Creating your Own Tactical Identity/System

Every year when I play football manager, I start off trying to build the perfect squad of players mainly to explore the new features of the game. Later my goal switches from building the perfect team to creating the perfect tactical system. Each year I task myself with trying to come up with a new innovative tactical creation and this is what keeps football manager fresh and exciting for me. The system itself is perfect in the sense that it makes the game extremely enjoyable and the resulting football must be satisfying (rather than unbeatable).

So I have started a new game save ready to tackle this challenge with Napoli: an exciting team with some good quality players but not in abundance.

Creating such a tactic isn't as hard as you might believe but the important thing is to have a clear direction for your end product. This means much more than what brand of football (ie possession or counter attack for example) but extends to:

How is space going to be created?

Where my attacking threats are going to come from?

What is my defensive shape going to be? etc

I tend to try to carpool as many tactical innovations and ideas that I find interesting or particularly effective or eyecatching and try to mould them into one coherent system. Each idea that is involved in the tactic's creation goes some way to answering each of these questions.

The Defense:

I have always thought about using a 3-man defense but I also wanted the ability to interchange smoothly into a 4-man defense easily rather than a 5 man-defense like the AI often does. Upon racking my brain for ideas I thought of Brazil's World Cup team in 2010. I remember the effectiveness of Maicon working the right flank on his own and I thought of Maggio doing something

I saw the potential for a back 3 plus a RWB could allow my team to play as a back three against weaker teams but as a back 4 against stronger teams. Being Napoli I thought i would play the LB far more defensively and perhaps even play a left-footed CB there.

The Midfield:

The other thing that I admired about Brazil's defensive set up was their 2 holding midfielders. They worked extremely well together and complemented one another. Both held well and one was given a slightly more advanced position in attack for a more creative role. Their close positioning made Brazil a difficult team to break down and also meant that inside forwards and attacking wingers would have less space to operate in. Holland used a similar-ish system of 2 DMs at the world cup using De Jong and van Bommel to halt oncoming attacks and shield the back 4.

I plan to utilise a similar idea, using an DM and a fairly aggressive DLP. The DLP will not be a Ramsey-type or Xavi-type player but more of a Felipe Melo role and so defensive ability is paramount. This suits my team since I have Walter Gargano to play the deeper DM role like De Jong did for Holland and Gokhan Inler to play the DLP role like Melo.

I also wanted to utilise the wings for width and so wanted to use wingers. I wanted both to shuttle up and down the pitch working hard in all phases of the game to act as link players. On the right hand side I already had my RWB but on the left I decided to go for a LM to work the flank with some additional help from the defensive LB.

The last man in midfield is placed as the link between my holding players and the strikers as well as a player who tries to get past to attack any holes in the defense. This idea is courtesy of qqq and his Liberation tactic. This role suits Hamsik to the letter.

The Attack:

I had two ideas for the attack, either a trident inspired by Bologna of 2001/02 and the current Napoli tactics or a double pivot which is one of the two natural supersessions of my triple midfield pivot in fm 11. I decided to go for the latter.

The double pivot is my favourite part of the tactic not only due to its effectiveness but also because it is completely my own creation. The aim of the double pivot is for both strikers to be the deeper striker and the more advanced striker. Both attack the channels, come deep, attack the defense etc... This creates space in front of the opposition back four and inbetween the CBs for other players to attack such as my MCa as well as enabling good interplay between the strikers. The fluidity created by these 3 players when combined with the 2 wide players should be able to move the opposition markers out of position to create space.

General Philosophies:

The aim of the tactic to create confusion within the opposition defense due to lots of fluid off the ball movement and random position interchange. This will allow gaps to form in the opposition defense which can also be exploited. Another aim is that if the opposition try to counter/reduce one of my offensive outlets by staying tight to one of my strikers for example this can be self-destructive in that it allows other players to thrive.

All of the concepts above placed into one formation looks like:

To implement this in FM the following roles were chosen:

There are some minor editing to individual instructions of some of the roles but nothing major.

I think the back 3 is fairly self-explanatory although I am considering making the DCl Vertonghen a cover.

The right wing back is a support so his mentality is not too high so he doesn't venture forwards too often.

The DM and MCr are my holding midfielders. The MCr is the creative one and is slightly higher up the pitch.

The MCl is set to attack the gaps created by the movement of the strikers.

