My 4-1-1-3-1 (AKA RTHerringbones guinea pig)

[daylight]

Well over at GD there has been quite a lot going on with regards to people's tactics and what is happening in the ME highlights.

Anyway here is my starting tactic..

Have been quite successful with it, I started using it last season once I got promoted to the German 2nd Division, I had a very good season and won promotion via the play offs.

The problem I have with this tactic is I am seeing too many shots at goal, it can be me hitting some 30 shots at goal and either scraping a 1-0 or indeed getting beat.

There are also times that the opposition are having a lot of shots and sometimes I manage to somehow grab a draw or a win.

There are a few matches that play out like I would expect in real life but just too often I am finding way too many shots at goal going on.

Any advice will be welcomed....unless it is Ackter just coming by to say "your tactics suck".

Here is a Steam screenshot incase some find the res not so good.

http://cloud-4.steampowered.com/ugc/470920074240585665/9A705988007805367872D538B61AECCFD4D9F5BE/

[Auqakuh]

Too many shots on goal (that aren't on target and testing the goalkeeper) = not enough creativity. That is, creativity in the sense of passing intelligence, not in the sense of freedom to ignore your tactical instructions. Indeed, sometimes creative freedom is exactly the problem, because it enables players to fall into the stupidity pattern described in the next paragraph.

I'd suggest looking at match stats and highlights and all and seeing whether the shooters are dribblers. Sometimes restricting the dribbling of certain players also restricts their silly shooting tendencies, because they stop dribbling themselves into other player's space (say, your lone striker) and going "Oh... there's nowhere to go now and I brought that centreback inside with me so now our centre-forward has 2,000 men marking him and obviously I can't pass back to the fullback because he wouldn't buy me a beer the other night. Guess I'll shoot then."

[RTHerringbone]

Welcome

Glad you took the time to post here, and hopefully the learned people in this sub-forum can give you some sensible advice which will reap some rewards.

Not directly related to the long shots, but in terms of general Roles, do you find any issues directly related to that narrow spine down the team?

There are no real stable, defensive Roles there. The Regista will Roam about, the AP won't really do much defensive work, and the AM is focused on supplementing your attack.

Long shots are often a symptom of poor movement (and hence no real passing options), and / or the opponent happily sitting deep and holding you at arm's length.

If your team can't break down their shape, they will resort to long shots.

Do these games occur against generally lower placed team, or is it pretty evenly distributed against all sorts of opposition?

[Äktsjon Männ]

It's a weird formation for a start. How are you supposed to defend the flanks? Advanced wingers rarely track back and your central players are encouraged to stay in the middle. You're isolating your full backs against the opposition wide players and you expect one of them to attack at every opportunity. Your DM is also on the most attack minded role for the position. That's exactly the kind of set up that is waiting to be counter attacked to death.

[Cleon]

You don't really have any variety in your attack, it's all heavily (tbh its the only focus) centralised. AM, AP and 2xIF's all wanting a similar kind of space. This will have a knock on effect with long shots because the movement is poor and easy to defend against meaning the players have no real options when the opposition crowd their own half. This will force them to shoot at silly times because the movement from midfield doesn't stretch the opposition enough.

In games where you get attacked this tactic should have a lot of joy but when the bus is parked I can see you have no real movement up top so will struggle to break sides down. It's made easier by the fact you have a striker who will drop off deep too and won't really push the defence back.

From a defensive standpoint you get out numbered on the wings and in the centre, no wonder you find you have lots of shots against too . You are a counter attacking sides dream.

You need to understand the weaknesses of the shape you want to use then set the roles accordingly to try and cover them up a bit while still being potent in goal. You don't really have any variety or balance with this shape. Left side is rather conservative and the right side if gung-ho.

To be fair Ackter would be right if he said those words to you

[Ackter]

In practice your team probably lines up like this when in possession:

Massive congestion up front, no support from midfield. You've also got a bit carried away with the team instructions imo, I'm assuming your individual instructions for at least a few positions also have a ton of added instructions?

[Cleon]

In practice your team probably lines up like this when in possession:

Massive congestion up front, no support from midfield. You've also got a bit carried away with the team instructions imo, I'm assuming your individual instructions for at least a few positions also have a ton of added instructions?

