Pairs & Combinations FM2015 - UPDATED

A CF(A) & AM(S) perhaps? F9 & SS are another. Van Persie is best leading the line, and Rooney best in build up. Although I feel his aggression and directness means he is not really a playmaker.

Yes, I've tried Rooney as a playmaker. He does well, but I feel like I'm not getting the most out of him as an attacking threat.

You could play a loose 4-4-2 and play them both as strikers, get a direct winger on the right, get a wide midfielder on the left tucking in.

I would honestly use Rooney as either a shadow striker or an attacking mid. Something where he is going to be a serious goal threat.

The problem of linking him up with RVP is that RVP is very much a Trequartista/Poacher type player and it's hard to get him as involved as you'd like sometimes. He tends to float around.

Rooney is definitely capable of being a wonderful creator but it's kind of a waste. Man U in real life are struggling for many reasons but Rooney having to assist a bunch of goals is a huge part.

IMO Wayne's biggest strength is his goal scoring ability and I would definitely make sure that whatever role/duty he has, that it is one where he is a threat on goal

Hi. Great thread. On the tactic list I cannot select 4-2-3-1 as the exact formation with two of the AM strata guys wide. On the list 4-2-3-1 sets them up as narrow and if I move them it is then called 4-5-1. Same with the other two options 4231 assymetric and 4231 deep. Using the creator also calls it 451. I have renamed it 4231 (a) but I am confused as I cant seem to select a formation you are using and other teams have?

Hi. Great thread. On the tactic list I cannot select 4-2-3-1 as the exact formation with two of the AM strata guys wide. On the list 4-2-3-1 sets them up as narrow and if I move them it is then called 4-5-1. Same with the other two options 4231 assymetric and 4231 deep. Using the creator also calls it 451. I have renamed it 4231 (a) but I am confused as I cant seem to select a formation you are using and other teams have?

It's just a quirk of the default templates for formation in FM. You are not alone - the 4-2-3-1 with AML/R is not available as a default shape to anybody.

Ok thanks RT. Thought I was missing something obvious so thats good that I am not completely dim!

After reading through the OP, I can honestly say this is in my top 5 of most helpful threads that I've read on this forum. Thank you, llama3!

No worries man

Same for me, thanks Llama. I used the guide in the first post and to create my tactic for Southampton. We play high pressing, fast attacking football. I regularly end up with 60%+ possession at home. I completely outplayed Chelsea and Arsenal at home, pressing the life out of them high up the pitch but I very rarely score more than 1 goal per game.

This is my tactic:

I've also made a mirrored version switching the wide roles around along with the CM roles.

However, I am struggling with away games. I find that I am drawing too many or conceding sloppy goals, even against the bottom teams. Any suggestions on how I could improve the tactic and what I should do for away games.

I also find that my striker is far too inconsistent. Mitrovic has 10 goals in 17 games which is decent but he goes missing far too often.

It's just a quirk of the default templates for formation in FM. You are not alone - the 4-2-3-1 with AML/R is not available as a default shape to anybody.

It's also called 4-2-3-1 Denmark and is available to AI managers, but curiously not to human managers. Neither is several other tactical templates. I don't know the reason for this. Maybe the simple answer is that SI don't want to "overload" us pretend managers with a bewildering number of tactical templates to choose from. But as we can easily make any formation we want anyway, (and I believe AI managers can't do that, but have to use a template), it's not a big deal.

It's also called 4-2-3-1 Denmark and is available to AI managers, but curiously not to human managers. Neither is several other tactical templates. I don't know the reason for this. Maybe the simple answer is that SI don't want to "overload" us pretend managers with a bewildering number of tactical templates to choose from. But as we can easily make any formation we want anyway, (and I believe AI managers can't do that, but have to use a template), it's not a big deal.

It is odd, as it used to be a default formation at one time, didn't it? Maybe in 11 or 12 and before? But yeah we can make any and all manners of weird shapes that the AI will not

Same for me, thanks Llama. I used the guide in the first post and to create my tactic for Southampton. We play high pressing, fast attacking football. I regularly end up with 60%+ possession at home. I completely outplayed Chelsea and Arsenal at home, pressing the life out of them high up the pitch but I very rarely score more than 1 goal per game.

