Pairs & Combinations FM2015 - UPDATED

[llama3]

Ok you have FAR too many team instructions. Less is more in terms of team instructions. Pick which is important. You have some contradictory ones and are over doing things like the ball retention shouts. You can have what duties you like on the flanks, but it is not my advice to set out like you do, that's your choice, it is your team. You haven't said precisely what style you want - counter-attacking, pressing, ball retention, good shape, intricate movement, playing direct, physical - how do you want to play?

[manulee]

Again thanks for your reply mate.

I want a solid team in defence pressing high when lost the ball and when with the ball have a good short pass.

using my wingers to cross or ditacte plays with my attacking mc and my F9.

basicly for me the perfect match will be a simbiose of barça real style: high pressing, short passing when in possession, then whit a missil pass making the difference.... dont know if i explain it the good way ....

Edit: would want to play in attacking very fluid system

[llama3]

Well this is even more of a reason to try and reduce the number of instructions - giving the players more freedom. For example you play narrower, yet want to use your flanks. You Press high and mark tight, but do not want to dive into tackles. I would simply stick with a few basic ones and add the rest as you need them - for example; shorter passing will give you a general style aiming towards possession, but you can leave off retain possession to allow your team the ability to play more direct if you need to. High Line and offside trap maybe, and add hassle if you need to step up the pressing. More Expression & More Roaming if you wish to as well. That give you some ideas?

[manulee]

everything you say give me ideas....

so,

shorter passing

pass into space

work ball into box

pllay out of defence

drill crosses

play narrower

push higher up

roam from positions

hassle opponents

use tighter marking

be more expressive

very fluid/ attacking

G-def

WBR/L-attack

CD-defend

BBM-sup and DLP-def

AMR/L- winger-attack

AF-attack F9-supp

PI to all players mark tight ou if I put it on TI dont need to put on PI ?

any comments?

EDIT: i play narrower because of the short passing.... no?

[lennon67]

Ok a 4-3-1-2 system's main points are that it lacks width, which must be provided by wing backs, and that the AMC can be a focal point to funnel attacks through, which means if he is kept quiet then it is often game over. So in short - you need wing backs on both flanks (i would avoid CWB(A)'s as they are still needed for defensive work too, especially with no HB or DM), your AMC can have greater movement with a T(A) role which will pull wide, also aiding width, and it will allow the CF(S) to drop deep, and get forward runs in from the midfield - speaking of which you may be a touch short of runners from central midfield - not certain which will work best, but a CM(A) is the role i think of when i want an offensive midfield runner from deep.

Thanks llama, I will change all the player roles to the ones you mentioned as a lot of it makes sense now and this will stop me from changing the player roles constant. One last thing though, would I have both the wing backs on a attack duty or leave them on support if I am going to change one of the central midfielders to a attack duty?

[llama3]

everything you say give me ideas....

so,

shorter passing

pass into space

work ball into box

pllay out of defence

drill crosses

play narrower

push higher up

roam from positions

hassle opponents

use tighter marking

be more expressive

very fluid/ attacking

G-def

WBR/L-attack

CD-defend

BBM-sup and DLP-def

AMR/L- winger-attack

AF-attack F9-supp

PI to all players mark tight ou if I put it on TI dont need to put on PI ?

any comments?

EDIT: i play narrower because of the short passing.... no?

No - your main threat you wanted to use is your flanks - it makes no sense to play narrower at all. Wingers are naturally very direct, your possession orientated game will not suit direct wing play as much so you need to find a balance.

Thanks llama, I will change all the player roles to the ones you mentioned as a lot of it makes sense now and this will stop me from changing the player roles constant. One last thing though, would I have both the wing backs on a attack duty or leave them on support if I am going to change one of the central midfielders to a attack duty?

Up to you, depends on the players, opposition and type of chances etc That kind of decision can be made on a game by game basis.

[manulee]

Llama,

thanks for the advice

[llama3]

No worries man, good luck.

[manulee]

https://my.pcloud.com/#page=publink&code=XZreMZiw8655d1LFhInNnWykSdOQcy9KlX

Llama,

there is my tactic....

can you please have a look?

[lennon67]

Up to you, depends on the players, opposition and type of chances etc That kind of decision can be made on a game by game basis.

Thanks for the help llama, much appreciated mate.

