[FM21] - Possession-based 4-3-3DM with a Regista

[Murcon17]

To change things up for FM21 and also in preparation for my Palermo save after the beta, I wanted to try and challenge myself by trying to implement a twist to my usual possession-based 4-3-3 where instead of using my usual holding midfielder on defend (either DM-D or DLP-D), to this time try and use a true playmaker out of the DM-strata, so what better fit than the Regista. My aim here was to create a tactic whose focal point is an Andrea Pirlo-esque player directing the team starting from deeper in the formation. For my testing I decided to use Hertha in the Bundesliga as I felt that they have a decent enough base of players, where I can hopefully see whether the tactic is working based on its principles, without running the risk of just winning due to having the best players, if I'd choose Bayern or Dortmund for example.

Currently I'm employing this tactic and I'm just going to briefly explain what I'm trying to achieve with each of the roles. I realized pretty quickly, that if I was going to utilize a Regista I needed one of the CMs on a defend duty so he would stay back or there'd be a huge gaping hole, when we pushed up all the way into the penalty box, between the last midfielder and the two centerbacks. As offensively I'm having the LB aggressively overlap and go down the left wing, I then use the LCM as a CM-D to stabilize both the gap left by the marauding LB as well as covering for the roaming and pushing of the Regista. On the other side I'm emplyong a WB-Su for the RB to shorten the gap on the right side to the midfield due to the more aggresive nature of the RW. And for the striker I'm currently using an AF-A, which brings me to my first point of dicussion. As I'm trying to encourage a short-passing game focused around keeping the ball, defensively I've moved up the line one tick to compact the space between the backline and frontline. The only PIs I'm using are higher pressing on the front 3 to institute a split-block in the pressing.

 

The Piatek Problem

When I first created the tactic, I chose my usual striker role for a 4-3-3 which was a DLP-A, to help promote link-up play in the space between the CMs and the striker. I used the DLP-A for 8 games with Piatek and while he did drop down and help link-up play, his output was well non-existent. 0 goals and 0 assists in 8 games and an average rating of 6.5 and a complete lack of any kind of forward runs/passes behind either a deep line or into the box, made me reconsider my choice of striker role. What was completely lacking from what I saw in games, was the striker being played in for either fast counter-attacks when the situation was opportune or also being able to get at the end of crosses or through balls into the box, so I decided to try an AF-A and well it worked way better than I expected with Piatek scoring 5 goals in 2 games, one being a penalty, since the switch. Now while I expect that production to mellow down, what I really like now with the AF-A role is that Piatek started making more runs and receiving passes behind the centerbacks, when we recover the ball deep and there is space to exploit, he scored twice on assists over the centerbacks from the Regista, pretty much exactly what I would envision with a deep orchestrator and he's also been more involved in getting on the end of through balls and crosses into the penalty area from both the flanks as well as the center. Which now leaves me questioning whether the lack of forward runs I saw was a striker role problem, meaning the DLF, or was it more a Piatek problem in terms of his PPMs and attributes?

So I wanted to ask, what is the opinion on using an AF in a possession-based system, especially a 4-3-3 that plays with inverting wingers? I so far assumed that some kind of link-up striker was absolutely necessary to make it work, be it DLF,CF,TM, but I'm now questioning whether thats truly necessary.

The two Registas

So far I've been using either Guendouzi or Löwen as my Registas, as I feel like, while they certainly aren't particularly transcendent in their ability, they're the best suited players in the Berlin squad in terms of their attributes for the role. In terms of their performance, I'd say they've been performing good to great in the games we've won, but they really struggled in the games we lost often with a rating around 6.3 or lower. Guendouzi's pass completion is 91% and Löwen at 87%.

And then I also wanted to ask just for general feedback on my tactic or any experience regarding trying to make a Regista work in a 4-3-3 system. My "requirements" I suppose are, that I want to try and make it work in a 4-3-3 with inverting wingers while playing a possession game. My results so far in the league have been 5W and 5L, all losses were against teams currently higher than us in the table, with an overall 46% possession(13th in the league). So not doing too great there, however we are 8th in total passes completed with 89% pass completion. So I'd say overall we're doing okay in terms of trying to play through possession football, as I think the possession% in-game is still based on the time spent on the ball, rather than the number of passes completed, like it's used for real-life stats.

So to summarize, what is the opinion on using an AF in a system trying to mainly play through possession? Did the DLF-A not work for me, due to the player or also because we are in general still struggling to dominate possession consistently? And then just general feedback regarding the roles I chose to try and achieve my possession 4-3-3 based around a Regista, especially as the results in terms of keeping position were so-so so far. I'm going to continue testing this current iteration of the strategy (up top), two games doesn't really tell me all that much yet, but I'm also curious to know what you guys think, as I haven't really tried to make a tactic work around a more exotic role like a Regista before and maybe I'm overlooking a problem somewhere.

Edited November 16, 2020 by Murcon17

[Experienced Defender]

17 hours ago, Murcon17 said:

So to summarize, what is the opinion on using an AF in a system trying to mainly play through possession? Did the DLF-A not work for me, due to the player or also because we are in general still struggling to dominate possession consistently?

Who said that the striker has to be on attack duty, to begin with?

I personally would set up your roles and duties slightly differently, but let's leave that for further discussion. 

[Fantasista10]

19 hours ago, Murcon17 said:

To change things up for FM21 and also in preparation for my Palermo save after the beta, I wanted to try and challenge myself by trying to implement a twist to my usual possession-based 4-3-3 where instead of using my usual holding midfielder on defend (either DM-D or DLP-D), to this time try and use a true playmaker out of the DM-strata, so what better fit than the Regista. My aim here was to create a tactic whose focal point is an Andrea Pirlo-esque player directing the team starting from deeper in the formation. For my testing I decided to use Hertha in the Bundesliga as I felt that they have a decent enough base of players, where I can hopefully see whether the tactic is working based on its principles, without running the risk of just winning due to having the best players, if I'd choose Bayern or Dortmund for example.

Currently I'm employing this tactic and I'm just going to briefly explain what I'm trying to achieve with each of the roles. I realized pretty quickly, that if I was going to utilize a Regista I needed one of the CMs on a defend duty so he would stay back or there'd be a huge gaping hole, when we pushed up all the way into the penalty box, between the last midfielder and the two centerbacks. As offensively I'm having the LB aggressively overlap and go down the left wing, I then use the LCM as a CM-D to stabilize both the gap left by the marauding LB as well as covering for the roaming and pushing of the Regista. On the other side I'm emplyong a WB-Su for the RB to shorten the gap on the right side to the midfield due to the more aggresive nature of the RW. And for the striker I'm currently using an AF-A, which brings me to my first point of dicussion. As I'm trying to encourage a short-passing game focused around keeping the ball, defensively I've moved up the line one tick to compact the space between the backline and frontline. The only PIs I'm using are higher pressing on the front 3 to institute a split-block in the pressing.

