3_5_2/ 5_3_2 Making it work

[prince0102]

Every season at the beginning I look at my top 11 players and see which tactic fits them. I know thats terrible. But anyway, Blackburn 3rd season my young fullbacks are still poor so I am looking at a non fullback option.

I checked out Cleon libero strikerless thread and got the libero attacking idea from there'

. The libero definitely improves passing interceptions cover for defense. So my 3_5_2moro looks like this

_____GK_______

_____Li (a)_____

__CD (d)__CD (d)___

DW (s)_AP (a)_DLP (d)_CM (s)_DW (a)

__AF (a)____DLF (s)__

I find this works very well until the AI inevitably makes the change of overloading the wings. Then you see the DW running back and forth between the winger and fullback. The libero helps out with those crosses and wingers cutting inside but I still lose a few games just from the wings.

One thing I have found works well especially against formations with advanced wingers such as 4231 or 451 is to drop the DW to WB and set tight marking to yes. Interestingly if you started in TC with 532 and moved the fullback to WB you get the exact same tactic even to the last notch in the sliders for wingbacks.

The tactic behaves like 532 too with the mid 3 providing defensive cover one wings. However as strong this tactic is defensively it really is very weak going forward. The midfield strength gets nullified with just 3 really in the center of the park.

Anyone able to work around this ?

[olivermain83]

I had success using WB's by copying Capello's 532/352 during his Roma days. This was my inspiration on the roles.

I used:

CD(X)BPD©CD(X)

WB(A) WB(S)

DLP(D) BWM(D)

T(A)

AF(A) TM(A)

I'd change the TM to a Poacher depending on what player I had there. Worked well and won me the league but I found it could struggle against 41221. I mainly faced 442's though so it wasn't much of an issue.

[Magpiestarnz]

The libero based formation, with wingbacks has been one ive been struggling to crack for years now. However, I have had more relative success in getting a working option recently (working being defined as "seeing the football I want to see"). Very small sample size, but all tactic bars are fluid.

(Background) Playing in Northern Ireland Championship 2, all players are very one dimensional, so simpler is better. Almost all teams play 4-4-2 variants. My squad has most talent in central midfield, and attack (relative statement). Plus I have 2-3 sweepers in the squad.

I am using a Rigid (3 specialists, and less movement from instructions), Counter (slower tempo except on the break, allows WBs to get forward). Press more, cautious tackling, zonal marking.

Libero(S)

CD (D) CD(D)

WB(A) WB (A)

DLP (S) DLP(D)

AM (A)

DLF(S) AF(A)

So, going forward you end up with fluid triangle passing around and in the box with the front 3. The WBs attack the byline, and into the box (sometimes end up with 5 in that area). The MCs feed the attackers, and the libero sits in the DM spot. Movement between the lines. Defending, the WBs retreat to make a back 5. Obvious weaknesses are the deep crosses across field. Have not been hit a lot on the counter yet (lack of pace and skill at this level?). Game lists the tactic as 5-2-1-2.

I think for this type of tactic to work in an attacking sense, the WBs need to be attacking. They provide the overload, and width to the fluid movement upfront.

Sorry if I rambled a bit. As you see from my post count I'm a reader (Lurker), and usually don't feel i can contribute much to a discussion. Expecting someone to point out the flaws

[NoChance]

I'll throw my hat into the ring as well. I also use wingbacks, rather than defensive wingers, and I can't say I've seen the AI trying to overload the wings so often?

At the back, I use a sweeper keeper to cover for long balls in the event my Libero has been caught up field. In practice, this rarely happens, but I've not been conceding from my GK being caught out of position so I've left it alone. Then it's an attacking Libero, with 2 normal DCs, and two wing backs in the DM strata (often both attack, sometimes one support/one attack).

In the midfield, I used to use 2 CMs, one support, one defend. Like you, I felt my midfield wasn't supporting the attack enough, so switched the support MC to a box to box mid. I then switched my other MC to a defensive ball winning mid. My rationale is that my defence usually outnumber the opponents forwards, so reducing the risk of my MCs being caught out of position, meaning it's worth the gamble in having the midfielders do the headless chicken thing if they're able to win the ball back occasionally. The final midfielder is an AMC trequartista - this is another argument for the headless chicken MCs since they have to do the defensive work of 3 players.

Up front, it's a typical DLFS/AFA pairing.