[eyalf83]

Great thread!

I learned alot from it!

thanks!!!

[JuanVeron]

Hello everyone,

I found this topic of very good use in building a tactic and playing FM in general, so thanks to the poster for that!

One question i have is the following.

I am playing a formation

-----------Gk-----------

Wb(a)-Dc(d)-Dc(d)-Wb(a)

----------Hb(d)----------

------Dlp(s)--Mc(s)------

----------Ap(a)----------

------Dlf(s)---Af(a)------

And quite naturally with the lone wide players, i face a lot of threats from oppositions combining over the flanks.

What can i optimally defend my team against these threats, knowing i am not using wide midfielders to offer support?

Thanks and best regards,

Maarten

[JD nawrat]

Set your central midfielders to close down more, meaning that one of them should often drift out to a winger with the ball? And/or consider having your central midfielders man mark the opposition wingers?

Probably the two most efficient ways to prevent your side from being overloaded down the flanks. It can leave you a little bit light centrally, so you'll also need your playmaker/strikers to help out defensively too.

[llama3]

https://my.pcloud.com/#page=publink&code=XZreMZiw8655d1LFhInNnWykSdOQcy9KlX

Llama,

there is my tactic....

can you please have a look?

Can you post it on here please, I don't have much free time to load the game up to inspect it. It makes more sense posted in the context of your team too.

Thanks for the help llama, much appreciated mate.

No worries.

Great thread!

I learned alot from it!

thanks!!!

No problem.

Hello everyone,

I found this topic of very good use in building a tactic and playing FM in general, so thanks to the poster for that!

One question i have is the following.

I am playing a formation

-----------Gk-----------

Wb(a)-Dc(d)-Dc(d)-Wb(a)

----------Hb(d)----------

------Dlp(s)--Mc(s)------

----------Ap(a)----------

------Dlf(s)---Af(a)------

And quite naturally with the lone wide players, i face a lot of threats from oppositions combining over the flanks.

What can i optimally defend my team against these threats, knowing i am not using wide midfielders to offer support?

Thanks and best regards,

Maarten

JDownie's advice is good, also consider playing wider to stretch your team nearer the flanks too. Maybe press higher up if it suits your team and opponents and cut out these balls into the flanks.

[daoan]

hi llama3, why don't you release preset tactics for us noobs to download and use? That way we can learn as well from those successful tactics.

[Cleon]

hi llama3, why don't you release preset tactics for us noobs to download and use? That way we can learn as well from those successful tactics.

You wouldn't learn, you'd just download the tactic and load it in game and not understand anything about it.

[James9]

Good morning Llama could you give me some advice on player roles for my Arsenal team. I want to play 4 2 DM 3 1 formation. I was considering havinh a HALF BACK AND REGISTA in the DMC positions. My choice for Half Back was betwee Arteta and Flamini and Regista was between Arteta and Ramsey. Could you advice me on what position would fit what player. Also I like playing Balance but with the additional roles does this now mean i would have to play Regid or Very Rigid. M other roles within the team or as follows - Sweeper Keeper, Center Back Wing Back Attack and Full Back - Support. The front 4 will be Inside Forward - Support - Advance Playmaker - Support - Winger - Attack and DLF - Attack. Do you think I need to make any changes to my Front 4. I am playing with a high block

[Northernpilgrim]

I too am really struggling, have started again at least 6-8 times already, yet to get beyond Christmas without quitting in frustration or being sacked. I've used 2 formations, 4-4-2 and a 4-3-3 / 4-5-1 hybrid.

My 4-4-2 looks like this

and my 4-3-3 looks like this

Ignore the team selection, as I just switched the formations from one to the other to take screenshots without amending the team.

Here are my league results

And the league table.

My squad doesn't look too shabby either

What I'm finding most frustrating is that all the tactics on the SI community board that are being heralded as great have been created with big teams, or at the very least Premier League teams, and even these tactics are useless in League 2. I accept that it's a new version of the game, but I've gone from being able to get Argyle from L2 to the Championship on FM13 (with arguably a much worse team than I have now), to barely being able to score a goal, and certainly not keep a clean sheet, in FM14. Football doesn't change that much in a single season, and therefore I don't see a reason for FM to either.

