Johan Cruyff's 3-4-3 Diamond (Very Fluid)

I am actually using it at the moment in a 4-4-2 and it works very well. I'll use Offside Trap when I have a very intelligent defensive player to play in a DC (Cover) spot as I like to have one person responsible for the trap, rather than 2 or 3.

I was under the impression that the whole back line is involved in pulling off an Offside Trap and that having a Cover duty is not advisable.

I have been struggling with getting what i want from a tactic into the game, i know how i want my team to play but just couldnt translate that into my tactics. And then i read this thread and it made so much sense! I have now taken so many ideas and implemented them into a 4-3-3 tactic with sporting and i am seeing exactly what i wanted from my team. Thankyou so much for enabling me to love the game again.

O-zil, have you experimented with different combinations up top for your AMC and STC?

I know you have gone for the more generic roles but have you tried anything different?

I was under the impression that the whole back line is involved in pulling off an Offside Trap and that having a Cover duty is not advisable.

My preference is to have my most intelligent player slightly deeper and calling the shots, a la Baresi.

O-zil, have you experimented with different combinations up top for your AMC and STC?

I know you have gone for the more generic roles but have you tried anything different?

Yes, I am pretty sure I have tried most of them at some time or another

My preference is to have my most intelligent player slightly deeper and calling the shots, a la Baresi.

Yes, I understand your preference. But does it work that way in the Match Engine?

Yes, I understand your preference. But does it work that way in the Match Engine?

Not really, the deepest defender will be playing them onside. A cover duty isn't a good option for offside trap.

Not really, the deepest defender will be playing them onside. A cover duty isn't a good option for offside trap.

Taking a closer look at the match engine, it seems that playing an offside trap almost negates playing a DC (Cover).

The heat map below is the without the ball positioning of a WB(A) - DC(D) - DC© - FB(S) back four, in a very fluid structure.

I looked through about 10 of them and they're all exactly the same.

The other possibility is that Very Fluid structure brings the mentality of the DCs so close together you can't observe a difference.

I am not sure if there is a better stat to analyse an offside trap but we're hardly shipping goals, either. 5 conceded over 31 league games.

Cleon confirmed my suspicions. Ozil, that is an impressive defensive record, either way. Romagnoli + Ruggani is an impressive partnership, eh?

Cleon confirmed my suspicions. Ozil, that is an impressive defensive record, either way. Romagnoli + Ruggani is an impressive partnership, eh?

That may also have something to do with it

Donnarumma behind them, De Sciglio flanking and Ruben Neves shielding.. It doesn't get much better!

But anyway, that's certainly not a 3-4-3...

That may also have something to do with it

Donnarumma behind them, De Sciglio flanking and Ruben Neves shielding.. It doesn't get much better!

But anyway, that's certainly not a 3-4-3...

I think this thread needs to morph into your one general concept that I see in all your tactics all over the forum. Which I've been following and have inspired me to start saves with Ajax and AC Milan recently. I remember you had a similar thread last year about Universality, if I'm not mistaken.

I think this thread needs to morph into your one general concept that I see in all your tactics all over the forum. Which I've been following and have inspired me to start saves with Ajax and AC Milan recently. I remember you had a similar thread last year about Universality, if I'm not mistaken.

Thank you for the input. I have actually been thinking the same thing.

I notice a lot of people misunderstanding or completely neglecting shape, whereas for me the combination of shape and mentality is the defining aspect of your tactical "philosophy". Using the 4-4-2 (or slight variant) as an example, the same formation could represent anything from Ranieri's Leicester or Simeone's Atletico, to Fergie's Man Utd in the 90s to Wenger's Invincibles or Sacchi's Milan - the formation would be the same or similar but the mentality and shape would vary vastly.

I find myself regularly reading threads where people take a screenshot of their formation and team instructions & don't even mention mentality / shape, sometimes from people who clearly know the game. Particularly lots talking about Gegenpressing or an Ajex-esq system.

I am perhaps thinking of another thread demonstrating a different formation, playing to the same style and then another thread - non tactic specific - explaining how you can successfully apply the concept yourself and use any balanced formation you choose.

And yes! Thank you for remembering the Universality thread - I am happy someone remembers!

Taking a closer look at the match engine, it seems that playing an offside trap almost negates playing a DC (Cover).

The heat map below is the without the ball positioning of a WB(A) - DC(D) - DC© - FB(S) back four, in a very fluid structure.

I looked through about 10 of them and they're all exactly the same.

The other possibility is that Very Fluid structure brings the mentality of the DCs so close together you can't observe a difference.

I am not sure if there is a better stat to analyse an offside trap but we're hardly shipping goals, either. 5 conceded over 31 league games.

That's an impressive record but it doesn't actually tell you if the offisde trap is working or not. The same with the heat map, heat maps are pretty pointless for most parts as they contain no context. Even with a cover duty the maps should show the playing in a similar line but it's what happens when your side uses the offside trap which is key and remember the offside trap isn't activated until there's actual danger, that's why average positions and heat maps mean so little

Obviously its working for you but my point is, a cover DC drops deeper than the others in the back line so its a risk due to how offside trap works in FM. The other defenders step up but the cover DC still stays deeper than the rest. I think I've seen this requested to be changed in a future version.