The left winger whips crosses to my onrushing players and maintains width in our team.

The 2 STs are both set to support roles so they have the same mentality and mixed run from deep. This allows both strikers to come deep giving the defense constantly unique situations to deal with every attack.

(Unfortunately this section will have few screenshots because the examples of the failings and weaknesses of the tactic when it was at the early stages of development are from a corrupted save game.)

Learning to interpret what happens during matches is extremely important if you want your tactic to be able to succeed both in the short term and in the long term. Without seeing the weaknesses in the tactic upon creation then don't be surprised when your team comes across a team that exploits them (either by good management by the AI manager or because that's how the opposition team normally sets up) that you can be thrashed. Losing is not the only problem that is caused by not spotting weaknesses in your tactics. A large number of yellow cards and a struggle against a particular type of team, whether that be weaker/stronger; or those that attack down the wing, use a target man, or have pacy strikers, or lots of playmakers etc are also signs that there may be weaknesses in the tactic. Some are more obvious than others, for example my formation is weaker defensively down the right flank than the left while others are less obvious.

The exploitation of my weaker flank was carried out to perfection by Tottenham in the Champion's League. I took a risk to try to use this unfinished tactic against Tottenham in the first round at home in the Champion's League but Bale ripped my team apart regularly beating Maggio on that flank. He was greatly helped by an attacking left back in Olsson giving both a numerical advantage as well as one due to natural ability. The result was not nice: a 4-0 loss despite being a reasonably even game. On another day the match could easily have been 4-4 but with confidence down due to their team regularly ripping through the flanks of my team it was not a surprise that they missed their opportunities to score.

First of all in analysing why my team lost so badly lets have a look at the line ups:

Even from the line ups it was clear as to where the game was going to be won and lost. Rather than this being a game of the midfield battle, there were 3 key battles on the field:

Olsson versus Lavezzi

Bale versus Maggio

Hazard versus Gargano

Battle 1: Olsson versus Lavezzi

This battle is less a head to head battle between the players but more a battle of which player is going to be forced to retreat into a defensive role. With both players being paramount to both sides chances of wining due to the attacking positions they take up and the fact that both attack the weakest part of the opposition defense.

Lavezzi is the ideal player to attack the gap left by Olsson when he goes forward during attacks. Exploiting this gap was going to be my best chance of scoring with a packed midfield and Spurs deploying to defensive CMs. If we could win the ball back and quickly play Lavezzi in behind Olsson, before he has a chance to track back then we had a good chance of scoring on the break.

On the other hand with Lavezzi not tracking Olsson back very far, Olsson had the chance to work with Bale to double team Maggio. If Olsson was brave and forgot about Lavezzi then in theory they would be able to retain possession better and would be able to exploit Bale's ability to the maximum.

Winner: Olsson

With Olsson pushing forward on their attacks, it became increasingly difficult to win the ball back and so couldn't actually exploit the advantages of Lavezzi not tracking back. A double whammy. Also with Olsson and Bale double teaming Maggio, Bale was even more dangerous: more on that later.

Battle 2: Bale versus Maggio

This was a head to head battle.

Maggio provided the width for my team on the right flank and so was required to push forward yet Bale was their best player and so the space behind Maggio was what Bale wants to attack. If Maggio was energetic enough to attack and defend then there would be increased space for Lavezzi and Cavani upfront with Olsson and Bale being forced to defend wider.

The threat of Bale attacking behind Maggio is a scary prospect for my defense. If Bale is unleashed down my right flank on the counter attack then that would be very dangerous.

Winner: Bale

This was partly due to Olsson pushing forward allowing Bale to attack Maggio more freely. When Maggio was forced to close down Olsson, Bale was left free to attack the box or whip in a cross. To counter this Gargano often came across to close Bale down, however this led to more problems...

Battle 3: Hazard versus Gargano

Another head to head battle.

Winner: Hazard

Gargano was going to have a tough enough time against Hazard without having to protect the left flank. With Gargano often being forced to close down Bale, he left Hazard free in-between the lines in a dangerous position. This meant that Hazard often found himself with the ball at his feet outside the box with no one around him. This gave my team a dilemma, do we leave him free, or close him down. If we close him down, it is likely that he will be able to pick a killer pass which will lead to a goal. This is because those that would be able to close him down are the CBs, and neither of my CBs are particularly fast, thus one CB wouldn't be able to keep the speedster Defoe under wraps. Instead we had to hope that Hazard would shoot from distance and not score or try a killer ball which could be intercepted by our back-line staying tight and compact.