[llama3]

Good morning Llama could you give me some advice on player roles for my Arsenal team. I want to play 4 2 DM 3 1 formation. I was considering havinh a HALF BACK AND REGISTA in the DMC positions. My choice for Half Back was betwee Arteta and Flamini and Regista was between Arteta and Ramsey. Could you advice me on what position would fit what player. Also I like playing Balance but with the additional roles does this now mean i would have to play Regid or Very Rigid. M other roles within the team or as follows - Sweeper Keeper, Center Back Wing Back Attack and Full Back - Support. The front 4 will be Inside Forward - Support - Advance Playmaker - Support - Winger - Attack and DLF - Attack. Do you think I need to make any changes to my Front 4. I am playing with a high block

If you want to play a high block then the DM's don't help too much. If you want to press then having the DM's as CM's instead will help. So probably need to sacrifice (or at least reduce) 1 or other ideal. Half Back's work perfectly in a Barcelona style with both full backs getting right forward, whereas in yours you play conservative 1 side and assertive on the other side of your defence, maybe not space for a half back to drop into. The Regista while positionally in an effective place, simply does not go tracking the ball enough to what is a de facto lone DM role. If your front 4 works well in terms of what you see then keep it, if not, then look at what is not working. Plenty of different alterations to those combinations could be effective.

I too am really struggling, have started again at least 6-8 times already, yet to get beyond Christmas without quitting in frustration or being sacked. I've used 2 formations, 4-4-2 and a 4-3-3 / 4-5-1 hybrid.

My 4-4-2 looks like this

and my 4-3-3 looks like this

Ignore the team selection, as I just switched the formations from one to the other to take screenshots without amending the team.

Here are my league results

And the league table.

My squad doesn't look too shabby either

What I'm finding most frustrating is that all the tactics on the SI community board that are being heralded as great have been created with big teams, or at the very least Premier League teams, and even these tactics are useless in League 2. I accept that it's a new version of the game, but I've gone from being able to get Argyle from L2 to the Championship on FM13 (with arguably a much worse team than I have now), to barely being able to score a goal, and certainly not keep a clean sheet, in FM14. Football doesn't change that much in a single season, and therefore I don't see a reason for FM to either.

Ok a few very fundamental issues:

4-4-2

• You play very rigid, yet have no specialist roles - you should change your philosophy instead, and possibly add 1 specialist role if it is appropriate. Based on the number of specialst roles, either very fluid (0-1) or fluid (1-2) are your best choices.
  
• You have a very symmetrical team, and you attack in 1 clear pattern, so you are predictable to defend against. Mix up your duties on 1 flank (make the FB an attack duty, and the Winger a support duty), and have your defensive duty MC on the same side as the more attacking full back. Simple change, just adapts the movement more.
  
• Clear ball to flanks, is a pretty extreme shout, it limits your team to 1 style of play. Maybe just start with the more direct passing style, and adapt to play wider, or clear to flanks in-game if needed.

4-3-3

• 1 attack duty, 7 support duties, 2 defend duties - you should mix these up far more. Your poacher must be so isolated, and he lacks real support.
  
• Again a symmetrical team producing similar types of chances, easy to defend against. An example here - if a team plays 2 quick, but small strikers, the chances are you drop deep and nullify both - but if a team plays a big man and a quick man - if you drop deep the big man dominates aerially close to your goal, or if you stay high the small man gets in behind - variation is king.
  
• Your philosophy is totally different - too fluid considering you have 2 specialist roles and 2 either/or roles. This should change, or this system should be more rigid. Considering I suggested more fluidity for your first system, I would suggest keeping the philosophy, and adapting the roles somewhat in this system.
  
• Never play a lone Poacher up front, unless he is seriously well supplied, and your team has other ways to adapt to create and score chances.

[James9]

Llama regarding high block and pressing would you recommend using hassle opponents to press as a whole team or would you give the front four close down more instructions to ensure that they put pressure on the defence. And then give the midfielders and defence close down less instructions to ensure they keep shape and not get dragged out of position. I just really wanted to find out if you can use a high block with just your front players pressing the ball. Also do use any OI in your tactics to stop dangerous players such as wingers and creative midfielders.

[aderow]

llama3, I'd like your opinion. How do you feel about strike partnerships where both strikers have support duties?