Just quit lurking and bothered registering just to ask how the heck a 7-1 extra time win happened?

My preference is to have my most intelligent player slightly deeper and calling the shots, a la Baresi.

Yes, I am pretty sure I have tried most of them at some time or another

Haha... I asked because things seem to be gelling nicely in my Ajax save with Zivkovic and Nouri up top but I'm not having the same pleasing play or results in my Santos save with Lima and Barbosa up top, when perhaps you might expect the same, if not better play and production.

I suppose with the generic roles though a lot of it is down to how you mold and develop players in terms of attributes and PPMs.

That's an impressive record but it doesn't actually tell you if the offisde trap is working or not. The same with the heat map, heat maps are pretty pointless for most parts as they contain no context. Even with a cover duty the maps should show the playing in a similar line but it's what happens when your side uses the offside trap which is key and remember the offside trap isn't activated until there's actual danger, that's why average positions and heat maps mean so little

Obviously its working for you but my point is, a cover DC drops deeper than the others in the back line so its a risk due to how offside trap works in FM. The other defenders step up but the cover DC still stays deeper than the rest. I think I've seen this requested to be changed in a future version.

It's an interesting point - perhaps if the player in the DC (Cover) position was a lower quality player it would pose more of an issue.

If I'm honest, I rarely observe any real difference playing an offside trap. I still get players caught offside in any sensible system and don't see noticeably more with an offside trap activated. Not massively concerned, it's a fairly minor detail in the grand scheme of things!

On the subject of heat maps / stats - are there any analytics you find particularly valuable in judging how a tactic is working? I am glancing at possession, average position and action zones but really 80-90% coming from the match engine itself.

Just quit lurking and bothered registering just to ask how the heck a 7-1 extra time win happened?

Very weird game. 1-0 up and the USA scored to draw level and take the game into extra time. Then - with no sending off or anything - the USA absolutely collapsed and we scored 6 more goals. Our players were certainly fitter, also I am not sure but I think USA switched to overload tactics. All of a sudden, every pass was forward, rushed and players bombing forward leaving gaps everywhere. Each time we scored, the problem worsened.

Felt a bit like Tottenham v Newcastle

Haha... I asked because things seem to be gelling nicely in my Ajax save with Zivkovic and Nouri up top but I'm not having the same pleasing play or results in my Santos save with Lima and Barbosa up top, when perhaps you might expect the same, if not better play and production.

I suppose with the generic roles though a lot of it is down to how you mold and develop players in terms of attributes and PPMs.

Barbosa seems to develop differently from one game to another - how has he developed on your game? More of a classic striker or a more complete player?

Lima is an excellent choice for this tactic. He could be a Supporting Midfielder, or in the advanced role.

@O-Zil - It's season one and I've just finished the league stage of the State Championship, so it's about 16 games in I think, plus 13 friendlies, so the tactic is fluid but yeah, I'm seeing better interplay and performance from my second season Ajax team, which has only been using this system since the end of preseason.

That said, Barbosa has had some injury niggles and both he and Lucas Lima have had their heads turned by bids from Europe, which I rejected. The transfer window is closed now and both are 'happy to stay', so hopefully I can see some better play in the main league championship... Once Barbosa recovers from his latest 3 week injury.

As for his development, Gabigol looks like he'll be more of an overall 'complete' type of player, as opposed to being really awesome at one particular role, but it is early days in season 1 and he has been hampered by a few injuries.

Hi O-zil to the Arsenal!,

I really love your work as I've been a long-time admirer of the universal approach to football and the 3-4-3/4-3-3 shapes/styles of play during the Cruyff/Guardiola eras at Barcelona. It's not just this thread I've enjoyed, but your broader portfolio of work across the forum and versions of the game, including this year's Ajax thread and last year's Universality topic.

At the moment, I'm managing Borussia Dortmund as I love the flexibility of their players and the options it gives you to switch between shapes, while still maintaining an overall high pressing philosophy. I typically use 4-3-3 (4-3-2-1) against the 4-2-3-1 and 3-4-3 (3-5-1-1) against the 4-1-2-2-1.

The thinking is that vs 4-2-3-1, I want 2 centre backs vs 1 striker, the DLP tracking vs opponent AMC, fullbacks/wingers matching up against direct opponents, 2 centre mids vs 2 centre mids and front 3 vs back 4 - this means my "spare man" when the opponent has possession is in my central defence and typically behind the ball.

On the other hand, vs 4-1-2-2-1 (4-3-3), or even a similar shape like 4-1-4-1 - when I'm using 3-4-3 (3-5-1-1) - my central CD takes the opposition striker, my wingers match up vs fullbacks and outside centre backs vs wingers but when the ball is on one side, the opposite outside centre back will tuck inside as "spare man 1" and the winger on that side will position himself between the opposing winger/fullback combo. My MC's and AMC will directly track the opponent MC's and DMC, while my DM will be "spare man 2" - meaning that I have 1 spare man to block the opposing striker from finding space in the channel between fullback and centre back - and a 2nd spare man to block the opposing striker from dropping deep and into space effectively (given the absence of an AMC in the opponent's formation). And just to finish things off, my striker watches/pressures the opposing centre back combo. Once again, I believe this helps me to have my "spare men" positioned deep and behind the ball when the opponent has possession.

