Inspired by England a 433. Advice would be appreciated.

It's not often that I am inspired by England but last night I was interested in the shape as it is pretty much what I used to play when I was managing IRL and to be honest I have never got it firing in FM so thought I would have another go.

IRL it was easy. I had a back four but had two fantastic wing backs who bombed up and down the wing. Sitting in front of them I had my Captain who used to just sit and dictate play. Ahead of him were two central midfielders who kept things tight but at least one of them had a fantastic engine to get up and support the striker. Out wide I had two young mavericks who I basically gave licence to by allowing them to roam and swap positions. They started wide but at all times had licence to come in narrow and with the wing backs supplying crosses at our best we had at least four to aim at in the box, these being the AML, AMR, Striker and a central midfielder. Up top I had a top striker in our League who could do a bit of everything.

Thus looking at England last night the philosophy was similar. Obviously I didn't have Rooney, Sterling and Welbeck in my team but it was the fluidity that impressed me at times with Welbeck and Sterling with licence to roam and having Clyne and Baines pushing on. Rooney pushed up on the last man thus allowing space behind him to attack.

How do I put this into FM though>? I started out with this....

It hasn't been too bad. Results so far are :

----------------------------------------Score-------------Shots--------------On Target---------------CCC-----------------Posession

Man City--------------------------------0------------------16--------------------4----------------------0----------------------59%

West Ham--(Valencia 3)---------------3------------------10--------------------6----------------------0----------------------43%

Southampton---------------------------1-------------------1---------------------1----------------------1----------------------46

West Ham--(Valencia)-----------------1-------------------26-------------------10---------------------6-----------------------54

West Ham-(Valencia 2, Downing)-----3-------------------17-------------------9----------------------1-----------------------48

Leicester--------------------------------0--------------------9--------------------1----------------------0-----------------------52

QPR--------------------------------------1-------------------4--------------------3----------------------1-----------------------50

West Ham-(Balanta)--------------------1------------------12-------------------3-----------------------2-----------------------50

West Ham-(Valencia)-------------------1-------------------18------------------7-----------------------1-----------------------50

Leicester---------------------------------1-------------------7-------------------3-----------------------1-----------------------50

West Ham-(Carroll, Song)--------------2-------------------26-----------------11----------------------1-----------------------57

WBA--------------------------------------0-------------------7-------------------2----------------------2------------------------43

To be fair to WBA they played with 10 men for 80 minutes!!

Shooting isn't the problem but creating CCC's and having shots on target seems to be the main issue, bar the Southampton game which I still can't believe how I didn't win comfortably. Goals are clearly coming from Valencia up top but it seems heavily reliant on that centre forward scoring. I don't think having him on an attack duty is an issue although I may be wrong but he leads the line well and I don't want him coming back deeper if he is scoring goals as it is. What I need is to offer him valuable support without weakening defensively.

In the matches I have played around with the wide players duties. They seem to be one part of the problem as they are not getting goals or assists. In the above I have them on roam from position but no matter what role they are in I find it very difficult to get much out of them. Even with roam on I see the WS on the left far to close to the marauding wing back. I want that wide player in or around the box. I have tried both as IF's, AP's (with structured mentality) and even a Roamdaughter but am really not sure how to get them involved. It is a difficult position because you want them chipping in with both assists and goals but I find the movement of AML and AMR very frustrating. In a perfect world maybe a RDM but with better defensive play would be ideal. You see Wellbeck last night and he was in the box an awful lot even starting from out wide but I can't really find a role that gives you that.

Also I find it difficult to get at least one CM offering support by getting forward more. I tried the BBM as a CM A and putting the right wing back on support but I found it made the midfield far weaker. I am experimenting on having "get further forward" on the BBM but again I am frustrated with the movement of the CM's.

I guess what you are looking for is the two wing backs and possibly one of the wide men supplying the ammunition with the striker, another wide man and one CM attacking the box.

Your thoughts would be gratefully appreciated.