Because honestly, I don't like attack duties. I feel like they lead to my striker(s) being pushed up too far up the pitch leaving them isolated and leaving my central mids with fewer passing options. I like for both my strikers to be a part of the build up. Sort of the same way you'd give a lone striker a support duty to link up with the midfield and keep him from becoming isolated up top.

Just something that's been on my mind lately.

[llama3]

Llama regarding high block and pressing would you recommend using hassle opponents to press as a whole team or would you give the front four close down more instructions to ensure that they put pressure on the defence. And then give the midfielders and defence close down less instructions to ensure they keep shape and not get dragged out of position. I just really wanted to find out if you can use a high block with just your front players pressing the ball. Also do use any OI in your tactics to stop dangerous players such as wingers and creative midfielders.

You cannot just constantly press high against all opponents. You have to adapt it. If you want to press with your front players then drop off with the others then you need to drop your line back to maintain the shape. You cannot keep a high line but not press.

llama3, I'd like your opinion. How do you feel about strike partnerships where both strikers have support duties?

Because honestly, I don't like attack duties. I feel like they lead to my striker(s) being pushed up too far up the pitch leaving them isolated and leaving my central mids with fewer passing options. I like for both my strikers to be a part of the build up. Sort of the same way you'd give a lone striker a support duty to link up with the midfield and keep him from becoming isolated up top.

Just something that's been on my mind lately.

I don't agree. The idea that no forward player leads the line or tries to stretch play is an issue. It makes it easy for opponents to defend your team by simply playing high. If you want your team to involve in the build up movement you can still use a CF(A), DLF(A) or AF(A). They can move into channels, roam, hold the ball up etc

[James9]

Thanks Llama. Would it be better to play a high block against teams with slow strikers and less creative and technical players and low block against better teams such as Chelsea and Man City

[aderow]

I don't agree. The idea that no forward player leads the line or tries to stretch play is an issue. It makes it easy for opponents to defend your team by simply playing high. If you want your team to involve in the build up movement you can still use a CF(A), DLF(A) or AF(A). They can move into channels, roam, hold the ball up etc

Well fair enough. In any case, these look fine to you then?

[llama3]

Thanks Llama. Would it be better to play a high block against teams with slow strikers and less creative and technical players and low block against better teams such as Chelsea and Man City

Seems like a sound plan.

Well fair enough. In any case, these look fine to you then?

If you wanted to have no strikers on attack duties you could always use a Shadow Striker and/or Inside Forwards on attack duty.

To the tactics above - 2 DLF's will play in a very similar fashion, and could get in each others way or struggle to bring something different to the team. Your central midfield pairing of 2 DLP's has a massive deficit of movement - especially as there are few breaking players in advanced positions for the DLP's to supply.

[aderow]

If you wanted to have no strikers on attack duties you could always use a Shadow Striker and/or Inside Forwards on attack duty.

To the tactics above - 2 DLF's will play in a very similar fashion, and could get in each others way or struggle to bring something different to the team. Your central midfield pairing of 2 DLP's has a massive deficit of movement - especially as there are few breaking players in advanced positions for the DLP's to supply.

The reason for the 2 DLFs goes back to my original concern; me not wanting my strikers to become isolated and wanting them to create chances, for each other and the wide players, as well as score goals. So in a way, I kind of do want them to play in a similar fashion.

I initially went with 2 DLPs because I had 2 players who were excelled in that role. It worked out, so I stuck with it. And tbh, I didn't want either of them getting too forward. I already had other players doing that (the wide players in the 442, the wide players and the attacking mid in the 4411, the wide players and the AP in the 451). I figured they'd suffice. That's also why I elected to go with a DLF in the 451 and 4411.

So after some thinking and reading and then re-reading, I've decided to make some changes and test some things out.

In the 442, I'll change the DLF(A) to a CF(A) and I'll change the DLP(S) to a CM(S).

In the 4411, I'll change the DLP(S) to a CM(S). Though, I think the AP(A) can get forward enough and can a decent amount of chances in front of goal especially with a DLF(S) in front of him, I'll try out an SS.

In the 451, I'll consider giving the AP(S) to an attack mentality.