Against 4-4-2/4-4-1-1 with deep wingers and greater reliance on an AMC/second striker type to support the main man up front, I use a completely different 2-3-4-1 formation, although with some of the same principles you've outlined in your own tactics, particularly regarding the Very Fluid shape. This allows my DLP/2 DC combo to watch the opposing 2 front players (whether 2 strikers or striker/AMC), my ML/R Wide Playmakers to attack space in the channels beside the opponent MC's, my AML/R Wingers to push back the opponent ML/R, my 2 AMC Advanced Playmakers to act somewhat like Inside Forwards to force the opposing fullbacks to stay narrow, while my F9 striker occupys the 2 centre backs. I find this combinations of roles to be very effective at dominating opposition 4-4-2/4-4-1-1 shapes.

The challenge for me is now to build a starting 11 that is flexible enough to switch between the 3 formations during the same game, without the need for substitutions, all while maintaining the relevance of each players PPMs as they shift through the different tactics and apply those PPMs to their slightly different (but often related, albeit in a new shape) roles/duties. It's going to take some amount of pre-planning and long-term development but I'm looking forward to the challenge and hopefully a very pleasing end product.

A couple of questions I have for you, related to the difference between your 3-4-3 and 4-3-3 shapes, particularly in relation to player instructions/team instructions:

1) In the 3-4-3, the DLP-D has the player instruction "Close Down Much Less" - do you think this is made more effective because the AM-A does a lot of the pressing required in front of him? In the 4-3-3 version you've used, did you also instruct the DLP-D to "Close Down Much Less" or did the absence of the AMC ahead of him in the 4-3-3 cause you to leave the DLP-D on the default closing down instructions?

2) Do you think the DLP-D on "Close Down Much Less" works better when he doesn't have a direct opponent (and can act as a "spare man" or "zonal screen") as opposed to when he has a direct opposing AMC to deal with? When he does have an opponent AMC to deal with, would you prefer he kept his position if the AMC went floating into wider areas or do you believe it would be advantageous for him to continue to close down that player where appropriate? In other words, for the overall shape and effectiveness of the pressing in the system as a whole, do you benefit more from the DLP-D always being that "Close Down Much Less" type of screen in front of the defence?

3) I'm not sure if this has anything to do with your decision-making process but I did also observe that the "Close Down Much Less" instruction for the DLP-D occurred while simultaneously using Tight Marking as a Team Instruction. Do you feel it's more appropriate or effective in this instance? If you didn't use "Close Down Much Less" in the 4-3-3 version, is this in any way partly because you didn't use Tight Marking as a Team Instruction and therefore felt that the player would be more "free" to close down higher up? Trying to understand the methodology you've used but perhaps I am overthinking things? Would be very interested to get an insight into your thought process here.

4) I noticed in the 4-3-3 version of your Very Fluid style approach that Tight Marking, Pass Into Space and Low Crosses were the 3 Team Instructions that were different (not present), compared to the 3-4-3 version. I am interested in the reasoning behind this, in terms of why they may be more desirable in one shape vs the other. I'd very much appreciate any insight you may have regarding this. My first inclination was that the Tight Marking is less relevant vs formations where your players naturally match up against opponents that play in very similar parts of the pitch (i.e. 4-3-3 matches up more closely to opponent formations than a more exotic 3-4-3, in terms of mirroring opposing player positions); Pass Into Space may be less effective in the absence of an AMC making forward runs, when your own STC is more inclined to drop deep (meaning less forward options for a through ball); and Low Crosses may be less relevant when Wing Backs provide the main crossing threat (due to Inside Forwards cutting infield), as opposed to attacking Wingers in a 3-4-3.

Thanks O-zil to the Arsenal! and keep up the magnificent work! Really love the framework you've outlined and the football it produces on FM.

@O-Zil - It's season one and I've just finished the league stage of the State Championship, so it's about 16 games in I think, plus 13 friendlies, so the tactic is fluid but yeah, I'm seeing better interplay and performance from my second season Ajax team, which has only been using this system since the end of preseason.

That said, Barbosa has had some injury niggles and both he and Lucas Lima have had their heads turned by bids from Europe, which I rejected. The transfer window is closed now and both are 'happy to stay', so hopefully I can see some better play in the main league championship... Once Barbosa recovers from his latest 3 week injury.

As for his development, Gabigol looks like he'll be more of an overall 'complete' type of player, as opposed to being really awesome at one particular role, but it is early days in season 1 and he has been hampered by a few injuries.

What exactly is the performance issue?

If it's goals, keep an eye on your team goals. I played this with a classic goalscorer up front at first, then after selling him, a more complete, well-rounded and creative player.

The first season my striker scored 31 goals, huge average rating and won all the awards plus a #70m move to Real Madrid.