You have nobody else getting in the box consistently besides Valencia, which is probably why you are finding he is the main goal-scorer. How is the WB behind W working out? I have played like this occasionally (one side anyway) with a WB(A) and W(S) as you have. I found there was a lot of overlapping, but the players tended to get in each others way sometimes. It worked mainly by dragging players out wide to help the opposition FB and thus create space in the centre (I think).

There are two ways to address the problem of not having support for the striker, anyway. One is to consider the role of the BBM, perhaps employing him as a CM(A), who I find is much more aggressive in getting forward. I think with your midfield 3, you can afford a more adventurous player there. The other would be to have an IF(A) or (s) on one of the flanks. He would get in the box to support your striker, free up space on the flank for the WB(A) on his side to get further forward and provide width, and be arriving at the back post to take advantage of any crossing opportunities that arise from the winger and WB on the opposite flank overlapping and double-teaming defenders.

You have nobody else getting in the box consistently besides Valencia, which is probably why you are finding he is the main goal-scorer. How is the WB behind W working out? I have played like this occasionally (one side anyway) with a WB(A) and W(S) as you have. I found there was a lot of overlapping, but the players tended to get in each others way sometimes. It worked mainly by dragging players out wide to help the opposition FB and thus create space in the centre (I think).

There are two ways to address the problem of not having support for the striker, anyway. One is to consider the role of the BBM, perhaps employing him as a CM(A), who I find is much more aggressive in getting forward. I think with your midfield 3, you can afford a more adventurous player there. The other would be to have an IF(A) or (s) on one of the flanks. He would get in the box to support your striker, free up space on the flank for the WB(A) on his side to get further forward and provide width, and be arriving at the back post to take advantage of any crossing opportunities that arise from the winger and WB on the opposite flank overlapping and double-teaming defenders.

Winger with (a) duty will most definitely get in the box. The main difference in the active instructions between winger and a IF is about what they do with the ball (going wide or cutting in).

With the dlp(d) in the DM spot I'd also try the BBM as a cm(a).

And for the last bold bit... Well again, wingers do get to the back post when the ball's on the other flank.

-SnUrF

Against Liverpool away I tried a CM A instead of the BBM and switched the CM S to a BBM and was 2-0 up but a silly back pass let in Sturridge and I went down 3-2, although I should have shut up shop!! I did notice though changing from a BBM to a CM A definitely affected the team defensively.

Have to be honest I didn't really see the CM A getting into the box, mainly just outside it. I wonder if it is having the CF on attack? Maybe on an attack duty he doesn't link up with those behind him, although in this formation I can't see the logic in playing a forward on support unless you want your wide men as primary goal scorers. In the past I have seen say a CF S or a DLF S ho0ld the ball and play in a Winger on attack but I found you then lose a certain scoring threat from your centre forward. With your CF on attack the winger attack definitely doesn't get into the box as much.

I also tried having the winger as a RMD with a CM A and having the winger on the left on support. The idea being you then have two players on the left with ammunition to cross to three in the box. Didn't really see much joy with that.

I can honestly say in FM15 roaming doesn't seem to work too well. Even with the wingers on roam they stay pretty wide. There isn't enough link up between the front three for me whichever roles out wide you play. I also tried using both wide men as playmakers in an effort for them to receive the ball but again not much joy.

I think lateral movement is poor that's half the problem so I am almost wondering if a play narrower shout with telling the wing backs to stay wide may help. Failing that dump the DLP and change it to an Anchor man and have some sort of playmaker in the CM strata?

***Update, Well I tried changing the BBM to a CM A. Swapped the WS to an IF S in an effort to create space for the wing back and also instructed the wing backs to play wider. Beat Palace 2-0 with Amaltifano and Valencia scoring with 20 shots, 10 on target but only 1 CCC. Must confess I do see Valencia shooting an awful lot from just outside the area when players are making runs.

