Some advice on my set up needed, trying to keep it simple but failing

[taylorsmen]

I'm really struggling to get me team scoring atm, the lack of shots and opportunities are scarce it's worrying me now. I've noticed a few people saying to keep things simple and to try and use the players to their strengths and to not over complicate things, so this is what i attempted to do and set about creating a simple straight forward approach (or so i thought)

I've even resorted to watching my games in full, so i can try and see where we're going wrong, but i just can't work it out.

I regularly pause the game and check analysis to see the oppositions players average positions and movement, and if i see the opposition is narrow in the middle i try and play wider using the touchline shout, but it doesn't seem to work in my favour (sometimes i try to exploit the flanks when i choose to play wider)

Formation and roles

I chose roles that i thought would suit each player and kept nearly 100% of the settings as default, the only things i changed was wide play to the midfield right, i set him to cut inside so that my attacking full back would overlap, i also changed the attacking midfielder centres wide play to move into channels, everything else is default.

Team instructions

As you can see i've kept the team instructions default with the exception of closing down (press more) and marking (zonal)

Results so far

Not sure if training info was needed but this is how i set it up.

Training

Where am i going wrong ? do the roles and duty's look acceptable ? am i worrying too soon and should i play at least half a season before i rethink ? (i think Hull should be performing better with the players they have tbh)

One last thing, morale for players has nearly always been good for most players, and the average ratings my players are getting suggest they are playing fairly decent, i'm just unable to turn draws into wins.

Hope i've included enough info, apologies if i haven't explained properly, i'm kind of crap at explaining things.

Thanks in advance for any advice

P.S This is a copy/paste job from notepad so if images don't work i'll edit it sharpish.

[RTHerringbone]

Damn good opening post, so should get attention from people who know what they're on about, rather than me!

Consideration one is to change your selection info view to include your coaches opinion on your player's best roles and duties - you can then ensure that you aren't fitting square pegs in round holes. That tip was picked up from one of Rashidi1's threads, and it is simple but effective.

I say that, because I don't know the Hull squad, but single striker formations fare best with a DLF up top, probably on a Support Duty. Not sure if Jerome can play as a DLF?

Aluko, Cairney and Jerome on Attack separates them from Quinn, Koren and Evans, and I would consider the following:

GK (D)

DL to WB (AT)

DR to FB (S)

Both CBs as you have them

DM to Anchor (D)

CM to BBM (S)

MR to Winger (A)

AML to Defensive Winger (S)

Cairney position as he is

Jerome position to DLF (S)

Key thing is to put players suited to the above roles in those places.

Not tweaking individual and team settings is a very good idea, so your tweaks there should have little impact.

It may be worth toying with the Press More setting, as that just gives license to your players to drift from their base position.

Remember also that the latest ME update results in fewer shots than the prior release. Good luck!

[taylorsmen]

Damn good opening post, so should get attention from people who know what they're on about, rather than me!

Consideration one is to change your selection info view to include your coaches opinion on your player's best roles and duties - you can then ensure that you aren't fitting square pegs in round holes. That tip was picked up from one of Rashidi1's threads, and it is simple but effective.

I say that, because I don't know the Hull squad, but single striker formations fare best with a DLF up top, probably on a Support Duty. Not sure if Jerome can play as a DLF?

Aluko, Cairney and Jerome on Attack separates them from Quinn, Koren and Evans, and I would consider the following:

GK (D)

DL to WB (AT)

DR to FB (S)

Both CBs as you have them

DM to Anchor (D)

CM to BBM (S)

MR to Winger (A)

AML to Defensive Winger (S)

Cairney position as he is

Jerome position to DLF (S)

Key thing is to put players suited to the above roles in those places.

Not tweaking individual and team settings is a very good idea, so your tweaks there should have little impact.

It may be worth toying with the Press More setting, as that just gives license to your players to drift from their base position.

Remember also that the latest ME update results in fewer shots than the prior release. Good luck!

Cheers for your reply, going to reread what you said and try a few things in the next match.

Jerome can play DLF so i'll try that too, i'm not too sure what you mean by toying with press more ? do you mean increasing/decreasing players individual settings ?

Thanks for the advice btw, going to play my next match and see how things pan out, got a small problem though, since i posted the results pic i played wolves and drew 0-0, told the players i wasn't happy (assertively) and i think i've lost the dressing room, a couple of players was unhappy with my team talk, Mclean went absent from training, i've got a tough battle ahead

I'll reply with result of the next match to say how the tweaks went.