Such a good picture

You can see all the different areas the opposition can hit him on the break from though.

[Ackter]

This is my similar setup:

In possession, it tends to line up like this:

The CF and WR are the most advanced, usually in amongst the defensive line. The WL is more reserved, and along with the CML they both offer support to the attack from a deeper position, giving both an extra option for attack and also working as another line of defense for the counter to break past.

Behind them is the CMR who wanders around the middle with the FBL and DLP further back again. My FBR is supportive as he doesn't have the pace to do what my FBL can do.

[Ackter]

Such a good picture

You can see all the different areas the opposition can hit him on the break from though.

The worst thing is I can see how easy it would be to start the counter because his entire attack are all so close together, it'll take one pass to bypass half the team.

It's the sort of thing I used to love exploiting in FML. Loads of teams had that highly central DR DL DC DC DM MC MC FC FC FC narrow formation if you remember, which caused everybody to complain about how massively overpowered it was. I wandered up with a SW DC DC WBL WBR MC MC MC ST ST formation and soaked up their attacks - it would take a maximum of two passes to get the ball to my strikers leaving them only the two opposition DCs to deal with. I'd often beat top of the gameworld teams 2-0 and 3-0 with less then 1/5th the amount of shots they had.

[Äktsjon Männ]

This may sound blunt, but basically you need to start over from scratch. Think about how you want to play. Where do you want your attack to be focused on? Where do you expect the goals to come from? The inside forwards? Then create space for them, play your midfield as a deeper unit and either have the striker stretch the defense or act as a playmaker. If you want to attack through central players then have wide support and a more compact shape. Ditch the d1ldo formation in favor of something more conventional which also includes some support for your full backs defensively. Balance is key.

[Ackter]

The False 9 in this version is an absolute gift imo. Just amazing for making the space your other players need.

False 9 + two IFs and a supportive CM would be a good place to start. May want to consider a halfback in DM as well as he'll drop back into the defensive line so your two DCs then provide proper support for your fullbacks without having to sacrifice too much of your attacking threat.

[daylight]

Not directly related to the long shots, but in terms of general Roles, do you find any issues directly related to that narrow spine down the team?

Do these games occur against generally lower placed team, or is it pretty evenly distributed against all sorts of opposition?

I am not seeing anything unusual through the centre, I seem to attack well through the middle, most of the trouble seems to come from players cutting in from the wings and shots flying in from all around the box, also a few from players that have come in from the wing and run into the 6 yard box.

The high scoring games seems to be a mix of different teams, from bottom of the league to the top of the league teams.

You need to understand the weaknesses of the shape you want to use then set the roles accordingly to try and cover them up a bit while still being potent in goal. You don't really have any variety or balance with this shape. Left side is rather conservative and the right side if gung-ho.

To be fair Ackter would be right if he said those words to you

I have managed a promotion with this tactic and have started fairly well in the few games I have played at the start of the new season, I would like to keep the shape, maybe different roles for some of the players?

I'm assuming your individual instructions for at least a few positions also have a ton of added instructions?

Nah the most any player has is 2, tbh I think most of the team don't have any, only the fullbacks and 2 centre midfielders.

The False 9 in this version is an absolute gift imo. Just amazing for making the space your other players need.

False 9 + two IFs and a supportive CM would be a good place to start. May want to consider a halfback in DM as well as he'll drop back into the defensive line so your two DCs then provide proper support for your fullbacks without having to sacrifice too much of your attacking threat.

Sounds good, I was considering using the CM as BWM and the DM as a DLP but I will give your advice a go, I will also give the False 9 a go.

[Cleon]

I am not seeing anything unusual through the centre, I seem to attack well through the middle, most of the trouble seems to come from players cutting in from the wings and shots flying in from all around the box, also a few from players that have come in from the wing and run into the 6 yard box.

The high scoring games seems to be a mix of different teams, from bottom of the league to the top of the league teams.

I have managed a promotion with this tactic and have started fairly well in the few games I have played at the start of the new season, I would like to keep the shape, maybe different roles for some of the players?