Have checked the roles for the wide players and only two allow the player to move into channels which if meaning between the full back and centre back is where you want those players running. Unfortunately the roles you can use that are the RMD and Wide Target Man which of course are unsuitable for Downing and Amaltifano. I am sure in FM`14 you could instruct wingers certainly to move into channels although I may be wrong.

lthe W(A) has stay wider active too, which is an off the ball instruction so he will not be in the box nearly as much, but should be when crosses come in from the other side.

lthe W(A) has stay wider active too, which is an off the ball instruction so he will not be in the box nearly as much, but should be when crosses come in from the other side.

That's true. Hence why I say it is a shame you cannot ask a winger or IF to "move into channels".

That's true. Hence why I say it is a shame you cannot ask a winger or IF to "move into channels".

They already play in the area that is classed as channels, so how would that make sense?

They already play in the area that is classed as channels, so how would that make sense?

Well I guess it depends on how you class channels. If the channels means out in wider areas of the pitch like most TV commentators seem to think that's what it is then agreed certainly a winger is stationed there. If though the channels are classed as the space between full back and centre back then as I say it is a shame you can't ask a winger to attack that area because generally a winger looks to go past the full back on the outside and play in a cross.. Ok arguably an Inside Forward can do that although possibly only on an attack duty although the idea of an IF is that he cuts inside and has a shot on goal.. I am assuming the channels in game are between full back and centre back.

The roles played by Welbeck and Sterling last night were neither winger or IF IMO. Maybe the behaviour I am looking to get possibly is an IF on attack with dribbles less and shoots less if you want him just getting into the area. I am trying to get bodies into the box without them shooting for goal 25 yards out. In the previous match I had Valencia played a lovely ball to Amaltifano who cut inside the defender "inside the area" and curled a left foot shot in at the far post. Beautiful goal but difficult to actually instruct them to do it.

Well I guess it depends on how you class channels. If the channels means out in wider areas of the pitch like most TV commentators seem to think that's what it is then agreed certainly a winger is stationed there. If though the channels are classed as the space between full back and centre back then as I say it is a shame you can't ask a winger to attack that area because generally a winger looks to go past the full back on the outside and play in a cross..

It is that space and the winger will naturally do this anyway depending on how wide you play and what footedness the winger is. If you are playing wide then obviously he won't be in the channels as much and he'll be more touchline instead. If you want a winger to always attack the channels then its not a winger you want because by definition a winger is someone who gets to the byline not someone who cuts inside all the time to attack free space. That would be a IF or WM depending on the positions you use.

It is that space and the winger will naturally do this anyway depending on how wide you play and what footedness the winger is. If you are playing wide then obviously he won't be in the channels as much and he'll be more touchline instead. If you want a winger to always attack the channels then its not a winger you want because by definition a winger is someone who gets to the byline not someone who cuts inside all the time to attack free space. That would be a IF or WM depending on the positions you use.

What would you suggest in the set up above Cleon? Would appreciate your input. The striker as a CF A is scoring so reluctant to use WM's as then he will be isolated. Maybe switch Downing to the right and have a right footer on the left and play them as IF's? I have to be honest. Even watching games on full I see little difference between the behaviour of and role in the AM L and AM R strata.

Why does a WM make the striker isolated? A WM can be as cautious or attacking as you wish, it's probably the best wide role in the game. I'm not saying change it btw its more I'm puzzled by your comments.

For me the tactic above has the same issues centrally as the 4-1-4-1 you posted the other day. Far too cautious yet again and relies too much on the width of the side and it'll be inconsistent in games that the wide players have a bad game or are marked out of it. Then your striker is just a spectator as he'll not have any supply or support. It's one of the main reasons you struggle to have anywhere close to 50% of shots on target. All your formations always suffer the same thing, you only ever create ones that have 1 source of goals and supply which means its hard to put good runs together or be consistent. Plus your still hung up on the CCC but must have been told a thousand times to ignore it, in FM it doesn't translate into an actual good chance and its by no means a way of measuring how good a tactic is. How many chances you have and how many on target and from what distance are a lot more important. You need to add more variety into your set ups imo and until you focus on doing that you will always struggle or get frustrated regardless of what tactic you use or what version you play.