For the team settings, I use rigid philosophy and typically an attacking strategy. I don't muck about with any sliders, except setting my GK to defender collect for distribution, and specifying a defender for him to distribute to (usually a wing back) - last season, my GK ended up with the second highest pass completion in the division at 86%.

I find the libero 5-3-2 formations are pretty robust and flexible - I leave the DCs alone, but will change pretty much any other player (position or role) in order to suit circumstances or to try something different. Rarely do I end up with a formation that flat out doesn't work, so I'd advocate a keep tweaking approach: not every change improves things, but they rarely make things dramatically worse.

[Cleon]

I'll throw my hat into the ring as well. I also use wingbacks, rather than defensive wingers, and I can't say I've seen the AI trying to overload the wings so often?

That's not the issue with wingbacks at all. The issue is they cut inside way to often and you can see them just standing there not knowing what to do next. This is regardless of the set up, settings or quality of the player. It's a really big flaw in the ME, I'm surprised you've never noticed, it's easy to see happening in the ME if you view a bit of games.

This is why either DW's or wingbacks from the fullback positions are much more effective because normal wingbacks don't do their job at all.

[RTHerringbone]

That's not the issue with wingbacks at all. The issue is they cut inside way to often and you can see them just standing there not knowing what to do next. This is regardless of the set up, settings or quality of the player. It's a really big flaw in the ME, I'm surprised you've never noticed, it's easy to see happening in the ME if you view a bit of games.

This is why either DW's or wingbacks from the fullback positions are much more effective because normal wingbacks don't do their job at all.

I'm quite a big fan of both wingbacks and defensive wingers, and have used one or the other throughout FM13.

I'd agree entirely that a DW is a far more effective defensive tool, but am finding wingbacks perfect for my needs when I use them.

Whilst cutting inside does happen, that can be a good thing on occasion.

Fiddling with Duty or Wide Play improves things, as does asking them to specifically man mark AI wide men.

I guess it's less of an issue as I use them alongside a Libero and two DCs (very similar to NoChance for my back five), so if the wingbacks do fail, I've got DCs offering the next line of defence.

[Cleon]

I'm quite a big fan of both wingbacks and defensive wingers, and have used one or the other throughout FM13.

I'd agree entirely that a DW is a far more effective defensive tool, but am finding wingbacks perfect for my needs when I use them.

Whilst cutting inside does happen, that can be a good thing on occasion.

Fiddling with Duty or Wide Play improves things, as does asking them to specifically man mark AI wide men.

I guess it's less of an issue as I use them alongside a Libero and two DCs (very similar to NoChance for my back five), so if the wingbacks do fail, I've got DCs offering the next line of defence.

Less of an issue doesn't mean they work though

Having WB's cut inside centrally is a big issue because you'd be using wingbacks to provide width or it's a waste of time using them imo. Majority use them for protection down the flanks and stop attacking threats. But this is no good if the player naturally drifts to the centre, it means you still have the issues that made you use WB's in the first place. They get caught out of position hell of a lot due to the cutting inside (something the user has no control over)

The DW's do the exact same job a WB should do and don't come centrally. I honestly don't know why anyone would favour a WB over them when they do everything the WB should and what you expect. I know everyone is different but there is no logic in using them instead of DW's. The DW's occupy the same space, track back the same and so on. There identical except the DW's function fine.

I know you have Libero etc so your safe but anyone else using them over the DW's can't be paying attention to what they actually do during a game and seeing the issues they cause because if they did, then they'd never use them in a million years

[RTHerringbone]

It's interesting because I've tried a few times to push up to a sort of 3-4-1-2 with DWs rather than 5-3-2 with WBs and haven't yet got it working.

I used a DW system for ages (based on your Yorkshireman, Libero and No Striker threads) and it was incredibly tight defensively.

My wingbacks save is at Barcelona 10+ years in and is fractionally less strong defensively so I'll have another look at getting a 3-4-1-2 up and running.

Everything I do know just feels like a dress rehearsal ahead of FM14!

[Cleon]

It's interesting because I've tried a few times to push up to a sort of 3-4-1-2 with DWs rather than 5-3-2 with WBs and haven't yet got it working.

I used a DW system for ages (based on your Yorkshireman, Libero and No Striker threads) and it was incredibly tight defensively.

My wingbacks save is at Barcelona 10+ years in and is fractionally less strong defensively so I'll have another look at getting a 3-4-1-2 up and running.

Everything I do know just feels like a dress rehearsal ahead of FM14!