[saware]

Taking a break from my career save so I decided to use the editor to see how Mata would fit in at Man Utd. Having read through several tactics threads I think I'm about there, I will play him off the right wing as a AP (S) and this helps to accommodate Rooney & Kagawa (he might not be fancied by Moyes but he's still pretty handy on the game). I will be playing Kagawa as a IF (A) from the left, but I'm unsure about Rooney. I want him to link up well with RVP & I want to to avoid all the above players taking up the same space. If I want RVP to play as a AF, is it best to play Rooney in the AMC position as a T? Would he work as a AMC (A)? I could obviously play them up front together but will that leave me open in the centre of midfield? I have a DLP (D) and a BWM (S) or BBM in there.

[llama3]

The reason for the 2 DLFs goes back to my original concern; me not wanting my strikers to become isolated and wanting them to create chances, for each other and the wide players, as well as score goals. So in a way, I kind of do want them to play in a similar fashion.

I initially went with 2 DLPs because I had 2 players who were excelled in that role. It worked out, so I stuck with it. And tbh, I didn't want either of them getting too forward. I already had other players doing that (the wide players in the 442, the wide players and the attacking mid in the 4411, the wide players and the AP in the 451). I figured they'd suffice. That's also why I elected to go with a DLF in the 451 and 4411.

So after some thinking and reading and then re-reading, I've decided to make some changes and test some things out.

In the 442, I'll change the DLF(A) to a CF(A) and I'll change the DLP(S) to a CM(S).

In the 4411, I'll change the DLP(S) to a CM(S). Though, I think the AP(A) can get forward enough and can a decent amount of chances in front of goal especially with a DLF(S) in front of him, I'll try out an SS.

In the 451, I'll consider giving the AP(S) to an attack mentality.

Sound like logical changes. Just experiment and see - your original ideas may be the best, but at least you will know.

Taking a break from my career save so I decided to use the editor to see how Mata would fit in at Man Utd. Having read through several tactics threads I think I'm about there, I will play him off the right wing as a AP (S) and this helps to accommodate Rooney & Kagawa (he might not be fancied by Moyes but he's still pretty handy on the game). I will be playing Kagawa as a IF (A) from the left, but I'm unsure about Rooney. I want him to link up well with RVP & I want to to avoid all the above players taking up the same space. If I want RVP to play as a AF, is it best to play Rooney in the AMC position as a T? Would he work as a AMC (A)? I could obviously play them up front together but will that leave me open in the centre of midfield? I have a DLP (D) and a BWM (S) or BBM in there.

Rooney as a Trequartista will neglect his hard working and bullish side to his game - an AM(A) role and duty will still allow it to flourish. Remember to get your full backs kicking on down each flank to account for playing with wide men coming inside, and either Rooney or RVP needs to be able to drag wide too in order to create space.

[aderow]

Thanks for the responses llama3. Best thing about FM is that keep learning new things all the time. I've done a lot of that as of late.

[saware]

Rooney as a Trequartista will neglect his hard working and bullish side to his game - an AM(A) role and duty will still allow it to flourish. Remember to get your full backs kicking on down each flank to account for playing with wide men coming inside, and either Rooney or RVP needs to be able to drag wide too in order to create space.

Thanks for the reply, will take the advice on board. Like I say, I can play both Rooney & RVP up front but would that leave my midfield too open?

[llama3]

Thanks for the responses llama3. Best thing about FM is that keep learning new things all the time. I've done a lot of that as of late.

Indeed, glad you have the enthusiasm bug

Thanks for the reply, will take the advice on board. Like I say, I can play both Rooney & RVP up front but would that leave my midfield too open?

Depends on how much tracking back your wide men do - but it is possible.

[Karnage94]

Hi everyone, I've been toying about with a Manchester United save but I've been having a horrible time of getting anything resembling good football. First season was a massive struggle and eventually I lost the title to Chelsea, knocked out of the semi's of the FA Cup by Chelsea and lost the CL final vs Real Madrid. It's been a few years since I've had any sort of trouble with United so I have to go back to the drawing board and look at my tactics. Defensively we are ok, nothing special but I wouldn't mind if we were good going forward. I've spent nearly every game making some minor change because I'm quite unhappy with what I see. I'm sure I've tried nearly every sort of combination of front 4 whilst still trying to retain some balance to the attack but there is an incredible lack of forward movement from the AM band.

This may be because 3 of my starting 4 have the PPM Comes Deep to get Ball? I'm not sure, but I'd like to think that when RVP drops deep that he has options running past him, but I don't really see this anywhere near as often as I'd like.

