Jump to content

Recommended Posts

image.thumb.png.e9c061ba2645de439b1d6d9409ae0dce.png

 

So we just made the playoff's. We did well with this tactic up until the last half of the season. I have tried a lot of different adjustments in the team instructions to no avail.

I have also tried to adjust some roles and duties.

I am looking for any advice but meanwhile I've had a few observations.

Most of the goals scored against me are from crosses. I tried having a higher LOE  and higher defensive line, but when I do that the opposing wingers abuse the space behind my defensive line on the break.

I have some nice chances created but a lot of shoots off target is there a way to adjust that?

My best inside forward in this instance Jeffrey Monakana the one on the best he dribbles past who ever guards him in this league for a good open shot. He's right on target but always into the keepers arms or off target. I don't believe he scored like that once in the entire season. So my question is there something I can improve to make his chances better or is he just not good enough at finishing.

Similarly my MC(A) Dominic Vose does not break through the way I hoped they would in terms of dribbling and shooting. Any Ideas?

My PF(S). I have tried as DLF(S), Poacher(A). I have also tried inverting the two AM's so IF(S) and W(A) it did not seem to change much.

 

Thanks!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Probably in line with the fact you have made the play offs - there is nothing majorly off with your setup. I think you're looking at a few tweaks more than anything drastic. Thoughts:

  • Not sure a Pressing Forward benefits you when your defence is sat deep - I'd definitely reconsider that role. A DLF(s), CF(s), F9(s) or TM(s) will make that role work better. He'll still also be able to create space and/or combinations for the MC(a) & IF(a) too. 
  • I'm a bit confused about how you're trying to create chances - playing out from the back means short distribution from the defensive line, but then you ask for direct passing - it's like you play short first, then once it hits your DLP(s) they play it long. I'd suggest looking at Direct Counter and Fluid Counter as templates for how you might want to play. Is it a case of you want rapid passing (direct) to break the lines or do you want quick combination play and ball-carrying (fluid)?
  • I can't answer for Vose or Monakana's finishing - attribute screenshots may help. 

Hope that helps

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Hav3n_The_Hero said:

image.thumb.png.e9c061ba2645de439b1d6d9409ae0dce.png

 

23 hours ago, Hav3n_The_Hero said:

Most of the goals scored against me are from crosses

Look at your right flank - you have an attacking FB and also an attacking CM in front of him, so who is providing the defensive cover (expect the DM, who probably cannot do the whole job). Tweaking the DL and or LOE is not going to help in cases like this one. 

On the other hand, the left flank looks a bit too conservative, i.e. without sufficient support in the final third. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, llama3 said:

 

  • Not sure a Pressing Forward benefits you when your defence is sat deep - I'd definitely reconsider that role. A DLF(s), CF(s), F9(s) or TM(s) will make that role work better. He'll still also be able to create space and/or combinations for the MC(a) & IF(a) too. 

So I changed my PF to a Target Man, that seemed to work really well. I won the first two playoff games pretty convincingly. I lost the final :(.

 

10 hours ago, llama3 said:

 

  • I'm a bit confused about how you're trying to create chances - playing out from the back means short distribution from the defensive line, but then you ask for direct passing - it's like you play short first, then once it hits your DLP(s) they play it long. I'd suggest looking at Direct Counter and Fluid Counter as templates for how you might want to play. Is it a case of you want rapid passing (direct) to break the lines or do you want quick combination play and ball-carrying (fluid)?

So it's interesting but I had a similar thought when I was wondering why the Target Man was working so well. I feel I should expect goals from the counter, but I feel my setup between my DLP, CM(A), W(S), for the most part would like build up on the play. I think may be something I experiment with next season. I will look at the Direct counter and Fluid counter templates.

 

3 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

 

Look at your right flank - you have an attacking FB and also an attacking CM in front of him, so who is providing the defensive cover (expect the DM, who probably cannot do the whole job). Tweaking the DL and or LOE is not going to help in cases like this one. 

