4132 - A new project for FM15. Advice would be appreciated.

........

Hi Sussex, looks good.

I would personally stick with at least 1 BWM, probably a defensive duty. You need a ball winner in that midfield, closing down and trying to initiate counter attacks. I personally find a BWM adds more than a DLP. I like the BBM.

I might also be tempted to have an attack duty in the MC strata, You want someone getting in the AMC lines, and also running off the strikers.

I always struggle with a CF, unless you have a truly world class player who is great at everything. I would be looking at a TM(A), or an AF(A) in that set-up. Especially if you're looking at utilising Carroll.

I would try the following...

-------------DF(s)---------TM(a)----------

-----BWM(d)-----CM(a)-----BBM(s)-----

-------------------AM(d)-------------------

WB(a)------CD(d)------CD(d)------WB(s)

-------------------GK(d)-------------------

I like that set up - but I would switch the 3 MC's into different slots. the CM(A) ahead of the WB(S) on the right, the BWM(D) in the middle, and the BBM(S) ahead of the WB(A) on the left.

Carroll is a typical Target Man - DLF(S) is the only other way I can think of using him effectively.

Sussex, my view is that to make the most of the system, a CM (A) has to go in somewhere to represent the tip of the diamond.

I wouldn't have a Defend Duty in front of an Anchor because it just makes no sense; you already have a reliably positioned man at DM so no need to add another. I'd look to add variety to the outer MCs, so perhaps the BBM on the side of the WB (A) and some sort of playmaker Role on the right who moves forward aggressively into the space behind the CF.

...and, if the balance of that is knackered, try a more conservative playmaker on the side of the attacking wingback instead. He should be able to play in the overlapping wingback, the CM at the tip of the diamond or the deeper striker. On reflection, it sounds like a better system.

That's a good point about the "tip" actually. Had let that bit slip my mind. Also agree with your point about the defend duty in front of the Anchor. Of course, a Ball Winning Midfielder (Support) could go in that lot somewhere too. How are you intending to use Alex Song? He is definitely a playmaker type, not the Ball Winner or Anchorman. You could go for a DLP at the base of the midfield (Song), and use his good distribution, press higher up with a Ball Winning Midfielder on 1 side, a BBM on the other, and the CM(A), like RTH says, as the tip.

With regards to your front 2 question, you probably wouldn't go far wrong with the classic Target Man support + Poacher combo. Carroll (if fit) and Sakho as the TM, Zarate or Valencia as Poacher. A TM would also help hold the ball up for your midfield runners.

Speaking of which, I've found the new Roaming Playmaker role to be excellent, and perfectly suited for Noble, Song or even Poyet.

Carroll could play as a DLF(S)? He will offer you a presence at crosses, set pieces etc - but it won't force your players to play it up long towards him.

I think the playmaker/defensive type role is perfect for Song.

Nice system to try and set up Sussex.

If i could give a bit of constructive feedback on the overall way you approach things, you seem to jump around a bit and not settle on anything for any length of time. I have read a few threads you did last year and that seemed to be a theme. You have lots of different ideas, but you seem to not want to nail just 3 or 4 of them down and work at it over a sustained period. You are, in essence, Claudio Ranieri

I would suggest you settle on a clear identity for this system, how you want it to play, and then let it run a few games. Focus on one or at most 2 areas at time to tweak. So maybe 4 games just focusing on the forward roles. Etc.

In terms of the actual shape/formation, my feedback:

1) The other 2 lads are right. There is no logic in playing a defend duty in the middle of your 3 infront of an anchor. I would get your CM(a) in there an decide what type you want. I have talked a lot about my love of the central winger, and this is a system where that would work central. A certain Mr Downing could be a nice candidate for that role?

2) The use of the DF seems unncessary for me at this level. Opposition DM's will be closed down by your CM anyway, and if you set your system to include some more closing down at a team level, you wont really have an issue with that. You can also specificaly man mark one on the rare occasion you come across one with killer ability (eg Pirlo or Xabi). This will free you up to have your 2 forwards work as a proper partnership going forwards, where their focus should be.