Second season, my replacement only scored 15 or so (plus a bicycle kick in the Champions League final! ) and not such a high rating however, my team scored significantly more goals on the whole, in my opinion, due to the space he created. We became much more fluid and played better football.

1) In the 3-4-3, the DLP-D has the player instruction "Close Down Much Less" - do you think this is made more effective because the AM-A does a lot of the pressing required in front of him? In the 4-3-3 version you've used, did you also instruct the DLP-D to "Close Down Much Less" or did the absence of the AMC ahead of him in the 4-3-3 cause you to leave the DLP-D on the default closing down instructions?

I always use a holding player in midfield set to close down much less. I want someone sitting in front of the defence, causing trouble just by being there.

The 3-4-3 certainly presses better than the 4-3-3. Whether that is solely down to the AM being ahead of the DLP(D), I am not sure. I notice "bands" of players are particularly effective and the 3-4-3 has a band of 5 across midfield, which is amazing for pressing.

Saying that, I have never had any issues with the 4-3-3 it's just that the 3-4-3 is outstanding.

2) Do you think the DLP-D on "Close Down Much Less" works better when he doesn't have a direct opponent (and can act as a "spare man" or "zonal screen") as opposed to when he has a direct opposing AMC to deal with? When he does have an opponent AMC to deal with, would you prefer he kept his position if the AMC went floating into wider areas or do you believe it would be advantageous for him to continue to close down that player where appropriate? In other words, for the overall shape and effectiveness of the pressing in the system as a whole, do you benefit more from the DLP-D always being that "Close Down Much Less" type of screen in front of the defence?

I prefer a compact zonal system. I want the defence and midfield tight and the wingers dropping back. This way we always have good numbers and if an AMC roams - or any other player - into another zone, the next player picks him up and we maintain our shape.

3) I'm not sure if this has anything to do with your decision-making process but I did also observe that the "Close Down Much Less" instruction for the DLP-D occurred while simultaneously using Tight Marking as a Team Instruction. Do you feel it's more appropriate or effective in this instance? If you didn't use "Close Down Much Less" in the 4-3-3 version, is this in any way partly because you didn't use Tight Marking as a Team Instruction and therefore felt that the player would be more "free" to close down higher up? Trying to understand the methodology you've used but perhaps I am overthinking things? Would be very interested to get an insight into your thought process here.

No. Tight marking happened as I noticed that the high-press was rarely directly winning possession - i.e. tackling the defender - instead it was forcing the defender into a speculative long pass where we could then win the ball easily. The tight marking is about making that long pass as easy as possible to intercept.

This was one of the more effective 'tweaks' - I noticed our efficiency off-the-ball increase notably which spurred an increase in possession, chances, goals and ultimately winning matches.

4) I noticed in the 4-3-3 version of your Very Fluid style approach that Tight Marking, Pass Into Space and Low Crosses were the 3 Team Instructions that were different (not present), compared to the 3-4-3 version. I am interested in the reasoning behind this, in terms of why they may be more desirable in one shape vs the other. I'd very much appreciate any insight you may have regarding this. My first inclination was that the Tight Marking is less relevant vs formations where your players naturally match up against opponents that play in very similar parts of the pitch (i.e. 4-3-3 matches up more closely to opponent formations than a more exotic 3-4-3, in terms of mirroring opposing player positions); Pass Into Space may be less effective in the absence of an AMC making forward runs, when your own STC is more inclined to drop deep (meaning less forward options for a through ball); and Low Crosses may be less relevant when Wing Backs provide the main crossing threat (due to Inside Forwards cutting infield), as opposed to attacking Wingers in a 3-4-3.

That's actually just timing. The 4-3-3 game I played with Barcelona was before I started with Ajax. At Ajax the 3-4-3 evolved to have tighter marking - as explained above - as well as lower crosses and pass into space.

Re lower crossing and pass into space, Suarez at Barcelona is far more complete than Zivkovic at Ajax. Suarez can attack any kind of cross so I keep it mixed whereas Zivkovic isn't great in the air. Zivkovic also has electric pace so I love to see him get in behind, whereas again Suarez can attack in lots of different ways.

Hope this helps and I am glad you have enjoyed!!

Excellent explanations my friend! I just enjoy your way of thinking as it's similar to mine.

Ö-zil to the Arsenal! just for my information how could you change or how could you manage the gap between the defence & the midflield ?

Ö-zil to the Arsenal! just for my information how could you change or how could you manage the gap between the defence & the midflield ?

Do you actually see a gap in the match engine?

Very Fluid gives you the most compact possible mentality split between defence and midfield. You could play a defensive midfielder but the effect of this is actually increasing the gap (as it reduces defensive line) but puts a player in that gap. Personally I prefer not to do that.

Hi again O-zil to the Arsenal!

I have been trying this again with PSG and it seems to be going a lot better. Gave the tactic more time to adapt and that seems to have helped. Can I ask two questions?

1) Do you like your wingers to have the gets into the opposition area PPM or any others?

2) Do you make any tweaks to the tactic in matches? I ask this because you say the tactic should be tough for any AI formation to deal with so was just wondering if you ever feel the need to change it up.

Hi again O-zil to the Arsenal!