It doesn't matter how well you've started though because you've been in the lower leagues. When you get to the top division and teams like Bayern etc visit you, you'll be on the wrong end of a bad result. You're set up to be smashed by half decent opposition. You can get away with staying like this until a certain point though.

You can retain the shape no doubt about that but you need to rethink the roles throughout the team to compensate the weird shape you want to play. You need better balance on both sides and more defensive cover.

[Äktsjon Männ]

I have managed a promotion with this tactic and have started fairly well in the few games I have played at the start of the new season, I would like to keep the shape, maybe different roles for some of the players?

Then go with ackter's suggestions. Use the DM as an auxiliary CB and the CM as a deep playmaker. You can't have everyone get forward and still have balance.

To be fair, I'm usually not a fan of the suggestion that successful unconventional tactics work because their exploiting something in the ME but in this instance I think your success is in a big way down to a couple of ME weaknesses. The defensive line dropping too deep and problems with engaging the ball carrier allow you to overload teams with all these central players. The lack of composure when playing out of the defense reduces the risk of being hit on the counter. I'd expect this set up to stop being effective when these issues are resolved with a patch resulting in you being countered much more aggressively and effectively.

[Ackter]

Suggested experiment:

If you really want an IF attacking formation, try something like this.

ST: False 9

AM: Shadow Striker

AMLR: Inside Forwards

The False 9 will be there to pull their defence all out of position, meaning when your shadow striker and IFs attack it throws the defence into panic.

I can't really think of a way of getting the narrow DM, MC, AM you want without being too frail defensively (though if you insist on playing it that way, the halfback + central midfielder on defend would be a decent attempt at it), so I suggest two defensive CMs holding their positions in the centre of the pitch at all times.

The two defensive CMs will allow your FBs to get forward more often and more safely (though you'll still be at risk from fast counters down the flanks, you'll be in a much better position with it).

[daylight]

It doesn't matter how well you've started though because you've been in the lower leagues. When you get to the top division and teams like Bayern etc visit you, you'll be on the wrong end of a bad result. You're set up to be smashed by half decent opposition. You can get away with staying like this until a certain point though.

You can retain the shape no doubt about that but you need to rethink the roles throughout the team to compensate the weird shape you want to play. You need better balance on both sides and more defensive cover.

Yeah I was using a more conventional 4-2-3-1 for my first promotion from the 3rd Division, I switched after about 10 games into the second season as I was getting some poor results and I decided to go with this unconventional 4-1-1-3-1.

I will give Ackters advice a go later tonight and see how I get on.

Thanks for the advice so far.

[Ackter]

See, I'm a lot nicer in this forum

[RTHerringbone]

See, I'm a lot nicer in this forum

Nicer audience, that's why

Good to see you in here.

[daylight]

Suggested experiment:

If you really want an IF attacking formation, try something like this.

ST: False 9

AM: Shadow Striker

AMLR: Inside Forwards

The False 9 will be there to pull their defence all out of position, meaning when your shadow striker and IFs attack it throws the defence into panic.

I can't really think of a way of getting the narrow DM, MC, AM you want without being too frail defensively (though if you insist on playing it that way, the halfback + central midfielder on defend would be a decent attempt at it), so I suggest two defensive CMs holding their positions in the centre of the pitch at all times.

The two defensive CMs will allow your FBs to get forward more often and more safely (though you'll still be at risk from fast counters down the flanks, you'll be in a much better position with it).

Would I be better dropping the CM back as a DLP on defend and along side him playing the Regista?

See, I'm a lot nicer in this forum

Yeah I have got to stop posting in GD, it's the mob mentality and all that.

[Ackter]

It's been a log time since I've been in here. At some point I'll start up my Catenaccio thread again, that was always fun.

[Ackter]

Would I be better dropping the CM back as a DLP on defend and along side him playing the Regista?

DLP & Regista are too similar to properly work together imo - they're both slightly different types of playmakers (one general, one specialist).

A half back + regista would be worth seeing how they work for you. You'll have the regista picking up the ball and passing it around, while the half back is there sweeping up the space in front of your two DCs (the half back is basically a more mobile anchor man with added support).

[Ackter]

Though my worry then would be you'd have too many specialist positions in the team, which can also be risky unless you have the absolute top quality players available to you in every position.