[RTHerringbone]

Avoid tweaking individuals where you can. I love the Tactics Creator and as soon as you override defaults, it renders shouts less effective.

Regarding Press More, I just meant that you might want to try to watch games with Closing Down on different settings, as it can drag players out of position.

My own tactics have Closing Down set to Press More, and it is the only element I'm not really sure about at the moment.

Don't forget, tweaks take a while to settle, so even if my suggestions were on the money, they mightn't hit home with your squad for a few games.

[taylorsmen]

I get you now on the press more, i only really close down the wingers and attacking full backs (not sure if that's good or bad) and yeah i knew tweaks take a while to settle in, i'm patient, you have to be when you watch the match in full

Playing M'boro at home now, may be some time till i post the result, a positive one hopefully.

[llama3]

the very obvious issue i can see if that you are trying to keep it simple - but that formation is not simple!

[taylorsmen]

HT update

Hull 2-0 M'boro

The simple changes you suggested is working quite well, i dropped Aluko in favour of Quinn because his tackling was slightly better then Alukos, and it's paying off, he's having a blast down the left flank so far, and it feels like we're playing more attacking football and it's pleasing on the eye only 45 mins gone so i won't get carried away, but a big improvement already, and thankfully i've got full match on full speed, so 45 mins is only 20 mins

[RTHerringbone]

Asymmetric formations are a bit funky.

I guess one benefit of them is that you get to open up roles that wouldn't be available in a more conventional formation (i.e. Anchor Man isn't available in a flat 4-4-2).

llama3 - do you think that even the more conventional formations (and so the roles available) can replicate roles that are unavailable in the TC?

Probably an irrelevant question if you use Classic tactics.

[taylorsmen]

the very obvious issue i can see if that you are trying to keep it simple - but that formation is not simple!

Can you expand on why it's not a simple formation maybe ? i was considering a 4-4-2 at the beginning but opted for the Asymmetric in the end, not too sure why really, would love to get this formation working well though before considering changing.

[lam]

^ This.

I loved that formation when I tried it a few times in FM12, but in the end I had about 5 version of it, one for left side, one for right side etc etc.....

Also, it makes analysing harder, especially when you start closing players down.

If you wanna stick with then then stick with it, but really, you might want to try something a little more simple.

Based on what I see above, I'd imagine that you are a little weak down your left side and that the opponent does fairly well on their right. There will be a fairly large gap between your FB and Winger. You MCL may cover this but it would worry me a little.

You got a few people attacking the opposition box, but you dont have anyone holding up the ball or sitting deep waiting for them to rush on. Your AF(A) is really going to be looking after himself first and foremost.

Without knowing the players I'd probably opt for IF(A) or AP(A) on the AML and leave MR as he is but REMOVE cuts inside. The reason being is that you AMCR is going to be occupying the exact space you want your MR to move into.

If you want your FB to overlap then consider giving the MR as defensive winger role in the MR position and your FBR should overlap him. Don't dismiss the defensive roles. They are great. They are very tiring as essentially it gets your attacking movement along with the players commitment in defence - these are great roles for players that are listed as FB/WB/MR type thing....

This is just a guess but I think RIGID would leave your players in some funny positions. You might want to consider FLUID for this type of formation.

Regards

LAM

[llama3]

Asymmetric formations are a bit funky.

I guess one benefit of them is that you get to open up roles that wouldn't be available in a more conventional formation (i.e. Anchor Man isn't available in a flat 4-4-2).

llama3 - do you think that even the more conventional formations (and so the roles available) can replicate roles that are unavailable in the TC?

Probably an irrelevant question if you use Classic tactics.

I don't think that you need other roles in other places - i.e. an anchorman in a 4-4-2 - cos if an anchorman held his position in that midfield zone he would be easily bypassed, and concede space behind himself. So there is a reason you cannot have an anchorman there (to conclude the example).

Can you expand on why it's not a simple formation maybe ? i was considering a 4-4-2 at the beginning but opted for the Asymmetric in the end, not too sure why really, would love to get this formation working well though before considering changing.

Because it has a tricky shape that opens up gaps in itself too. It does not have the same balance and shape as a more traditional formation. Not to say it can't work at all - but you claimed to be keeping it simple - that is not a simply formation to make work, there are a lot more options and interactions to consider.