I covered this in the How To Create Goalscorers thread I did last week.

You need more structure inside the systems you use, you need a plan B without needing to change much during games. By this, I mean you need to create multiple sources of runners, support and supply in the system you use. Then you'll find consistency should improve dramatically because you aren't relying on one particular source or waiting for a moment of individual skill or a mistake from the opposition for goals.

It's not just the roles and duties you need to look at but also the personnel. The two advanced MCs in a 4-3-3 or 4-5-1 need to be quick off the mark, and ideally, they should be able to take the ball and drive into space when the wingers and striker are isolated. Song and Noble won't give you that. They'll crawl up the pitch, hit a wall of recovering defenders and be forced to either hit a hard, low probability pass to a winger pushing up on his man or, worse yet, play a safe possession pass to one of the most timid, workmanlike wingers in the history of English football.

Right Sussex as others have said you need more variety in attack and your midfield is so so so so cautious!

I'm obsessed with making sure my tactics are balanced, and have various ways of attacking. A simple rule of thumb is this..

Make sure to have 1 attack duty in each band of the team. Simple enough yeah? This will help you immensely.

Break the team into groups and ask yourself "does this make sense?" So for example...

start with the front 3. In a 433 you really need to get this combination right because the striker will easily be isolated without an AMC behind (like in my 4231/433 which you can read about in my recent thread).

Ideally you'd create a solid grouping between the 3 that includes 2 #9 players and 1 #10. In your case you have 2 wingers and a CF-A. Well, the CF-A is a #9, but the wingers are not #10's. So you've got an isolated striker. Again that isn't to say that this cannot work AT ALL, but it isn't ideal. It may work a treat against a narrow team that doesn't cope with your wingers, but as others have said, you can't get consistent results with unbalanced tactics. To remedy this... you need a #10. One of those wingers should be changed to something like: IF-S or AP-S. OR you could choose to make the striker a #10 (support duty!) so perhaps CF-S, and then make sure you've got a proper #9 out wide (IF-A, RMD-A).

Now the central midfield. You've got a DM-CM-CM triangle. The point backwards, as louis van gaal would say. This means that your striker IS potentially isolated, so a runner from CM is key. Right now you have CM-S, BBM, and DLP-D. Who is going to be getting into the box to score / assist goals? The BBM is a nice role, and one that I use a lot, but that isn't nearly as effective as a CM-A or AP-A. You need balance, and to achieve balance you need someone who is more attacking minded in central midfield to help your attack. Honestly just changing your CM-S to CM-A would be a massive help.

The backline is fine, but I would be wary of using both wingbacks on attack as West Ham United in the premier league.. You're going to rely on that DLP-D covering a lot of space! So maybe use 1 wingback on support and one on attack. And again, you need to also consider the partnerships with the advanced wide men.. If you choose to use wingbacks, why would you use wingers ahead of them? Both are designed to play wide. Where's the variety? You want to create a dynamic partnership where one player cuts in and one stays wide or vice versa. Think in terms of underlaps and overlaps.

I hope this helps!

On the topic of wingers, I have strong wide players who on both sides are far more suited to playing as wingers (neither great on the opposite side).

Am I right in thinking that a FB is the best player to have behind? aware of the problems created by having a 'predictable' attack and poor combinations, so would the best way to go be a W(a) with a FB(s) and W(s) (or even DW?) with a FB(a)? The players in question are quick, skilful dribblers so to me more suited as wingers than wide midfielders.

Just a couple from me and from looking at your tactic you have both WB's on attack duty with wingers. Surely the rb is not going to be of much use if the winger (a) is getting to the byline.

I would go for WB (A) with an inside forward on support and possibly an inverted wb on support if you play with a winger on attack. I have no idea how well this would work but going from your tactic the WB's will be in the same space as the wingers with no one supporting the striker apart from your BBM and you would need a proper BBM to do that role. With inside forward and a inverted wb they would go into the space behind the striker. Like I said I have no idea how well this would work or even if the inverted wb will get that high up the pitch cutting inside but give it a try.