 

The Piatek Problem

When I first created the tactic, I chose my usual striker role for a 4-3-3 which was a DLP-A, to help promote link-up play in the space between the CMs and the striker. I used the DLP-A for 8 games with Piatek and while he did drop down and help link-up play, his output was well non-existent. 0 goals and 0 assists in 8 games and an average rating of 6.5 and a complete lack of any kind of forward runs/passes behind either a deep line or into the box, made me reconsider my choice of striker role. What was completely lacking from what I saw in games, was the striker being played in for either fast counter-attacks when the situation was opportune or also being able to get at the end of crosses or through balls into the box, so I decided to try an AF-A and well it worked way better than I expected with Piatek scoring 5 goals in 2 games, one being a penalty, since the switch. Now while I expect that production to mellow down, what I really like now with the AF-A role is that Piatek started making more runs and receiving passes behind the centerbacks, when we recover the ball deep and there is space to exploit, he scored twice on assists over the centerbacks from the Regista, pretty much exactly what I would envision with a deep orchestrator and he's also been more involved in getting on the end of through balls and crosses into the penalty area from both the flanks as well as the center. Which now leaves me questioning whether the lack of forward runs I saw was a striker role problem, meaning the DLF, or was it more a Piatek problem in terms of his PPMs and attributes?

So I wanted to ask, what is the opinion on using an AF in a possession-based system, especially a 4-3-3 that plays with inverting wingers? I so far assumed that some kind of link-up striker was absolutely necessary to make it work, be it DLF,CF,TM, but I'm now questioning whether thats truly necessary.

The two Registas

So far I've been using either Guendouzi or Löwen as my Registas, as I feel like, while they certainly aren't particularly transcendent in their ability, they're the best suited players in the Berlin squad in terms of their attributes for the role. In terms of their performance, I'd say they've been performing good to great in the games we've won, but they really struggled in the games we lost often with a rating around 6.3 or lower. Guendouzi's pass completion is 91% and Löwen at 87%.

And then I also wanted to ask just for general feedback on my tactic or any experience regarding trying to make a Regista work in a 4-3-3 system. My "requirements" I suppose are, that I want to try and make it work in a 4-3-3 with inverting wingers while playing a possession game. My results so far in the league have been 5W and 5L, all losses were against teams currently higher than us in the table, with an overall 46% possession(13th in the league). So not doing too great there, however we are 8th in total passes completed with 89% pass completion. So I'd say overall we're doing okay in terms of trying to play through possession football, as I think the possession% in-game is still based on the time spent on the ball, rather than the number of passes completed, like it's used for real-life stats.

So to summarize, what is the opinion on using an AF in a system trying to mainly play through possession? Did the DLF-A not work for me, due to the player or also because we are in general still struggling to dominate possession consistently? And then just general feedback regarding the roles I chose to try and achieve my possession 4-3-3 based around a Regista, especially as the results in terms of keeping position were so-so so far. I'm going to continue testing this current iteration of the strategy (up top), two games doesn't really tell me all that much yet, but I'm also curious to know what you guys think, as I haven't really tried to make a tactic work around a more exotic role like a Regista before and maybe I'm overlooking a problem somewhere.

Personally I’m a big fan of the Regista role and you’re right with putting a defensive duty in the midfield to compliment his forward thinking game. 
 

In terms of how you’ve set it up, it looks decent! My only suggestion would be that a Regista thrives with runners in front of him so maybe tinker some roles to suit that. I’d potentially switch the CAR to a BBM and maybe change one of the IWs to a W or IF for more direct runs in behind. 
 

Regarding the AF, I’ve had success in the past using them in possession systems regarding you give them the right support. In FM20 I was using a PF(A) as I felt support duty strikers didn’t offer enough movement. Now in FM21 in the new ME I’m having great success (although early days) with a F9 but you need the right player and teammates making runs off him. 
 

PS. I’m also thinking of a Palermo save for the full release. Could be fun  

[sporadicsmiles]

For me the biggest problem you have is in entirely lacking any central penetration. You midfielders and striker are just always going to be so far away from each other that almost all of your play is going to be long balls toward the striker or more likely down the flanks. None of this will suit the regista. Worse, your roles in midfield are encouraging teams to defend in the area with the regista, which will result in him lacking both space and time.

Playing with an AF in this formation is trying to create space between midfield and defence. It will keep the CDs deeper to deal with the AF, who is not going to drift deep. However he is always outnumbered, so that it is a problem, and he entirely lacks support so he will have to do things by himself. 

What you really want to be doing here is giving the opposition midfield and defenders some questions to answer. Having the striker drop off the defensive line towards the AMC area, and having a midfielder joining to the same area will create choices for opposition players to make. Who picks up whom? Do CDs drop with the striker? Does a midfielder pick him up? If the midfielder picks him up who deals with the attacking CM? If the CD picks him up who deals with the wingers cutting inside? This is advantageous because opposition players making the wrong choice will create space, and you can exploit that space. And even better, if you make the midfield have to do things closer to their defence, they are further away from the regista, and so he can have more influence on the game. 

[ryandormer]

4 hours ago, sporadicsmiles said:

For me the biggest problem you have is in entirely lacking any central penetration. You midfielders and striker are just always going to be so far away from each other that almost all of your play is going to be long balls toward the striker or more likely down the flanks. None of this will suit the regista. Worse, your roles in midfield are encouraging teams to defend in the area with the regista, which will result in him lacking both space and time.

Playing with an AF in this formation is trying to create space between midfield and defence. It will keep the CDs deeper to deal with the AF, who is not going to drift deep. However he is always outnumbered, so that it is a problem, and he entirely lacks support so he will have to do things by himself. 

What you really want to be doing here is giving the opposition midfield and defenders some questions to answer. Having the striker drop off the defensive line towards the AMC area, and having a midfielder joining to the same area will create choices for opposition players to make. Who picks up whom? Do CDs drop with the striker? Does a midfielder pick him up? If the midfielder picks him up who deals with the attacking CM? If the CD picks him up who deals with the wingers cutting inside? This is advantageous because opposition players making the wrong choice will create space, and you can exploit that space. And even better, if you make the midfield have to do things closer to their defence, they are further away from the regista, and so he can have more influence on the game. 