[RTHerringbone]

I don't think that you need other roles in other places - i.e. an anchorman in a 4-4-2 - cos if an anchorman held his position in that midfield zone he would be easily bypassed, and concede space behind himself. So there is a reason you cannot have an anchorman there (to conclude the example).

Good point and duly noted.

[taylorsmen]

^ This.

I loved that formation when I tried it a few times in FM12, but in the end I had about 5 version of it, one for left side, one for right side etc etc.....

Also, it makes analysing harder, especially when you start closing players down.

If you wanna stick with then then stick with it, but really, you might want to try something a little more simple.

Based on what I see above, I'd imagine that you are a little weak down your left side and that the opponent does fairly well on their right. There will be a fairly large gap between your FB and Winger. You MCL may cover this but it would worry me a little.

You got a few people attacking the opposition box, but you dont have anyone holding up the ball or sitting deep waiting for them to rush on. Your AF(A) is really going to be looking after himself first and foremost.

Without knowing the players I'd probably opt for IF(A) or AP(A) on the AML and leave MR as he is but REMOVE cuts inside. The reason being is that you AMCR is going to be occupying the exact space you want your MR to move into.

If you want your FB to overlap then consider giving the MR as defensive winger role in the MR position and your FBR should overlap him. Don't dismiss the defensive roles. They are great. They are very tiring as essentially it gets your attacking movement along with the players commitment in defence - these are great roles for players that are listed as FB/WB/MR type thing....

This is just a guess but I think RIGID would leave your players in some funny positions. You might want to consider FLUID for this type of formation.

Regards

LAM

Thanks for your advice, it's all quite a lot to take in so i'll have to read a few times so i don't overload myself :o

I'm going to try the Fluid style in the next game, i'm also going to try the MR as a DW and see how things go in the next game, i'll try the other suggestions ob=ver the next few games and see how things pan out.

I really do appreciate all the advice btw, hitting the pillow now so if i don't respond till tomorrow then don't think your help isn't appreciated.

The last game ended 2-0 btw, so a win and a more positive team.

[lam]

Llama makes a very valid point about having gaps in your own system, and maybe I can expand on that if he doesnt mind.....

If you can imagine a team playing a simple 442 against you, now forget about making your own space, if they have two strong MC's how are you going to control them? You CML could take one, but who controls the other? Are you going to drag your PLAYMAKER back which then kinda stops much of his creative freedom if he is running around closing others down. Do you ask the DM to step up thus breaking the shield infront of the DC's? What if they have the Man U 4231 with two MC and one AMC.... your DM is on the AMC the MCL is on their MCR, that means they can focus play through their MCL.

Now, there is certainly merit in having team focus their passing through their weakest player, and this can be acheived by tight man marking their good one and NOT tight marking the other but closing him down hard and tackling hard (HIGHLY EFFECTIVE IF THEY HAVE LOW COMPOSURE AND BRAVERY). However, and back to my point, if you do this, you'll need an a mirror image version of this for when the quality player is on the other side. Then, what are you going to do when they start swapping the players around which they will do when you take the good one out of the game......

So, can you see how it's complicated?

Regards

ps... good win!

[fmFutbolManager]

This is the formation I am playing/have changed to and I've just won my 4th game in a row. I am using different player roles to you, but I'm getting some really good results, good football and more importantly a decent amount of shots and goals. I don't 100% understand why it works, it just does.

This is my formation with my individual player roles, strategy and philosophy.

These are my team instructions.

[taylorsmen]

Thanks for all the replies, will take on board what everyone has said, hopefully i start to grasp FM13 and do well at Hull.

Sorry for replying late, just got home from work, will try out a few things you guys have suggested later when i load up the game.

[RTHerringbone]

I'm confused that OneUnited's tactic works, it pretty much goes against everything I've learned in recent weeks

My expectation would be that the team plays one dimensional football with limited movement from defence, to midfield and then an isolated forward.

What sort of match stats does that tactic generate?

[lam]

Every tactic can work.

I'm not suggesting that OneUnited's tactic is like this as I haven't tried it, but some will fail against certain competition, certain formations etc etc.

The point behind having a balanced and understandable tactic is that when things start to go wrong, you can stop them. If you have a tactic that you dont understand or don't know why it doesnt work.... there isn't anywhere to go from there.