3) I would have at least one full back as a CWB(a). You need width in this system when you go forward, and you need width high. Dont be afraid of being exposed by the role - Try it out and see before you worry about that. I play a back 4 with 2 x CWB(a) and no DM and i dont have that issue, so dont dismiss the principle (as i did myself originally!) without seeing how it works.

Thats it for my feedback for now, but the key element is to be a bit more methodical. It might take half a season, or even best part of a full season to get it right, but if you keep changing 3 or 4 roles every other match, you wont get there.

Good luck

Haven't really been using Carroll as he is pretty hopeless and as a TM I suspect you have to go more direct, may be wrong though.

No need to be more direct when using a TM, and Carroll is far from hopeless !

My usual go to teams to play as are West Ham and Juventus, and I play both without wingers, a Target Man as one striker and decent slick passing. In one save I even bought Carroll for Juventus as back up to Llorente - and he did so well he became my first choice ahead of Llorente.

It really comes down to how you set up the whole team. As Jambo just said, pick a system and develop it over time. Evolution not revolution .

Looks pretty sound - from personal experience of Jenkinson - he has a great engine, gets up and down the flank all day long, but his crossing is by far his most important stat, keep an eye out if he is taking the right opportunities to whip in balls. I should imagine a few deep crosses from him to the back post where Carroll is could actually earn quite a few goals. I think you have Song and Kouyate spot on there.

Yup that looks pretty good all round. I think you would want some PI's to get the best out of the downing role. Perhaps encourage him to run with it more.

Now stick with it for at least 10 games! Make proper notes of the things you see in game, pause, replay, all that good stuff. You will get onto something effective if you are methodical

I know I was shot down (in a logical way ) for suggesting the BWM(d), but i find that he creates a better link between the DM and the other midfielders. Of course having the 2 (d) roles wouldn't be "needed", but in my experience it's not that illogical.

Maybe ask the BWM(s) to hold position (if you can, can't remember off the top of my head), to close the gap. I would (personal opinion) want him closer in that heatmap to the opposition #4.

You can also try change the BBM to be an RP or a CM(s), and see what difference it makes to the positional heatmap.

I know I was shot down (in a logical way ) for suggesting the BWM(d), but i find that he creates a better link between the DM and the other midfielders. Of course having the 2 (d) roles wouldn't be "needed", but in my experience it's not that illogical.

Maybe ask the BWM(s) to hold position (if you can, can't remember off the top of my head), to close the gap. I would (personal opinion) want him closer in that heatmap to the opposition #4.

You can also try change the BBM to be an RP or a CM(s), and see what difference it makes to the positional heatmap.

I love using a BWM in any midfeld combo that isn't just 2. Anything greater than a 2 man central midfield set-up and its one of my favourite roles because they can win the ball back high up the pitch and start attack. Drop back into defence, link midfield to attack, link defence to midfield and so on. It's a real versatile role.

I would avoid getting too caught up in heatmaps. They serve somewhat of a purpose, but they are averages. They dont tell anywhere near the story. If you would like some input in terms of how the shape is working out, rather than post the heat map try posting 2 or 3 screenshots of the game situation - Pause the game when you are in possession/out of possesion in natural situations (eg not a set piece recovery) and use a camera view that shows the entire pitch. That will give you a far better feel for shape and formation effectiveness.

On the long shots - dont assume that the 2 instructions you mention will fix it. Look for the cause, not just the analysis screen. Look at some of the long shot clips and consider if there were passing options, and if not how could you get some more passing options, or what other aspects might have caused it. Also look for PPMs and weaknesses in key attributes.

Two BWM's would make the midfield unpredictable imo. By that I mean it could work fine but if suddenly they both close down aggressive like they do then you basically lose any midfield shape you had and it can be easily bypassed.

Dear lord man would you let it go more than 90mins without a change........

Just look back at those clear cut chances. Most of the times chances from impossible angles are even counted as CCC or set piece/corner chances. Im pretty sure those long shots are because everyone is trying to attack the box and there are no passing back or wide options. Or sunderland played a very narrow tactic which was hard to break.

Would this work considering the CWB on the left hand side?

_____________BWM S or D ____CM A_________BBM__________

___________________________DLP D______________________

Or even a Roaming Playmaker instead of the BBM. Not sure if two playmakers would work but maybe go back to an AM D and have the Roaming Playmaker on the right dropping deeper to collect from the AM?