This is my tactic:

I've also made a mirrored version switching the wide roles around along with the CM roles.

However, I am struggling with away games. I find that I am drawing too many or conceding sloppy goals, even against the bottom teams. Any suggestions on how I could improve the tactic and what I should do for away games.

I also find that my striker is far too inconsistent. Mitrovic has 10 goals in 17 games which is decent but he goes missing far too often.

The formation is probably the issue here - maybe dropping the AML&R back to ML&R and you will restrict the space the opposition has to play in. Perhaps a W(A) on the right, and WM(S) on the left (sit narrow, cut inside) will replicate an IF(S) with better defensive responsibilities

----------------GK(D)----------------

-------------------------------------

FB(S)------CD(D)------CD(D)----FB(A)

-------------------------------------

-----------------A(D)----------------

----------DLP(S)------AP(A)----------

-------------------------------------

IF(A)---------------------------IF(S)

-------------------------------------

-----------------CF(S)---------------

4-1-2-2-1

Counter/Balance

Team Instructions : shorter passing, work ball into box, pass into space, exploit the flanks, Hassle opponents, Higher Tempo.

No specific player instructions.

Thanks Llama for sharing the knowledge. i used the guide to create my tactic above.

I managed to get 4th place for EPL using current approach. the problem is my striker just score 12 goals in overall competition for 1 season.

Am i correct using CompleteFwd for this formation, or any suggestion for other roles?

i just bought valon behrami from Napoli and i want to use him as a BWM(S), will it work if i use trio A(D) on DM, AP(A)-BWM(S) in Midfield?

Until now i still have doubt on what mentality/fluidity shld i use My direction of playing is attack from both flanks, with combination coming from ST. I also want my midfield duo -AP and DLP do killer passing either directly to ST or Winger, while Anchorman help to defend and cover the back 4.

Thanks!

A BWM in there will be fine. I am not sure why you are playing down the flanks, you lack players wide - your IF's come inside, and the FB(S) will not get forward. A CF(S) is a good call.

A BWM in there will be fine. I am not sure why you are playing down the flanks, you lack players wide - your IF's come inside, and the FB(S) will not get forward. A CF(S) is a good call.

so the option is either 1. change my FB(S) to WB(A) ? but i'm afraid it will be vulnerable to opp attack.. the reason i used FB is because they will tend to keep lurking around his area without moving forward (CMIIW)

Or 2. remove 'exploit the flanks' TI. but how to tell my team to focus the attack on my two IFs ?

Thks.

1) can choose a FB(A) or WB(S) too

2) the IF comes inside and exploits the middle - not the flanks

Is this for FM2014? If yes, could you point out a similar "Pairs & Combinations: The Complete Series" (if it exists) for FM2013 please?

Is this for FM2014? If yes, could you point out a similar "Pairs & Combinations: The Complete Series" (if it exists) for FM2013 please?

I referred to it for an FM13 save I still have going. There are a few more roles in 14, but that doesn't change the basic ideas here, which work very well in 13.

It is all still relevant - i start writing it with FM13 and updated it with FM14.

The formation is probably the issue here - maybe dropping the AML&R back to ML&R and you will restrict the space the opposition has to play in. Perhaps a W(A) on the right, and WM(S) on the left (sit narrow, cut inside) will replicate an IF(S) with better defensive responsibilities

Thanks for the advice. I made the changes you suggested and won my last three away games 4-1, 3-1, 4-1. The matches themselves have been pretty even but I took my chances while the opposition didn't. Seems a bit more solid at the back now.

Thanks for the advice. I made the changes you suggested and won my last three away games 4-1, 3-1, 4-1. The matches themselves have been pretty even but I took my chances while the opposition didn't. Seems a bit more solid at the back now.

Super! Hope the form continues.

Hi,

i wonder if you give your wise knowlegde about my following tactic i want to adopt with Porstmouth.