Agree with this advice.

I'm playing with Arsenal at the moment, and after a very lucky second place finish in season one, I have switched to a very fluid possession tactic for season two, and it has been unbelievable. Smashed Barcelona in the Champions League 3-0 at home, 4-1 away, as well as beating Man Utd and Man City away.

The critical thing for my tactic has been filling the gap left between striker and central midfield, and I do that with either a F9 or CF(s) and a CM(a). Opposing defenders get dragged all over the place. As @sporadicsmiles said, defenders then have difficult choices to make. Do they follow the striker who has dropped deep, or hold the line? Do they push up to close down the CM(a) who is making a forward run into the box? Etc.

With your set up, you'll probably find that one of the opposing centre backs is always able to mark Piatek fairly comfortably.

Also, you have a positive mentality, and so even with 'shorter passing,' the tempo is likely to be slightly higher, and so the team will probably try more forward passes than sideways or backwards. This will probably give your full backs less time to get forward and overlap. As such, opposing full backs can probably mark your wide players fairly comfortably.

Given that both central midfielders have fairly conservative roles, the regista probably has very few passing options available. The full backs won't have had time to get forward, the central midfielders have no intention of moving forward, and all three attackers are marked out of the game.

Since the regista is an aggressive playmaking role, with roaming by default, you'll probably want one of the central midfielders to be quite conservative, but the other should get forward and support the attack. I think something like this:

CM(d)          CM(a)

Reg(s)

This way, you can still have an aggressive left-sided full back, with a slightly less aggressive right-sided full back to account for the CM(a) on that side. The CM(a) should get forward to support the attack, leaving space for the regista to roam into. If you use a supporting striker, the regista should have tons of options to pass to.

You should see 'overlaps' everywhere, which should help with possession football:

Left WB(a) overlaps CM(d);

Left WB(a) also overlaps left IW(s);

Reg(s) 'overlaps' CM(d); and

CM(a) 'overlaps' the supporting striker.

The right WB(s), if you stick with that role, will also overlap sometimes, but not as often as the left one.

Possibly consider dropping the tempo slightly, too, to give the full backs time to get forward.

I wasn't expecting this to be such a long post, but I hope it helps!

Edited November 18, 2020 by ryandormer

[DudeRat]

1 hour ago, ryandormer said:

Agree with this advice.

I'm playing with Arsenal at the moment, and after a very lucky second place finish in season one, I have switched to a very fluid possession tactic for season two, and it has been unbelievable. Smashed Barcelona in the Champions League 3-0 at home, 4-1 away, as well as beating Man Utd and Man City away.

The critical thing for my tactic has been filling the gap left between striker and central midfield, and I do that with either a F9 or CF(s) and a CM(a). Opposing defenders get dragged all over the place. As @sporadicsmiles said, defenders then have difficult choices to make. Do they follow the striker who has dropped deep, or hold the line? Do they push up to close down the CM(a) who is making a forward run into the box? Etc.

With your set up, you'll probably find that one of the opposing centre backs is always able to mark Piatek fairly comfortably.

Also, you have a positive mentality, and so even with 'shorter passing,' the tempo is likely to be slightly higher, and so the team will probably try more forward passes than sideways or backwards. This will probably give your full backs less time to get forward and overlap. As such, opposing full backs can probably mark your wide players fairly comfortably.

Given that both central midfielders have fairly conservative roles, the regista probably has very few passing options available. The full backs won't have had time to get forward, the central midfielders have no intention of moving forward, and all three attackers are marked out of the game.

Since the regista is an aggressive playmaking role, with roaming by default, you'll probably want one of the central midfielders to be quite conservative, but the other should get forward and support the attack. I think something like this:

CM(d)          CM(a)

Reg(s)

This way, you can still have an aggressive left-sided full back, with a slightly less aggressive right-sided full back to account for the CM(a) on that side. The CM(a) should get forward to support the attack, leaving space for the regista to roam into. If you use a supporting striker, the regista should have tons of options to pass to.

You should see 'overlaps' everywhere, which should help with possession football:

Left WB(a) overlaps CM(d);

Left WB(a) also overlaps left IW(s);

Reg(s) 'overlaps' CM(d); and

CM(a) 'overlaps' the supporting striker.

The right WB(s), if you stick with that role, will also overlap sometimes, but not as often as the left one.

Possibly consider dropping the tempo slightly, too, to give the full backs time to get forward.

I wasn't expecting this to be such a long post, but I hope it helps!

Great advice @ryandormer, i've also had (some) success using similar roles and movement is key. Not had a great deal of time on FM21 yet but I suspect it is similar to FM20 in that the ME really penalises possession based tactics. It's common to see 60% + possession, 30 shots to you 2 against and draw 1-1... or lose!

I tend to use an IF one side and Winger the other. Behind the winger I tend to use an IWB and on that side I play the more attacking central midfielder, the IWB then covers some of his marauding play. The one question I would like to ask you @ryandormer is how have you managed to create a very fluid system with your roles as the majority of them need to be support?  It might be 7 or 8 in a balanced mentality.

I've always looked to play a very fluid system, but you are somewhat shoehorned into choosing certain duties to keep the fluidity. I often use 'Be more Expressive' as I just believe creative players should be given license to use flair to add an extra dimension to the movement and passing. However, in FM20 thid did not always translate into much during matches, except players deciding not to defend as well!!

[ryandormer]

1 hour ago, DudeRat said:

Great advice @ryandormer, i've also had (some) success using similar roles and movement is key. Not had a great deal of time on FM21 yet but I suspect it is similar to FM20 in that the ME really penalises possession based tactics. It's common to see 60% + possession, 30 shots to you 2 against and draw 1-1... or lose!

I tend to use an IF one side and Winger the other. Behind the winger I tend to use an IWB and on that side I play the more attacking central midfielder, the IWB then covers some of his marauding play. The one question I would like to ask you @ryandormer is how have you managed to create a very fluid system with your roles as the majority of them need to be support?  It might be 7 or 8 in a balanced mentality.

I've always looked to play a very fluid system, but you are somewhat shoehorned into choosing certain duties to keep the fluidity. I often use 'Be more Expressive' as I just believe creative players should be given license to use flair to add an extra dimension to the movement and passing. However, in FM20 thid did not always translate into much during matches, except players deciding not to defend as well!!