I think what I have here seems logical enough, Fellaini is set to Hold Position so that I retain some structure in the middle of the pitch. I think the back 4 and Keeper are self explanatory. I could set the left back to an Attack duty as well if that isn't overkill. The CM's I feel are grand as they are. I've used them as DM's too but I feel I lack a connection from the AM's to the DM's which I tried to change with Rooney as an AP - S but that would mean having to use RVP as an AF, but he still comes deep so we sorely lack runners in behind. RVP has been woeful for me throughout last season and has shown no sign of progress, but I feel that's more to do with the lack of good movement around him.

I'm a touch lost and need help at this point... Thanks

[llama3]

Hi everyone, I've been toying about with a Manchester United save but I've been having a horrible time of getting anything resembling good football. First season was a massive struggle and eventually I lost the title to Chelsea, knocked out of the semi's of the FA Cup by Chelsea and lost the CL final vs Real Madrid. It's been a few years since I've had any sort of trouble with United so I have to go back to the drawing board and look at my tactics. Defensively we are ok, nothing special but I wouldn't mind if we were good going forward. I've spent nearly every game making some minor change because I'm quite unhappy with what I see. I'm sure I've tried nearly every sort of combination of front 4 whilst still trying to retain some balance to the attack but there is an incredible lack of forward movement from the AM band.

This may be because 3 of my starting 4 have the PPM Comes Deep to get Ball? I'm not sure, but I'd like to think that when RVP drops deep that he has options running past him, but I don't really see this anywhere near as often as I'd like.

I think what I have here seems logical enough, Fellaini is set to Hold Position so that I retain some structure in the middle of the pitch. I think the back 4 and Keeper are self explanatory. I could set the left back to an Attack duty as well if that isn't overkill. The CM's I feel are grand as they are. I've used them as DM's too but I feel I lack a connection from the AM's to the DM's which I tried to change with Rooney as an AP - S but that would mean having to use RVP as an AF, but he still comes deep so we sorely lack runners in behind. RVP has been woeful for me throughout last season and has shown no sign of progress, but I feel that's more to do with the lack of good movement around him.

I'm a touch lost and need help at this point... Thanks

Ok mate, you don't seem too far away from where you need to be.

Left flank: with the AML playing as an IF(A) a WB(S) is a good match, will provide late overlaps in the move as I think you lack width on the left.

Right flank: a W(S) and WB(A) will cause overloads, but could get in each other's way. Perhaps a playmaker could come inside and help control play.

Central midfield: a Central Midfielder who holds position is basically a DLP - perhaps a DLP(S) & changing Carrick to a CM(D) to complement can help you control play and retain more discipline at the back to compensate for your advancing wing backs.

[James9]

Ok mate, you don't seem too far away from where you need to be.

Left flank: with the AML playing as an IF(A) a WB(S) is a good match, will provide late overlaps in the move as I think you lack width on the left.

Right flank: a W(S) and WB(A) will cause overloads, but could get in each other's way. Perhaps a playmaker could come inside and help control play.

Central midfield: a Central Midfielder who holds position is basically a DLP - perhaps a DLP(S) & changing Carrick to a CM(D) to complement can help you control play and retain more discipline at the back to compensate for your advancing wing backs.

sorry for jumping on this thread guys. llama would a Central Midfielder - Defend and DLP - Support be a good midfield combination or would i need someone to link midfield and attack better than a DLP support would. Playing with Arsenal my midfield combinations are Arteta or Flamini in Central Midfielder -Defend position and either Ramsey or Wilshere in DLP - Support. I am even thinking of playing Rosicky in the DLP Support position.

Llama do you think a Central Midfielder - Support would link better with the attack than a DLP Support. The only think that concerns me about playing one of Central Midfielders Support is what I gain in attack I might loose in defense because from what i understand the Central Midfielder -Support does not hold position as a good as a DLP - Support

Llama would really appreciate your tactical expertise with this.

[Karnage94]

Ok mate, you don't seem too far away from where you need to be.

Left flank: with the AML playing as an IF(A) a WB(S) is a good match, will provide late overlaps in the move as I think you lack width on the left.

Right flank: a W(S) and WB(A) will cause overloads, but could get in each other's way. Perhaps a playmaker could come inside and help control play.