Usually if you play Winger (A) play a full back on (s) behind him and vice versa. If you play with a wide midfielder who does more defensively then use a wing back behind him.

Let me try and understand what the OPs goals are:

1. Fullbacks who occasionally cross, they are not the prime source of goals

2. Wingers who cut inside and sometimes go wide to cross and swap positions

3. A central midfield pairing where one is the engine who drives forward and arrives late in the box.

4. And a dm who just recycles possession, does little in the way of creatively opening up play since thats the primary purpose of the MC engine.

5. Old fashioned centre forward

For me when doing any kind of a system, setting the goals is the first thing i look at..how correct am I at understanding the overall goals?

Thank you for all your help.

I totally agree with what you all say, have looked at it and came up with this,. Far from perfect but a start.

Standard/Fluid

I played Arsenal away in the game I used this.

Firstly I accept that I was (and usually am too cautious). In my defence I try when starting out getting a defensive base sorted firstly then add attacking intent. Defensively it was ok as goals against weren't bad but yes it was too cautious.

I looked at what Cleon said to start with about the use of WM's rather than an AML and AMR so thought I would try that. Usually I always try and have a more defensive minded CM on the same side as the attacking full/wing back but if I didn't want two attacking duties down my left hand side (WB A/WM A) then I had to ignore this option because that would mean that I would need two attacking duties on the right possibly being a CM A and a WM A. This I felt is too aggressive and I felt would probably not work having two attacking duties side by side running forward together. Not saying it wouldn't work just that IMO it doesn't look right.

So hence why making the left CM a CM A. Coupled with the Wing Back on attack I felt a more conservative duty was needed at left midfield so decided just as a starting point to have Downing as a WM S (He is I assume is the most timid, workmanlike wingers in the history of English football?!) To be honest he didn't seem to do much all game, certainly not attacking wise so maybe some tweaks needed there.

The other WM I placed on attack with the WB on support as advised above so I don't have both wing backs on attack. No reason for this way around apart from usually Cresswell (injured) and Jenkinson (can't play v Arsenal) are my usual wing backs and Cresswell seems to be the more attacking of the two.

I then thought that I would try and get Song up there as well to an extent by using him as a BBM. I suspect that there is no reason why not to have the CM A on the right and BBM on the left but I just thought that this way around they were more balanced as stated above re two attacking duties in midfield side by side. I stand to be corrected.

I left Valencia as a CF A but felt that this would cause problems. This is really what I meant Cleon is that in a 4141 with WM's rather than AML/AMR any striker on an attacking duty possibly will become isolated. I see many a post advising against it. Those posts might be wrong but without a No 10 as Bababooey points out or a striking partner or at least an AMR/AML supporting a lone striker on attack they will possibly be isolated without such support.

(PS Cleon - Did I post a 4-1-4-1 the other day?!!! - Don't think that one was me!!)

As the game started as I suspected it became evident that the CF A wasn't working. Valencia just ran with it and shot from distance (I notice he has that PI so that might have something to do with me not getting more than 50% of shots on target. I may ask him to unlearn it as most end up in Row Z when he shoots from outside the area.) So I changed him to a CF S.

Not long after Amaltifano equalised running on to a Song through ball doing exactly what he didn't do at AMR. Things still didn't look quite right though. I felt Kranevitter was getting caught on the ball too much which I suspect a symptom of having a DLP in the DM area when playing teams with an AM as he probably gets hassled and doesn't have the space to pick out a pass. Changed him to an Anchor Man so players didn't look for him as much and things seemed to play out smoother. There was some nice link up play between the midfield and striker and Valencia made it 2-1 after a lovely little pass between the channels from Amaltifano. Towards the end a Jarvis (who replaced Downing) cross was met with a left foot volley from Amaltifano to make it 3-1. So I have got Amaltifano firing if nothing else!!

Arsenal had 7 shots, 2 on target with 1 CCC (I know they aren't important!) and 50% possession. West Ham had 19 shots with 10 on target and 4 CCC's with 50% possession so possession wise was good away at a top team. As I say I think Valencia's long shots contribute to missed chances although not sure to make him unlearn long shots or ask him to shoot less which seems a little extreme for a striker?!