Remember the RP will also create for you in the final 3rd, so despite the fact you have 2 playmakers, they can operate in very different areas of the field. Essentially the RP is like a "box to box" playmaker, so the leap from B2B to RP isn't that great (assuming you have a player who has some creative & passing attributes).

Personally, if your team shape is fluid, I'd go with:

_______BWM (D)______CM(A)_____CM(S)_______

WB(A)______________DLP(D)____________WB(S)

DLP should be set on more direct passing imo.

I'd completely ignore the ratings altogether, to be perfectly honest.

If you look at his contribution in matches, is it OK? If so, sod the rating.

The ratings can be a bit imbalanced. I would look at his stats and judge by what you see him doing in-game. If he is making the right passes and tackles and interceptions, making the runs etc - he is doing fine.

Until SI will finally decide to use separate rating algorithms for each role (or at least for each position, that would be a start), I wouldn't worry about the ratings much. In this rating system, get your worst player from B team and put him on a role in your team that usually get the best ratings, he will still get one of the best ratings in your team, if not the best. Your overall success will diminish, of course, because your 11 as a whole will be weaker, but ratings just aren't good enough in reflecting individual performances.

Look at your player at DMC position. Using the editor, bump up Poyet's CA to 200, he will still get the lowest rating in your team, because at that position the player will not have as many critical tackles and headers like the defenders, and he will not have as many critical passes, dribbles, assists and goals. His stats created by ME, combined with the current rating system, will not allow him to get high ratings.

i found in my save with west ham that song played very well as a defensive midfielder on support playing infront of the two CB, could load you his stats up to see if you like.

Well just an update.

Moved Song to HB with direct passing added. Noble to CM S rather than DLP S and beat Hull 6-0! The move seemed to free up the CM A who scored two and the team seemed to play far more fluid football, getting it wide and I think 3 of the 6 were headers. Of course it is only one game and I always seem to win well the first game after a tinker. Not that I am suggesting the game learns your tactics!!!!!

The AI are simply playing differently when it doesn't work aswell. You keep tinkering roles but the reality is you won't stumble upon role panacea. You need to focus more on match strategy, your roles are very coherent at the moment.

The more generic version of a role can be very useful sometimes - an MC(S) instead of a DLP(S) can often be useful, not attacting the ball directly, but playing in a fairly similar manner.

The AI are simply playing differently when it doesn't work aswell. You keep tinkering roles but the reality is you won't stumble upon role panacea. You need to focus more on match strategy, your roles are very coherent at the moment.

A good simple point, and one worth reinforcing.

An awful lot of threads we get in the forum are from people who actually arrive at a sensible balance pretty quickly, but their problem thereafter is match management (or, often, a lack of it). It's like people are setting up systems for matches where there are only 11 players on the pitch. If FM had a training mode with just 11 players on the pitch, you would still see variance in play if you could exactly replicate the conditions of a particular move. Why? Because FM actually does a decent job of representing that each player is unique.

If your system works well in one match, it is a combination of factors - the "correctness" of the system in that match relative to that of the AIs own system and match management, plus the performance of your individual players in playing out that system in that match.

You can, to an extent, enforce a Lobanovskyi-esque choreographed style of play which to a degree will make your system play more similarly from match to match, but even with that achieved, you still need to be mindful of the AI.

A lot of words to say this:

System is one thing, but you have to be aware of factors affecting it, and of the need to be mindful of the AI system.

Well my defensive changes at Arsenal tend to be:

• Monreal/Gibbs on as a substitute on the left flank, so I have both left backs on at the same time, with the player in advance playing as a DW(S). Adds much more defensive skill & solidity compared to keeping Cazorla or Ozil on there.
  
• Flamini alongside Arteta in midfield, with a CM(D) & DLP(S) combination - both side deep, cautious and spread the ball
  
• Change of strategy - often I become more cautious later in the game, and by dropping down the strategies, I can increase ball retention, which leads me on to...
  
