[FM21] 4-3-3, the elusive dream - all hands on deck!

[Christopher S]

BOOM!

I'm back at it again. Not having found the success I've wanted in my last 2 attempts at building my own system, I just gotta say; third time's the charm, right? Right? Throughout all of my footballing and FM life, I've played many formations. Most of them actually. I had a brief stint with the 4-2-3-1, after refusing to accept it as a legitimate formation for years. 4-4-2 was the goto for a couple of years. I had a fairly long affair with the 4-1-3-2/4-1-2-1-2/4-3-1-2 variants. 4-5-1 even. But no matter what, I always come back to 4-3-3 (or the 4-1-2-2-1 as FM used to call it). In my eyes, it's simply winning. The best. The most flexible, and the most ideal system. It can easily morph into a 4-2-3-1, a 4-5-1, a 3-4-3, a -3-4-2-1, even a weird 4-1-2-1-2. It has loads of inherent passing triangles and can both counter and control possession well. In the words of Tina Turner:

It's simply the best

So, what's the problem? Well..... turns out, I'm not the best at executing it. Hell, I'd struggle to say good even. I try, try and try, and fail, fail and fail. So after much tinkering with other systems, and some 4-3-3s, here we are again. Back by the drawing board. This time, however, I've actually settled on some predefined criteria for my system. I've also mapped out how I see my players position, and what passing combinations I'm looking for.

Highlights

To keep things orderly, here are some of the key things I'm looking for:

1) Overlaps. The 4-3-3 is extremely adept at building overlaps through the full backs, as well as having players positioned to find them in space out wide. 
2) Runs into the half-space and positional interchange in the right half space. On the left, our winger+the striker will be the most likely players to find the half space. On the right, our MCr and winger will hopefully be able to alternate in finding the space to make it harder to mark. 
3) My left CB moving up. Ideally, the way I see this, there should be space for my left CB to move up into space with the ball or to receive a pass. Unsure how to achieve this movement in the game, however. 
4) Striker. My striker needs to be avaliable for short passes but also move laterally and vertically to provide a real threat. If not, defenders will not move to mark him. 
5) Width. We're going to have a vast amount of players in the centre of the pitch, and as such, we need to stretch the field to create openings. Pounding crosses into the box from our full backs isn't going to be enough to do this on it's own, and as such we should look to position wider overall. 
6) Ball recovery. In my experience, the 4-3-3 doesn't function very well if it's pushed back - at least for what I want to achieve. It's a formation where it's difficult to play slowly out from the back when pushed back. As such, we'll look to do most of our defending up the pitch. 

Key players/positions (no particular order): 

1) Nr. 5 (MC left). Principal playmaker, set up to be able to find both full backs and the half spaces. Mr. Key Pass himself
2) Nr. 11 (Striker). Must be able to do a little bit of everything. Pass, move, hold up play, dribble and most importantly score goals. 
3) Nr. 9 (Left winger). Will often be heavily involved in the initial buildup phase, and as such will have to be able to both keep the ball and find teammates under heavy pressure. 

Primary goal scorers (in order): 

1) Nr. 11 (Striker). While I want him to be a passing outlet during buildup, he must be a threat on goals especially from crosses as overlaps are one of our primary weapons. If we can't reliably finish our crosses, we're forked. 
2) Nr. 10 (Inside Forward). Secondary goal threat, looking to attack the space our striker leaves behind. 
3) Nr. 6 (MC right). Will ideally look to attack the half space when our Inside Forward isn't able to, or make runs in behind our striker centrally. 

Luckily, my preferred choices for the ST, MCr and IF roles are all strong or decent in the air. So, where does this leave me as a starting point? Well, here: 

As for PI's: 
- IWs has 'Sit Narrower' to open up space for the bombing LB and to create a tighter link with the ST and MC left. 
- IWs has 'Hold Up Ball' because in my experience, IW and IF never really looks for overlaps themselves, and rather mindlessly cut inside while dribbling. I want to encourage him to wait for the team to move up. 

TI and Mentality explenations:

I chose 'Attacking' mentality for 3 reasons. I am aware that all 3 might be blatantly wrong, so feel free to correct me. 
1) In my experience, Positive doesn't allow full backs to properly bomb forward into space. 
2) As we want to attack space in the third half, we need to allow players to be creative and take risk
3) Our goal is to defend higher up, and that requries a certain level of risk taking defensively. I want my CBs to cut infront of attackers as often as possible. 

As for the TIs: 
1) Shorter passing + Lower tempo: The default passing and tempo for the attacking mentality is fairly direct and high, and in my experience (especially) higher tempo doesn't consitently allow a 4-3-3 to move up the pitch reliably. I don't want the ball to 'outrun' our players. I also want to encourage my players to play through the middle of the pitch if possible, without using focus play. We're not looking for direct passing for the sake of it. 
2) Wide: More space, simple as that. I want to stretch the pitch and force the opposition to leave open space in their defense. This will also slightly encourage my players to look for the wide players. 
3) Overlap Left: I've created a natural overlap, yes, but the mentality shift from this instruction means my IWs and APs are on the same mentality. I suspect this'll create som needed stability on the left side. 
4) Higher LOE+Higher DL. We defend further up, simple as that. Considering moving the DL to Much Higher, but Higher+Attacking mentality might be enough. 

Caveats and suspisions: 

1) My left side looks risky on paper. I might have to chang ethe APs to a DLPs, but I'm worried that'll be too static. Will monitor this closely. 
2) Similarly on the right hand side, my IF and MEZ are both uber-attacking. Less sure what I could do here without throwing off the attacking balance. 
3) Counter-press? I'm mixed on this setting for the 4-3-3. It's a fairly bottom heavy formation, and even when we camp in the opponents half, it often comes apart when counter-pressing. 
4) Roles in general. I think most of them makes sense in theory, but I'm sure alterations can be made. Not sure how to properly evaluate that, though. 
5) The DM. Considering a BWMd or BWMs here; I imagine we're going to need to sweep up counters in wide areas, and having someone more willing to do that that then a DMd might be helpful. 
6) Counters in general. Might just be a natural drawback of the approach, though, and something I have to accept. 

