Narrow 4231; patient build-up while retaining counter-attacking force

I commented in the feedback thread but I think the discussion went out of the scope of that thread, so I continue here instead.

Quote Originally Posted by Cleon View Post

Patient build up play is lethal, I use a flat defensive 3-4-3 with only one attacking striker and I dominate possession at around 69-77% per game and create 10-15 quality chances a game and I'm scoring plenty of goals. I think I've only failed to score less than 2 goals on 4 occasions throughout the season. So patient build up play can be very rewarding.

If you're using the 4-2-3-1 that you did a thread on for FM14 then I see a few flaws with that set up which won't help you when breaking sides down. It lacks any kind of real movement if its same as in this thread or based on this which I assume it is;

http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php/386739-Narrow-4-2-3-1-Control-and-Counter-duo.-Stable-tactic-in-14.3.

It's quite static and very central focused.

How exactly is it static?

The idea is that the right side is more attack-focused, so the right wing-back is therefore less attacking and the right defending midfielder is more focused on controlling space. The left side has a support AMC, and he provides early passing option and arrives later in the area. On that side, the wing-back is attacking and the hole he is leaving behind is covered by a more aggressive defending midfielder. The DLF-A provided plenty of passing option behind the opposition defense, and an early passing option as well as making one-two combos with the TQ very often. The tactic was good both at quick attacks, longer attacks, (initial attack phase, redistribution phase and the restart phase) wide play and central play in FM14. In FM15, it is far less dynamic. The only individual instructions are that the support AMCL is given "run with ball" and the team is told to build up attacks from defense.

How would you suggest approaching the roles, individual and team instructions for this narrow tactic in FM15? I don't like the passing team instructions; Retain Possession is better covered by "play slower" and "Work Ball into Box" stops crossing. More Direct instructs them to find the striker first and then move the team up afterwards, which is a bad idea when I have five midfielders. Shorter Passing may make it difficult for the full backs, and stop too many quick attacks. Finding this balance between quick attacks, longer attacks and defensive capabilities is really what I am after, because that is what I had in FM14.

Edit: oh, I realised that the picture of the tactic in the tactic download thread is of a mirrored version. In the pictured version, the right wing back should have been set to Attack, and the left back set to wing back -automatic. Also, I ended up using a Shadow Striker instead of AMC-A.

I've not tested it on the latest patch yet, but the tactic I created from my Ramsey thread is a beast at home and does pretty much what you seem to want. Destroyed the league 2nd season with Southampton and only lost it by 6 points in the first season. Although I do use a different tactic away from home.

Not 100% convinced about the LB and RB roles yet.

You can get rid of 'play out of defence' if you have good passing defenders. Also helps if you get your CM-A to 'come deep to get ball'.

You can also get rid of 'stay on feet' - I only use it at the moment because my squad is extremely young and they give away a lot of penalties by diving in.

Control - Very Fluid

The 2 draws were 1-1s. IIRC both of their equalisers came from free-kicks.

The system is really all about the CM-A. If he's not got good off the ball, anticipation, work rate, passing, composure, decisions, team work or stamina, it'll probably fall apart. Luckily Henriksen is very cheap and brilliant in the role, especially after he's learnt the necessary PPMs.

I've not tested it on the latest patch yet, but the tactic I created from my Ramsey thread is a beast at home and does pretty much what you seem to want. Destroyed the league 2nd season with Southampton and only lost it by 6 points in the first season. Although I do use a different tactic away from home.

Not 100% convinced about the LB and RB roles yet.

You can get rid of 'play out of defence' if you have good passing defenders. Also helps if you get your CM-A to 'come deep to get ball'.

You can also get rid of 'stay on feet' - I only use it at the moment because my squad is extremely young and they give away a lot of penalties by diving in.

Control - Very Fluid

The 2 draws were 1-1s. IIRC both of their equalisers came from free-kicks.

The system is really all about the CM-A. If he's not got good off the ball, anticipation, work rate, passing, composure, decisions, team work or stamina, it'll probably fall apart. Luckily Henriksen is very cheap and brilliant in the role, especially after he's learnt the necessary PPMs.

Not the same system so not sure your post is relevant? I'll respond to Biggus now though let me wrote something up.

How exactly is it static?