• TI's - I can ask the team to retain the ball more, take a breather, lower tempo, waste time (anything which involves me keeping the ball off of them for as long as possible), I tend to sit a touch deeper and more compact, less risky passing and dribbling. I still want a threat most of the time, but sometimes you just have to accept that it is 1-0 with 5 minutes to go, and if you defend well, you don't need the 2nd goal. If I am getting very cautious and just seeing the game out, I tend to invert my defensive plan, and just get the ball down the flanks quickly & shoot on sight to try and waste time turning play over via goal kicks etc.
  
• Formation - often I may switch from 4-4-1-1 for example to 4-1-4-1 as it is more defensively solid & compact, reducing key areas of space for the opponents to play in.

I struggled to break teams down last season, but won the title on the last day, largely thanks to a superb run of 6 games without conceding in April, including 4 consecutive 1-0 wins, which were scrappy and I defended hard for late in the game - but it didn't matter. I won.

Well it's not as simple as "change to defensive and you'll win" because you have to weigh up how much pressure you are under, how well you can keep the ball, does your shape encourage you do that too. If I was using a 4-2-3-1 I would not play Defensive, because if I don't press effectively the opposition have time and space in front of my defence. So it is very situational.

I rarely play with duties, but roles themselves I play with for circumstances. I.e. adding DW, having a DLP alongside the CM(D) instead of the BBM. Sometimes a DF.

Switching your lone wing back's to support is a potentially useful idea.

In my save I managed to create a very successful 4-1-4-1 so far, and only recently I wanted to develop a tactic with more crowded center midfield, but with 2 strikers, and decided on 4-1-3-2, exactly like Sussex's formation. My biggest problem so far has been to get my 3 MC's more involved in creating and scoring. I play with 2 complete forwards upfront, and 2 BBM's, one on each side of the CM(a). I also use control-fluid mentality. My 3 CM's are always playing so close to each other, even though I am using 'play wider' TI. What I want to see is my 2 BBM's roaming more, like they are supposed to, but all they are doing is gathering around that CM(a), and creating a very congested area in the middle of the pitch, with all the opponent players also joining them there. The only thing that works is my WB(a)'s going forward and crossing the ball. Other than those two, nobody is providing any width. The reason for using CF(s) was the same thing. If my BBM's are not roaming to the sides, I thought maybe I can get my strikers to move wider, and the BBM's and the CM(a) will make forward runs to the space emptied by the CF's. But it is not happening. The three CM's are almost always staying put, other than set pieces. The only time I see them moving around is the throw-ins

Unless somebody can tell me what I can do to improve the situation, I will give up on this tactic and go back to lone striker and 2 wingers, and 2 CM's.

Just to summarize, this is my formation:

WB(a)-CB(d)-CB(d)-WB(a)

BWM (d/s)

BBM(s)-CM(a)-BBM(s)

CF(s)-CF(s)

I like symmetric tactics, but just to see if things will change, I also tried changing one of the strikers to AF, and one of the BBM's to a roaming playmaker. No matter what I do, the three CM's stay too close to each other.

Thanks, but see, this doesn't help with either of my problems. It's not like I'm getting good results. It's just I can't get them to play the way I want. Problems are, again:

1) Three CM's playing too close to each other, never going wide (why don't we have the 'play wider' instruction for the CM's anyway??? It is grayed out for all of the roles)

2) Other than the two forwards, the only players I can get involved in goals are the attacking wingbacks. Other than providing passing options to other players, to re-set the attacks, CM's are doing nothing. Sometimes they keep passing the ball between each other, and they look like they want to move somewhere, but wherever they want to move, there is somebody occupying that spot, so it is all congested, that is until they decide to pass the ball to the wingback attacking from the flank, then the play opens up.

In my 4-1-4-1, I use 2 BBM's in the middle, and they are great at making assists AND scoring. In that system, they are continuously attacking the box, and helping defense too, which actually what BBM should be all about. With 2 strikers upfront, BBM's get stock in the MC strata. I want them to make more runs ahead of the CF(s)'s and get into goal scoring positions.

I will now try some PI's to establish this.