I have been trying this again with PSG and it seems to be going a lot better. Gave the tactic more time to adapt and that seems to have helped. Can I ask two questions?

1) Do you like your wingers to have the gets into the opposition area PPM or any others?

2) Do you make any tweaks to the tactic in matches? I ask this because you say the tactic should be tough for any AI formation to deal with so was just wondering if you ever feel the need to change it up.

Glad to hear it.

1) Nothing is particularly necessary - perhaps runs with ball down their respective flank and maybe gets into opposition area if you intend for them to be major goalscorers.

2) Rarely. I will shift to a more attacking mentality if I need to chase a goal but that's on rare occasions.

Glad to hear it.

1) Nothing is particularly necessary - perhaps runs with ball down their respective flank and maybe gets into opposition area if you intend for them to be major goalscorers.

2) Rarely. I will shift to a more attacking mentality if I need to chase a goal but that's on rare occasions.

Great I will take a look at that.

Perhaps Lucas Moura is not cut out for this system on the wing at least. He has decent work rate but poor teamwork. Will look to upgrade.

Great I will take a look at that.

Perhaps Lucas Moura is not cut out for this system on the wing at least. He has decent work rate but poor teamwork. Will look to upgrade.

Teamwork is not necessarily a problem. Teamwork is a neutral attribute, by which I mean that higher isn't necessarily better. Players with low team work are more likely to go for goal themselves. So long as they have the correct attributes elsewhere - finishing, composure, off-the-ball - that's not necessarily a problem.

Can also be useful in avoiding "possession for the sake of possession".

Yes, I realize this is a tiny sample-size, but I just had to share.

I implemented this tactic as seen in the first two posts for my Atletico team (it's 2028). I was going into a Group-Stage Champions League game against FC Kobenhaven. I was 4th in the group after 2 games with 1 point (Lost to Dortmund and drew AC Milan).

Wow, this team likes this tactic!

We won 6-1. We had 30 shots, 13 on target and 63% possession. They had 3 shots, 1 on goal and 37% possession.

This game bumped me into second place in the group thanks to now having a +4 goal differential.

AM Fran Villalba - 2G/2A 9.6R

LM Jose Antonio - 1G/2A 9.4R

RM Mikel Martinez - 1G/2A 9.4R

CF Higinio Martinez - 1G 7.9R

CF Kevin Lemos - 1G 7.1R

The 3 CMs had 7.8, 7.9 and 8.1 match ratings.

What exactly is the performance issue?

If it's goals, keep an eye on your team goals. I played this with a classic goalscorer up front at first, then after selling him, a more complete, well-rounded and creative player.

The first season my striker scored 31 goals, huge average rating and won all the awards plus a #70m move to Real Madrid.

Second season, my replacement only scored 15 or so (plus a bicycle kick in the Champions League final! ) and not such a high rating however, my team scored significantly more goals on the whole, in my opinion, due to the space he created. We became much more fluid and played better football.

I always use a holding player in midfield set to close down much less. I want someone sitting in front of the defence, causing trouble just by being there.

The 3-4-3 certainly presses better than the 4-3-3. Whether that is solely down to the AM being ahead of the DLP(D), I am not sure. I notice "bands" of players are particularly effective and the 3-4-3 has a band of 5 across midfield, which is amazing for pressing.

Saying that, I have never had any issues with the 4-3-3 it's just that the 3-4-3 is outstanding.

I prefer a compact zonal system. I want the defence and midfield tight and the wingers dropping back. This way we always have good numbers and if an AMC roams - or any other player - into another zone, the next player picks him up and we maintain our shape.

No. Tight marking happened as I noticed that the high-press was rarely directly winning possession - i.e. tackling the defender - instead it was forcing the defender into a speculative long pass where we could then win the ball easily. The tight marking is about making that long pass as easy as possible to intercept.

This was one of the more effective 'tweaks' - I noticed our efficiency off-the-ball increase notably which spurred an increase in possession, chances, goals and ultimately winning matches.

That's actually just timing. The 4-3-3 game I played with Barcelona was before I started with Ajax. At Ajax the 3-4-3 evolved to have tighter marking - as explained above - as well as lower crosses and pass into space.

Re lower crossing and pass into space, Suarez at Barcelona is far more complete than Zivkovic at Ajax. Suarez can attack any kind of cross so I keep it mixed whereas Zivkovic isn't great in the air. Zivkovic also has electric pace so I love to see him get in behind, whereas again Suarez can attack in lots of different ways.

Hope this helps and I am glad you have enjoyed!!

Thank you O-zil to the Arsenal!. Really appreciate your insights.

No. Tight marking happened as I noticed that the high-press was rarely directly winning possession - i.e. tackling the defender - instead it was forcing the defender into a speculative long pass where we could then win the ball easily. The tight marking is about making that long pass as easy as possible to intercept.

This was one of the more effective 'tweaks' - I noticed our efficiency off-the-ball increase notably which spurred an increase in possession, chances, goals and ultimately winning matches.

THIS. This, I believe, is a key way to play/be successful in this iteration of FM.

Ö-zil to the Arsenal! just for my information how could you change or how could you manage the gap between the defence & the midflield ?

