FM too focussed on formation "trends"

Playing as Chelsea with Roman's billions, I tried to get a few different formations going. Eventually after dropping to 12th after 9 games of the third season, I switched to the 4231 barcelona formation and have conceded about 5 goals for the rest of the season whilst scoring 3-5 in most matches.

I think FM has become too streamlined- with the tactics creator we have a lot of people playing similar setups and when you try to create something else I think the game doesn't handle it as well as it used to.

Cheers

I've noticed that too...

4-2-3-1 seem to be ultra-effective even when the players would be better suited for, say, a good old 4-3-3.

It's still possible winning with a different formation, but in FM2011 the 4-2-3-1 is more or less a "quick fix" for every team.

Could it be because many newgens' shapes seem tailor-made for the Inside Forward role, while pure strikers still struggle to perform as well as their stats might suggest?

Basically what DM/Anchor man was for FM10, AMC/Inside Forward is for FM11

I don't agree. I've played with a number of different clubs at wildly varying levels. For me personally attempts to transfer tactics between clubs has never been as effective as developing brand new club-specific tactics. My successful tactics have been pretty varied: 4-1-4-1, 4-6-0, 4-3-1-2, 4-2-2-2...

In fact the only constant is that i've not been able to get AML/AMR to work as well as ML/MR.

I had a strange experience. Playing as Chelsea I used the 442 that worked for me in '05, '06, '07, '08 and won the league with 95 points and a treble. Ramires in Right Midfield scores 20 goals in this formation:

......................cech......................

Ivanovic.....Terry.....Alex..........Cole

.....................Essien.....................

Ramires...........Lampard............Malouda

.....................................................

...............Drogba.......Torres............

the next two seasons it totally crumbled and despite signing Robben (and Balotelli) season 2 we just totally collapsed. Season 3 after 9 games sitting in 12th I switched to a simple 4231 and conceded about 5 goals for the rest of the season scoring 3-5 in most games and winning another treble.

Anyway- looking forward to FM12 now, hoping that the tactical interface makes more sense to me!

There's a reason why 4-2-3-1 is the current "trend" tactic. It's a very effective tactic that is good defensively (becomes 4-5-1 or 4-1-4-1) and offensively (god I feel American right now(becomes 4-3-3 or 4-2-1-3)). Until a team comes along with a tactic that counters this well, you will see this used for the next couple of years.

Sorry if this might seem a daft question. But can anyone link me to or show me this coveted 4-2-1-3? Which roles do you give for the positions etc? In my current save with United I'm into my 2nd season and am using a fairly simple 4-4-2 with roles tailored to my specific players. Needless to say, beating Real Madrid 4-1 in my recent Champs League group match shows I must be doing something right!

Sorry if this might seem a daft question. But can anyone link me to or show me this coveted 4-2-1-3? Which roles do you give for the positions etc? In my current save with United I'm into my 2nd season and am using a fairly simple 4-4-2 with roles tailored to my specific players. Needless to say, beating Real Madrid 4-1 in my recent Champs League group match shows I must be doing something right!

I don't use this line-up myself but try sfraser's 'Meet The System' thread in Tactics & Training section somewhere. Unfortunately I don't know how to link you there.

There's a reason why 4-2-3-1 is the current "trend" tactic. It's a very effective tactic that is good defensively (becomes 4-5-1 or 4-1-4-1) and offensively (god I feel American right now(becomes 4-3-3 or 4-2-1-3)). Until a team comes along with a tactic that counters this well, you will see this used for the next couple of years.

I'd agree with that, event though I think it's a little too extreme in FM. I think an important point is though: FM is becoming too narrow. Especially with the tactics creator we have a big number of people playing similar systems and this threatens what many people have always loved about FM. It's like making your own football world, and in the past I feel the game was more balanced and especially understandable to the point where I could make several systems that work logically.