I had the same hesitation--I always wanted to use 'very fluid' in FM20, but it only ever worked when my team was already head and shoulders above every other team, so it didn't really feel like an achievement! I think the engine in FM21 makes 'very fluid' quite viable again. Some of the movement that is possible in the final third on this engine is superb, I really enjoy this game. Credit to SI for being able to get it out.

Essentially, I took the 'tiki taka' pre-set, and removed any instructions that I thought were unnecessary/unhelpful. The instructions I normally add during game, if required, are 'overlap right' and 'focus play down the right.' Sometimes I increase the width if I struggle to break teams down. I haven't felt the need to use 'be more expressive' yet. I packed the team with support duties, only using one attack duty in midfield to bridge the gap between CM and CF. So the tactic looks like this:

Sometimes I change the CF(s) to F9.

Table currently looks like this:

These were the stats for my home win against Barcelona:

To relate it back to @Murcon17's original post, I wouldn't use a regista in my system because I want both central midfielders in front of the DM to get forward (albeit to different extents). If I did use a regista, as @Murcon17 wants to, I would probably amend the roles to:

In FM20, it was really difficult to get the front three to offer enough penetration if they were all on support (unless you did something like @Rashidi did with liquid), but I've not had that problem so far with the FM21 engine.

Edited November 18, 2020 by ryandormer

[DudeRat]

19 minutes ago, ryandormer said:

I had the same hesitation--I always wanted to use 'very fluid' in FM20, but it only ever worked when my team was already head and shoulders above every other team, so it didn't really feel like an achievement! I think the engine in FM21 makes 'very fluid' quite viable again. Some of the movement that is possible in the final third on this engine is superb, I really enjoy this game. Credit to for being able to get it out.

Essentially, I took the 'tiki taka' pre-set, and removed any instructions that I thought were unnecessary/unhelpful. The instructions I normally add during game, if required, are 'overlap right' and 'focus play down the right.' Sometimes I increase the width if I struggle to break teams down. I haven't felt the need to use 'be more expressive' yet. I packed the team with support duties, only using one attack duty in midfield to bridge the gap between CM and CF. So the tactic looks like this:

Sometimes I change the CF(s) to F9.

Table currently looks like this:

These were the stats for my home win against Barcelona:

To relate it back to @Murcon17's original post, I wouldn't use a regista in my system because I want both central midfielders in front of the DM to get forward (albeit to different extents). If I did use a regista, as @Murcon17 wants to, I would probably amend the roles to:

In FM20, it was really difficult to get the front three to offer enough penetration if they were all on support (unless you did something like @Rashidi did with liquid), but I've not had that problem so far with the FM21 engine.

Thanks @ryandormer much appreciated. Like I said, not much time on FM21 yet so looking forward to the possibility of some attacking possession football!!

Regarding the Regista, I've always been a fan and have used them successfully in the past, but has always required very intelligent players in front of him, deciding when to stick and when to twist, but also the ability to anticipate situations. This meant it limited the ability to use it in lesser teams.  A DLP with the right instructions can be just as effective with progressive football and killer passes while remaining better positioned for counter attacks.  I've also found that this often means he gets more of the ball, as he is usually less advanced and the ball over the top, if not picked up by him, is often passed straight back to him by defenders.  Hes definitely not as spectacular as the Regista but I think Pirlo (certainly in the latter years) played more like a DLP, possibly even a DLP(d)! While he was without doubt the craetive force, he never strayed far from the defensive midfield strata and also remained central as much as possible. This allowed him the passing options but also meany he didn't get boxed in as easily. He was always on hand to collect the ball from the defence.

 

@Murcon17 I will definitely been keen to see if you get the Regista working effectively, good luck!

[Murcon17]

As I've changed quite a bit on my current tactic and to give an update of sorts. A lot of what you guys suspected and I also was wary of, happened quite quickly with the Advanced Forward. When there wasn't the space or opportunity to play him in with long balls over the top or through balls, there was a complete inability of the team to even attempt to build-up play through the middle of the park. And especially against stronger opposition sides what usually happened was the ball going out wide to the wingers, who then attempted suicidal dribbles across the whole pitch with varying success rates, but it looked and also played atrocious. And for some reason the defensive workrate also completely went nowhere, it honestly felt like the players just didn't want to do anything that could be considered having to work, they were mostly just escorting the opponent all the way into our penalty area without pressuring them. Results wise it was still kinda fine, with still some wins, but those didn't feel earned and they weren't. I think most games the team had 5-6 shots and an xG of 0.2-0.3. While trying to fixing the tactic, I also got pretty fed up with the Hertha players and decided to try again with a different club (I really wonder how many real life managers wish they could do that sometimes, just reload and take a different team) and as I also read something about the Bundesliga having ridicilously high pass completion rates, which I also saw in my own save, no club was below 85%. I swapped over to Nantes and rebuild the tactic.

This is the current look of the tactic, where I tried to adress most problems and concerns I found. Both the IF(S) and the IW(A) I felt were way too dribble heavy, always preferring to try to dribble across the whole field and shooting instead of being more involved in trying to build up an attack, which is why I've now gone with an IW(S) and a W(S) on the opposite side, to have some stretch a bit wider on one side as being too narrow on both flanks also felt like an issue. I still do use an opposite footed player on the right side at times, as that can create a sort of wider IW that doesn't only cut inside, and was also what I used before the IW was implemented, as I never really liked the one-track goal scoring focus of the IF.

To furthermore rein in the aggressive cutting and dribbling inside of the IW, I've gone with an underlap on the left side to lower both his mentality and then raise the corresponding mentality of the now WB(S) so that he still attacks down the left on the regular, but without the dribble more of WB(A) (The dribbling was really driving me mad and I'm not sure if it's just a tactic issue, but also too eager dribbling through the ME, but anyhow tactically I can at least attempt to tone it down). The reason I went for underlap instead of overlap is, that as far as I understand the underlap instruction from guides by @Rashidi and others is that underlapping leads to the players looking for and playing predominantly low passes inside the box, without completely taking away the outside pass, which is exactly what I want as I don't want to rely predominantly on crosses. As on the right side the winger will now be providing the width, I've gone with a simple FB(S), so that he still goes forward at times, but mainly stays deeper to provide some defensive cover behind the winger. I'd also really like to go with the same underlap instruction here, to achieve similar passing behaviour than on the left flank, but it would bump the FB mentality also to attacking and then he becomes too much of an aggressive overlapper, rather than this more supportive function on positive. The reason for both CBs now being CDs is that Nantes doesn't really have a CB that I trust to fulfil the role of a BPD otherwise I'd be using one BPD+CD.