Soo... now what? 

I test it out. Would love to hear your thoughts on this. The reference here is the original movement and passing graphics. If the roles and instructions I've selected seem weird in reference to that, please let me know. I expect a lot of things to go wrong here; in my experience my players really struggle to find players on the overlap, even when it's blatantly obvious - hopefully this won't happen again. 

I look forward to hearing from you!

 

[Christopher S]

IMMEDIATE CONCERN

 

Has anyone been able to make your players actually use their CBs in build up? For some reason, every time my players are in this situation, they try the most risky pass available instead of just slotting over to my CB (#2) and opening up the field completely. Here, he randomly tries to hit my MCr (#8) and gives the ball away. 
This is something that's been bothering me for weeks now? Anyone have a solution for this?

Cheers!

[frukox]

31 minutes ago, Christopher S said:

IMMEDIATE CONCERN

 

Has anyone been able to make your players actually use their CBs in build up? For some reason, every time my players are in this situation, they try the most risky pass available instead of just slotting over to my CB (#2) and opening up the field completely. Here, he randomly tries to hit my MCr (#8) and gives the ball away. 
This is something that's been bothering me for weeks now? Anyone have a solution for this?

Cheers!

The attacking mentality is a really forward-thinking one. Positive or Balanced may see him pass the ball more safely here.

Edited February 2, 2021 by frukox

[Christopher S]

1 minute ago, frukox said:

The attacking mentality is a really forward-thinking one. It raises that CB's mentality to Balanced. This means he's willing to take as much as risk a CMS is played on a Balanced mentality. I think that's the culprit here. Positive or Balanced may see him pass the ball more safely here.

Will try.

Reason I posted about it is because I'm yet to see that happen at all, regardless of mentality and instructions - player seem almost married to the idea of passing forwards no matter what. Personally, I wish there was an instruction to encourage players to cycle the ball across the back 4 and/or the DM, as it's a tool I really like but can never really make happen in the game. 

[frukox]

4 minutes ago, Christopher S said:

Will try.

Reason I posted about it is because I'm yet to see that happen at all, regardless of mentality and instructions - player seem almost married to the idea of passing forwards no matter what. Personally, I wish there was an instruction to encourage players to cycle the ball across the back 4 and/or the DM, as it's a tool I really like but can never really make happen in the game. 

Try lower mentalities for a safety-first approach but you may need to change TIs, PIs and etc. to accommodate it better but your CBs won't go up as they would do with a Balanced mentality. 

Edited February 2, 2021 by frukox

[Christopher S]

That's what I'm worried about. I keep feeling like the ME is restricting my ability to have my team play the way I want them to, as every change in the right direction introduces a change in the wrong direction that I can't compensate for or remove. 

[frukox]

36 minutes ago, Christopher S said:

That's what I'm worried about. I keep feeling like the ME is restricting my ability to have my team play the way I want them to, as every change in the right direction introduces a change in the wrong direction that I can't compensate for or remove. 

Yeah, I understand you whole-heartedly but we have to work within the confines of the ME. For example, let me share an example with you. I'm away from my PC so there will be no screenshots:

In FM20, a supporting striker doesn't really drop deep apart form the build-up phase in the middle third or having the trait of Comes Deep to Get Ball so for example I used an APA with a Very Attacking Mentality on AM strata with lots of PIs:

-Move Into Channels

-Get Forward

-Pass It Shorter

-Close Down More

-Tackle Harder

-Roam from Position

-Hold Up Ball

It behaves like a CFS but on a higher mentality to support my two inside-oriented wingers on attack(a WMA and an IWA) properly. 

To sum up, we sometimes need to adapt to "rules" of the ME.

 

 

Edited February 2, 2021 by frukox

[Christopher S]

6 minutes ago, frukox said:

Yeah, I understand you whole-heartedly but we have to work within the confines of the ME. For example, let me share an example with you. I'm away from my PC so there will be no screenshots:

In FM20, a supporting striker doesn't really drop deep apart form the build-up phase in the middle third or having the trait of Comes Deep to Get Ball so for example I used an APA with a Very Attacking Mentality on AM strata with lots of PIs:

-Move Into Channels

-Get Forward

-Pass It Shorter

-Close Down More

-Tackle Harder

-Roam from Position

-Hold Up Ball

It behaves like a DLFs but on a higher mentality to support my two inside-oriented wingers on attack(a WMA and an IWA) properly. 

To sum up, we sometimes need to adapt to "rules" of the ME.

 

 

That's a fair point. Ironically, I'm experiencing the opposite in FM21. Strikers with supportive roles come WAY too deep, especially off the ball, and strikers with attacking roles are generally way too isolated/uninvolved in buildup. 
I'm yet to find a reliable middle point, because what I want is a striker that pressures CBs and DMs off the ball, is available for combinations in buildup and then looks for space in behind the defenders in the final third. To my experience, that is a fairly reasonable thing to expect but I'm yet to find a role that does this. 

[frukox]

3 minutes ago, Christopher S said:

That's a fair point. Ironically, I'm experiencing the opposite in FM21. Strikers with supportive roles come WAY too deep, especially off the ball, and strikers with attacking roles are generally way too isolated/uninvolved in buildup. 
I'm yet to find a reliable middle point, because what I want is a striker that pressures CBs and DMs off the ball, is available for combinations in buildup and then looks for space in behind the defenders in the final third. To my experience, that is a fairly reasonable thing to expect but I'm yet to find a role that does this. 

Maybe, a CFA with trait of Comes Deep to Get Ball and Plays One-Twos?