Certainly it has helped me realise that a WM can have just as good an effect on attack as a AMR/L can although as I say the WM S role seemed very quiet but making it more attacking would probably make the midfield a bit too gung ho?

So I have tried to get runners in the team WB A, WM A, BBM and the CM A and also with those runners two points of attack either side of the striker rather than having one side top heavy attacking the other other flank too conservative. Finishers in the team possibly CF S, CM A, WM A and to an extent BBM. Possibly a bit low on creators although both Song and Noble played through balls and suspect Downing plays balls from deep but more than happy to be advised, especially re the DM role.

Totally understand though that at times I don't have enough runners. My 4132 had that problem originally until I changed it and with that and the above was still 5th in the League after 24 games although yes I was drawing games I should have won because I wasn't converting the chances I was creating hence obviously the chances weren't good enough.

Obviously also playing FMC there isn't too much in the way of heat map's etc I can take a look at.

Do appreciate the advice.

Thank you for all your help.

I totally agree with what you all say, have looked at it and came up with this,. Far from perfect but a start.

Standard/Fluid

I played Arsenal away in the game I used this.

Firstly I accept that I was (and usually am too cautious). In my defence I try when starting out getting a defensive base sorted firstly then add attacking intent. Defensively it was ok as goals against weren't bad but yes it was too cautious.

I looked at what Cleon said to start with about the use of WM's rather than an AML and AMR so thought I would try that. Usually I always try and have a more defensive minded CM on the same side as the attacking full/wing back but if I didn't want two attacking duties down my left hand side (WB A/WM A) then I had to ignore this option because that would mean that I would need two attacking duties on the right possibly being a CM A and a WM A. This I felt is too aggressive and I felt would probably not work having two attacking duties side by side running forward together. Not saying it wouldn't work just that IMO it doesn't look right.

So hence why making the left CM a CM A. Coupled with the Wing Back on attack I felt a more conservative duty was needed at left midfield so decided just as a starting point to have Downing as a WM S (He is I assume is the most timid, workmanlike wingers in the history of English football?!) To be honest he didn't seem to do much all game, certainly not attacking wise so maybe some tweaks needed there.

The other WM I placed on attack with the WB on support as advised above so I don't have both wing backs on attack. No reason for this way around apart from usually Cresswell (injured) and Jenkinson (can't play v Arsenal) are my usual wing backs and Cresswell seems to be the more attacking of the two.

I then thought that I would try and get Song up there as well to an extent by using him as a BBM. I suspect that there is no reason why not to have the CM A on the right and BBM on the left but I just thought that this way around they were more balanced as stated above re two attacking duties in midfield side by side. I stand to be corrected.

I left Valencia as a CF A but felt that this would cause problems. This is really what I meant Cleon is that in a 4141 with WM's rather than AML/AMR any striker on an attacking duty possibly will become isolated. I see many a post advising against it. Those posts might be wrong but without a No 10 as Bababooey points out or a striking partner or at least an AMR/AML supporting a lone striker on attack they will possibly be isolated without such support.

(PS Cleon - Did I post a 4-1-4-1 the other day?!!! - Don't think that one was me!!)

As the game started as I suspected it became evident that the CF A wasn't working. Valencia just ran with it and shot from distance (I notice he has that PI so that might have something to do with me not getting more than 50% of shots on target. I may ask him to unlearn it as most end up in Row Z when he shoots from outside the area.) So I changed him to a CF S.

Not long after Amaltifano equalised running on to a Song through ball doing exactly what he didn't do at AMR. Things still didn't look quite right though. I felt Kranevitter was getting caught on the ball too much which I suspect a symptom of having a DLP in the DM area when playing teams with an AM as he probably gets hassled and doesn't have the space to pick out a pass. Changed him to an Anchor Man so players didn't look for him as much and things seemed to play out smoother. There was some nice link up play between the midfield and striker and Valencia made it 2-1 after a lovely little pass between the channels from Amaltifano. Towards the end a Jarvis (who replaced Downing) cross was met with a left foot volley from Amaltifano to make it 3-1. So I have got Amaltifano firing if nothing else!!