Central midfield: a Central Midfielder who holds position is basically a DLP - perhaps a DLP(S) & changing Carrick to a CM(D) to complement can help you control play and retain more discipline at the back to compensate for your advancing wing backs.

Thanks llama3. The thing with Shaqiri on the right is that he has the PPM cuts inside, so he plays more like an Inside Forward anyway. I still can't grasp why RVP (and to a lesser extent Rooney) have been so poor for me. I'll implement the changes there and I'll report back with results.

[llama3]

sorry for jumping on this thread guys. llama would a Central Midfielder - Defend and DLP - Support be a good midfield combination or would i need someone to link midfield and attack better than a DLP support would. Playing with Arsenal my midfield combinations are Arteta or Flamini in Central Midfielder -Defend position and either Ramsey or Wilshere in DLP - Support. I am even thinking of playing Rosicky in the DLP Support position.

Llama do you think a Central Midfielder - Support would link better with the attack than a DLP Support. The only think that concerns me about playing one of Central Midfielders Support is what I gain in attack I might loose in defense because from what i understand the Central Midfielder -Support does not hold position as a good as a DLP - Support

Llama would really appreciate your tactical expertise with this.

The answer is in the OP - depends on how many central midfielders you have and if you are fulfilling all the responsibilities of central midfielders. In a 2-man central midfield CM(D) & DLP(S) is a fairly poor pairing. In a 3-man central midfield it depends how it is set up - with a DM behind them it is a woeful pairing, with an AM in front it is a superb choice - as long as it suits your style and players.

Thanks llama3. The thing with Shaqiri on the right is that he has the PPM cuts inside, so he plays more like an Inside Forward anyway. I still can't grasp why RVP (and to a lesser extent Rooney) have been so poor for me. I'll implement the changes there and I'll report back with results.

Perhaps you have Shaqiri, Rooney & Insigne trying to get too central and high, leaving them getting in each others way. Another reason for having a playmaker on 1 flank. Perhaps a team selection issue too, as well as a tactical issue. Perhaps a more traditional AP would be a better selection. A Mata/Kagawa type as opposed to Insigne & Shaqiri which are more wide forwards.

[Karnage94]

I can totally see the argument for that. I tried this out in a 3-0 away win at Everton which has been one of the first times I've been happy with an away performance (boosted however with a pair of free kicks).

I have Januzaj on the left as he is definitely a playmaker type, Kagawa will play here as well. Shaqiri and Rooney would be the main choices for the SS role, Rooney for his striking ability and Shaqiri for his direct nature, then Insigne, Shaqiri and Zaha on the right as the other direct option from the AM band. Does that look and sound about right to you? I the personnel I have at FB means I'm not tied to which side I play the attack duty on, and since both wingers are going to come inside in different ways, does it matter which way around I should have it? I'll have the CM-D cover on the side of the attacking full back to keep everything balanced

[llama3]

I would also point out your use of specialist roles (i personally adhere religiously to wwfan's guidelines on it, appreciate not everyone wants to, but i will point out that you either want universality or specialism, and the more specialist you are, the more rigid your mentality structure needs to be to accomodate it - this can have a drastic impact on your football). Sounds like your balance with the CM(D) on the same side as attacking FB is good - nothing wrong with swapping sides as long as the relevant combinations swap with it. Glad you are pleased with your football in the win at Everton, I do hope it continues.

[Karnage94]

I would also point out your use of specialist roles (i personally adhere religiously to wwfan's guidelines on it, appreciate not everyone wants to, but i will point out that you either want universality or specialism, and the more specialist you are, the more rigid your mentality structure needs to be to accomodate it - this can have a drastic impact on your football). Sounds like your balance with the CM(D) on the same side as attacking FB is good - nothing wrong with swapping sides as long as the relevant combinations swap with it. Glad you are pleased with your football in the win at Everton, I do hope it continues.

Yeah I forgot to re-tally my specialist roles. Looks like I'll be leaning towards Balanced/Rigid. 2 half specialist roles (CF and SS) with 2 playmaker roles. A Rigid philosophy is probably more in line with what I am looking for, more emphasis on players doing a certain job and playing a certain way. This isn't a save I'm taking hugely seriously so I'm willing to chop and change things.

[AusBlackCat]

Loved reading this and has helped me start to build a tactic. However I am struggling to take it to the next level and it seems to be very inconsistent - especially away from home.