Unfortunately this was asking for too much. Hazard ended with 2 assists and I think 4/5 key passes where as Bale ended up with 2 goals and 1 assist.

I was bitterly disappointed with myself and knew that the tie was over.

When the second leg arrived, I made changes to the tactic and tried again:

I changed WBR from a wing back attack to a support and reduced his runs from deep.

This was done so he wouldn't get caught upfield as much so Bale would be less of a threat. I also used Zuniga rather than Maggio, since Zuniga actually has some defensive ability and would be able to cope Bale much better in defensive situations, whilst still being able to provide width in my team. The knock on effect of this was that Gargano didn't need to cover the right flank as often and so could stay tight on Hazard trying to mark him out of the game.

I changed Lavezzi's instructions so he was a bit wider and attacked the right flank more from the STCr position, in an attempt to really make the most of the gap left by the attacking fullback, Olsson.

The final change was one of personnel. I played Dossena at LM and Ansaldi at LB. This is a far more attacking combination and means I should be able to overload the left flank as well as the right flank. The fact that both of these players are very good at crossing helps this fact.

The result of these changes was an utter domination of the second leg. Unfortunately, we could only score 2 but on another day we could have scored 4 or 5. The fact that the Spurs keeper got the man of the match really highlights this.

To understand why these changes worked lets have a look at the line up in the second leg and the resulting battles:

By carrying out the above changes I have essentially made my team more able to win and exploit the first battle mentioned before between Lavezzi and Olsson. As well as this I have introduced a new battle between Dossena and the opposition RB (Sorry it says DL on the diagram where it should say DR). As well as this I have now made the midfield battle more important and one that I intended to win.

Battle 1: Olsson versus Lavezzi

With the changes above, I have made my team able to find Lavezzi more easily and have also placed him in a better position to be able to immediately exploit the gap here. This to a slight detriment to the fluidity of my double pivot but if it works then the knock on effect of losing this battle will greatly help the team.

Winner: Lavezzi

With Zuniga much less offensive than Maggio, the advantage of Olsson being attacking was greatly reduced. He was so ineffective that with Lavezzi running riot down this flank, they were forced to employ Olsson much more defensively. By this point we had already scored through a Lavezzi counter attack to set up Cavani. By them going more defensive, I was able Lavezzi closer to my normal double pivot instructions, thus able to at times exploit Olsson but also getting better link-up play with Cavani. Plus with Olsson, not being as attacking, there was now never an advantage Spurs down in the battle. The move was purely damage limitation which suits me fine.

Another benefit of Lavezzi winning this battle is shown on the line up. With Lavezzi attacking the right flank behind Olsson, Tottenham's left CB was forced to move across to cover thus allowing Cavani to attack the space created. The knock on effect of this was the right CB moving across thus creating space for Hamsik to attack into which he struggled to find in the first leg. This gave the Spurs' left back a dilemma but more on this later.

Battle 2: Bale versus Zuniga

With Zuniga being more defensive coupled with the fact that Olsson was more defensive, this battle was much more of a head to head battle. This was very much a case of Bale trying to dribble past Zuniga but with Zuniga being reasonably capable at defense and with a lack of support for Bale, Bale quickly became repetitive and predictable. The times when Bale did beat Zuniga, he could only cross to a box where he is aiming for Defoe and Hazard most of the time. Kara and Vertonghen are more than capable of dealing with these crosses and so Bale was nullified as a threat. Zuniga offensively had a good game and being more defensive actually opened up the midfield slightly which benefited me with the midfield battle and as well creating more space for Cavani to operate in.

Winner: Zuniga

Battle 3: The left flank

With the use of Dossena and Ansaldi I had a much more potent attacking force down the left flank. Also the use of Ansaldi who pushes up more due to the PPM: gets forward whenever possible, Dossena was able to attack the opposition LB more regularly rather than having to act as a link player as often.

The risk associated with this change was that Spurs' RM Lennon and later Valencia could attack more ferociously down the wing and put in more dangerous crosses to someone who could win a ball in the air: Bale.

Winner: Napoli

This is mainly due to Battle 1, forcing the opposition back-line to shuffle across to cover for Lavezzi. If the RB does move across, then the RM has to cover Dossena leaving Ansaldi to whip in a cross from deep. This is how we scored our second goal. If the RM does not cover Dossena, then Dossena can cross from the byline or even attack the goal.