I tend to ignore tactics advice because there is always something they aren't happy with and try to get you to fix.

E.g. if you solved the gap issue they mention by dropping your AM to CM and your CM to DM, they'll bang on about a gap between your midfield and striker.

So you drop your striker to AM and, now your strikers are being outnumbered by their defenders.

Push him back up and your CM to AM so there's no gap and you'll now be outnumbered in midfield.

It's daft and needs to be looked at for future versions.

O-zil, really liking what you have done here and I'm trying to use it for my Cardiff team.

I don't really have the players yet but will give it time and try to improve so that we can bring in those required while, at the same time, training the ones I've got.

Two questions about things I'm still not that clear about:

1) Earlier on in the thread you said: "Across the entire team, everyone would benefit from Plays Simple Passes and Plays One-Twos." but later say that Nunnely does not have these and wasn't trained to have them and..... all bar wingers should have them.....and wingers don't necessarily need any PPMs although runs with ball down left/right and gets into opp area can be useful.

My question is more of a summary really: So all players except for wingers should have Plays Simple Passes and Plays One-Twos? I would have thought that having your CBs and GK playing simple passes would be good but not one-twos as it might be a bit risky?

2) The striker: ideally a Complete Forward? You say you've tried many different roles but CF turns out to be the best, right? I don't have one suitable yet so was wondering if it's better to play and train him as a CF or play him in a more suitable F9 role until I can afford a proper CF?

Thanks

Teamwork is not necessarily a problem. Teamwork is a neutral attribute, by which I mean that higher isn't necessarily better. Players with low team work are more likely to go for goal themselves. So long as they have the correct attributes elsewhere - finishing, composure, off-the-ball - that's not necessarily a problem.

Can also be useful in avoiding "possession for the sake of possession".

That is good to know for the future. I did however take Moura out of the team and replaced him with Guedes (I saw him in the Sacchi thread). What a player!

I have currently conceded only 1 goal in the past 8 games and scored 27.

I must note since my team have "forged an extremely strong understanding" as per the match report the tactic has completely shone

Yes, I realize this is a tiny sample-size, but I just had to share.

I implemented this tactic as seen in the first two posts for my Atletico team (it's 2028). I was going into a Group-Stage Champions League game against FC Kobenhaven. I was 4th in the group after 2 games with 1 point (Lost to Dortmund and drew AC Milan).

Wow, this team likes this tactic!

We won 6-1. We had 30 shots, 13 on target and 63% possession. They had 3 shots, 1 on goal and 37% possession.

This game bumped me into second place in the group thanks to now having a +4 goal differential.

AM Fran Villalba - 2G/2A 9.6R

LM Jose Antonio - 1G/2A 9.4R

RM Mikel Martinez - 1G/2A 9.4R

CF Higinio Martinez - 1G 7.9R

CF Kevin Lemos - 1G 7.1R

The 3 CMs had 7.8, 7.9 and 8.1 match ratings.

Fantastic!

O-zil, really liking what you have done here and I'm trying to use it for my Cardiff team.

I don't really have the players yet but will give it time and try to improve so that we can bring in those required while, at the same time, training the ones I've got.

Two questions about things I'm still not that clear about:

1) Earlier on in the thread you said: "Across the entire team, everyone would benefit from Plays Simple Passes and Plays One-Twos." but later say that Nunnely does not have these and wasn't trained to have them and..... all bar wingers should have them.....and wingers don't necessarily need any PPMs although runs with ball down left/right and gets into opp area can be useful.

My question is more of a summary really: So all players except for wingers should have Plays Simple Passes and Plays One-Twos? I would have thought that having your CBs and GK playing simple passes would be good but not one-twos as it might be a bit risky?

2) The striker: ideally a Complete Forward? You say you've tried many different roles but CF turns out to be the best, right? I don't have one suitable yet so was wondering if it's better to play and train him as a CF or play him in a more suitable F9 role until I can afford a proper CF?

Thanks

1) Plays Simple Passes and Plays One-Twos would be beneficial to every position, but real life isn't always like that. Nunnely doesn't have them as I intended developing him to play on the left side of a 4-3-3, cutting in, but the relevant attributes did not develop so he ended up as a classic winger. You could also add Runs with ball down X flank.

2) I always use a complete forward role - but different players play it differently. Zivkovic was more of a goalscorer whilst Kjuipers was more of a creative, intelligent player. Same role, played very differently. The difference influenced the entire rest of the team.

I tend to ignore tactics advice because there is always something they aren't happy with and try to get you to fix.

E.g. if you solved the gap issue they mention by dropping your AM to CM and your CM to DM, they'll bang on about a gap between your midfield and striker.

So you drop your striker to AM and, now your strikers are being outnumbered by their defenders.

Push him back up and your CM to AM so there's no gap and you'll now be outnumbered in midfield.

It's daft and needs to be looked at for future versions.