I wasn't having a go, I should clarify that before I start. I was just picking up on the fact you said results are better when you use the higher mentalities compared to lower ones

Firstly I should point out I picked up on the fact you mentioned lower mentality systems didn't suit your tactic and you go more aggressive against the defensive sides. The reason why I believe is the 4231 narrow is in the same mould as the 424 in regards to it being an attacking tactic by default, this doesn't mean it can't work with other mentalities but it is a very attacking shape. What it focuses on is putting constant pressure on the oppositions back line which is easy to do against sides who attack you or are more adventurous going forward. But when you face teams who defend deep then the roles you are using give you movement in the wrong areas and that's what I was referring too as static. It's why you have more success when switching to attacking or being more aggressive because that's what the narrow 4231 is all about. But against the defensive sides they are more compact and I don't see any of the roles you used that offer you any kind of intelligent movement in the right kind of areas that you need.

The DLF will wander about but I'm not sure it'll be enough and the fact that you use a treq takes something away from the advantage of playing with 3 AMC's imo because he drops far too deep at times and while he will offer movement it will be movement which is deep. This means you don't really have anyone running in behind to create space needed to break stubborn sides down. Your outer 2 AMC's will be predictable in play and because the treq drops off this makes it easier for the opposition to pick the AMC's up.

I would also say that sometimes even going more aggressive doesn't work either? I'd be shocked if you said it always worked. As when you go attacking you'll be trying to force them into submission almost.

The idea is that the right side is more attack-focused, so the right wing-back is therefore less attacking and the right defending midfielder is more focused on controlling space

It's not really more attacking though is it? The BWM is very aggressive with his closing down so this means he will move around from him position a lot and because he's at the DMC spot (even off set) he will still tend to cover all of the DMC area so he can drift to either side, he'll go where he thinks the threat is. How do you mean he is controlling space?

The left side has a support AMC, and he provides early passing option and arrives later in the area. On that side, the wing-back is attacking and the hole he is leaving behind is covered by a more aggressive defending midfielder. The DLF-A provided plenty of passing option behind the opposition defense, and an early passing option as well as making one-two combos with the TQ very often. The tactic was good both at quick attacks, longer attacks, (initial attack phase, redistribution phase and the restart phase) wide play and central play in FM14. In FM15, it is far less dynamic. The only individual instructions are that the support AMCL is given "run with ball" and the team is told to build up attacks from defense.

This was kind of my original point. All that is good but against defensive sides they don't tend to let you in behind and will sit deep, narrow and compact and just hit you on the counter. The fact you have 4 players in the AMC area is making it hard to create space as its congested even if the treq drops deep, it's still congested when sides sit deep.

How would you suggest approaching the roles, individual and team instructions for this narrow tactic in FM15? I don't like the passing team instructions; Retain Possession is better covered by "play slower" and "Work Ball into Box" stops crossing. More Direct instructs them to find the striker first and then move the team up afterwards, which is a bad idea when I have five midfielders. Shorter Passing may make it difficult for the full backs, and stop too many quick attacks. Finding this balance between quick attacks, longer attacks and defensive capabilities is really what I am after, because that is what I had in FM14.

It depends on the situation really. Why do you have to have one set way and why not adapt it depending on who you face? Because you use a narrow 4231 it means against certain formations you'll always struggle with counter attacks based on what shape you are playing. However against these sides who play defensive I'd try and be smarter by creating movement lower down the pitch and forcing the opposition onto you more to allow gaps to appear for your more aggressive players to take advantage of. Movement from deep can create space further up the pitch if done correctly. To give you a better idea and in more depth, I recently wrote these posts about playing against defensive teams, attacking teams and then one speaking about how they both differ which means the space you attack and need to use is different. I think this will be helpful in terms of understanding what I was on about and should help you be able to identify the roles and possible instructions needed.

http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php/403153-Building-A-Tactic-From-The-Beginning-And-Maintaining-It-Long-Term

Post 13 is for playing attacking sides, post 17 is for playing defensive sides and the last post in the thread is the one discussing the differences.

I didn't spot that the tactic in the photo is mirrored from the one I use (and didn't have an attacking wing back) before it was too late. The side with the BWM DM has an attacking wing back and a support wide AMC. the side with the Shadow Striker/AMC-A has a MC-D and a wingback set to support. They are supposed to arrive in attacking positions at different points of the attack, so usually, if the initial attack is stopped, the ball is passed to the attacking wing back, TQ or AMC-S. If that does lead to nothing, the support wing back arrives latest of all and by that time, the rest of the team should have started their re-positioning for the "second wave".

The movement in FM14 was excellent!