On the other hand if the Spurs' RB does not move across, then Hamsik can charge forwards into the gap between the RB and the CBr putting him through on goal.

Battle 4: The Midfield Battle

Tottenham had lost the battle on the right flank which had then caused them to lose the battle on the left flank. Unless they changed something soon then it was very possible that we could score the 4 goals we needed. They responded by trying to win the midfield battle and close down our CMs aggressively to stop us from being able to switch the ball from the right flank to the left flank effectively thus giving their defense a chance to reset. This had worked to some extent but introduced a new problem: Inler was a deep lying playmaker and closing him down meant space was created for Cavani as shown on the formation diagram.

Hamsik could also move into this space and he became increasingly difficult to mark for Sandro as he popped up just about everywhere in the opposition half, moving to where the space was.

Gargano and Hazard both became a bit isolated and tracked each other closely but this worked in my favour because Gargano wasn't too important to my attacking game but Hazard was to theirs. With Hazard never really in space, he struggled to even initiate counter attacks.

Another consequence of their pressing was that Gargano and Inler were forced to go even deeper to receive the ball, meaning that their defense had to push up allowing more direct balls to be played to Cavani and Lavezzi who could beat the opposition defense for pace any day of the week.

Winner: on balance Napoli

These few changes were enough to turn the second leg performance on its head. By targeting the battles which I had lost the first time round, and turning them around as well as making new battles which I thought I could win, basically made my team look better than it was. I was attacking the Tottenham weaknesses in a much more varied and sophisticated manner and in doing so trying to mask the weaknesses that my team had.

reserved for defense 2

reserved for attack

reserved for attack 2

reserved for attack 3

reserved for conclusion

Great looking start to a thread. I think creating a tactical identity (or flavor) is pretty crucial in whatever you're doing. A lot is written on designing for tactic or designing for players but I think there can be far more interplay between the two ideals if you design for concept. By creating a set of ideals (or a philosophical approach)you can typify the club you're building rather than just the squad you have right now. That way you can change your squad makeup or your tactical makeup (or both over time) but still retain the flavor that you've been building.

I tend to emphasize one dimension and then add more as the squad/tactic develops rather than 'carpool' ideas and try to integrate most/all of them so it'll be interesting to see how each individual idea goes in to your overall idea.

Great looking start to a thread. I think creating a tactical identity (or flavor) is pretty crucial in whatever you're doing. A lot is written on designing for tactic or designing for players but I think there can be far more interplay between the two ideals if you design for concept. By creating a set of ideals (or a philosophical approach)you can typify the club you're building rather than just the squad you have right now. That way you can change your squad makeup or your tactical makeup (or both over time) but still retain the flavor that you've been building.

I tend to emphasize one dimension and then add more as the squad/tactic develops rather than 'carpool' ideas and try to integrate most/all of them so it'll be interesting to see how each individual idea goes in to your overall idea.

I agree completely. Normally I don't put all my ideas straight into one tactic. When I started my Napoli save I used a couple of these ideas in the first season in a 3421. This had a trident upfront instead of the double pivot but used the 2 holding mids and the wide players are fairly similar to the ones I use at the moment.

Now into the second season, since i have a bit more quality (and less CBs thanks to a 4 month injury to Van Buyten) I have decided to go to my current formation. I haven't completely nailed it yet but it's getting there. The defense is a little shaky at times on the counter or against strong teams but attacking wise it can be supremely varied and produces great interplay. The great thing about the tactic so far is although there is quite a lot of tactical ideas being carpooled, I have spent a long time trying to make sure that the ideas complement each other as much as possible.

I'm looking forward to see how it'll develop and what you do with it.

I have a similar 'flavor' tactic that I occasionally that hinges around getting the RB to work the side. It's only a 'sometimes' tactic so I haven't really had to develop it to a point where I can use it in a variety of situations but something that really helped was setting the focus passing down the left but making sure a couple of players had roles that allowed them some creative passing freedom so that they could ignore the 'down the left' instructions and fire a ball out right to the RB who was in A C R E S of space! So much space to run at the opposition that I stuck my quickest, most direct striker at RB to give him a run at a fragmented defence - exciting! Not practical all the time of course but an interesting 'flavor' to switch to for 10/15 mins during a game.