Edited February 2, 2021 by frukox

[Christopher S]

4 minutes ago, frukox said:

Maybe, a CFA with trait of Comes Deep to Get Ball and Plays One-Twos?

That might work? I've never tried that role in FM21, as the game insists all my strikers are completely unqualified for the role. Even with 12+ in all relevant stats, it rates 1/5 stars for the role. Now, I know that role evaluation isn't the end all be all, but surely there is some hard coded justification behind it? Right? 

[frukox]

1 minute ago, Christopher S said:

That might work? I've never tried that role in FM21, as the game insists all my strikers are completely unqualified for the role. Even with 12+ in all relevant stats, it rates 1/5 stars for the role. Now, I know that role evaluation isn't the end all be all, but surely there is some hard coded justification behind it? Right? 

As long as your forward is physically and mentally a bit better, it may work. My thinking is CFA on Attacking mentality will nearly always try to dribble to pass or shoot or play the risky pass so Comes Deep to Get Ball and Play One-Twos may help him first position himself a bit deeper to be involved in the build-up and then dart forward when there is an opportunity. 

[Christopher S]

11 minutes ago, frukox said:

As long as your forward is physically and mentally a bit better, it may work. My thinking is CFA on Attacking mentality will nearly always try to dribble to pass or shoot or play the risky pass so Comes Deep to Get Ball and Play One-Twos may help him first position himself a bit deeper to be involved in the build-up and then dart forward when there is an opportunity. 

Solid logic. I'll look into it. 

In the meantime, the by far biggest struggle we have is even creating anything. There seems to be one or more fundamental flaws in system, as we are barely creating chances, let alone having any shots - and struggling for possession on top of that. I'm 4 games in, and it could barely be worse.

We've not had more than 10 shots in either of these games, and only broke 1.00 in xG in one of them. I expected there to be growing pains, but this is... well, it's a total disaster. 

Edited February 2, 2021 by Christopher S

[frukox]

4 minutes ago, Christopher S said:

Solid logic. I'll look into it. 

In the meantime, the by far biggest struggle we have is even creating anything. There seems to be one or more fundamental flaws in system, as we are barely creating chances, let alone having any shots - and struggling for possession on top of that. I'm 4 games in, and it could barely be worse.

What do you see in attacking build-ups or defensive transitions? Can you be a bit more specific?

 

[Christopher S]

2 minutes ago, frukox said:

What do you see in attacking build-ups or defensive transitions? Can you be a bit more specific?

 

Mostly unnecessary passes (like I screenshotted), missed simple short passes, random hoofball, failed dribbles - and complete lack of vision going forward. The latter is a universal problem, regardless of tactics. My players seem borderline incapable of spotting space and/or teammates with space ahead of them, no matter the roles or instructions.

Let me try and watch a game in 'Full' mode to get a better grip, and take some notes, then I'll come back to you.

Edited February 2, 2021 by Christopher S

[frukox]

1 minute ago, Christopher S said:

Mostly unecessary passes (like I screenshotted), missed simple short passes, random hoofball, failed dribbles. Let me try and watch a game in 'Full' mode to get a better grip, and take some notes, then I'll come back to you.

If your tactical familiarity is close to full do it once but if not first increase it for a better analysis with match training programs like Match Tactics, Attacking Movement, Defensive Shape, etc.

[Christopher S]

2 minutes ago, frukox said:

If your tactical familiarity is close to full do it once but if not first increase it for a better analysis with match training programs like Match Tactics, Attacking Movement, Defensive Shape, etc.

It's pretty darn familiar. PDR is what it is, as all the players naturally aren't in the PDR the game has deemed them optimal for. 

[frukox]

Just now, Christopher S said:

It's pretty darn familiar. PDR is what it is, as all the players naturally aren't in the PDR the game has deemed them optimal for. 

Then do it once or twice. It's going to be enough. My first feeling is your DM, playmaker, striker, the role of left FB and your right flank might be problematic. Watch out for Overlap Left and Wider Width, too.

[Christopher S]

5 minutes ago, frukox said:

My first feeling is your DM, playmaker, striker, the role of left FB and your right flank might be problematic

In other words; it's all pretty much a problem.

Gonna go to town on some analysis and notes, and post the results here. Hopefully there is something to be learned from it. 

[Garrlor]

I personally would play your Mez on the opposite side to the IF(A), so they are not running into each other. I also find that a Wb(su) or FB(at) works well with a winger on the side of the Mez as they will pull defenders away to generate room for the Mez to operate. Full backs will get forward, even on positive or balanced, but you need to give them time to get there by keeping the ball, something a 4-3-3 should be good at. Maybe taking shorter passing off, as it doesnt really work with a wider playstyle.

Looking at your roles/duties and overall team mentality, you have gone with.... CHARGE! as your option. Everyone trying to bomb forward, press high up the pitch and generally be as aggresive as a Scotsman who is badly in need of a drink. This is compounded by making your attacking players even more attacking by using an attacking mentality. Double Charge? Bayonet Charge? No, Ill go with Charging with a Nuke strapped to your forehead. If a team can play past your press half your team is still forward streaming towards the opponents box and making threatening gestures at the goalkeeper. Attacking mentality combined with an attacking duty will see your players make rash choices and force the risks far more than they need to.

Changing down a notch or two and using tempo is a good option, increasing tempo if you are being to slow to target gaps and move off the ball then slowing it down when you are a goal or two up to try and control the game, rather than relying on mentality.

Edited February 2, 2021 by Garrlor
added more detail

[sporadicsmiles]

2 hours ago, Christopher S said:

Has anyone been able to make your players actually use their CBs in build up? For some reason, every time my players are in this situation, they try the most risky pass available instead of just slotting over to my CB (#2) and opening up the field completely. Here, he randomly tries to hit my MCr (#8) and gives the ball away. 
This is something that's been bothering me for weeks now? Anyone have a solution for this?