----------------SW(A)----------------

-------------------------------------

---------CD(D)--------CD(D)--------

CWB(A)------------------------CWB(A)

-----------------HB(D)----------------

----------B2B(S)------CM(A)----------

-------------------------------------

IF(A)---------------------------IF(S)

-------------------------------------

-----------------F9(S)---------------

4-3-2-1

Control/Very Fluid

Team Instructions : shorter passing, pass into space, work ball into box, Play out of Defence, Drill Crosses, Exploit the Middle, Look for Overlap (not sure if needed with CWB (A) ) , Play Narrower,

Push Higher up, Hassle opponents, Stay on Feet, Use Offside Trap, Higher Tempo.

No specific player instructions yet

Only GK will distribute to defend and shorter passing (last one is more of a test)

I want my keeper to get higher on the pitch to cover the distance between defence and himself in combination with Offside trap. Maybe a risk/reward situation

i want my DM to drop deep between my 2 DC so that my WB (CWB's) can go forward in combination with Look for Overlap (or better get it off ?)

My B2B will play as a runner and he will get 2 pairs of lungs my CM(A) will be the runner/creator .

my left IF will get a support role. still playng as an IF that will cut inside but will also look to gives assists. Right one will be an IF cutting inside and will shoot to score

My F9 will drag 1 or 2 dc's out of position to give space for my IF's, or when free will try to dribble to pass or to take a longshot.

I want to play a shorter passing game and exploit the middle . In that way the Pass into Space will become handy to use as my IFs will cut inside and both midfielders + F9 will be there also.

I want to play narrower so i give no room to the opposition and the defending will be stronger. Team will push higher up the pitch and will hassle the opponents but wont fly to tackle so thats why i want Stay on Feet.

I want them to play on higher tempo so the oppenent wont have time to get to his position. But if my team makes to many wrong passes because of this i will reconsider this.

So this how i see it, what do you think about this ?

Looks like quite an attacking system there, perhaps your BBM could become a DLP(S) and link up better with your defence and half back - seeing as the CM(A) will do the running anyway. I would consider making the AML an IF(A) if you find the F9 and IF(S) get in each others way. Otherwise fairly decent.

Looks like quite an attacking system there, perhaps your BBM could become a DLP(S) and link up better with your defence and half back - seeing as the CM(A) will do the running anyway. I would consider making the AML an IF(A) if you find the F9 and IF(S) get in each others way. Otherwise fairly decent.

ok thanks for input. And would it help to change the CM(A) to a CM(S) ? so i dont need to change the BBM role?

You need either BBM or CM(A) - could go AP(A) & BBM(S) maybe, or CM(A) and DLP(S) - depends how you want to play.

You need either BBM or CM(A) - could go AP(A) & BBM(S) maybe, or CM(A) and DLP(S) - depends how you want to play.

if i would go for AP(A) , wouldnt that go against the rule for "Very Fluid" ? in term of specialism ?

1 specialist role in a very fluid is ok - more is not recommended.

so with 2 CWB, 1 BBM , 1 AP and 1 F9 i have more then 1 Specialist.. Then maybe it better for to go for Balance style ? or use 2 tweaked cm (S) to keep the Very Fluid ?

According to wwfan's 12 step guide - F9 is a specialist, as is the AP - the BBM & 2 x CWB are 0.5's - Balanced sounds good.

I've been bumbling along with my Ayr United team for just over a season, going OK and achieving board expectations but by no means spectacular. I stumbled across this guide and applied the theories to my team and have now gone on my longest winning streak of my season-and-a-half long career (5 wins and counting).

It took me a couple of hours doing some proper analysis of my team to find the strongest combined 11 that worked with the pairs theory and working out the best team instructions to match my overall team strengths and weaknesses but, my god was it worth it!

So cheers to llama3 for one of the most easily-digestible and implementable theory-type posts on this forum

Thank you, as long as it helps that's good by me. Hope the results continue to keep coming.

Top quality stuff.

What I enjoyed reading the most is about how you build your team. Actually, I don't find that to be the most useful part of the guide, but I really enjoy reading about how people go about building their tactics. The ideas behind it, and all... So, if you find time in the future, perhaps when you start a new save, to write about that more, it would be really appreciated.

A little help here please....