Arsenal had 7 shots, 2 on target with 1 CCC (I know they aren't important!) and 50% possession. West Ham had 19 shots with 10 on target and 4 CCC's with 50% possession so possession wise was good away at a top team. As I say I think Valencia's long shots contribute to missed chances although not sure to make him unlearn long shots or ask him to shoot less which seems a little extreme for a striker?!

Certainly it has helped me realise that a WM can have just as good an effect on attack as a AMR/L can although as I say the WM S role seemed very quiet but making it more attacking would probably make the midfield a bit too gung ho?

So I have tried to get runners in the team WB A, WM A, BBM and the CM A and also with those runners two points of attack either side of the striker rather than having one side top heavy attacking the other other flank too conservative. Finishers in the team possibly CF S, CM A, WM A and to an extent BBM. Possibly a bit low on creators although both Song and Noble played through balls and suspect Downing plays balls from deep but more than happy to be advised, especially re the DM role.

Totally understand though that at times I don't have enough runners. My 4132 had that problem originally until I changed it and with that and the above was still 5th in the League after 24 games although yes I was drawing games I should have won because I wasn't converting the chances I was creating hence obviously the chances weren't good enough.

Obviously also playing FMC there isn't too much in the way of heat map's etc I can take a look at.

Do appreciate the advice.

I also play FMC and a quick tip is to save a match after it's finished, and then quit to the start screen (saving first obviously), and then hit "view match" and load up your FMC match that you saved. You'll now be able to see the analysis as if you were playing in normal FM mode.

On to the tactics...

Your striker is very isolated, again. If you change to a support duty then that will be a huge help. As it stands now, you have not created a partnership with the striker. The closest thing is a CM-A / CF-A but this is far from ideal. If you choose to use nobody in the AMCLR spaces then the striker has to come deeper or else he will be isolated. If your strategy is to isolate the striker for whatever reason, perhaps to be insanely defensive, then carry on. But in terms of balanced tactics, it's just not wise. Re-read my post to see what changes you could make, other than simply changing to a CF-S..

I like the rest of your setup though! So that's the good news. Like I said the big thing is the striker being isolated. Fix that and you've got an extremely well balanced set up.

I also play FMC and a quick tip is to save a match after it's finished, and then quit to the start screen (saving first obviously), and then hit "view match" and load up your FMC match that you saved. You'll now be able to see the analysis as if you were playing in normal FM mode.

On to the tactics...

Your striker is very isolated, again. If you change to a support duty then that will be a huge help. As it stands now, you have not created a partnership with the striker. The closest thing is a CM-A / CF-A but this is far from ideal. If you choose to use nobody in the AMCLR spaces then the striker has to come deeper or else he will be isolated. If your strategy is to isolate the striker for whatever reason, perhaps to be insanely defensive, then carry on. But in terms of balanced tactics, it's just not wise. Re-read my post to see what changes you could make, other than simply changing to a CF-S..

I like the rest of your setup though! So that's the good news. Like I said the big thing is the striker being isolated. Fix that and you've got an extremely well balanced set up.

Thanks Bababooey. Did change to a CF S as per paragraphs 7 and 8 in the match report so to speak. Only started with a CF A to confirm my own fears that he would be isolated and he was so as I say changed to a CF S. Other change was to change the DLP D to a AM D for reasons outlined in paragraph 9.

So basically now lining up -

________________CF S________________

WM S______CM A_______BBM S______WM A

________________AM D_______________

WB A______CD D_______CD D_______WB S

________________GK D_______________

It's a nice Plan B to my 4132.

Thanks Bababooey. Did change to a CF S as per paragraphs 7 and 8 in the match report so to speak. Only started with a CF A to confirm my own fears that he would be isolated and he was so as I say changed to a CF S. Other change was to change the DLP D to a AM D for reasons outlined in paragraph 9.