Although it probably is an effective move to go 4-2-3-1 at the higher levels I wouldn't say the game has become to streamlined or easy. I do most of my playing in the lower leagues and I've found success with a good standard 4-4-2 and a 4-3-3. In fact at the lower level I'd say the 4-2-3-1 wouldn't be anywhere near as effective due to the lack of specialist players to fill many of the positions

I'm using a 4-2-2-2 formation (4 defenders, 2 CM, 2 Wingers, 2 Strikers). Though I tend to switch the formation if I move to a new club to whatever would suit the players at their club.

4-2-3-1 worked great for me in FM10, but has been awful for me in FM11. I have switched to the 4-3-3/4-5-1 and had great success.

The point about most people using similar systems for success is true, but then it's true of real life football, in that there aren't that many different systems which are used. The majority of big teams seem to play a variation of 4-5-1 or 4-4-2 these days.

I actually always have a lot of trouble with single-striker formations. When I use a Poacher-style forward, I always find they get easily marked by two centrebacks, and when I use a more dynamic forward, I find that they rarely ever make themselves available for the easy through-ball/cross.

Also, since strikers go in and out of form each so rapidly, and since they have to deal with the dropping confidence phenomenon (i.e., missing shots early drops their playing rating, affects their performance and starts a vicious cycle towards more blown shots), I've taken to always using a second striker in case the other one just has a poor match.

It's less about the formation than the style of play. Narrow formations playing through the middle are more efficient than wide formations aming for crossing to powerful strikers because Heading is an "off" ability (except for on set pieces). This is totally reversed from FM2010. Until SI balances this and reduces the amount of one-on-ones with the keeper (and the importance of Pace), some tactics will be favoured over others.

It's less about the formation than the style of play. Narrow formations playing through the middle are more efficient than wide formations aming for crossing to powerful strikers because Heading is an "off" ability (except for on set pieces). This is totally reversed from FM2010. Until SI balances this and reduces the amount of one-on-ones with the keeper (and the importance of Pace), some tactics will be favoured over others.

:confused:

I've had far more success by playing down the wings than by the middle. Having proper wingers is almost indispensable for success in this version of FM.

If anything, FM isn't giving enough of an advantage to modern formations in its engine. I've bafflingly had lots of success with a 4-2-2-2 (2 defensive CMs, 2 wingers, 2 advanced forwards) when that would've been an outdated tactic in modern top-level football - you concede far too much space in the midfield. Being outnumbered in the midfield isn't enough of a disadvantage in the current match engine.

I'd say this engine is better than FM10, though. In FM10 for me, it was far too easy to win by playing narrow formations such as 3 central midfielders and 3 central strikers, wingers seemed not to work. Other than in Italy and Brazil, in real life currently you'll find all top level football clubs playing with wingers.

Or perhaps the fact we're all having wildly conflicting conclusions as to how the match engine works, means that it goes far deeper than we think. There's subtle differences between our experiences that are making all the difference... In fact I've noticed some pretty major differences between the leagues I've managed in FM11. For example, in Italy you're more likely to find yourself disadvantaged by being outnumbered in midfield than in England or Croatia, where playing that 4-2-2-2 wide formation seems more effective.

By the way, Barcelona doesn't play 4-2-3-1, they play 4-3-3 or if you like, a 4-1-2-3 (Busquets definitely sits deeper than the other two central midfielders Xavi and Iniesta, sometimes even drops between the centre-backs in the early stages of possession). 4-2-3-1 is more like Real Madrid's formation, with a clear forward in Benzema, Ozil as a clear AMC, Ronaldo and Di Maria as clear inverted wingers, albeit Di Maria will sit deeper. Then Xabi Alonso and Khedira take turns on helping the attack as the 2 deeper midfielders, Xabi with a slightly more defensive role of the two.

Although to be fair the Barça/Real formations are quite similar and subtle variants of each other, it mostly depends on whether the midfield triangle has 1 man behind and 2 ahead, or the opposite. They have completely different dynamics, though.