To try and improve the build-up play through the middle, I've opted to go with a CM(A), as on the old midfield none of the three players got up the pitch fast enough or seemed to want to, which only increased the amount of dribbling from the wingers (I have nightmares from those dribbles now). The CM(A) now nicely gets early and fast up the pitch providing an advanced sort of passing option and pivot, similiarly to how having an AM would work, just starting from deeper. And as I was also lacking forward pushes from the central midfield up the pitch, the CM(A) has been instructed to dribble more, I'll be going through all the PIs later. The Regista and CM(D) stayed the same as their partnership works as expected. And to round off the lack of buildup through the middle I now went to a CF(S), so that the striker especially early in the build-up drops into the AM strata and is available for passes and moves defenders around.

 

Team instruction wise I've added the aforementioned Underlap left as well as a slower tempo, to try and increase the patience of the forwards coupled with them now being all on support duties, to easier facilitate the fullbacks and midfielders getting up the pitch, before the forwards decide again that dribbling will save them.

In transition I added slowing the pace down to also help with building properly and controlled from the back, to achieve the playstyle I want; if I could get them to play like Spain did against Germany yesterday, I'd be ecstatic, because Spain's build-up from the back was beautiful. And while I'm generally a fan of letting the keeper decide where to distribute the ball, he was hoofing it up field to often for my liking, hence the instruction to distribute it to the backline.

And defensively is still the same with the higher line to congest the space and move the whole formation closer together and with the offside trap to help the defenders in maintaining the high line.

PI wise the front three are still instructed to close down more, but to help with that press when the opponent moves forward into our half the two CMs are also now instructed to close down more, which seemed to really help the lack of pressure on the ball in our own half. The CM(A) also has the aforementioned dribble more and the CM(D) has been instructed to also stay wider in possession, which both opens up the space centrally when the Regista pushes level and beyond him and also covers the vacated space on the left flank left by the LB a bit better. And due to the LB providing the width and the CM(D) staying behind to fill the gap in the left AM strata, the IW(S) has also been told to sit narrower when in possession to be available as an option.

 

Still early days with this current iteration, but it's looking more promising so far. Been generally in the lead in terms of possession as well as completed passes and while in some games the tactic struggles to create a lot of shots, it's mostly been hovering around 7-8 shots per game, most of those have been high quality with an xG/shot ratio of 0.15-0.2. And in a more game sense I've also been wondering where exactly the Regista ends and the DLP starts, as while the distinction in the game is pretty clear cut, it obviously isn't with how players like Pirlo or more recent Jorginho under Sarri played. I certainly will experiment at least with trying the DLP against bigger sides as the Regista due to his aggressiveness, will always leave the formation more vulnerable to the counter than a DLP would, but it would feel kind of wrong to not use the Regista role, when it is in the game.

Improvement wise I'd defintely like to see more passes attempted into the box from wider areas as well as centrally, which could be achieved with work ball into the box or maybe focus play through the middle, but I'm kinda wary of either, as I feel like direction play to the middle could make it too narrow again, and working the ball into the box in conjunction with short passing and lower tempo may end up being overkill. Do any of you have experience or attempted something in that direction?

Edited November 18, 2020 by Murcon17

[ryandormer]

1 hour ago, Murcon17 said:

As I've changed quite a bit on my current tactic and to give an update of sorts. A lot of what you guys suspected and I also was wary of, happened quite quickly with the Advanced Forward. When there wasn't the space or opportunity to play him in with long balls over the top or through balls, there was a complete inability of the team to even attempt to build-up play through the middle of the park. And especially against stronger opposition sides what usually happened was the ball going out wide to the wingers, who then attempted suicidal dribbles across the whole pitch with varying success rates, but it looked and also played atrocious. And for some reason the defensive workrate also completely went nowhere, it honestly felt like the players just didn't want to do anything that could be considered having to work, they were mostly just escorting the opponent all the way into our penalty area without pressuring them. Results wise it was still kinda fine, with still some wins, but those didn't feel earned and they weren't. I think most games the team had 5-6 shots and an xG of 0.2-0.3. While trying to fixing the tactic, I also got pretty fed up with the Hertha players and decided to try again with a different club (I really wonder how many real life managers wish they could do that sometimes, just reload and take a different team) and as I also read something about the Bundesliga having ridicilously high pass completion rates, which I also saw in my own save, no club was below 85%. I swapped over to Nantes and rebuild the tactic.

This is the current look of the tactic, where I tried to adress most problems and concerns I found. Both the IF(S) and the IW(A) I felt were way too dribble heavy, always preferring to try to dribble across the whole field and shooting instead of being more involved in trying to build up an attack, which is why I've now gone with an IW(S) and a W(S) on the opposite side, to have some stretch a bit wider on one side as being too narrow on both flanks also felt like an issue. I still do use an opposite footed player on the right side at times, as that can create a sort of wider IW that doesn't only cut inside, and was also what I used before the IW was implemented, as I never really liked the one-track goal scoring focus of the IF.

To furthermore rein in the aggressive cutting and dribbling inside of the IW, I've gone with an underlap on the left side to lower both his mentality and then raise the corresponding mentality of the now WB(S) so that he still attacks down the left on the regular, but without the dribble more of WB(A) (The dribbling was really driving me mad and I'm not sure if it's just a tactic issue, but also too eager dribbling through the ME, but anyhow tactically I can at least attempt to tone it down). The reason I went for underlap instead of overlap is, that as far as I understand the underlap instruction from guides by Rashidi and others is that underlapping leads to the players looking for and playing predominantly low passes inside the box, without completely taking away the outside pass, which is exactly what I want as I don't want to rely predominantly on crosses. As on the right side the winger will now be providing the width, I've gone with a simple FB(S), so that he still goes forward at times, but mainly stays deeper to provide some defensive cover behind the winger. I'd also really like to go with the same underlap instruction here, to achieve similar passing behaviour than on the left flank, but it would bump the FB mentality also to attacking and then he becomes too much of an aggressive overlapper, rather than this more supportive function on positive. The reason for both CBs now being CDs is that Nantes doesn't really have a CB that I trust to fulfil the role of a BPD otherwise I'd be using one BPD+CD.

To try and improve the build-up play through the middle, I've opted to go with a CM(A), as on the old midfield none of the three players got up the pitch fast enough or seemed to want to, which only increased the amount of dribbling from the wingers (I have nightmares from those dribbles now). The CM(A) now nicely gets early and fast up the pitch providing an advanced sort of passing option and pivot, similiarly to how having an AM would work, just starting from deeper. And as I was also lacking forward pushes from the central midfield up the pitch, the CM(A) has been instructed to dribble more, I'll be going through all the PIs later. The Regista and CM(D) stayed the same as their partnership works as expected. And to round off the lack of buildup through the middle I now went to a CF(S), so that the striker especially early in the build-up drops into the AM strata and is available for passes and moves defenders around.