[daylight]

This is what I have so far.

Again A Steam screenshot http://cloud-2.steampowered.com/ugc/470920074243772171/B59D3AADD92A269397F0F022D908B1B3CAEB7E6A/

I took your advice Ackter and I also changed some of the team instructions.

Better?

[Ackter]

I'd still be a bit worried by the CWB as he'll do so little defending, it'll be something to look at if you find that the halfback/DCs start to struggle down that flank.

[daylight]

I'd still be a bit worried by the CWB as he'll do so little defending, it'll be something to look at if you find that the halfback/DCs start to struggle down that flank.

Man I would hate to change that, he has been fantastic for me, picked him up for cheap in pre-season and he was won or been close to winning MotM in every game so far.

[Äktsjon Männ]

How about switching your DM's? Easier for the half-back (what a stupidly misworded role) to drop back when the CB fills in on the flank. Might try a stopper duty on that side as well.

[Ackter]

Well hopefully with the halfback you'll effectively be running a back three (you won't need that DC on stopper duty because the halfback will be doing that role for you) which will allow you to be more risky down the wings.

[Ackter]

How about switching your DM's? Easier for the half-back (what a stupidly misworded role) to drop back when the CB fills in on the flank. Might try a stopper duty on that side as well.

Stopper and halfback basically do the same role, but from different positions. The half back will be there doing the stopping in front of the defensive line.

You also probably don't need the Push Up team instruction, as with the half back on the pitch the defensive line is naturally higher anyway.

[daylight]

How about switching your DM's? Easier for the half-back (what a stupidly misworded role) to drop back when the CB fills in on the flank.

Yeah was thinking that, I will change that around before I start to play tonight.

[RTHerringbone]

If you do elect to use a Half Back, just keep an eye on what happens with the DCs.

They are a bit buggy at the moment, and stay very wide for too long.

Sometimes that is a good thing, but if you play against 2 strikers and the DCs are split wide, it could be brown trousers time.

[Ackter]

With his CWB setting up camp on the opposition's wing, that's probably a good thing.

[james_wilko]

I`m currently using a 4-1-1-3-1, with the full backs pushed up in to wingback positions and a half back dropping into the defence.

Looks like this:

It`s very effective, only lost 2 games by the start of January in my fourth season, away to Bayern and Man City. Currently top of the league and top goalscorers with 44 in 19 games. Looks pretty good offensively too and fairly solid in defence.

[daylight]

Just how important is the star ratings for the players?

It has me a little worried that my striker only has a 2 and a half star rating for the false 9 role.

[Ackter]

Just how important is the star ratings for the players?

It has me a little worried that my striker only has a 2 and a half star rating for the false 9 role.

It's based on the attributes highlighted for that role (you can see them on the development > training screen) and their current ability iirc. A False 9 requires good passing, teamwork and workrate to be ideally effective, which some strikers have problems with. Don't let it put you off, though, he'll still be able to perform there.

My Complete Forward only has 2.5 stars in the role because he's really young, but still has 7 goals in 13 appearances.

[daylight]

I have only played 4 games so a bit early to give any decent feedback since I changed my tactics but I just had another of the high shots game where a team has so many shots but ends up on the losing side.

Happens quite often in my save, this time I was the lucky side.

Steam screenshot http://cloud-2.steampowered.com/ugc/470920074249471279/0A8EBA334D4D122CF39ACB5AF384AFF11D5FF36A/

[daylight]

Well the new formation is a no go.

Having played a few games the team is just not playing well.

I have went from around 58% possession to around 42%, we are constantly playing in our own half, I see the problem the team has, there is just too big a hole in the middle of the park, there is no out ball in the centre and the ball is constantly coming right back at us.

I have managed a couple of wins but to be fair they were games I had no right to win.(see screenshot above)

The false 9 was also a dead loss, it could be that he was not getting the service but my striker that I played as a CF on support and he was getting goals and his rating was at 7,30 has become a passenger, he was constantly getting ratings of around 5.8.

I am not going to go back to my old formation just yet, I can maybe agree with Cleon that my old formation was just good against the lower teams and I want something more solid for this division.