It's less about the formation than the style of play. Narrow formations playing through the middle are more efficient than wide formations aming for crossing to powerful strikers because Heading is an "off" ability (except for on set pieces). This is totally reversed from FM2010. Until SI balances this and reduces the amount of one-on-ones with the keeper (and the importance of Pace), some tactics will be favoured over others.

Hmmm, I've actually had more success playing down the flanks and using wingers who cut inside for the shot/through-ball. At least in my experience, narrow formations tend to get smothered by anchor men. The trick, at least for me, is to use more direct-passing with fullbacks so they quickly get the ball down the flanks before the opposition defenders pack the box then use short-passing wingers/inside forwards to tap the ball into the channels while the space is still there.

Of course, this kind of proves the OP's basic point about trendy tactical ideas, but I still find it works best with two strikers (with one waiting in the channels at each flank instead of staying central to wait for a cross).

I've bafflingly had lots of success with a 4-2-2-2 (2 defensive CMs, 2 wingers, 2 advanced forwards) when that would've been an outdated tactic in modern top-level football - you concede far too much space in the midfield.

That's true, though I think it's partly dependent on mentality. For defensive tactics, more CM's obviously do a better job of protecting the box and quickly regaining possession, but for offensive tactics, CM's seem to be fairly ineffective at either contributing to build-up play or timing their forward runs. Generally, I have trouble getting much out of players like Fabregas and usually just end up retraining them as Eden Hazard-esque wide playmakers.

I actually always have a lot of trouble with single-striker formations. When I use a Poacher-style forward, I always find they get easily marked by two centrebacks, and when I use a more dynamic forward, I find that they rarely ever make themselves available for the easy through-ball/cross.

Also, since strikers go in and out of form each so rapidly, and since they have to deal with the dropping confidence phenomenon (i.e., missing shots early drops their playing rating, affects their performance and starts a vicious cycle towards more blown shots), I've taken to always using a second striker in case the other one just has a poor match.

My wingers usually outscore my striker over the course of the season. Both are set as inside forwards, with the striker set as DLF, and they basically form a front 3.

My wingers usually outscore my striker over the course of the season. Both are set as inside forwards, with the striker set as DLF, and they basically form a front 3.

Mine are the same way. In fact, I find that my advanced mid-fielders tend to be better finishers overall as the season goes on, even though their shooting stats are lower. I think part of it has to do with mid-fielders being under less pressure to score. If your striker misses a lot of shots one day or goes a few matches without a goal, the press starts asking questions and he loses confidence. If a mid-fielder misses a lot of shots or goes a few matches without a goal, that's just him being a mid-fielder and it doesn't affect his performance in the slightest.

Also let's not forget the ridiculous influence of Pace and Acceleration...

You can get 4 "Oba Oba Martins" and kick some major asses despite them being more suited for track&field than for football... Sure the SoG/Goal ratio would be far from great but out of 4 one-on-one they'll surely put one away...

I'm struggling to find the motivation to be tactically "creative" when it's clear a pacey winger/striker is always going to be a better choice than, say, a traditional Target Man or a possession-oriented slow AMC

Or perhaps the fact we're all having wildly conflicting conclusions as to how the match engine works, means that it goes far deeper than we think. There's subtle differences between our experiences that are making all the difference... In fact I've noticed some pretty major differences between the leagues I've managed in FM11. For example, in Italy you're more likely to find yourself disadvantaged by being outnumbered in midfield than in England or Croatia, where playing that 4-2-2-2 wide formation seems more effective.

Me too. In Spain, my Las Palmas game, I have a big, strong and fast world class striker who should dominate in the air in the box, and some pretty good wingers with good crossing. However, no matter what I do to the wingers, the crosses do not reach his head.

In Italy, managing Juventus, Iaquinta being inferior in every way to that striker scores on crosses consistently. Defenders in Spain and Italy are usually equally small, and the quality is roughly the same.