On the other hand, the left flank looks a bit too conservative, i.e. without sufficient support in the final third. 

You know you're pointing out something that is making me feel stupid. I have noticed the majority of mistakes on my team always comes from my DR. I think it may be because he's always trying catch up to the left winger because he was beat on that side on the break. would have switching to support be enough?

How should i remedy the left side? Switch him to attack. There are far fewer attacks on the left side.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Hav3n_The_Hero said:

I have noticed the majority of mistakes on my team always comes from my DR. I think it may be because he's always trying catch up to the left winger because he was beat on that side on the break. would have switching to support be enough?

If you are asking about your right back, then yes - switch his duty from attack to support and that should be okay. When I use such combo - FBsu, CMat and Wsu - it generally works well for me, both in defense and attack (speaking of course about the 4141dm wide formation). Depending on how good as a player your RB is, you may even consider an IWB on support, but that's a more demanding role and requires a different set of attributes. And given that you are in a lower league, I guess the IWB would not be a good idea in this particular case though. 

 

6 hours ago, Hav3n_The_Hero said:

How should i remedy the left side? Switch him to attack

No. I would rather go with a WB on support (instead of FB on support). With a DLP and attacking IF in front of him, WBsu would make most sense in terms of overall tactical balance. Of course, pay attention to the player playing the role to see if he can perform it properly. 

As for the rest of your tactic, your instructions suggest you are basically trying to play a counter-attacking style of football (although a couple of TIs are still confusing me a bit). If so, then probably some more tweaking would be needed.

Link to post
Share on other sites
vor 3 Stunden schrieb Experienced Defender:

If you are asking about your right back, then yes - switch his duty from attack to support and that should be okay. When I use such combo - FBsu, CMat and Wsu - it generally works well for me, both in defense and attack (speaking of course about the 4141dm wide formation). Depending on how good as a player your RB is, you may even consider an IWB on support, but that's a more demanding role and requires a different set of attributes. And given that you are in a lower league, I guess the IWB would not be a good idea in this particular case though. 

 

No. I would rather go with a WB on support (instead of FB on support). With a DLP and attacking IF in front of him, WBsu would make most sense in terms of overall tactical balance. Of course, pay attention to the player playing the role to see if he can perform it properly. 

As for the rest of your tactic, your instructions suggest you are basically trying to play a counter-attacking style of football (although a couple of TIs are still confusing me a bit). If so, then probably some more tweaking would be needed.

Could you explain the differences between a FB on attack and a WB on support? I understand that a WB offers better support going forward whereas a FB starts from a deeper position. My theory always was that a FB on attack duty bombs forward as soon as he sees the chance, although he starts from a very deep position. Basically he needs to be able to run up and down the flank all game. In comparison I always thought a WB on support duty starts a bit higher in his basic position but doesn't bomb forward as far and as often (due to being on support duty and not attack duty).

Obviously my logic is flawed. Could you explain what the difference is between those positions?

Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, burnum said:

Could you explain the differences between a FB on attack and a WB on support?

WB is a (bit) more attack-minded role than FB and also a bit more aggressive when defending. So even though in this case FB is played on attack duty and WB on support, it's quite possible that the FB on attack will behave more responsibly in defense than the WB on support. Simply because the nature of the role makes him slightly more cautious when he gets forward to support the attack.

Which one is better to use (if any) depends entirely on the overall context of your tactic. 

I'll give you some practical examples of  setups employing both:

PFat

Wat                                  IWsu

APsu    CAR

HB

WBsu    CDde   CDde    FBat

Or:

DLFsu

IFat                                IWsu

APsu   CAR

HB

WBsu   CDde   CDde   FBat

Or:

PFat

Wat                                   IWsu

BBM    DLPsu

HB

WBsu    CDde   CDde    FBat

Or:

PFat

Wsu                                 IWsu

CMat    DLPsu

HB

WBsu    CDde   CDde    FBat

Of course, the amount of defensive risk varies from setup to setup, so it's very important that you make sure your players are capable enough to play each one properly.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...