So basically now lining up -

________________CF S________________

WM S______CM A_______BBM S______WM A

________________AM D_______________

WB A______CD D_______CD D_______WB S

________________GK D_______________

It's a nice Plan B to my 4132.

Right, looks balanced to me. I would just caution that you lack a true "creator" in central midfield. Granted, if you've got the right type of player you can have your creator on the flanks, but again, ideally you want to make sure you're getting the right balance centrally. When I make tactics I make sure I have (in central/defensive/attacking midfield) at least: 1 creator, 1 linker/runner, 1 holder. This way I'm allocating roles properly.

For games where you think you can dominate, try using both WM's on attack. You might be pleased with the overloads created in that case.

All else looks great.

Right, looks balanced to me. I would just caution that you lack a true "creator" in central midfield. Granted, if you've got the right type of player you can have your creator on the flanks, but again, ideally you want to make sure you're getting the right balance centrally. When I make tactics I make sure I have (in central/defensive/attacking midfield) at least: 1 creator, 1 linker/runner, 1 holder. This way I'm allocating roles properly.

For games where you think you can dominate, try using both WM's on attack. You might be pleased with the overloads created in that case.

All else looks great.

Must confess just played Chelsea in the Capital One Cup Final and only created one chance until I swapped to my 4132.

Are you suggesting a CM S rather than a BBM as a creator or having maybe a DLP in DM area? In the above if you put any kind of playmaker in there you then only have three potential players getting anywhere near the box. The CF A, CM A and WM A.... I really find that the CM A doesn't get beyond the striker. He runs and then slows down almost sitting back. Always noticed this with any CM in FM15.

RE playing the WB S as a WB A would you then not change the CM A role or you will have three attacking roles on the left hand side?

Must confess just played Chelsea in the Capital One Cup Final and only created one chance until I swapped to my 4132.

Are you suggesting a CM S rather than a BBM as a creator or having maybe a DLP in DM area? In the above if you put any kind of playmaker in there you then only have three potential players getting anywhere near the box. The CF A, CM A and WM A.... I really find that the CM A doesn't get beyond the striker. He runs and then slows down almost sitting back. Always noticed this with any CM in FM15.

RE playing the WB S as a WB A would you then not change the CM A role or you will have three attacking roles on the left hand side?

It's up to you to decide, not me lol. Just try to do things logically. The BBM is not a creator, and neither is the CM-S. Creators in CM/DM spots: AP-S/A, DLP-S/D, CM-A, REG, and RPM.

What I was suggesting above was that you use something like.. AP-A, BBM, Anchor. That would be one of the most balanced set ups you could have. Simple and well thought out.

I'm not sure why you're assuming that only 3 players would get near the box (CF-A, CM-A, and WM-A). You're not looking to have extra strikers or box players. Attack duties aren't just about scoring goals, it's about creating space and overloads. You need players driving forward and taking risks to be successful.

I'm going to show you my current 4-3-3 setup with Manchester United, 5th season in. Granted, this isn't to suggest this tactic is something to copy, but it's an example of what you can achieve with balance

Now look at our league position, goals scored, and goals conceded...

This is not to gloat, but to show that a tactic can be incredibly successful if it is balanced! I made changes throughout the season in some matches, but this generally stayed as it is. It worked beautifully in 95% of our matches, and that is down to balance.

Notice how I don't have any conflicting combinations, and that my team is built on groups of players combining together to perform different tasks.

- the central mids share the responsibilities of creating, linking, and holding

- the wide forwards + striker combine to create a dangerous front 3 that is dynamic AND varied. Everyone will score goals.

- the central defenders are an obvious partnership, not much to explain there

- the wingbacks work in tandem with the wide forwards but ALSO with the double pivot in CM. If my WB-A (rafael) bombs forward, I expect that my CM-D will track back to cover his butt. etc. etc. Also, these players are usually fullbacks, not sure why I had them on as wingbacks when I drew up the tactic on that website