I asked the CM(a) to move into channels, and the BBM's to try more risky passes, and in my first game it produces better results in terms of those three getting more involved in scoring. I still wish I could ask the two MC's on the sides to move wider. I think this was actually possible when FM used to have sliders. I don't understand why the option is not even there any more. I can ask the wide midfielders to play more inside, why can't I ask the MC's to play more outside?

Run wide with ball maybe?

That may be the answer, good call. I will try and let you know. I just wonder, when it says run wide with ball, does the player go wider only when he has the ball, or like it says in the description of the PI, when the team has the possession.

Not sure, might be worth a go though.

Nope, that didn't do the trick. Unfortunately, there is no instruction available in the current ME that will make your 3 MC's spread out a bit. Just doesn't make any sense to me why the option is not there.

As I said before, I was able to get all three of them more involved in goal scoring opportunities, which at least makes this tactic still usable for me.

That was an excellent sequence of ball retention, and a lovely cross there.

why do you feel the need to change at all for those games, out of interest?

I think you are making too many changes. For the tough away games, I would tend to downgrade Duties (like you did with the Wingbacks) OR I would tweak things at a team level (such as Mentality).

My feeling is that by doing both, you took any attacking edge out of your system and made it anaemic. If you are finding the Defensive / Counter Mentalities hard to work with - don't work with them

Disregarding the away game issue - do you spot any issues with the gaps that appear between your Half Back and CM (A)? When you Attack, what sort of space is between those guys? Do the AI ever take advantage of it?

Hi Sussex, I'm currently using a VERY similar 4132 in my FM13 save Season 2136/37.

The only differences being using a DLPd at DM and a DLFs up top instead of a DFs.

I am using Balanced, Counter with all other TI's at Default and a base set of shouts of Push Higher Up, Play Out of Defence, Work Ball Into Box.

I recently got absolutely hammered 3-2 by Coventry (title challengers thanks to a heavy spending tycoon takeover), sped into a 3-0 lead within 15 minutes and I spent the rest of the game trying to break down a now sitting defence with my goals coming from set pieces and not open play. For this game the only change I made was to change my WBa's to WBs thinking they would sit a little more. This is in part true but they still like to bomb forward and all of the Coventry goals came from exploiting the space left behind.

I began to have a poke around, checking the mentalities to find a more suitable sitting role or duty and found that changing roles (in my case and my team) was not the answer but...

Changing STYLE was...

In a Balanced set up the mentality for WB's is just about as high as my AF and is higher than all the other roles in the team.

Switching to a Rigid style and leaving all roles and duties unchanged now has my WB's in line with my DLP and below my CM's.

I only replay games when I get a crash dump so I can't say for a certainty that this will work, but I've played 4 games since Coventry where I've not been favourite and felt the need to be more cautious and all I changed was to switch down to Rigid and I won them all on an ok 9-2 spread.

It might help...

57! However, much like yourself, I have moved on slightly again...still using Rigid/Balanced, Counter though.

l to r

SK(d)

WB(a), CD(d), CD(d), FB(s)

DLP(d)

CM(s), BWM(s), CM(a)

DLF(s), AF(a)

I often tend to press more aggressively against bigger teams. They can dominate the ball if you stand off them too much, and I like to force mistakes out of them and attack the space. It yielded mixed results. My games against big sides last season:

Man Utd - (H) 3-2, (A) 4-2, (A) 0-5 - came from 2-0 down in the first league game and cup game, but it backfired in the final league meeting

Man City - (H) 1-0, (A) 1-1

Chelsea - (A) 2-1, (A) 1-1, (H) 1-1, (H) 1-1 - lots of draws, met in the cup, including a replay

Tottenham - (H) 3-1, (A) 2-2

Liverpool - (A) 2-0, (H) 1-0, (N) 1-0

Only lost 1 "big game" all season!

Hey Sussex, you going to get a lot of different advice. I was just about to post that you can play with less closing down in a lot of systems where you are the weaker team, with a control mentality away from home...and then I see llama3 with him pressing high against the bigger teams. What you can take from this is that there will be a few ways you can skin the cat provided you have the right players for it:

With a 4132 formation you have the luxury of a diamond defense. With one defender on cover and another on defend alongside either a DLP is not a bad thing. You could alos have a BWM there, but it all depends on who you have at your disposal. A lot of your football will come from being in the opponents half..so i don see this system being very successful if you are going to play anything less than standard. If you intend to turn it into a defend at all costs then you need to give the three midfielders different instructions.