In FM15, I have not managed to ensure that the AMC's or striker does not simply shoot before even the redustribution phase arrive up front. If I add the "slow down play" team instructions, I feel that I do nothing but pass the ball around and it all ends up in a hopeless shot anyway. All the counter-attacks and passing from side to side to create space in the middle are gone. An attack down the left side ends up being a cross or a shot from the left side - they never think "we'll have to open them up" and switch flank a couple of times to create movement centrally. This could be because Bradford in League One does not have the players to think in those "advanced" terms, but the Oviedo team I started with in Adelante in 2017 (FM14) certainly wasn't that much better, and -they- managed that just fine.

So I gather that what I should do in FM15 is to switch to Counter or even Defensive then, and let the attacking nature of the formation do the work for me offensively? It is just that I find their closing down on my own half infuriatingly passive, and the attacking four tends to be rather eager to finish attacks prematurely. To control the game, I will therefore end up with 10 or more team instructions - and for each one I add the versatility of the tactic is diminished. I don't want to end up having 38 tactics; one for each opponent in the league, home and away. The whole point of playing Very Fluid is to let the players deal with problems within a loose framework of complementary skills and movement. If I need to change stuff based on whatever the AI is doing, then the tactic isn't good enough and I'll delete and start again.

It is with a good portion of scepticism that I start clicking on stuff in the Team Instructions window. It shouldn't be necessary to click for instance "Retain Possession" to make the AMCL/WBL decide that a cross is not a good idea with only one player in the box currently, and pass back to the BWM who passes it to the MC-D who passes it to the WBR who drags the whole defense across towards him, and leaves space for the AMCR to go to the byline or do whatever he pleases with his space. That should be inherent to both Attacking and Control.

You refer a lot to Mentality and Team Instructions, but not to Player Instructions. Why is that?

If you dislike traits of individual player behaviour within certain Mentalities, then why not amend it via Player Instructions? In my opinion, FM15 is more responsive to PIs and TIs than FM14 ever was, so if you want your AMC to be more patient and not shoot, then you have presumably tried asking him not to do so as often?

If it wasn't clear from the above post - I want ONE tactic to let me be able to attack efficiently on the counter, defend reasonably competently, and score from long attacks (i.e switching flanks at least once, probing), against a reasonable range of opponent tactics and quality.

Dominant matches 15-20 shots, 50% at goal, 33-50% of those in goal (i.e I expect to regularly score more than two goals). Less than that is not good enough. When I am not dominant, the requirement is to be more efficient than the opposition. I expect to overperform, but not at the cost of playing silly football or micromanaging the matches - to me FM is not about one-uping the AI.

What I am missing to do this, is the balance and timing of movement vs passing. If I understand those helpful posts above correctly, I should:

* Keep the DLF, or even make him deeper with another role like F9

* Move the DMCL to MCL position

* Change the TQ to AP-S

* Make the tactic symmetric; wide AMC's and wingbacks exact same roles

* Since there would be a complete lack of early movement behind the defense now, both wide AMC's would have to be attacking (in which case this is just a narrow 424)

* Switch to Counter and add aggressiveness through Team Instructions

* Wingbacks would have to be attacking to provide width

Am I right so far?

But your wishlist is impractical - you have to show some sort of concession to the AI, surely? :confused: You might not want to have to do it, but this is no longer the click-and-win game it was. You don't want that, but the wishlist does lean towards it, and heavily.

A narrow 4-2-3-1 against a 4-4-2 operates differently to how it operates against a 4-1-2-3 DM. It operates different against a 4-4-2 with a Counter Mentality, to how it does against a 4-4-2 with a Control Mentality. It operates differently against two same-Mentality 4-4-2s where one of the MCs is a CM (A) in one, but a BBM in the other.

You refer a lot to Mentality and Team Instructions, but not to Player Instructions. Why is that?

If you dislike traits of individual player behaviour within certain Mentalities, then why not amend it via Player Instructions? In my opinion, FM15 is more responsive to PIs and TIs than FM14 ever was, so if you want your AMC to be more patient and not shoot, then you have presumably tried asking him not to do so as often?

Because then I would actually be saying to them "I want you to play -this- exact way" at the same time as I every day at the training field tell them "you are free to do as you please, mostly"?

If I tell the wing backs to cross less often, for instance, I am not sure they would do so when it is the correct decision to do so. This is the problem of the "Walk ball into box" team instructions. They start doing what I want, yes, but they do so at the cost of not booting the ball behind the defense when the opportunity arises. In my experience from previous FM's, once you start tweaking the tactics to prevent silly shots, you are just patching the stump of a lost leg - the ME is really telling you that something is fundamentally wrong and you are on the wrong path. To me, slowing the play down results in that they do not attack quickly at all and I end up losing the ball in high positions and pretty much watch my defenders pick up high clearances aimed at their lone striker all day long.