I think the problem with AM's tactical advice is that it reads as if it's a considered opinion based on what one is seeing on the pitch, but in reality it's triggered by specific statistical results. My favorite example is that if your are trailing significantly in possession %, your AM will urge "retain possession". As little as 20 seconds later, your results in heading will lead your AM to cross more, which will trigger "pump ball into box", "cross from deep", and "float crosses"...and cancel "retain possession". And then there is the ubiquitous "we are being seriously overrun in the midfield" because your opponent has 5 mids to your 3 or 4. I laugh when this tidbit pops up when I'm up 3-0 and have had 60% of possession. Personally, the only AM advice I pay any attention to at all is when "he" suggests closing down or man-marking specific opposing players when I'm in "key" highlights mode.

I'm going to try an experiment with this tactic.

The CM(S) on both sides of the DLP(D), I'm going to make them BBM(S) to see what this opens up.

EDIT: Also, what about a Shadow Striker in the AMC position?

I'm going to try an experiment with this tactic.

The CM(S) on both sides of the DLP(D), I'm going to make them BBM(S) to see what this opens up.

EDIT: Also, what about a Shadow Striker in the AMC position?

Try making your Player Role / Instructions edits from the Player Instructions screen so you can see the differences - the names are very plastic and the differences are minimal.

Box-to-Box midfielders are just central midfielders who roam. I forget the difference Shadow Striker -> Attacking midfielder, but it's pretty minor.

Hi ö-zil, thanks a lot for this post. I can tell from your OP that you must have had so much fun when this finally came together! Every new version of FM I try to create a diamond 3-4-3 that works as it should (with Ajax) sometimes based on Cruijff's principles and his famous Barcelona side, sometimes a more rigid and disciplined version that would be more akin to van Gaal's Ajax '95 side, which was the football I grew up with. Now, I am not too sure about Cruijff's version, but in van Gaal's 3-4-3, the DM (or DLP in this tactic) would pick up the opposing striker when playing against a front 3 (or 1). Obviously, you're not in the business of recreating van Gaal's side, but it seems to make sense to me to have it like that. For, having played your tactic and very much enjoyed doing so, I did notice when up against a 'smart' opponent playing 3/1 forwards, having the centre back pick up the centre striker is risky. If it is a targetman-like striker, not so much. Then it becomes a bit of a battle of strength between the centre back (i am talking about the 'real' centre back, on cover duty) and the striker. With a player like Ajer, you'll be fine most of the time. But a 'smart' striker would drop deep, drag the CB up the pitch, leaving a gap where that CB used to be, and inside forwards or attacking midfielders overlapping the opponents' deep-dropping striker will have a blast. This is the main weakness I found in this tactic, such that, if I would be up against this one, I would definitely try to exploit this and play with a false nine coupled with an AM... I am not sure if you have encountered such movements, but wonder if you have suggestions to protect oneself from such kinds of attacks. Personally, that's why I referenced it, I think the DM/DLP picking up the striker and the CB playing even more as a cover would resolve the issue. Ideally, without possession, when up against 3/1 forwards, the DLP would play more as a CB on stopper duty, coupled with a sweeper on defend, who, well, actually covers instead of closing down the striker. Setting it up like that in FM, however, has as its downside that the CB on stopper duty doesn't venture up the pitch far enough to act as the DLP one would want him to be in possession. I tinkered around a bit with playing with a CB(stopper) coupled with a Libero (attack), such that, they kind of reverse roles when transitioning from without/with possession, and interestingly, the match engine this time around does not quite stop the Libero from pushing up beyond the CB in front of him. I found the Libero would more or less step into midfield, as one would want him to, in order to play a DLP-ish role - yet he also, does not venture into midfield quite far enough to my taste.

I digressed a bit... To summerize: it seems to me the problem when facing 3/1 forwards is to find a way to have a DLP/CB hybrid. Man marking the striker when playing a proper DLP does not quite seem to do the trick for me... I wonder if you have any ideas on this? I Always find it difficult to 'concede' and play a 4-3-3 versus 3/1 strikers. For, yes, that diamond sure looks nice doesn't it? ))

I think your decision with CM(S) works better than the BBM. BBM looks like they roam a bit too much and even with the instruction aren't quite far enough forward.

I've not had a chance to try a SS yet as the guy I was going to use got injured for 8 months...

I think your decision with CM(S) works better than the BBM. BBM looks like they roam a bit too much and even with the instruction aren't quite far enough forward.

I've not had a chance to try a SS yet as the guy I was going to use got injured for 8 months...

Yes, that's exactly what I found. I also found that they'd 'roam' into odd, ineffective positions. I am not keen on the Roam from Position instruction aside from players in the final 3rd of the field.

Can't argue with your tactic though.

I've started it in 27 games through 1 Feb as Atletico (2028). We've got 74 goals scored and have given up 28. All but 4 goals come from inside the penalty box. 41 from the spot area and 20 from right in front of the net. 8 from the left of the box and 3 from the right.

Currently we're first in La Liga with a record of 16-4-0 with a +35 GD. We've made it through to the first knock-out stage of the Champions Cup (I play against Bayern...).

The most remarkable bit about this is... I've not save scummed once. These are just straight-results. No rage-quits, nothing.

EDIT: Oh - I've also changed the LM/RM to Support duties instead of Attack.

Can't argue with your tactic though.