GK http://imgur.com/cFCoDEn

RB http://imgur.com/FmtKnBc

CD http://imgur.com/0o7NUjU

LB http://imgur.com/2g5mixl

DM http://imgur.com/JbbuRm1

CMR http://imgur.com/efZXIWH

CML http://imgur.com/rdlO3XS

AMR http://imgur.com/dDFcpcz

AML http://imgur.com/7RvqCi2

CF http://imgur.com/zyrw0sS

I haven't even bothered looking at all the photos. It is instruction overkill. You should have a handful of shouts for team instructions to dictate your basic style, and the others should be match by match decisions. You then have players with lots of individual instructions, most of which, the effect is already covered in your team instructions. e.g. Your central defenders do not need instructing to pass it short, they have already been asked to play out of defence.

What specific issues are you facing? Try to play without all those extra shouts for players and just the key handful for your team first.

Want to play a fast counter attack style with higher pression in a 4-4-2.

The main roles:

Exploit flanks

Pass into space

Run at defense

Get stuck in

High tempo

DC: will be a stopper/cover

MC: DLP (D) & BBM (S)

PL: ?

Any suggestion?

None without knowing anything about the team you have, players etc etc

A 4-4-2 is not the best shape for pressing either. Also crucially counter-attacking and pressing do not work at all. Counter-Attacking works bit sitting deep and compact, before breaking rapidly. Pressing teams push high and aim to squeeze space.

The team is Nottingham Forest, so if I want to press higher to get the ball quickly and go out in attack, I should user a Normal or Attacking style?

I have a question about some idea i have.. I want to make a 4231 tactic, but it would be like this:

Balanced/Control

SW (S)

FB (A)

CD (D)

CD (D)

FB (A)

DM: Regista (S)

DM: Half Back (D)

AMC : Trequartista (A)

IF S

IF S

CF A

would there be to much empty space between my DM's and my AMC ??

The team is Nottingham Forest, so if I want to press higher to get the ball quickly and go out in attack, I should user a Normal or Attacking style?

A more attacking strategy has a naturally high defensive line and level of pressing.

I have a question about some idea i have.. I want to make a 4231 tactic, but it would be like this:

Balanced/Control

SW (S)

FB (A)

CD (D)

CD (D)

FB (A)

DM: Regista (S)

DM: Half Back (D)

AMC : Trequartista (A)

IF S

IF S

CF A

would there be to much empty space between my DM's and my AMC ??

With your Full Back's providing an outball, and the improved distribution of a Regista, as well as the good movement of a Trequartista you should be fine.

So if I want to press higher to get the ball quickly and go out in attack I should go with something like this:

LD: FB (S)

CD: CD (D)

RD: FB (A)

DM: DLP (S)

LM: winger (A)

CM: BBM (S)

CM: CM (D)

AMR: IF (S)

PL: DF (S)

With a attack/balanced

Team instructions:

Push higher up

Hassle opponents

Higher tempo

Exploit flanks

Play out of defense

Shorter passing

Use Offside trap

Any change?

You said that 4-4-2 is not the best shape, should I use a 4-1-2-2-1, 4-4-1-1 or go to a 4-2-3-1?

Hello Llama,

Hope everything is going well.

Firstly a quick thank you to say that your advice so far has been hugely helpful. I am going to post a screenshot later but I had my first real success having taken your advice. I am now looking to evolve that system and build on that success.

My question - what do you make of playing players on the same flank with the same mentality?

Here is what I am thinking:

Mentality: Depends on the occasion

Style: Fluid

Formation: 4-4-1-1

GK: Sweeper Keeper (D) - Szczesny

DR: Wing back (S) - Sagna

DCR: Centre Back (X) - Varane

DCL: Centre Back © - Mertesaker

DL: Complete Wing Back (A) - Andre Ayew

MR: Wide Midfielder (S) - Wilshere

MCR: Central Midfielder (D) - Lucas Romero

MCL: Central Midfielder (S) - Ramsey

ML: Wide Midfielder (A) - Cazorla

AMC: Advanced Playmaker (S) - Ozil

FC: Advanced Forward (A) - Mitrovic

If that is not a sound structure I would probably flip the midfield over which would make it comply with you guide.

I like the idea of two attacking players combining on the left, I think Ayew / Cazorla could make a Cole / Pires esq combination on the left..