Well, those are my preconceptions anyway

But your wishlist is impractical - you have to show some sort of concession to the AI, surely? :confused: You might not want to have to do it, but this is no longer the click-and-win game it was. You don't want that, but the wishlist does lean towards it, and heavily.

A narrow 4-2-3-1 against a 4-4-2 operates differently to how it operates against a 4-1-2-3 DM. It operates different against a 4-4-2 with a Counter Mentality, to how it does against a 4-4-2 with a Control Mentality. It operates differently against two same-Mentality 4-4-2s where one of the MCs is a CM (A) in one, but a BBM in the other.

Yes of course, but they would cope with it differently and competently enough that I wouldn't have to change my approach (much).

There must be a difference between "operates differently" and "stops working". There are different spaces being exploited and exploitable of course, but that is the whole point - I don't want to tell them to play more on the right side because their left side is weaker today, or to retain possession more today because they have only three midfielders while I have five. Any tactic should be dynamic enough that the increased chance of my AMCR beating that weak DL of theirs has an impact on the match, and the extra space my midfielders find because they have only three of them should result in the same input into the ME.

Yes of course, but they would cope with it differently and competently enough that I wouldn't have to change my approach (much).

There must be a difference between "operates differently" and "stops working". There are different spaces being exploited and exploitable of course, but that is the whole point - I don't want to tell them to play more on the right side because their left side is weaker today, or to retain possession more today because they have only three midfielders while I have five. Any tactic should be dynamic enough that the increased chance of my AMCR beating that weak DL of theirs has an impact on the match, and the extra space my midfielders find because they have only three of them should result in the same input into the ME.

To all the questions: why?

If the AI operates in a way that stifles (as an example) your central AMC, why should you not have to change tact? A more Fluid Team Shape isn't just an "Ah well, you find the answer lads" button, but that seems to be (at a stretch!) what you want. Why should your players just know how to play to suit the demands of the match? If that happens, why do we have a manager at all?

Yes of course, but they would cope with it differently and competently enough that I wouldn't have to change my approach (much).

There must be a difference between "operates differently" and "stops working". There are different spaces being exploited and exploitable of course, but that is the whole point - I don't want to tell them to play more on the right side because their left side is weaker today, or to retain possession more today because they have only three midfielders while I have five. Any tactic should be dynamic enough that the increased chance of my AMCR beating that weak DL of theirs has an impact on the match, and the extra space my midfielders find because they have only three of them should result in the same input into the ME.

You don't have to do that but you have to realise that the different teams give up different space. So against weaker sides the space in in front of the opposition, against stronger sides it's in behind them. You focus on that, not that your left side is more weaker today etc. You focus on where the space is that the opposition give up. In your tactic you don't really use roles that benefit a slow patient counter attacking tactic, its more suited to being gung-ho.

For example you are facing someone using a defensive 442, then maybe ask your Treq to be a Enganche or AP instead to stop him being as deep as there is no need. The 442 has little protection against AMC's. You've made a minor subtle change yet the impact on what you've actually done will be huge.

The key is the roles and shape you select, if you want them to be able to do everything (with regards to play) then use roles that actually do offer different kinds of movement and compliment each other and aren't just like for like which is what the original threads tactic is like. You don't have variety in role/duty selection. Look at the shape you use, its not really a counter attacking shape or a shape that is solid. It's a very gung-ho tactic like the 424 is. Sure you can use them on lower mentalities but they are designed to overpower the opposition in a specific way. You've chosen an aggressive tactic and want it to be something that it isn't.

The changes and small tweaks you make all depends on the set up you start with. Design something that allows for most of the stuff you are wanting to achieve and choose a shape that actually allows for that type of play that you are creating. Remember its much easier to get players to go forward than it is to get them further down the field in transitions. Keep in mind the shape you see is your defensive shape and work with in that kind of mind set.

If it wasn't clear from the above post - I want ONE tactic to let me be able to attack efficiently on the counter, defend reasonably competently, and score from long attacks (i.e switching flanks at least once, probing), against a reasonable range of opponent tactics and quality.

Dominant matches 15-20 shots, 50% at goal, 33-50% of those in goal (i.e I expect to regularly score more than two goals). Less than that is not good enough. When I am not dominant, the requirement is to be more efficient than the opposition. I expect to overperform, but not at the cost of playing silly football or micromanaging the matches - to me FM is not about one-uping the AI.