I've started it in 27 games through 1 Feb as Atletico (2028). We've got 74 goals scored and have given up 28. All but 4 goals come from inside the penalty box. 41 from the spot area and 20 from right in front of the net. 8 from the left of the box and 3 from the right.

Currently we're first in La Liga with a record of 16-4-0 with a +35 GD. We've made it through to the first knock-out stage of the Champions Cup (I play against Bayern...).

The most remarkable bit about this is... I've not save scummed once. These are just straight-results. No rage-quits, nothing.

EDIT: Oh - I've also changed the LM/RM to Support duties instead of Attack.

That is fantastic. Delighted to hear this is working for you. Well done!

With the support roles for the wingers do you still maintain the 3-4-3 diamond shape when in possession?

Edit: ah, just noticed your attacker role - I assume you're playing an out-and-out goalscorer up top?

Having attempted 3 in the back formations before, I had noticed attack wingers didn't offer much help on defense. Opponent attackers would exploit that area outside the outside CB and play crosses in a lot. So, I typically play with Support roles.

Yes, I can see that. For me, I was more successful with at least one of my wingers being a natural wingback for balance. Nunnely was always very attacking but did a good job of tracking back. Also, by the time Nunnely made it into the first team we were so dominant that we could afford a slightly more luxury player given his goal / assist contribution.

It's funny you mention one of the wingers being a natural WB - on my sub list, Lucian Olteanu is exactly that. He just also happens to be a natural DL and ML - and is one of my best contributors, he's a 4.5 CA/PA.

I've also got a young natural WB/RB who I'm training as a MR as well.

As for the CF(A), I've also played it as a CF(S) as you demonstrated but I haven't noticed any significant differences - my guess is because I've been rotating every-other-game between Higuinio and Lemos - Lemos is a 21yr old Wonderkid while Higinio is a 29yr old "World-Class Striker".

"assign a broad individual training program whilst in U19 squad." What do you mean a broad individual training program ? Is that simply adding an additional focus for them to work on ? Thanks

It's funny you mention one of the wingers being a natural WB - on my sub list, Lucian Olteanu is exactly that. He just also happens to be a natural DL and ML - and is one of my best contributors, he's a 4.5 CA/PA.

I've also got a young natural WB/RB who I'm training as a MR as well.

As for the CF(A), I've also played it as a CF(S) as you demonstrated but I haven't noticed any significant differences - my guess is because I've been rotating every-other-game between Higuinio and Lemos - Lemos is a 21yr old Wonderkid while Higinio is a 29yr old "World-Class Striker".

That's a pretty nice situation to be in!

The only difference between a Complete Forward in Attack vs Support is a higher mentality and more direct attacking (both passing and forward runs). It won't be a major difference however the wrong player or wrong combination or roles behind him may see the striker isolated.

"assign a broad individual training program whilst in U19 squad." What do you mean a broad individual training program ? Is that simply adding an additional focus for them to work on ? Thanks

I just mean one of the individual programs which trains as many attributes as possible i.e ball playing defender, complete fullback, roaming playmaker, deeplying playmaker, box-to-box mid, wide playmaker, defensive winger, complete forward...

And yes, I will regularly assign an individual focus. Not necessarily when they're 16 but perhaps second or 3rd season I will use the individual attribute focus to iron out any small weaknesses or generally improve strength, quickness, leadership or set pieces where relevant.

That's a pretty nice situation to be in!

The only difference between a Complete Forward in Attack vs Support is a higher mentality and more direct attacking (both passing and forward runs). It won't be a major difference however the wrong player or wrong combination or roles behind him may see the striker isolated.

I just mean one of the individual programs which trains as many attributes as possible i.e ball playing defender, complete fullback, roaming playmaker, deeplying playmaker, box-to-box mid, wide playmaker, defensive winger, complete forward...

And yes, I will regularly assign an individual focus. Not necessarily when they're 16 but perhaps second or 3rd season I will use the individual attribute focus to iron out any small weaknesses or generally improve strength, quickness, leadership or set pieces where relevant.

Özil you look inbox ?

So you control all the training yourself?

Do you find players becoming a bit bored with doing the same training week in week out? I forget what they exactly say but something like "player X feels like he is not gaining any more benefit from the current training focus". If/when that happens, what do you do?

So you control all the training yourself?

Do you find players becoming a bit bored with doing the same training week in week out? I forget what they exactly say but something like "player X feels like he is not gaining any more benefit from the current training focus". If/when that happens, what do you do?

If it's working, I do nothing - life's tough! If nothing changes after 3-6 months then I stop. Unfortunately for the moaning player, if I view that attribute as essential for the role, I'll sign a replacement who has it.

There seems to be a glitch where a player will tell you training isn't working but the attribute rises steadily. Fortunately it never effects morale so I leave it.

It seems most common when you're working on a real weakness - i.e improving a <10 attribute.

Özil you look inbox ?

Hi Ricochets,

You have all of the information you need to create the tactic yourself in the opening post. This is not a plug-and-play so I do not advise copying every role without taking into account the strengths and weaknesses of your team. See other responses in the thread for examples of how other people have had success.