I am going to try a 4-1-2-2-1, basically my old formation but sacrificing the AM to play more in the middle, I will also assign some different roles so I am more solid defensively.

I will post some screenshots later when I get time to set the team up.

[Ackter]

The false 9 isn't there to get goals, he's there to make room for the others to exploit - in this case your AM and inside forwards.

The hole in midfield is why I suggested the two defensive CMs, so there'd always be someone there.

[daylight]

Yeah I know the false 9 is to make room but with ratings of around 5.8 it just isn't working out for him.

I will try a bit later with the 4-1-2-2-1 and see how I get on, I will set up the players a bit different with their roles, I may even make peace with my right back and set him to support instead of attack.

[Äktsjon Männ]

From my experience the two DM combo is a bit dodgy at the moment. They do fall too deep and the lack of composure in playing out of the back means constant hoofs up field because there's few obvious options in centre midfield. A two CM midfield works much better although it does have its issues as well so it's better complemented with wide midfielders instead of advanced wingers.

[sriracha]

Serious question to everybody offering advice in this thread - how do personally go about evaluating tweaks to your tactic?

Say you are in a similar position to daylight. You've got a tactic that works well ~80% of the time, there's just one, two aspects you're not happy with. You've got a theory how you could improve. Now how do you test it? How do you make sure you're evaluating your tweak and not say the difference in quality between your last ten opponents (before change) and next ten opponents. What if other important things happen - say two games into the test phase you lose your most prolific striker to injury for three months? Etc etc pp ... I assume you get the gist.

Also the other way around - how do you evaluate whether by improving one aspect of the game you have actually deteriorated in another?

Cheers

[Äktsjon Männ]

I'm also not a fan of the false9/dlf role in a combo with an amc. They just keep getting in each others way and the inside forwards looking to attack the same area make it even worse. It also reduces the all important space between opposition midfield and defense. I see this as a big reason why some people struggle with attacking combinations in their 4231 variants - they blindly follow the 12 step guide which states that a lone striker has to be on support and then fail to realise that what they have is all forward players bunching up in the same space. The false 9 is perfect for all the 433 variants simply because the space is there to drop into.

[RTHerringbone]

I actually stopped using an Inside Forward in my 4-2-3-1 for a couple of reasons:

i) I don't think they play often enough like an Inside Forward - too wide for too long, almost like a Winger really

ii) On the occasions when they do Cut Inside, it squeezes space in the middle

My front 4 is now as follows:

AML is an AP (A)

AMR is a W (S)

AMC is a SS

ST is an AF (A)

This creates lot of movement, varied supply and space.

The AP offers creative composure and assists from dangerous areas, a Wing Back overlaps him to provide width and a different supply from the flanks.

The Winger stretches the pitch on the other side and crosses early, and I'm tinkering with getting a Full Back to Cut Inside from Deep behind him.

The AF is asked to Move Into Channels and Run Wide With Ball, which drags a DC out of position, creating space for the SS to attack.

[RTHerringbone]

I actually stopped using an Inside Forward in my 4-2-3-1 for a couple of reasons:

i) I don't think they play often enough like an Inside Forward - too wide for too long, almost like a Winger really

ii) On the occasions when they do Cut Inside, it squeezes space in the middle

My front 4 is now as follows:

AML is an AP (A)

AMR is a W (S)

AMC is a SS

ST is an AF (A)

This creates lot of movement, varied supply and space.

The AP offers creative composure and assists from dangerous areas, a Wing Back overlaps him to provide width and a different supply from the flanks.

The Winger stretches the pitch on the other side and crosses early, and I'm tinkering with getting a Full Back to Cut Inside from Deep behind him. I'd love it if I could encourage him to Get Further Forward and arrive late into the box, as at the moment we do have issues with everyone tending to arrive at similar times.

The AF is asked to Move Into Channels and Run Wide With Ball, which drags a DC out of position, creating space for the SS to attack.

[Cougar2010]

Well the new formation is a no go.

Having played a few games the team is just not playing well.

I have went from around 58% possession to around 42%, we are constantly playing in our own half, I see the problem the team has, there is just too big a hole in the middle of the park, there is no out ball in the centre and the ball is constantly coming right back at us.

