mentality in a RoT system should be given more attacking tools depending on their attributes. Therefore all players should have some through balls, crossing, run with ball, long shots optioned. DMCs should mainly concentrate on long shots and through balls. Wide players can cross, run with ball, play through balls but not make many long shots as angles will be against them. AMCs should look for through balls primarily but also have long shots and run with ball available. FCs can do everything.

In short, mentality is the tool that informs players of risk/reward and combines with decision making to construct attacking moves. Additional tools to be taken into consideration are player attributes and player instructions. A logical combination of all three will determine how successful a tactic will become.

retired_dolly67601

wwfan, that was a great write up.

So, theoretically, if you had a midfielder who's mentality was set to 20, that would mean he'd be looking to make an attacking move 100% of the time.

So if you set his other instructions to rarely for everything apart from try through balls which would be set to often, that would mean that every time he received the ball then for a very high percentage (can't say 100% because rarely doesn't mean never, so there's always a slim chance of attempting one of the other things) he would attempt a through ball?