The formation is a 4-2-3-1

I'm also playing balanced and standard, it was on control but I am changing it up to attempt to change my luck!

I'm using Sunderland with January transfer updates.

At home with control it is quite decent against the same calibre of teams as me, but if I'm playing against a team thats playing a lot deeper than I am I struggle to break them down and just have meaningless possession, and they usually end up capitalising on a mistake and beating me.

So my main struggles are breaking down teams that sit deep against me, bigger teams at home or away, and it definitely struggles away from home. I also seem to leak too many goals. Especially away from home.

Any help would be greatly appreciated, I don't need to be going grey at 26 years old from stress haha!

[llama3]

You aren't too far off, but there is a real lack of movement in the final third, and clearly only 1 man spearheading your line, maybe getting a wide forward or more of a threat from deep could help you.

[AusBlackCat]

You aren't too far off, but there is a real lack of movement in the final third, and clearly only 1 man spearheading your line, maybe getting a wide forward or more of a threat from deep could help you.

Hmm thats kind of nice to hear that I'm not too far away haha! So maybe changing the AP to a T? Or even change the DLP to an AP on Attack? How about defensively, won't that leave me even more open to counter attacks?

[bwidell]

Here's what I came up with so far. Pretty basic, but I want to get a nice 4-4-2 working, focusing on wide play.

Curious to get some thoughts on my CM pairing. Will the two playmakers be able to function together?

Haven't applied any Team Instructions yet, because I want to get the roles down first and see how it plays.

[AusBlackCat]

I've made a few changes but I leak way too many goals and I'm not sure how to change that without sacrificing on attack. I can't seem to find the right balance between defense and attack.

[Dr. Hook]

Curious to get some thoughts on my CM pairing. Will the two playmakers be able to function together?

Haven't applied any Team Instructions yet, because I want to get the roles down first and see how it plays.

I would say that the two playmakers are good as far as where they occupy the pitch, so you'll get some options at different strata. The problem I forsee, and you'll notice after watching a match or two, is that with two playmakers, you're apt to see a lot of play up the middle whereas the 4-4-2 is as much about wide play. You'll run into a fair few sides that use a DM, and as I've found, play through the middle gets stifled. It also seems to me that players look to the playmakers as a first pass option, and you *might* see the the two center mids trying to ping the ball back and forth to each other. Just a couple thoughts, but definitely worth trying out and seeing how it goes!

[yonko]

Yeah I forgot to re-tally my specialist roles. Looks like I'll be leaning towards Balanced/Rigid. 2 half specialist roles (CF and SS) with 2 playmaker roles. A Rigid philosophy is probably more in line with what I am looking for, more emphasis on players doing a certain job and playing a certain way. This isn't a save I'm taking hugely seriously so I'm willing to chop and change things.

Don't worry about the number of specialist roles in your tactic. If it works for you to use two playmakers, SS and CF, then no need to change (and if doesn't work, it may not be necessarily because of the roles). Plus, I personally do not think that CF and SS are specialists or even half of specialists.

[looking busy]

Thanks for the thread Llama3

After spending a couple of commuting days reading through the initial couple of posts and looking at the players I have available I've changed from a 4-1DM-4 (advanced wingers)-1 to a 5-3-2 with wing backs and an AM.

Seems to have given me much more options up front and the 3 CBs (two on stopper and 1 cover) provide the defensive solidity that I had before.

I'm now playing:

GKs

CBx -- CB s -- CBx

WBs ------------ WBs

------ DLPd -- BBMs

------- AMa--------

----F9 ---- AF

Pre-season was the best we've had and hopefully we can be challenging for the playoffs rather than looking at avoiding relegation.

[kerrdavidson95]

Gents, its about time for my seasonal "what is wrong with my tactic" question. Been very inconsistent, here's the setup.

Usually I play Vorm; Clyne, Lovren, Balanta, Shaw; Ward-Prowse, Nainggolan, Wanyama; Barkley, Honda; Rhodes/Jese.

[PequenoGenio]

Can you guys tell me if this will work?

Team:

GK:

FB's:

CD's:

DM:

CM:

ML:

AMR:

AMC:

ST:

Tips and improvements are welcome

[Uncle_Sam]

Probably wont work because it's Mexico.