BPDs will look to play riskier passes, and playing an attacking mentality will generally make your team look to take more risks. If you want to build from the back, two BPDs is not really the way to go. I use regular CBs so they look to get the ball to someone closer by rather than trying a hollywood pass. 

[Hartplatz]

To be honest, my biggest gripe would be your selection of roles and duties. Both flanks look very vulnerable, even more so as you play with a lot of risk. Your forwards could also do with a few tweaks.

1. On your left, your LB is going to bomb forward a lot, while the AP is not going to be able to offer enough protection. Particularly as the overlap instruction futher enhances your LB's aggressive mentality. You should turn your LB into something a little more conservative, perhaps a FB(a). You might also want to consider turning your AP to a DLP, and switch off the overlap TI.

2. On your right, your WB(su) is not also going to offer enough defensively with your CMR and and the Inside Forward both on attack. He needs to be more conservative and possibly sit narrow.

3. I agree with @Garrlor, MEZ/IF-pairing is also less than ideal, having them both on attack is not going to offer enough penetration. Since you seem to struggle creating anything, this is where I'd look. MEZ(a) and W(Su) works well in term of the space they use.

Edited February 2, 2021 by Hartplatz

[Christopher S]

29 minutes ago, sporadicsmiles said:

BPDs will look to play riskier passes, and playing an attacking mentality will generally make your team look to take more risks. If you want to build from the back, two BPDs is not really the way to go. I use regular CBs so they look to get the ball to someone closer by rather than trying a hollywood pass. 

That's fair and all, but that's not at all what the screen shot was showing. The player on the ball was my central midfielder, hitting a 40 yard pass instead of using his defenders as an outlet to switch the play. That was the point I was making; I very rarely see midfielders use CBs to switch play even when it's clearly the better option. 

Quote

I personally would play your Mez on the opposite side to the IF(A), so they are not running into each other. I also find that a Wb(su) or FB(at) works well with a winger on the side of the Mez as they will pull defenders away to generate room for the Mez to operate. Full backs will get forward, even on positive or balanced, but you need to give them time to get there by keeping the ball, something a 4-3-3 should be good at. Maybe taking shorter passing off, as it doesnt really work with a wider playstyle.

My experience is that full backs will almost never move into the final third off the ball, nor will players play the ball into the open space for the to run onto. The only two PDR's I've found to cause this reliably are WBa and CWBa, generally with Attacking Mentality. If not, they generally stay idly on the border of the third half and do nothing, while teammates play as if they're not there even when there is 30 meters of open space ahead of them. So my question is; how can we have such a different experience with this aspect? It genuinely baffles me. 

Quote

Looking at your roles/duties and overall team mentality, you have gone with.... CHARGE! as your option. Everyone trying to bomb forward, press high up the pitch and generally be as aggresive as a Scotsman who is badly in need of a drink. This is compounded by making your attacking players even more attacking by using an attacking mentality. Double Charge? Bayonet Charge? No, Ill go with Charging with a Nuke strapped to your forehead. If a team can play past your press half your team is still forward streaming towards the opponents box and making threatening gestures at the goalkeeper. Attacking mentality combined with an attacking duty will see your players make rash choices and force the risks far more than they need to.

I don't disagree with you, but again, my experience differs - and so does the advice I keep seeing on this forum. A total of 3 attacking roles shouldn't be too many (any less, and you get the regular advice of "not enough penetration"), and supportive roles are both too static off the ball and come too deep in defense from my experience. Especially in the AM+ST positions. I want to point out that I am fully aware that I have no idea what I'm doing, but whenever I try to apply the same logic I keep seeing being offered in here, it does the complete opposite of what it's 'supposed' to - or it doesn't do anything at all. I know player attributes are supposedly more impactful than ever, but to me the end result just makes me feel like I have no agency over the outcome of the game. 

I'm happy to tone down any and all things in the aim to achieve the play patterns I outlined in my OP, but as I mentioned further up, I feel like any instruction or change I do towards it, introduces some unwanted consequence. Does any of this make any sense?

Quote

1. On your left, your LB is going to bomb forward a lot, while the AP is not going to be able to offer enough protection. Particularly as the overlap instruction futher enhances your LB's aggressive mentality. You should turn your LB into something a little more conservative, perhaps a FB(a). You might also want to consider turning your AP to a DLP, and switch off the overlap TI.

To preface, I'm perfectly happy to try.
However, my experience with this exact set up - which I've used a number of times previously - is that the fullback will refuse to move into the final third and my DLP will play as if the left flank doesn't exist. On top of that, FBa (or any duty for that matter) are, in my opinion, WAY too conservative in defense no matter hard I tell them to press - they will happily give opposing wingers 20 yards of space to receive passes, and almost never go for tackles. 

Quote

2. On your right, your WB(su) is not also going to offer enough defensively with your CMR and and the Inside Forward both on attack. He needs to be more conservative and possibly sit narrow.

3. I agree with @Garrlor, MEZ/IF-pairing is also less than ideal, having them both on attack is not going to offer enough penetration. Since you seem to struggle creating anything, this is where I'd look. MEZ(a) and W(Su) works well in term of the space they use.

Combined these to, as they both pertain to the right hand side. 

The Winger role is, in my opinion, completely useless. What is supposed to be a role for providing width plays like anything but that. I've posted about this before, but even when using my right footed winger, who has the 'Hugs Touchline' PPM, in a Winger role, he cuts inside. Constantly. The one thing I'm yet to see unless you set team width to 'Extremely Wide', is players going wide and staying wide. That's why I went for the IFa, as my experience tells me using a Winger isn't gonna do anything differently anyway. If you know a way to make the Winger role actually play like a wide player, than feel free to tell me how.  Like I pointed out in my OP, I knew the right hand side could be an issue. 