 

Team instruction wise I've added the aforementioned Underlap left as well as a slower tempo, to try and increase the patience of the forwards coupled with them now being all on support duties, to easier facilitate the fullbacks and midfielders getting up the pitch, before the forwards decide again that dribbling will save them.

In transition I added slowing the pace down to also help with building properly and controlled from the back, to achieve the playstyle I want; if I could get them to play like Spain did against Germany yesterday, I'd be ecstatic, because Spain's build-up from the back was beautiful. And while I'm generally a fan of letting the keeper decide where to distribute the ball, he was hoofing it up field to often for my liking, hence the instruction to distribute it to the backline.

And defensively is still the same with the higher line to congest the space and move the whole formation closer together and with the offside trap to help the defenders in maintaining the high line.

PI wise the front three are still instructed to close down more, but to help with that press when the opponent moves forward into our half the two CMs are also now instructed to close down more, which seemed to really help the lack of pressure on the ball in our own half. The CM(A) also has the aforementioned dribble more and the CM(D) has been instructed to also stay wider in possession, which both opens up the space centrally when the Regista pushes level and beyond him and also covers the vacated space on the left flank left by the LB a bit better. And due to the LB providing the width and the CM(D) staying behind to fill the gap in the left AM strata, the IW(S) has also been told to sit narrower when in possession to be available as an option.

 

Still early days with this current iteration, but it's looking more promising so far. Been generally in the lead in terms of possession as well as completed passes and while in some games the tactic struggles to create a lot of shots, it's mostly been hovering around 7-8 shots per game, most of those have been high quality with an xG/shot ratio of 0.15-0.2. And in a more game sense I've also been wondering where exactly the Regista ends and the DLP starts, as while the distinction in the game is pretty clear cut, it obviously isn't with how players like Pirlo or more recent Jorginho under Sarri played. I certainly will experiment at least with trying the DLP against bigger sides as the Regista due to his aggressiveness, will always leave the formation more vulnerable to the counter than a DLP would, but it would feel kind of wrong to not use the Regista role, when it is in the game.

Improvement wise I'd defintely like to see more passes attempted into the box from wider areas as well as centrally, which could be achieved with work ball into the box or maybe focus play through the middle, but I'm kinda wary of either, as I feel like direction play to the middle could make it too narrow again, and working the ball into the box in conjunction with short passing and lower tempo may end up being overkill. Do any of you have experience or attempted something in that direction?

The new set up looks really nice, I'd be interested to see how it plays. I might try the Reg(s) and CM(d) set up myself in some games.

The only suggestion I would make would be don't underlap on the left, it seems contradictory to the roles you have chosen (IW(s) comes inside, and should surely be overlapped by the WB(s)). Ideally, the WB(s) overlapping should occupy the opposing full back, stretching the defence, and giving your team more room to move in the middle.

I haven't used the narrow width with focus through middle, but I just saw a video by @Rashidi on it, and it looks like it could work. I'll probably give it a go, as long as the opposition are not relying on multiple DMs. Definitely worth a try, and might get the sort of build up you want.

[Murcon17]

vor 23 Minuten schrieb ryandormer:

The new set up looks really nice, I'd be interested to see how it plays. I might try the Reg(s) and CM(d) set up myself in some games.

The only suggestion I would make would be don't underlap on the left, it seems contradictory to the roles you have chosen (IW(s) comes inside, and should surely be overlapped by the WB(s)). Ideally, the WB(s) overlapping should occupy the opposing full back, stretching the defence, and giving your team more room to move in the middle.

That's the thing the underlap, doesn't make the WB not overlap, he still does and on the regular, but from what I've seen and understand it makes him more likely to first look for an inside pass rather than a cross. I've even gotten some strong low crosses out of it to either the striker or opposing winger. I treat it as a kind of first look to the inside of the pitch rather than the outside. Afaik neither the overlap or underlap instruction tell players behind that they should be doing them, but rather for the player with the ball in that situation to look for a player making the appropiate run. What usually happens is the IW getting the ball and laying it to the regista who plays it out to the WB going down the flank, who then lays it inside to the underlapping IW, plays and looks quite nice. It's currently just missing that last punch to get really dangerous at times, but that may just be individual player quality, Nantes aren't exactly world beaters.

Edited November 18, 2020 by Murcon17

[DudeRat]

13 hours ago, Murcon17 said:

As I've changed quite a bit on my current tactic and to give an update of sorts. A lot of what you guys suspected and I also was wary of, happened quite quickly with the Advanced Forward. When there wasn't the space or opportunity to play him in with long balls over the top or through balls, there was a complete inability of the team to even attempt to build-up play through the middle of the park. And especially against stronger opposition sides what usually happened was the ball going out wide to the wingers, who then attempted suicidal dribbles across the whole pitch with varying success rates, but it looked and also played atrocious. And for some reason the defensive workrate also completely went nowhere, it honestly felt like the players just didn't want to do anything that could be considered having to work, they were mostly just escorting the opponent all the way into our penalty area without pressuring them. Results wise it was still kinda fine, with still some wins, but those didn't feel earned and they weren't. I think most games the team had 5-6 shots and an xG of 0.2-0.3. While trying to fixing the tactic, I also got pretty fed up with the Hertha players and decided to try again with a different club (I really wonder how many real life managers wish they could do that sometimes, just reload and take a different team) and as I also read something about the Bundesliga having ridicilously high pass completion rates, which I also saw in my own save, no club was below 85%. I swapped over to Nantes and rebuild the tactic.

This is the current look of the tactic, where I tried to adress most problems and concerns I found. Both the IF(S) and the IW(A) I felt were way too dribble heavy, always preferring to try to dribble across the whole field and shooting instead of being more involved in trying to build up an attack, which is why I've now gone with an IW(S) and a W(S) on the opposite side, to have some stretch a bit wider on one side as being too narrow on both flanks also felt like an issue. I still do use an opposite footed player on the right side at times, as that can create a sort of wider IW that doesn't only cut inside, and was also what I used before the IW was implemented, as I never really liked the one-track goal scoring focus of the IF.