Are you just going through the motions now? Wanting to play but can't get into any save because you know FM14 (judging by past history) isn't likely to be that far away? It stops me getting into long term saves around this time of year

[RTHerringbone]

Are you just going through the motions now? Wanting to play but can't get into any save because you know FM14 (judging by past history) isn't likely to be that far away? It stops me getting into long term saves around this time of year

Yeah, it sucks.

I've got copies of all my saves and keep doing an evening or two on each.

Have a transfer updated database loaded so am quite tempted to have a look at Napoli.

[prince0102]

Cleon, does this wingback issue exist even if you choose wingback instead of fullback at DR/DL position ?

[Cleon]

Cleon, does this wingback issue exist even if you choose wingback instead of fullback at DR/DL position ?

I've already answered this in post 5

[NoChance]

That's not the issue with wingbacks at all.

With respect, it is the issue the OP with his wide players mentioned by the OP, hence I was suggesting wing backs as a potential solution.

The issue is they cut inside way to often and you can see them just standing there not knowing what to do next. This is regardless of the set up, settings or quality of the player. It's a really big flaw in the ME, I'm surprised you've never noticed, it's easy to see happening in the ME if you view a bit of games.

Not only have I noticed, but I've embraced it. Following a thread from here earlier, I use "wrong-footed" wing backs to take advantage of their cutting inside (strictly speaking, one wrong-footed, and one two-footed, but you know what I mean). Once you recognise that the opposition rarely picks up the wing backs' runs until the wing backs are very advanced, they become an attacking asset. I can't say I've seen them standing around with nothing to do, they're usually providing options for the player with the ball, and combine particularly well with the trequartista. Must admit, I didn't realise I couldn't stop them cutting inside: I assumed it was a consequence of my instructions, but since it's working for me, I've never felt the urge to change it.

Do I care that they're caught up field on occasion? Not really: long balls over the top get cleared up by my back line; slower play down the wings and they have the pace to recover.

This is why either DW's or wingbacks from the fullback positions are much more effective because normal wingbacks don't do their job at all.

I think we're asking them to different jobs: I'm looking for them to contribute to the attack by arriving late, disrupting the opposition defensive shape, and providing additional options for whoever has the ball. In other words, I want them to contribute mainly to the attack, while defensive duties are secondary. I think you're after a more all-round contribution.

[Cleon]

I think we're asking them to different jobs: I'm looking for them to contribute to the attack by arriving late, disrupting the opposition defensive shape, and providing additional options for whoever has the ball. In other words, I want them to contribute mainly to the attack, while defensive duties are secondary. I think you're after a more all-round contribution.

Which doesn't make sense why you use WB's because the DW's would be better suited to this. Check both the roles and look at the settings if you don't believe me

Not only have I noticed, but I've embraced it. Following a thread from here earlier, I use "wrong-footed" wing backs to take advantage of their cutting inside (strictly speaking, one wrong-footed, and one two-footed, but you know what I mean). Once you recognise that the opposition rarely picks up the wing backs' runs until the wing backs are very advanced, they become an attacking asset. I can't say I've seen them standing around with nothing to do, they're usually providing options for the player with the ball, and combine particularly well with the trequartista. Must admit, I didn't realise I couldn't stop them cutting inside: I assumed it was a consequence of my instructions, but since it's working for me, I've never felt the urge to change it.

I don't mean this as having a go at you but how much of the game do you actually watch? Because I could look at any of your matches you've played and show you it happening in your own game where the player looks confused and does nothing. It happens time and time again.

WB's do not contribute to attacking phases of play properly nor do they do the defensive job properly either. If I get time I'll try and create a thread and highlight the issues later in the week because people seem to be confused about what WB's actually do. I'll highlight all the issues and show you the faults then maybe people be able to see them in their own games

If you are happy with them cutting inside and playing central that's fine but it doesn't change the fact this is not what a wingback should be doing, it's not part of their game or the role. It happens due to small ME bugs. It's not that I want to ask them to play differently to you it's the fact the role doesn't work how it should and a wingback is not a wingback.

[NoChance]

Which doesn't make sense why you use WB's because the DW's would be better suited to this. Check both the roles and look at the settings if you don't believe me

I find DWs tend to attack a little too early and get picked up by the opposition. My attack is basically 3 phases: the treq and AF are upfield in phase 1. Phase 2 has the DLF and BBM arriving to help them out. Finally, the wing backs arrive to provide further options - while the Libero and BWM hang back a bit further. This means the opposition full backs have usually picked up an attacking player prior to the wing backs arriving, so either leave the WBs alone, or are late picking them up.