What I am missing to do this, is the balance and timing of movement vs passing. If I understand those helpful posts above correctly, I should:

* Keep the DLF, or even make him deeper with another role like F9

* Move the DMCL to MCL position

* Change the TQ to AP-S

* Make the tactic symmetric; wide AMC's and wingbacks exact same roles

* Since there would be a complete lack of early movement behind the defense now, both wide AMC's would have to be attacking (in which case this is just a narrow 424)

* Switch to Counter and add aggressiveness through Team Instructions

* Wingbacks would have to be attacking to provide width

Am I right so far?

And you believe one single tactic can achieve that in every single game?

Point to me please, of an example in real life where anything even close to that has ever happened?

You want one single tactic to do everything without actually needing to manage.

Of course FM is about "one-upping the AI". The AI is the other team. The entire concept of the sport is to one up the opposition! Sure there are different ways to do it, and i am not saying you need to be Pep and tweak 5 times in every match, but its a little niave to think that unless you play as Bayern, you can just steam roller every game and be strong in every single area.

Other football managers are not stupid (in FM, or in real life, unless we count Brendan Rodgers last night...). They will adapt to your system and exploit any weakness, just as you are trying to do with setting up your core tactic.

I think the core idea of creating that system and shape is quite interesting and could be a really good discussion around how to get it working. Cleon has already given you some brilliant input above. However your end outcome seems so skewed that i dont think you will ever achieve it.

Not the same system so not sure your post is relevant? I'll respond to Biggus now though let me wrote something up.

Ah sorry, only just realised he meant 3 CAMs by 'narrow'. Just delete these posts.

And you believe one single tactic can achieve that in every single game?

Point to me please, of an example in real life where anything even close to that has ever happened?

You want one single tactic to do everything without actually needing to manage.

Of course FM is about "one-upping the AI". The AI is the other team. The entire concept of the sport is to one up the opposition! Sure there are different ways to do it, and i am not saying you need to be Pep and tweak 5 times in every match, but its a little niave to think that unless you play as Bayern, you can just steam roller every game and be strong in every single area.

Other football managers are not stupid (in FM, or in real life, unless we count Brendan Rodgers last night...). They will adapt to your system and exploit any weakness, just as you are trying to do with setting up your core tactic.

I think the core idea of creating that system and shape is quite interesting and could be a really good discussion around how to get it working. Cleon has already given you some brilliant input above. However your end outcome seems so skewed that i dont think you will ever achieve it.

It did in FM14.

If I rephrased to "battle of wits with the AI", would that make more sense to you?

It did in FM14.

If I rephrased to "battle of wits with the AI", would that make more sense to you?

Not entirely true though is it? You did better once you improved your players but I can remember the posts from FM14 when everything wasn't so rosey. Or have you forgot this thread?

http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php/381887-FM14.2.1-Creating-a-defensively-solid-tactic-for-the-weakest-team-in-the-league

In fact that thread reinforces what's been said in here, except it was you saying it about this very shape ffs

Not entirely true though is it? You did better once you improved your players but I can remember the posts from FM14 when everything wasn't so rosey. Or have you forgot this thread?

http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php/381887-FM14.2.1-Creating-a-defensively-solid-tactic-for-the-weakest-team-in-the-league

In fact that thread reinforces what's been said in here, except it was you saying it about this very shape ffs

Well, this is 14.2 and the tactic is for 14.3 and isn't really the same. I massively overperformed in 14.3 with counter and control using that narrow 4231, long before I got the best team in the leauge (that followed the success). Once I had the best team I stopped using the counter strategy.

It did in FM14.

If I rephrased to "battle of wits with the AI", would that make more sense to you?

What do ya know, they made FM more realistic between last year and this

Afraid the rephrasing doesnt really make sense no. I guess if i were to phrase it appropriately, you mean that you dont want to have to manage the games like a football manager. Basically you want to play the game as DoF - You want to do all the signings etc, set the initial tactic but just be able to use the same tactic, 90mins every week. Thats fair, its your £40 quid, you get to decide how you play the game. Just pointing out that its not realistic, either in real football or in FM15. Not to achieve the amazing results you are after.

The core shape/system could really become something interesting, but it would require more management than you are looking to put in, so will save that discussion for another place/day - Good luck in finding the quick fix utopia you are after

BiggusD, clear your PM storage, please.