There is movement in that team, but it's mostly mixed, however you will note that he is using Targetman. If you have a good targetman then it can make a bad tactic very good. (again, not suggesting OU's is bad).

LAM

[taylorsmen]

GK (D)

DL to WB (AT)

DR to FB (S)

Both CBs as you have them

DM to Anchor (D)

CM to BBM (S)

MR to Winger (A)

AML to Defensive Winger (S)

Cairney position as he is

Jerome position to DLF (S)

I've decided to stick with this suggestion till the end of the season to see how things pan out, only at the end of November so it may take a while to post my final results, it's worked decently for me for 2 games and i'm curious more then anything if it will come good, cheers for everyones help, this is why this Forum is special, the community on here are second to none

[lam]

Thats great news that it's working..... next step... understand WHY it's working.

Mr Herringbone has been posting like a loon here recently and if I recall correctly less than a week ago he barely knew what he was doing..... and here he is posting you tactcs that are working!

you can thank him by learning why it's working

Herringbone

[RTHerringbone]

If my suggestions have helped then it's great, and an affirmation that everything I'm trying to take on board from a long list of people (principally lam, llama3, Rashidi1. Cleon and wwfan) is finally sinking in.

This game is tough, but this forum really educates you and gives you a chance to succeed.

[fmFutbolManager]

I'm confused that OneUnited's tactic works, it pretty much goes against everything I've learned in recent weeks

My expectation would be that the team plays one dimensional football with limited movement from defence, to midfield and then an isolated forward.

What sort of match stats does that tactic generate?

I play through the middle mainly. Usually counter or defensive. I'm Parma, so have a weak team but my passing cuts through teams easily and my ST is always on the last man ready for through balls from Ninis.

Stats wise I'm usuall even on possession. More CCC than opposition, but hey have more shots, usually from range. It's not perfect, I know it could be better but it's working for now

[taylorsmen]

Thats great news that it's working..... next step... understand WHY it's working.

Mr Herringbone has been posting like a loon here recently and if I recall correctly less than a week ago he barely knew what he was doing..... and here he is posting you tactcs that are working!

you can thank him by learning why it's working

Herringbone

It seemed like it was working to begin with but it's going pair shaped again started off well then a run of bad results happened, tbh it's getting tiring and no fun at all watching games in full, i feel like FM hates me lol

I'm not one for giving up but i'm really disheartened i can't get this to work, in the last game against Sheff Wed they had a man sent off round the 60 mins mark so i changed strategy to attacking (added a few shouts too - get ball forward - push up higher ect) to try and put them on the back foot, it seemed to work (commentary said Sheff W was withstanding heavy pressure - or something like that) and we had attack after attack, but it led to nothing. Ive now dropped down to 18th in the league.

If i don't have a run of wins then i'm probably going to get the sack, i'm going to stick with this save a little while longer to see (or hope) something clicks/kicks in and i turn it around, i'm not hopeful though.

Onwards and upwards (or downwards in my case lol)

[fmFutbolManager]

I know someone above **** on my tactics but why not give them a try? I'm having some good results with it outlined below.

I did play a traditional 4-2-3-1 pre-patch and was having good results, then it went to **** after the patch was released, so changed to the one above and these are the results that followed.

[taylorsmen]

It all got too frustrating in the end and i decided to ditch the tactic completely and start a fresh ( a new game)

I read (and read again) wwfan and loversleap posts - guides - and to my joy i'm seeing some lovely football (we are actually seeing plenty of shots on goal / target now) i've gone back to the traditional 4-4-2 as the asymmetric was causing me headaches, the game has certainly become fun again that's for sure. And apologies for not sticking it out, especially after all the help / advice you guys have given me, but the advice has given me food for thought and all in the right direction.

@OneUnited it's nice to see your having a good run too, cheers for your advice, grateful for it (and for everyone else of course)

Onwards and upwards (upwards this time round hopefully lol)

[RTHerringbone]

I know someone above **** on my tactics but why not give them a try? I'm having some good results with it outlined below.

I wasn't being offensive and sorry if it seemed I was. What I was trying to say was that the way you have built your tactics doesn't stack up with what I have read to date.

[fmFutbolManager]

I wasn't being offensive and sorry if it seemed I was. What I was trying to say was that the way you have built your tactics doesn't stack up with what I have read to date.

Didn't think you were being offensive at all