To furthermore rein in the aggressive cutting and dribbling inside of the IW, I've gone with an underlap on the left side to lower both his mentality and then raise the corresponding mentality of the now WB(S) so that he still attacks down the left on the regular, but without the dribble more of WB(A) (The dribbling was really driving me mad and I'm not sure if it's just a tactic issue, but also too eager dribbling through the ME, but anyhow tactically I can at least attempt to tone it down). The reason I went for underlap instead of overlap is, that as far as I understand the underlap instruction from guides by @Rashidi and others is that underlapping leads to the players looking for and playing predominantly low passes inside the box, without completely taking away the outside pass, which is exactly what I want as I don't want to rely predominantly on crosses. As on the right side the winger will now be providing the width, I've gone with a simple FB(S), so that he still goes forward at times, but mainly stays deeper to provide some defensive cover behind the winger. I'd also really like to go with the same underlap instruction here, to achieve similar passing behaviour than on the left flank, but it would bump the FB mentality also to attacking and then he becomes too much of an aggressive overlapper, rather than this more supportive function on positive. The reason for both CBs now being CDs is that Nantes doesn't really have a CB that I trust to fulfil the role of a BPD otherwise I'd be using one BPD+CD.

To try and improve the build-up play through the middle, I've opted to go with a CM(A), as on the old midfield none of the three players got up the pitch fast enough or seemed to want to, which only increased the amount of dribbling from the wingers (I have nightmares from those dribbles now). The CM(A) now nicely gets early and fast up the pitch providing an advanced sort of passing option and pivot, similiarly to how having an AM would work, just starting from deeper. And as I was also lacking forward pushes from the central midfield up the pitch, the CM(A) has been instructed to dribble more, I'll be going through all the PIs later. The Regista and CM(D) stayed the same as their partnership works as expected. And to round off the lack of buildup through the middle I now went to a CF(S), so that the striker especially early in the build-up drops into the AM strata and is available for passes and moves defenders around.

 

Team instruction wise I've added the aforementioned Underlap left as well as a slower tempo, to try and increase the patience of the forwards coupled with them now being all on support duties, to easier facilitate the fullbacks and midfielders getting up the pitch, before the forwards decide again that dribbling will save them.

In transition I added slowing the pace down to also help with building properly and controlled from the back, to achieve the playstyle I want; if I could get them to play like Spain did against Germany yesterday, I'd be ecstatic, because Spain's build-up from the back was beautiful. And while I'm generally a fan of letting the keeper decide where to distribute the ball, he was hoofing it up field to often for my liking, hence the instruction to distribute it to the backline.

And defensively is still the same with the higher line to congest the space and move the whole formation closer together and with the offside trap to help the defenders in maintaining the high line.

PI wise the front three are still instructed to close down more, but to help with that press when the opponent moves forward into our half the two CMs are also now instructed to close down more, which seemed to really help the lack of pressure on the ball in our own half. The CM(A) also has the aforementioned dribble more and the CM(D) has been instructed to also stay wider in possession, which both opens up the space centrally when the Regista pushes level and beyond him and also covers the vacated space on the left flank left by the LB a bit better. And due to the LB providing the width and the CM(D) staying behind to fill the gap in the left AM strata, the IW(S) has also been told to sit narrower when in possession to be available as an option.

 

Still early days with this current iteration, but it's looking more promising so far. Been generally in the lead in terms of possession as well as completed passes and while in some games the tactic struggles to create a lot of shots, it's mostly been hovering around 7-8 shots per game, most of those have been high quality with an xG/shot ratio of 0.15-0.2. And in a more game sense I've also been wondering where exactly the Regista ends and the DLP starts, as while the distinction in the game is pretty clear cut, it obviously isn't with how players like Pirlo or more recent Jorginho under Sarri played. I certainly will experiment at least with trying the DLP against bigger sides as the Regista due to his aggressiveness, will always leave the formation more vulnerable to the counter than a DLP would, but it would feel kind of wrong to not use the Regista role, when it is in the game.

Improvement wise I'd defintely like to see more passes attempted into the box from wider areas as well as centrally, which could be achieved with work ball into the box or maybe focus play through the middle, but I'm kinda wary of either, as I feel like direction play to the middle could make it too narrow again, and working the ball into the box in conjunction with short passing and lower tempo may end up being overkill. Do any of you have experience or attempted something in that direction?

I've always had a bit of a hatred for inside forwards too, always seemed a bit overpowered to me! Had a quick play with your tactic @Murcon17and found that using advanced playmakers on the flanks seemed to really work in stopping the wide men dribbling and created some really nice passing moves, defensively they seemed a bit hit and miss but didn't play too much with the team or player instructions so may be able to make this more consistent.  Trequartistas seem to work really well too, although they have times when they decide to ignore all instructions and try to take on the whole team!  Funnily enough, despite their description, they seemed to press more than the AP or IF's so not sure what happened there... I also had a quick shot at moving the AML and AMR into STCL and STCR, this created lots more chances and I think with time would mean a considerable increase in goals. I rotated between DLP's and F9's, but looking through some other tactics, think PF's could do a good job here too. Against teams playing wide I ask the wide strikers to stay wider and if the opposing fullbacks were causing problems, asked the wide strikers to man mark them. Sorry I couldn't spend a bit more time narrowing down team and player instructions, but it showed me that there is definitely room to work with the Regista and compliment the style of football you want to play. Might do one myself now!

[sporadicsmiles]

16 hours ago, Murcon17 said:

 

 

the only thing formation wise I would change here is the duty of the IW. This system is crying out for another attack duty, and it make sense to have it on that side. The idea scenario here is that you create pressure on both channels (with IW and CM(A)) when the CF drifts around pulling CBs with him. With the regista theoretically being able to pick out both of these players from his central role, but the winger also doing so. I think this would help create more chances, and you can always switch around what this role is doing based on what you see and the match situation. 

[Murcon17]

vor 8 Stunden schrieb sporadicsmiles:

the only thing formation wise I would change here is the duty of the IW. This system is crying out for another attack duty, and it make sense to have it on that side.

By the numbers the tactic is performing well so far I'd say. Sitting 2nd in Ligue 1 after 12 games with 8W, 2D and 2L. But especially in terms of shots taken, it's not really firing on all cylinders.

The reason I don't have either winger or fullback for that matter on an attack duty, is while it does increase their frequency and their tendency to drive forward into space, it comes with the caveat that they all become dribble heavy. Like for every good forward run into space, they make 2 bad dribbles kind of. I've been trying to coax out some more runs out of them by putting the Get further forward PI on them, but it's only working somewhat. Probably overall rather a mentality issue as well as the IW is on balanced and the W on positive, but every time I had either on an attacking mentality or higher they just turned into dribbling machines and I haven't found a way to tone it down without ruining the dribbling of the rest of the team if I'd go with "dribble less".