Assuming you want to do a standard>control setup, you can have 2 B2BMC playing alongside a DLP and then make one of your strikers a DLF(S), or TQ, the other striker can be a typical poacher. With your fullbacks I would make them attacking fullbacks because of your screen and watch the matches I play and adjust accordingly. If you are faced with stronger wingers then you may want to consider them on support. What I believe you have to do against strong sides is make your frontline close down aggressively, but you only concievably have 2 doing that you could still get the MCs to do that role if the DLP is good at screening.

Scoring goals will come as a result of your fullbacks getting into play or from your DLP using the TQ as an outlet

Experiences regarding playing the big teams away, I can only offer very limited advice from my first 2 seasons playing in the Premier League in my Walsall saves. First season, I tried the sit back and catch them on the break routine, got beat in every single one. The closest I came to winning one was the Carling Cup final, where I changed my approach and pressed them, only using a standard mentality, but I set up to exploit weaknesses (not that they have many) in their defence, rather than being obsessed with trying to stop them scoring. I think not conceding early helped, but it was a much more even affair than my league games against the top 5.

Following season, I had a slightly better team, but not that great, my approach worked much better v these teams, I took one thumping off Man United, when I couldn't stop them, but they have built an awesome team in my game, I beat Aresnal twice, Liverpool twice, Man City 4 points, 2 points off Chelsea. Chelsea and Man United are like the best teams in Europe now too on my game.

I know there is no real great tactical advice in there, I'd just advise against trying to sit back against them, it just seems as though they do wave after wave of attack until they finally score, or at least that's my limited experience. I spend more time analysing how I can score against them now, than how I can stop them. They have world class players, sometimes they are just going to play brilliantly.

I've recently been struggling to get anything out of my defensive midfielder, like you I am playing with a HB(d). He was consistently getting sub 7 match ratings. His average was something at 6.8 compared to the rest of his team mates (7.8+) he was miles behind.

Since I've added close down much more he has come to life. 7s and 8s all over the place.

Whilst we play different shapes, we have similar ideas so it might work well for you.

My system is

--------- CF(s) ------

AP(s) -------------- AP(s)

--- CM(a) --- CM(a) ---

--------- HB(d) -------

FB(s)- BPD - CB(d) - FB(s)

Close down much more as a team or just on the Half Back?

Sorry, just on the the HB. He comes out an intercepts a lot more. He plays like a really aggressive CB stopper.

Can you put your finger on what makes the player have a good / indifferent game? Take a look at the formations you are facing when the CM (A) had an off game.

Do you find that specific players play well or poorly in that role? If so, which players?

There are various ways of playing the 4132, its currently my new flavour of the season. Quite different your system and mine, pretty rock solid thus far, the only time I have to adapt is when i am in the ECL against teams that play an aggressive 4231.

As you probably know, the last few years I have been focusing on youth development, so every now and then I look at what I have in my youth and decide what kind of formation is best for the overall development of the majority. In my first season I had a bunch of midfielders, the fullbacks were good, but I had more mids so i went strikerless. This season I noticed the emergence of my fullbacks so I opted for a formation that suited the kind of football i enjoy, fast fluid and loads of options. This led me to my flying fullback 4132. The system relies heavily on my fullbacks and my Treq to create a lot of the goals. My front line do a lot of channel movement so they bring others into play. Furthermore, with the flank attack I usually have options. Either we go down aggressively and pump the box so full of crosses, we end up becoming swiss cheese makers, or, my midfield patiently camp and we work the ball around through my frontline. My central midfielder has managed to get a few 9s in the season, but its not a position i am heavily reliant upon.

I have been mulling over my next blog post, and this has given me an idea. I have been assessing my sides performances and then opting for tweaks in my systems to accommodate their strengths...this is how it looks like at the moment. I do make changes some of the time depending on whom i meet. We play an attacking, fluid system, with most sides. I have noticed that my MCa does tend to drop out of some matches, i will keep track of this a bit more, but having said that...i tend to rotate that spot between 3 players. So I will keep tabs,