Thanks I shall update the thread with some extra screenshots of the tactic in action tomorrow. Just beat Lecce 4-0 away from home and got 8 clear cut chances. Due to the space creation, when we do create chances they tend to be good ones. The wide players do have a tendency of finding loads of space and this allows them to grab a couple extra goals and assists which is great!

At the moment I have this tactic (not really sure what to call the formation is it a 3142 or a 4132?) and 2 slightly different 3421s. I have had no eureka moments for a 3rd tactic yet. Give it a couple of seasons and when I have managed to end up with a different combination of players, another formation will come to mind.

Great looking start to a thread.

Thanks. I hope to be able to add some more either today or tomorrow.

Brillliant start, only had a brief skim read through it. Will have a detailed read later on today looking forward to more though

lucatonix is one of my favourite posters, I'm looking forward to watching this develop

lucatonix is one of my favourite posters, I'm looking forward to watching this develop

Thanks I think my next update will be finished either tonight or tomorrow. It's taken slightly longer to do after oversleeping quite a bit this morning.

The next part of the thread has been completed. Hope you enjoy

The next part of the thread has been completed. Hope you enjoy

A great insight into the battles all over the pitch. I also like how you've fit the tactics on top of each other in the screenshots so immediatley you can see where the issues you face would arise

Quality written too

A great insight into the battles all over the pitch. I also like how you've fit the tactics on top of each other in the screenshots so immediatley you can see where the issues you face would arise

Quality written too

Thanks. The next update will finally go into more detail into if I have managed to get the tactic to work; combining the elements of attacking play that I want effectively. I have been tweaking to no end with the defense though, since I can't decide whether I want 2 lines of four in defense or more of a 451 defensively (RW as the STCr).

Superb stuff.

.Love the way you've set up a plan, not been too proud to admit where it failed and then systematically set apart solving it using both tactics and personnel. And well written too! Kutgw

excellent read lucatonix

I dont post on here often but i love the way you pick apart the wrong parts of your tactic and show us where they are going wrong and how you intend to improve those areas, really looking forward to reading more on this

hopefully a new update soon, KUTGW

Brilliant read Lucatonix. As previously mentioned, its great the way you set up a plan implemented it analysed where it wasn't working and why it wasn't working and changed it accordingly. The second leg of the Spurs game shows that superbly. Thats the one bit of the game Im still not happy with, bookmarked this thread and looking forward to the next part.

I'd be interested to hear how you actually analyse if your tactic is working. Do you just watch it in the ME?

Been checking this thread everyday hoping the next few posts have been filled in.

Great read.

Brilliant read Lucatonix. As previously mentioned, its great the way you set up a plan implemented it analysed where it wasn't working and why it wasn't working and changed it accordingly. The second leg of the Spurs game shows that superbly. Thats the one bit of the game Im still not happy with, bookmarked this thread and looking forward to the next part.

I'd be interested to hear how you actually analyse if your tactic is working. Do you just watch it in the ME?

When I create a new tactic I draw out the shape that I want with arrows for player movement. This helps me to visualise and confirm what I want from each player and that the players positioning and movement complement each other.

From this starting point I can then use the tactics creator to build the tactic. I then try it out in a friendly or a meaningless match (eg last couple of matches of the season if the league position is already confirmed. Once I see the tactic during the match I can compare the movement of the players with what I wanted/expected. I can then make changes accordingly. At this point I may also have a better idea to create space and so make some extra changes

For example when I started making this tactic I put the MCa as an AMa. But the centre became too crowded and he didn't attack the spaces in the backline very well. By moving the am back to the MC position it freed up my strikers a bit and also allowed my MC to make late bursts into the box to.catch the defense unaware.

Just beat Barcelona 5-1 at home in the second leg of the Champion's League Quarter Final after losing 1-0 away in the first leg. I think this shall be my next update, hopefully finished by the end of the weekend. (However i didn't use this tactic in either of the legs, I feel it follows on nicely from the Tottenham match since it is a similar idea.)

How did you push Lavezzi wider in the second leg??

How did you push Lavezzi wider in the second leg??

Iirc, i just increased the team width a little and set the wide play to hugs touchline or moves into channels. I also set him as an advanced forward so he would attack that space more regualarly and with more intent.

Sorry about the lack of activity. Will be posting again in 2 weeks when my A levels have finished.