Hmmm, I've actually had more success playing down the flanks and using wingers who cut inside for the shot/through-ball. At least in my experience, narrow formations tend to get smothered by anchor men. The trick, at least for me, is to use more direct-passing with fullbacks so they quickly get the ball down the flanks before the opposition defenders pack the box then use short-passing wingers/inside forwards to tap the ball into the channels while the space is still there.

Yeah that is what I do too. Crossing to the strikers is very rare, though. It is usually the other winger who scores on crosses, and those crosses usually comes from deep.

Getting to cross from the byline with 2 or more players running into the box, curling outwards, that is very very dangerous for any RL defense, but it doesn't seem like it is in FM11. I feel at least part of the problem is that a player's chance of actually reaching a cross with his head in the box is a matter of anticipation, pace and acceleration, not jumping, off the ball and heading. A player's proficiency in the air should be governed in-match by his off the ball, heading, strength and jumping attributes primarily. Which means that striker that is good in the air should score many goals from crosses. As it is now, they don't.

Also, when you have a striker that is strong in the air on the team, players should seek to use that to the team's advantage. It's 9th season and Real Madrid have a 195cm tall striker with 20 in jumping and 19 in strength. His companion up front was a fast and small striker. Yet, he won 1 of 2 aerial challenges while his smaller teammate won 1 of 6. Why?

I have noticed too pretty early in my FM11 experience that target men seem worthless, so I stuck with advanced/deep-lying/trequartista forwards. It doesn't bother me too much because I never liked to play with target men. But there may be something weird there.

Wingers however are very dangerous in this game, because they tend to exploit space very well, even if their crosses to the forwards hardly ever result in goals. I have also had much more success in telling them to aim for the far post and have the opposite side winger head them in, by arriving late to the keeper's box.

*Player naming*

Sorry if this might seem a daft question. But can anyone link me to or show me this coveted 4-2-1-3? Which roles do you give for the positions etc? In my current save with United I'm into my 2nd season and am using a fairly simple 4-4-2 with roles tailored to my specific players. Needless to say, beating Real Madrid 4-1 in my recent Champs League group match shows I must be doing something right!

Defence: whatever your preference is. Back fours never change.

Midfield: The two CMs are essentially the same as in a 4-4-2. Presumably you're using Carrick and Fletcher- these two probably work best as a DLP and BWM respectively. Against most teams, I have them both on support duties, but I'll change one or both to "defend" when I think it appropriate. Gibson is a good back up for Carrick and Anderson for Fletcher (Anderson can also play Carrick's role and as a B2B midfielder).

Use Nani as an inside forward, regardless of which side he plays on. The other winger, use in whatever role you think suits them best- I'd suggest "winger" for Valencia, it isn't ideal but you can still play very good football.

The AMC- always have them on RFD. Other than that, pick the role that suits them best.

Striker: much as with the rest of the team, any role can work. I prefer poacher, advanced forward or complete forward (attack) as they'll try and get in behind the defence (the main weakness of 4-2-3-1 is the lack of players in behind the defence). Hernandez is ideal for poacher or advanced forward, Rooney is good for pretty much any role except maybe Target Man. Don't try and shoehorn Berbatov into poacher or advanced forward or defensive forward, otherwise he'll be fine.

Regardless, if you're using a successful tactic already... why change?

Everything comes down to pace in fm11. if you have burners at the wings and up top you are going to kill teams. i find the most effective strikers to be walcot lennon types who just run by everyone. target guys with 20 finishing and composure score way fewer goals for me than burners with 11 finishing and composure but 19 speed and accel.

Sorry if this might seem a daft question. But can anyone link me to or show me this coveted 4-2-1-3? Which roles do you give for the positions etc? In my current save with United I'm into my 2nd season and am using a fairly simple 4-4-2 with roles tailored to my specific players. Needless to say, beating Real Madrid 4-1 in my recent Champs League group match shows I must be doing something right!

http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php/265090-Meet-The-System

(hope this works) Try here.