To summarize... 

I don't mean to be dismissive towards any of you - I'm just an inquisitive person that needs to process information a certian way to learn from it. I'm frustrated that no matter what I do, no matter what I advice I follow, there doesn't seem to be a red thread or any consistent outcomes from any tool, instruction or setting. I don't feel like there is any predictability, what so ever, towards what a TI, Pi or mentality setting will result in, nor a limit to how misleading said tools can be. It's probably a me problem, of course, but still frustrating. Anywho, thanks a lot for chiming in! I really appreciate it.

[Christopher S]

Match Analysis

Starting tactic: 

Full analysis here (with screenshots of certain things): https://shrib.com/#Aleah5abrrmg

Highlights from analysis: 

1) Both CMs had several occurances of unecessary attempts at 30+ yard lateral passes. 
2) Gradually lowered every setting related to attacking urgency, but no cigar - players still refuse to utilize defenders or teammates positioned behind them for possession. No matter how many well positioned teammates my players have behind them, they will only pass sideways or forward, even if there is no one there to pass to. 
3) Pandoras Box. On lower mentalities and/tempo, team is more patient with the ball. However, conversely, players are less willing to move up the pitch. On higher mentalities, the opposite is true. Either way, I don't get what I want; a slow buildup to move the entire team up the pitch. 
4) Match Engine flaw: opposing players dribble mine as if they were training cones, my players can barely pull off a dribble to save their lives. This happens regardless of attributes for both attackers and defenders on either team. I've corrobrated this with other players, as well. Our leading theory is that ME is rubberbanding AI player ability to compensate for human players making better transfers and tactical decisions. Incredibly infuriating to watch, though, as my 17 Dribbling, 17 First Touch, 13 Technique, 15/15 Acc/Pace, 15 Agility player on the wing goes 2/13 on dribbles, while the opposing wingers with single digit technical stats blow past my defenders like they werent there. 

I made change gradually through the game (noted in the full analysis), and ended up with this setup by the end of the game: 

Some PIs too: 

- IWs: Roam from Position was added, as despite having 'Sit Narrower', he would do anything but sit narrower. 
- DM: Take Fewer Risks. Several occurances of hoofball and random lateral 30+ yard passes despite having multiple options. 
- Both Fullbacks: More Urgent pressing, Mark Tighter and Tackle Harder. Default settings are far too passive for my liking; I want them to physically dominate the wingers. (And inb4 someone says this is why opposing wingers blow past them; No. that happens regardless of instructions. These instructions are an attempt at preventing it, by makign sure they don't get the ball in space in the first place). 
- Right fullback: Sit Narrower. 

As for the TI changes: 

WBIB: Patience, to allow rest of team to move up. 
Much Lower Tempo: trying to get my team to actually play patiently, instead of insisting on playing forwards. As mentioned previously, doesnt work. The ME insists on going forwards no matter what. 
Play out of defence: see above ^ 
Hold Shape: see above ^
Counter-Press: I noticed we defended direct passing really well, and wanted to emphasize it by putting pressure on the opposing team in buildup. 
More Urgent: see above ^

Also changed the Mezzala from Attack to Support. The player has the 'Gets Forward Whenever Possible' PPM, which should make him more attacking than a standard MEZs. MEZa is also way too attack minded for my taste, and borderline refuses to be a part of buildup. I need him to be a passing option in buildup, move up the pitch alongside the ball, and surge into the box in the final third. MEZs seemed to work better, but I still don't like the Mezzala role. It's way too insistant on staying wide, even when the ball is on the opposite side of the field, creating huge gaps in the middle of the park. Might try anothre role here. 

Result: 

A dreadful game, simply put. We had one - 1 - attack I consider good enough throughout the game, the rest of these finishes were mostly from set pieces or pseudo-counters. We couldn't keep possession properly either; I'm looking for 55%-60% as the baseline for this playstyle to be effective, and we were nowhere near that. While the changes I made pre-game and during the game improved some aspects, we're still nowhere near the type of football I outlined in my OP. 

sigh....

[denen123]

5 hours ago, Christopher S said:

IMMEDIATE CONCERN

 

Has anyone been able to make your players actually use their CBs in build up? For some reason, every time my players are in this situation, they try the most risky pass available instead of just slotting over to my CB (#2) and opening up the field completely. Here, he randomly tries to hit my MCr (#8) and gives the ball away. 
This is something that's been bothering me for weeks now? Anyone have a solution for this?

Cheers!

"Play out of defence" Team instruction is a fix.

It'll force your team to recycle a lot when under pressure. 

 

Also, "distribute to fullbacks TI" seems to work really well as it creates so many options in early build up. Try it and see.

Edited February 2, 2021 by denen123

[Razor940]

Do you even have the players to do this? I know everyone is jumping in with some nuggets here and there, but the most important thing by far is what your players can do. I don't know your squad and I doubt most people know. 

You are playing on cautious, with much lower tempo, and TIs that reatard the your offensive flow. All this with a... 3rd tier club? Do your players have the mentals and technicals to see, think and execute on the pitch? 

[frukox]

18 minutes ago, Christopher S said:

Match Analysis

Starting tactic: 

Full analysis here (with screenshots of certain things): https://shrib.com/#Aleah5abrrmg

Highlights from analysis: 

1) Both CMs had several occurances of unecessary attempts at 30+ yard lateral passes. 
2) Gradually lowered every setting related to attacking urgency, but no cigar - players still refuse to utilize defenders or teammates positioned behind them for possession. No matter how many well positioned teammates my players have behind them, they will only pass sideways or forward, even if there is no one there to pass to. 
3) Pandoras Box. On lower mentalities and/tempo, team is more patient with the ball. However, conversely, players are less willing to move up the pitch. On higher mentalities, the opposite is true. Either way, I don't get what I want; a slow buildup to move the entire team up the pitch. 
4) Match Engine flaw: opposing players dribble mine as if they were training cones, my players can barely pull off a dribble to save their lives. This happens regardless of attributes for both attackers and defenders on either team. I've corrobrated this with other players, as well. Our leading theory is that ME is rubberbanding AI player ability to compensate for human players making better transfers and tactical decisions. Incredibly infuriating to watch, though, as my 17 Dribbling, 17 First Touch, 13 Technique, 15/15 Acc/Pace, 15 Agility player on the wing goes 2/13 on dribbles, while the opposing wingers with single digit technical stats blow past my defenders like they werent there. 