Overall I really like the patient build-up with the support duties, it's just missing that switch to tell the players in the last 20-25m to drive more into the space and attempt some riskier passes to try and break open the backline more.

vor 10 Stunden schrieb DudeRat:

Had a quick play with your tactic and found that using advanced playmakers on the flanks seemed to really work in stopping the wide men dribbling and created some really nice passing moves, defensively they seemed a bit hit and miss but didn't play too much with the team or player instructions so may be able to make this more consistent.  Trequartistas seem to work really well too, although they have times when they decide to ignore all instructions and try to take on the whole team! 

There's definitely still some potential in there for the three forward positions, I've been using a F9 at times with the second striker, as he's not that suited to being a CF and it did create some interesting scenarios. For some reason the F9 felt more eager to drive into space behind the defense after laying a pass off to a teammate as the CF(S) at times. But yeah, I haven't really found a way to increase the two wingers individual mentality without them going crazy on the dribblings, the increase in forward runs just does not seem worth it at the cost of those dribbles. And I think I've seen some people say that three striker formations kind of break the game at the moment, so I'd rather not use something that's working because of that, but could certainly be interesting for trying a more narrower system.

 

If anyone has any tips or ideas, how to encourage more forward runs/passes onto them without the increase in dribbling, would be appreciated. Because currently the player making the most forward runs into space and being played in is usually the CM(A), which makes sense as he has a very attacking mentality, I think I've got 5 goals and 1 assist out of the players in that role so far, feels like the perfect role for a Frank Lampard type midfielder that likes getting on the score sheet. Overall I'm currently averaging 55% possession for 2nd best behind PSG in the league and first in passes completed with over 700 more than 2nd place Monaco, the tactic just lacking that last impetus in the final third to turn it a bit more aggressive. Played a bit with the CF on attack instead and he instantly scored from a through ball and also stretched the field a bit better by leading the opposing defense closer to their goal, but then he's missing in the early phases of the build-up. Probably going to try the AML as an AP(S) with the CF(A) and see if the AP can adequately fill the space left from switching the CF duty and the increase in mentality from the CF then makes the last part of the attacking phase a bit more dangerous.

[Zemahh]

2 hours ago, Murcon17 said:

If anyone has any tips or ideas, how to encourage more forward runs/passes onto them without the increase in dribbling, would be appreciated.

Seems like you're doing well overall, so I'd be careful not to upset the applecart too much, but you could try some small tweaks:

• WB-Su -> FB-At: With a CM-De on his side, you can probably afford a more adventurous player. FB-At has no Dribble More locked in (which you specifically said you don't want), but has a higher Mentality than WB-Su. With an IW-Su ahead, you can create a nice natural overlap.
• Remove Underlap Left: This instruction lowers your IWs Mentality (makes him take less risks and judging by what you're saying, you're lacking penetration in final third) and looks for underlapping runs—which your setup doesn't have. CM-De will Hold Position and WB/FB won't be underlapping either, so you could be stifling your IW unnecessarily with that instruction.
• Remove Shorter Passing: Play Out Of Defence should cut unnecessary long balls already, so perhaps you're limiting yourself too much with Shorter Passing on top of it (again, judging by you saying you lack "riskier passes"); especially in combination with Lower Tempo, which is another instruction that slows your play down and allows opposition to settle.

One more change you could consider, is CF-Su -> DLF-At. He will still Hold Up Ball and Move Into Channels, but make a forward run or two more than a Support-Duty striker. Besides that, I'm not really sure a roaming striker is what you want when you have no other Attack Duties (apart from CM, which could be kept quiet). I agree with @sporadicsmiles that you could probably use another Attack Duty somewhere (either Support striker + Attack wide forward or Attack striker + Support wide forward).

Hope that gives you some ideas!

[Murcon17]

As I've now reached 13 games unbeaten in the league, sitting 2nd in the table. I wanted to give a sort of conclusive update of sorts, at the very least now for the beta, as I'm pretty happy with how the tactic plays and I think it reached the point, where I can reasonably say that any deficiencies in terms of results, rest on the personell rather than the tactic, as at least realistically speaking the Nantes squad has no business sitting that high up the table in real life at least.

For those interested, I'm going to add the current league table, the general performance stats as well as possession-related stats into the spoiler below.

Spoiler

And now last but not least, the "final" tactic that I've reached.

The PIs are as followed: LB: Stay wider

CM(D): Stay wider, close down more; CM(A): Dribble more(to encourage forward breaking runs and ball carries through the line from the center of the formation, could likely also be achieved through a PPM), close down more, I've also experimented with Roam from position for the CM(A) which makes him a real driving force all over the pitch, so if you have a stand-out player for this role you might want to turn him into a free attacking 8 of sorts.

IW(S): Get further forward, close down more, sit narrower; W(S): Get further forward, close down more and F9: Close down more

What ended up solving my problem in terms of forward seeking passes in and around the box, turned out to be Work ball into the box. Pretty much instantly after I've added it, I saw both more cutbacks as well as attempts of squaring the balls from wider areas into the center, as well as the midfield line attempting through balls into the box for the front three to run onto and try and either shoot or square it towards the center.

From all the striker roles I've tried, I believe that the False 9 is the best roles for this system, as the player both drops deep enough in build-up to be an effective part in working towards the opponents box, but also that the False 9 still gets forward to be at the end of crosses or makes themselves available for through balls, which none of the other supportive striker roles seemed to accomplish. My guess would be this is relating to the other roles wanting to hold up play or being more prone to play with their back towards goal. I haven't gotten either striker to really score a lot so far, but as the role in general makes the right movement and is in the right positions to score, I think this is just a case of having the right striker able to put themselves into better positions more often and finish those chances.

For anyone wishing to try this tactic for themselves, most of the Nantes player either don't have any PPMs or if they do none that should be too critical in terms of making this tactic work, as I didn't rely on any PPMs to get the behaviour I want, so it should be straight forward to implement for yourselves. I also neither set-up set piece routines or any specific training, so there probably even is some more potential to be squeezed out by setting everything up.

One obvious downside of the tactic is that if you are not able to gain and keep possession of the ball long enough to play the slow build-up, you could end up with below 5 shots per game or even worse, so having a different tactic or two, especially against stronger opposition sides, might be necessary.

Edited November 21, 2020 by Murcon17