Thanks!

So if I want to press higher to get the ball quickly and go out in attack I should go with something like this:

LD: FB (S)

CD: CD (D)

RD: FB (A)

DM: DLP (S)

LM: winger (A)

CM: BBM (S)

CM: CM (D)

AMR: IF (S)

PL: DF (S)

With a attack/balanced

Team instructions:

Push higher up

Hassle opponents

Higher tempo

Exploit flanks

Play out of defense

Shorter passing

Use Offside trap

Any change?

You said that 4-4-2 is not the best shape, should I use a 4-1-2-2-1, 4-4-1-1 or go to a 4-2-3-1?

Shapes like a 4-2-3-1, 3-4-3, 3-4-1-2, etc etc are excellent for pressing, because of the good pitch coverage, and high numbers of attackers. How you have set up is a rather odd range of duties with little obvious movement that I can see

Hello Llama,

Hope everything is going well.

Firstly a quick thank you to say that your advice so far has been hugely helpful. I am going to post a screenshot later but I had my first real success having taken your advice. I am now looking to evolve that system and build on that success.

My question - what do you make of playing players on the same flank with the same mentality?

Here is what I am thinking:

Mentality: Depends on the occasion

Style: Fluid

Formation: 4-4-1-1

GK: Sweeper Keeper (D) - Szczesny

DR: Wing back (S) - Sagna

DCR: Centre Back (X) - Varane

DCL: Centre Back © - Mertesaker

DL: Complete Wing Back (A) - Andre Ayew

MR: Wide Midfielder (S) - Wilshere

MCR: Central Midfielder (D) - Lucas Romero

MCL: Central Midfielder (S) - Ramsey

ML: Wide Midfielder (A) - Cazorla

AMC: Advanced Playmaker (S) - Ozil

FC: Advanced Forward (A) - Mitrovic

If that is not a sound structure I would probably flip the midfield over which would make it comply with you guide.

I like the idea of two attacking players combining on the left, I think Ayew / Cazorla could make a Cole / Pires esq combination on the left..

Thanks!

Works for some systems & players, not for others. Personally I don't use it, but I know it helps a lot of people.

llama thanks for the help. Will go using a 4-2-3-1 like this:

LD: FB (S)

CD: CD (D)

RD: FB (A)

CM: DLP (S)

CM: CM (D)

LM: winger (A)

AM: SS (A)

RM: IF (S)

FC: F9 (S)

PL: DF (S)

would a system work with 2 BBM midfielders and 1 Anchorman ? suported by 2x WB(A) and 2x IF(S) and a F9/Treq ?

would a system work with 2 BBM midfielders and 1 Anchorman ? suported by 2x WB(A) and 2x IF(S) and a F9/Treq ?

No

The IF(s) will get in the way of each other, no variation and none of your front 3 actually trying to get in behind.

Is the engine samrt enough to cope with 2 Registas in the formation, so when ones carries the other sits deeper?

I was thinking of having a back 3, but with 4 in front, 2 complete wing backs and 2 Registas? i suppose i sould even go 2 and 5 and have a HB in the middle of the 2?

Firstly guys, I don't appreciate it when people use this thread for a moan at the game - there is a feedback thread for that, and this is a thread to help people with their issues. Not for rants. Thanks.

Is the engine samrt enough to cope with 2 Registas in the formation, so when ones carries the other sits deeper?

I was thinking of having a back 3, but with 4 in front, 2 complete wing backs and 2 Registas? i suppose i sould even go 2 and 5 and have a HB in the middle of the 2?

Answer - don't know, never tried it, why don't you see how it goes?

llama3,

I ipologise for that,

but as you imagine, i play fm sinc i was 16, and now, at 35 , with a master in coach, i dont get any pleasure plyng my favorite game.

But you right, it s not here that i have to blame.

If you have time, plese help me in my post,

thanks

llama3,

I ipologise for that,

but as you imagine, i play fm sinc i was 16, and now, at 35 , with a master in coach, i dont get any pleasure plyng my favorite game.

But you right, it s not here that i have to blame.

If you have time, plese help me in my post,

thanks

Of course, I'll have a look now.