I made change gradually through the game (noted in the full analysis), and ended up with this setup by the end of the game: 

Some PIs too: 

- IWs: Roam from Position was added, as despite having 'Sit Narrower', he would do anything but sit narrower. 
- DM: Take Fewer Risks. Several occurances of hoofball and random lateral 30+ yard passes despite having multiple options. 
- Both Fullbacks: More Urgent pressing, Mark Tighter and Tackle Harder. Default settings are far too passive for my liking; I want them to physically dominate the wingers. (And inb4 someone says this is why opposing wingers blow past them; No. that happens regardless of instructions. These instructions are an attempt at preventing it, by makign sure they don't get the ball in space in the first place). 
- Right fullback: Sit Narrower. 

As for the TI changes: 

WBIB: Patience, to allow rest of team to move up. 
Much Lower Tempo: trying to get my team to actually play patiently, instead of insisting on playing forwards. As mentioned previously, doesnt work. The ME insists on going forwards no matter what. 
Play out of defence: see above ^ 
Hold Shape: see above ^
Counter-Press: I noticed we defended direct passing really well, and wanted to emphasize it by putting pressure on the opposing team in buildup. 
More Urgent: see above ^

Also changed the Mezzala from Attack to Support. The player has the 'Gets Forward Whenever Possible' PPM, which should make him more attacking than a standard MEZs. MEZa is also way too attack minded for my taste, and borderline refuses to be a part of buildup. I need him to be a passing option in buildup, move up the pitch alongside the ball, and surge into the box in the final third. MEZs seemed to work better, but I still don't like the Mezzala role. It's way too insistant on staying wide, even when the ball is on the opposite side of the field, creating huge gaps in the middle of the park. Might try anothre role here. 

Result: 

A dreadful game, simply put. We had one - 1 - attack I consider good enough throughout the game, the rest of these finishes were mostly from set pieces or pseudo-counters. We couldn't keep possession properly either; I'm looking for 55%-60% as the baseline for this playstyle to be effective, and we were nowhere near that. While the changes I made pre-game and during the game improved some aspects, we're still nowhere near the type of football I outlined in my OP. 

sigh....

Never give up. It's the easiest to do. Identify issues you've encountered first. Tweaking step by step may be the best way to build a long-term tactic. 

I think your first issue is lack of passing options exacerbated by lower tempo, Cautious mentality and WBIB due to unbalanced distribution of roles and duties. I'd first look into that if I know my players can do what I instruct to them.

Edited February 2, 2021 by frukox

[Christopher S]

22 minutes ago, denen123 said:

"Play out of defence" Team instruction is a fix.

It'll force your team to recycle a lot when under pressure. 

 

Also, "distribute to fullbacks TI" seems to work really well as it creates so many options in early build up. Try it and see.

Again, the problem isn't getting the defenders to pass it out. It's getting my midfielders to pass it back to my defenders when under pressure, instead of opting for 40 yard passes laterally or towards goal.

13 minutes ago, Razor940 said:

Do you even have the players to do this? I know everyone is jumping in with some nuggets here and there, but the most important thing by far is what your players can do. I don't know your squad and I doubt most people know. 

You are playing on cautious, with much lower tempo, and TIs that reatard the your offensive flow. All this with a... 3rd tier club? Do your players have the mentals and technicals to see, think and execute on the pitch? 

That's a totally fair point! I'm in The Championship, by the way. Placed 3rd regular season last season, but failed in playoffs, after juggling 9 different tactics and stringing together a lot of lucky results due to borderline explotative set piece tactics. In my opinion, 8th-5th is where we belong, player wise. 

According to the attribute comparison in the Team Report, I should absolutely be able to. And disregarding that, the players I have should be able to do what I ask. I'm not expecting Tiki-taka or Total Football, just a certain approach. I've specifically only recruited players with 11+ in Anticipation, Concentration, Composure, Teamwork, Decisions, Work Rate and Determination for the past 3 seasons. If there are some attributes and/or specific positions roles you believe have certain demands, I'd be more than happy supply screenshots of the relevant players.

12 minutes ago, frukox said:

Never give up. It's the easiest to do. Identify issues you've encountered first. Tweaking step by step may be the best way to build a long-term tactic. 

I don't intend to, but I don't know what to do next. I've mentioned this before in another thread, but I struggle really hard with getting any useful feedback from the ME to any of the steps I take. I feel like I'm going in blind, and no matter what I do I never get closer to the goal. 

Edited February 2, 2021 by Christopher S

[sporadicsmiles]

2 hours ago, Christopher S said:

That's fair and all, but that's not at all what the screen shot was showing. The player on the ball was my central midfielder, hitting a 40 yard pass instead of using his defenders as an outlet to switch the play. That was the point I was making; I very rarely see midfielders use CBs to switch play even when it's clearly the better option. 

Fair enough,  I misunderstood your point. I'd still avoid using BPD if you want to build from the back. Using an attacking mentality is going to encourage all your players to take greater risks, and also encourage faster transitions. Your tactic does not have play out of defence, if it is the first one. That might be something to explore. I also get my keeper to pass the ball to CBs and FBs. The other thing with attacking is you never really have phases of play long enough to recycle the ball a couple of times, its all a bit frantic and looking to attack and score. I play the same formation, but from balanced. I find that my DM(D) and both CBs are involved in recycling the ball quite often. Sometimes even my goalkeeper will get the ball passed back to him. 