I don't mean this as having a go at you but how much of the game do you actually watch?

Depends on the match - I start on comprehensive, and if everything is going swimmingly, I watch less. For big or eventful matches, I go to full. For example, I watched these two in full:

Fiddled the tactics almost continuously for the first 20 minutes or so - re-did them completely with a switch to a 4-3-3 after their second goal at 30 minutes.

Yes, we had both used all our subs before the injuries, so the match finished 9 vs 8 (their second red card - Sergio Ramos - is missed from the screenshot). Again, was tweaking tactics - mainly via shouts, rather than anything dramatic on the tactics screen - almost from the kick off.

Because I could look at any of your matches you've played and show you it happening in your own game where the player looks confused and does nothing. It happens time and time again.

I will keep an eye out for this, but like I say, I can't say I've noticed it so far.

WB's do not contribute to attacking phases of play properly nor do they do the defensive job properly either. If I get time I'll try and create a thread and highlight the issues later in the week because people seem to be confused about what WB's actually do. I'll highlight all the issues and show you the faults then maybe people be able to see them in their own games

This is the bit I don't really understand: they are contributing pretty much exactly how I want them to in attack. I agree they could do more defensively, but at the same time, if that was what I was after, I'd probably use support duties for them.

If you are happy with them cutting inside and playing central that's fine but it doesn't change the fact this is not what a wingback should be doing, it's not part of their game or the role. It happens due to small ME bugs.

We may have different ideas here: as a Rangers fan, in recent years I can certainly suggest Steven Whittaker as an attacking wing back that was more than happy to come inside and contribute in the middle. Whether that should be replicable in FM via the attacking wing back role or some other role is a bit of a moot point.

[Cleon]

I think you keep missing the point. Some players do have tendencies to cut inside but on FM all players cut inside when used as wingbacks. Every single one of them and there isn't anything the user can do to combat this. You can limit the damage and how badly it affects your shape but you cannot stop it happening.

[ham_aka_stam]

I use DWs, in the following setup:

---AFa-CFs-AFa---

-------------------

DWs-APa-CMd-DWs

-------------------

-----CBd-CBd------

--------Ls---------

But, if the opposition has wingers in the AMR/L positions, I will drop the DW to WB because I find WBs at FB don't don't close down quick enough.

Yes, WBs at WB have issues, but sometimes they're worth it.

[NoChance]

I think you keep missing the point. Some players do have tendencies to cut inside but on FM all players cut inside when used as wingbacks. Every single one of them and there isn't anything the user can do to combat this. You can limit the damage and how badly it affects your shape but you cannot stop it happening.

Okay, having just watched a full match paying particular attention to the positioning of my wing backs, they didn't cut in as often as I was expecting (it seems when they do, they're more effective so show up on more often on the highlights, giving me the impression they cut in more often than they did - usually, when watching a full match, it's the opposition I'm paying attention to rather than my wing backs). It was noticeable that they cut in more later in the match, whether this is a consequence of them becoming tired, the opposition becoming tired, or the AI changing their tactics/OIs, I have no idea.

As an experiment, both wing backs were right-footed: in particular, the WBR also had the "Avoids weaker foot" PPM. Both wingbacks also have "get forward whenever possible" and "knocks ball past opponent", for what it's worth. Here's their position maps:

I know the position maps don't tell the whole story, but I'm happy to send the full match to you if you want to PM me your email address.

The WBL created two goals: one by coming inside to complete a 1-2 with the treq, one by staying wide and crossing, from which a penalty was awarded. At no stage did I see the wing backs "just standing there not knowing what to do next".

UPDATE: You've piqued my curiousity so I'm now experimenting with different WBs & instructions to see if I can make them stay wide.

[RTHerringbone]

But, if the opposition has wingers in the AMR/L positions, I will drop the DW to WB because I find WBs at FB don't don't close down quick enough.

Yes, WBs at WB have issues, but sometimes they're worth it.

Pretty much what I do.

The whole thing about what wingbacks do or don't do relative to what you expect a wingback in real life to do is pretty subjective.

For me, I would expect a wingback to play wider more consistently than they do on FM, and it can cause issues if left unchecked, but can be worked around.

Not ideal, but not a major issue in my opinion.