I have managed a couple of wins but to be fair they were games I had no right to win.(see screenshot above)

The false 9 was also a dead loss, it could be that he was not getting the service but my striker that I played as a CF on support and he was getting goals and his rating was at 7,30 has become a passenger, he was constantly getting ratings of around 5.8.

I am not going to go back to my old formation just yet, I can maybe agree with Cleon that my old formation was just good against the lower teams and I want something more solid for this division.

I am going to try a 4-1-2-2-1, basically my old formation but sacrificing the AM to play more in the middle, I will also assign some different roles so I am more solid defensively.

I will post some screenshots later when I get time to set the team up.

Yes I think you've identified the issue with your "new" formation.

With your DMs on defend & support orders with the AMC/AMR on attack and the AML on support you have a big gap between your players in the middle of the field with limited passing options for moving from defending to attacking.

Next step is to decide how to overcome this, one way is to tinker with the formation - options could be AMC to MC or AML/AMR to ML/MR. The other is to stick with the formation and tinker with the roles/duties - maybe your supporting DM to attacking combined with changes to your front four so that two of your three AMs are on support.

[Becanes]

Just wanted to say thanks to all the contributors in this thread. I think it has helped me to see some issues I was having. I'm not using a formation like Daylight but it's always nice to look at a thread and maybe find some ideas I haven't thought of so I can apply it to my formation and team. My issue was mainly about opening space in the final third and untilizing that space. It's worked for one match so far. Thanks.

[daylight]

Well I have played a few games and I am getting some joy from the new formation.

I know you guys will give me grief on 2 things.

1. I am still using my right hand side a bit gung ho, I can't help it I am just getting so much joy down that side, I have set my CM to defend on that side to give some cover, which brings me to point number 2.

2. I only have defend and attack in the midfield with no 'support' role selected, Like I said I am getting great joy down the right, also with my AP on attack I am seeing some great things from him and the left sided IF.

Defensively we have looked better but of course I would still like your thoughts.

Steam screenshot http://cloud-4.steampowered.com/ugc/470920157695757429/9F45647BF147D5E4FCF6FBAAA06DCD65D8966A88/

My last few results have been really positive.

Including a 2-0 win away to Bayern*

0-0 against Leverkusen

4-1 against Werder Bremen

2-2 against Schalke.

*The 2-0 was a very strange game where I had a 2-0 lead and then had a player sent off, my DM, a long story short I ended up finishing the game with no striker the only high up player was my right sided IF on support and 1 centre midfielder and a left midfielder, BM where throwing the kitchen sink at me so it was all hands to defence really.

[Cougar2010]

Looking a little similar to what I use atm except you need more players on support orders up front.

While my shape is the same I have different roles/duties with my front three all on support orders. As it stands all three front players are looking to get forward as soon as you win possession while what you want is some turning and looking to receive possession in the opposition half. I also don't like lone forwards being AFs, personally I think you should have a supporting ST dropping off the front to create space for your attacking IFs (DLF/Target man/complete forward depending on the player used).

[daylight]

Yeah I have since changed the striker to a CF on support, I think I will just have to bite the bullet and set my right IF to support also.

[daylight]

Looking like this now.

Steam screenshot http://cloud-3.steampowered.com/ugc/470920157697435245/15068928D2FC72C03B90871E39689F22B624AC46/

Is the winter break in Germany so I have a few friendlies lined up to test this out.

[Katana]

daylight; a few questions concerning your formation. I use the same formation, as I had some good runs with it in FM13, albeit with different roles than yours.

How is your IF performing re what RTHerringbone said "I don't think they play often enough like an Inside Forward - too wide for too long, almost like a Winger really"? I can not seem to get my IFs to run into the middle like I want them to though. They keep playing like wingers trying for the cross (or the off-player corner that never works and just looks stupid when they try ). And while we're at it, do you see a big difference in how the IF(L) and the W® operate on the pitch?

Also, you've set up a CFs and an APa. I would think that these two would cram together in the same position (AM), thus not utilizing space upfront very efficiently. Do you see the same, or do they stay out of each others way? A heatmap from a couple of matches would be interesting.