It is all a matter of balance and what you are trying to achieve. If the attacking mentality is a key part of what you want to achieve, then you will not see a lot of build up play involving CBs because that is not what you are asking from your team. 

[Christopher S]

5 minutes ago, sporadicsmiles said:

It is all a matter of balance and what you are trying to achieve. If the attacking mentality is a key part of what you want to achieve, then you will not see a lot of build up play involving CBs because that is not what you are asking from your team. 

I have no particular preference for mentality. The only mentality I like, is the mentality that makes my team play the way I want. I chose Attacking as a starting point fully aware that it might be completely wrong.

[frukox]

18 minutes ago, Christopher S said:

Again, the problem isn't getting the defenders to pass it out. It's getting my midfielders to pass it back to my defenders when under pressure, instead of opting for 40 yard passes laterally or towards goal.

That's a totally fair point! I'm in The Championship, by the way. Placed 3rd regular season last season, but failed in playoffs, after juggling 9 different tactics and stringing together a lot of lucky results due to borderline explotative set piece tactics. In my opinion, 8th-5th is where we belong, player wise. 

According to the attribute comparison in the Team Report, I should absolutely be able to. And disregarding that, the players I have should be able to do what I ask. I'm not expecting Tiki-taka or Total Football, just a certain approach. I've specifically only recruited players with 11+ in Anticipation, Concentration, Composure, Teamwork, Decisions, Work Rate and Determination for the past 3 seasons. If there are some attributes and/or specific positions roles you believe have certain demands, I'd be more than happy supply screenshots of the relevant players.

I don't intend to, but I don't know what to do next. I've mentioned this before in another thread, but I struggle really hard with getting any useful feedback from the ME to any of the steps I take. I feel like I'm going in blind, and no matter what I do I never get closer to the goal. 

First, you want your team to move together. So keep mentalities closer and go back to the drawing board and decide on your goalscorers, how(at least 3-4 different ways) and who to create those goalscoring chances and which players are going to cover players going forward. 

Then, as far as I understand you want to play a progressive possession game, which means utilizing possession just to win the game. Select the most basic TIs to recreate that style on and off the ball. Finally tweak the system as you go in a meaningful manner. 

Edited February 2, 2021 by frukox

[Christopher S]

6 minutes ago, frukox said:

First, you want your team to move together. So keep mentalities closer and go back to the drawing board and decide on your goalscorers, how and who to create those goalscoring chances and which players are going to cover players going forward. 

Then, as far as I understand you want to play a progressive possession game, which means utilizing possession just to win the game. Select the most basic TIs to recreate that style on and off the ball. Finally tweak the system as you go in a meaningful manner. 

Thing is, this is what I did (unsuccesfully, if I may say so myself), and have done repeatedly for the past weeks. And yet, here we are. 

Believe it or not, I spend a lot of time going over the logic and thought behind my setups. If you look in the OP, I even noted that I suspected lack of cover on both sides would an issue. I selected the minimum amount of TIs I believed were necessary to recreate the style I wanted. I listed who my goal scorers where, and how I was going to create chances. 
I obviously failed at one or more things along the way, but my point is; I already follow this process. And I can't get it to work. :P 

Sidenote: While I'm not married to the idea of keeping the ball 70%+ of the game, I do lean towards possession heavy as opposed to progressive possession. Reason being that I don't trust the ME to defend properly, and higher possession tends to allow fewer defensive actions. I wish it weren't like that, but that's my experience.

Edited February 2, 2021 by Christopher S

[frukox]

4 minutes ago, Christopher S said:

Thing is, this is what I did (unsuccesfully, if I may say so myself), and have done repeatedly for the past weeks. And yet, here we are. 

Believe it or not, I spend a lot of time going over the logic and thought behind my setups. If you look in the OP, I even noted that I suspected lack of cover on both sides would an issue. I selected the minimum amount of TIs I believed were necessary to recreate the style I wanted. I listed who my goal scorers where, and how I was going to create chances. 
I obviously failed at one or more things along the way, but my point is; I already follow this process. And I can't get it to work. :P 

Sidenote: While I'm not married to the idea of keeping the ball 70%+ of the game, I do lean towards possession heavy as opposed to progressive possession. Reason being that I don't trust the ME to defend properly, and higher possession tends to allow fewer defensive actions. I wish it weren't like that, but that's my experience.

Now I looked at the OP closely and yes, you are right. You tried to do that:p

You want both fullbacks to go forward and both wingers to go inside, right? It will be hard to balance the distribution of roles and duties, then. Sorting out TIs will be much easier after you sort this out.

[Christopher S]

2 minutes ago, frukox said:

You want both fullbacks to go forward and both wingers to go inside, right? It will be hard to balance the distribution of roles and duties, then. Sorting out TIs will be much easier after you sort this out.

Yes and no. I opted for that because the Winger role never actually keeps width effectively. No matter what I do, Wingers end up drifting inwards instead of exploiting the space that is available on the wing. 

Edited February 2, 2021 by Christopher S

[frukox]

Just now, Christopher S said:

Yes and no. I opted for that because the Winger role never actually keeps width effectively. No matter what I do, Wingers ended up drifting inwards instead of exploiting the space that is available on the wing. 

As you know I'm not on FM21 but it should work in the way it should be. If not send a couple of PKMs and report it as a bug for the QA team to look into. It's a serious one, really but it may need more confirmations from other tactically-aware users.

[Christopher S]

Just now, frukox said:

As you know I'm not on FM21 but it should work in the way it should be. If not send a couple of PKMs and report it as a bug for the QA team to look into. It's a serious one, really but it may need more confirmations from other tactically-aware users.

I've been considering doing that. I've been seeing other users in here share the same notion over the past few weeks, so I don't think I'm alone in this. 