Here's a shot analysing 50 games of a flat 4-3-3 at an admittedly good Barcelona side a few games in, using attacking wingbacks on both sides.

It was far from porous down the flanks and as you can see, the purpose of the wingbacks in this shape was to assist from high up the flanks, which they certainly did for me.

[prince0102]

I use DWs, in the following setup:

---AFa-CFs-AFa---

-------------------

DWs-APa-CMd-DWs

-------------------

-----CBd-CBd------

--------Ls---------

But, if the opposition has wingers in the AMR/L positions, I will drop the DW to WB because I find WBs at FB don't don't close down quick enough.

Yes, WBs at WB have issues, but sometimes they're worth it.

Ya but this exactly leads to my original problem that this tactic acts as a 523 or in my case 532 and is seriously lacking in attack.

[prince0102]

Rtherringbone unfortunately Barca makes it look this way. I did a quick vacation for 6 months with 352 and 532 and got resultso as expected. 352 showed the same screen with majority of the goals from wings. 532 was much less conceded goals but horrible scored goals. This is with Blackburn mid table expectation.

[ham_aka_stam]

Ya but this exactly leads to my original problem that this tactic acts as a 523 or in my case 532 and is seriously lacking in attack.

I don't have this problem at all. In fact it can be too "attacking" for me, with too many players joining the front line and crowding the box.

I'll also push the Libero to DM/MF if I'm against a team with a single striker.

[RTHerringbone]

Rtherringbone unfortunately Barca makes it look this way. I did a quick vacation for 6 months with 352 and 532 and got resultso as expected. 352 showed the same screen with majority of the goals from wings. 532 was much less conceded goals but horrible scored goals. This is with Blackburn mid table expectation.

My goals are coming overwhelmingly through the middle though - the image was used to show that wingbacks can be part of defensively robust system, yet still offer some assists up the flanks.

[NoChance]

Ya but this exactly leads to my original problem that this tactic acts as a 523 or in my case 532 and is seriously lacking in attack.

Would you say the problem is that your forwards aren't able to retain possession long enough for the supporting players to arrive, or is it that your other players are simply never arriving?

[prince0102]

Would you say the problem is that your forwards aren't able to retain possession long enough for the supporting players to arrive, or is it that your other players are simply never arriving?

From what I have seen, the AF is isolated when he receives the ball and has to dribble through 2 or 3 defenders by himself. Maybe 532 is not a good tactic to move up at a quick tempo after winning possession. I wonder if an attacking strategy is better with 532 so you are pushing the defensive line up

[NoChance]

From what I have seen, the AF is isolated when he receives the ball and has to dribble through 2 or 3 defenders by himself. Maybe 532 is not a good tactic to move up at a quick tempo after winning possession. I wonder if an attacking strategy is better with 532 so you are pushing the defensive line up

I use an attacking strategy with my 5-3-2 most of the time, for what it's worth. But, I think you may also want to have someone closer to your AF so he has an option other than trying to take on the 2 or 3 defenders: maybe move your AP from the MC line to the AMC line? I don't think they'll need to hold up the ball for too long before your DLF/DWs/CM provide further options.

Another idea occurs to me that maybe you could switch the DLF from support to attack: it's not an idea I've tried, but it may help to give the AF another option. The downside is that it may also leave your front two completely separated from your midfield, though.

[Midnight Rob]

I quite like the 352 in an FM sense as you can pack the midfield but still retain 2 strikers.

My version is a flat back 3 and a flat midfield 5. Both wide men are defensive wide mids retaining a 532 feel to it. Given the last sentence, I don't feel that it is suitable for quick, counterattacking wide play and so have mine set up as a possession junkie. This has made it incredibly reliable and solid. Very few high scoring games but big passing numbers as you can see.

[uselessoak]

I am playing a 3-5-2 and having a great time with Napoli, winning a treble in the 1st season. Also had great success with Roma. It is a pretty simple tactic. Basically cd(x), cd©, cd(x) in defense. A flat 4-man midfield dw(s), cm(s), cm(d), dw(s). Then an ap(s) in amc position, and a poacher and cf(a) upfront. Was conceding a bit of goals but making the dws mark opponent wingers seem to have made the defense pretty solid.

Even though both my strikers are on attack duty, I don't find them isolated as the amc is connecting the midfield and attack pretty well. The dws also contributes a lot in attack, either crossing a ball or cutting inside. Most goals come from both strikers and most assists from the ap, but the dws do their fair share of assists and goals.