[frukox]

10 minutes ago, Christopher S said:

I've been considering doing that. I've been seeing other users in here share the same notion over the past few weeks, so I don't think I'm alone in this. 

 

Did you look into this discussion? You are after this kind of transition into attack, after all when I look into the movement and passing chart.

[Jaye]

Wingers have acted that way in the AML/R slots for a few editions now. As far as the game is concerned, anyone playing in those positions are forwards, therefore they will come inside to support the attack, especially when you're playing with a lone forward. The key difference in the roles is how they behave in possession. Wingers take the ball out wide and cross early (on support) or try to drive for the byline (on attack), whereas the Inverted Winger and Inside Forward cut inside with the ball. 

As someone who played a 4-3-3 with two Wingers (one support, one attack), I can tell you it's not as big an issue as made out. Firstly, they only tuck in when the ball is approaching the penalty area. In other phases of play, they do keep the width. Secondly, they attack the byline close to the outer sides of the penalty area, which is a more dangerous space to attack. They still stretch defences, even if the ME doesn't really show it all that well. 

If you use Wingers in the ML/MR spots, they will stay much closer to the touchline, but during the penetration phase they'll hang deeper than they would as AML/R. You can still get them coming in at the back post to finish chances.

If you want to play a possession-based style, load up the Tiki-Taka or Vertical Tiki-Taka presets and have a look at the roles/duties and TIs. They'll give you an idea on how to build the style. Then you get tweak them to suit your team better. 

[Christopher S]

1 minute ago, frukox said:

 

Did you look into this discussion? You are after this kind of transition into attack, after all when I look into the movement and passing chart.

I've been following that thread, actually, out of curiosity more than anything. Never looked at any of it constructively. 

I'm looking at the player mentalities for my team right now, and an issue I see occuring is that the CM and ST roles don't really have a middle point mentality wise. On Balanced, Strikers are either Cautious or Attacking - nothing in between. As for central midfielders, they are either Balanced or Attacking. Meaning that any attempt to add penetration from either of those positions will lead to big mentality gaps. How would you approach this? 

[Christopher S]

6 minutes ago, Jaye said:

As someone who played a 4-3-3 with two Wingers (one support, one attack), I can tell you it's not as big an issue as made out.

That's debatable. It might not be an issue in isolation, but in the context of how I want to play it is. The AML/R positions are really badly made, in my opinion. It should be possible to ask a player in this position to keep width in the final phase of play - but that doesn't work. Similarly, there should a role in this position that isn't hard coded to 'Dribble More' without being a playmaker or RMD - but there isn't. 

6 minutes ago, Jaye said:

f you use Wingers in the ML/MR spots, they will stay much closer to the touchline, but during the penetration phase they'll hang deeper than they would as AML/R.

And therein lies the problem. The ML/MR approximations of the roles I want for my AML/R retain their positions too deeply for my liking, and from my experience they do not get involved in play the way someone with a higher starting position would. Further, due to the issue with how drastically different Support and Attack roles are for Strikers, you get an issue with finding a way to get your striker properly involved. 

Edited February 2, 2021 by Christopher S

[frukox]

12 minutes ago, Christopher S said:

I've been following that thread, actually, out of curiosity more than anything. Never looked at any of it constructively. 

I'm looking at the player mentalities for my team right now, and an issue I see occuring is that the CM and ST roles don't really have a middle point mentality wise. On Balanced, Strikers are either Cautious or Attacking - nothing in between. As for central midfielders, they are either Balanced or Attacking. Meaning that any attempt to add penetration from either of those positions will lead to big mentality gaps. How would you approach this? 

That's one of the limitations of the ME. You can't choose anything in between as SI removed team shape. That was the reason why we needed it. It allowed us to fine-tune mentalities across the team.

I wouldn't deem it as a gap. For example, a DLFS drops deeper and presses later and a CMA presses earlier due to higher mentality to get compact in that area of the pitch. It's logical while a CMS covers that CMA and if he fails he's in position to delay the attacker to let him get back into a defensive position and so on.

Edited February 2, 2021 by frukox

[Razor940]

1 hora atrás, Christopher S disse:

Again, the problem isn't getting the defenders to pass it out. It's getting my midfielders to pass it back to my defenders when under pressure, instead of opting for 40 yard passes laterally or towards goal.

That's a totally fair point! I'm in The Championship, by the way. Placed 3rd regular season last season, but failed in playoffs, after juggling 9 different tactics and stringing together a lot of lucky results due to borderline explotative set piece tactics. In my opinion, 8th-5th is where we belong, player wise. 

According to the attribute comparison in the Team Report, I should absolutely be able to. And disregarding that, the players I have should be able to do what I ask. I'm not expecting Tiki-taka or Total Football, just a certain approach. I've specifically only recruited players with 11+ in Anticipation, Concentration, Composure, Teamwork, Decisions, Work Rate and Determination for the past 3 seasons. If there are some attributes and/or specific positions roles you believe have certain demands, I'd be more than happy supply screenshots of the relevant players.

I don't intend to, but I don't know what to do next. I've mentioned this before in another thread, but I struggle really hard with getting any useful feedback from the ME to any of the steps I take. I feel like I'm going in blind, and no matter what I do I never get closer to the goal. 

Although the opposition is not the best, your players aren't the best to play this style either. If you cap them with a lot of TIs and PIs, you will pretty much need world class players to pull it off, even playing against teams of low level. From my understanding you are trying to throw the cheese to the knife and expecting it to be sliced, and that won't happen. 

Taking the first screenshot you posted, does you AP have the off ball to give lines of pass as he's the playmaker? Does the AP have the positioning and tackle to balance the midfield? Does your IW have the off the ball to play with roam from position? Why couple IF(a) with Mezz(a), and attacking mentality, as both have the bomb foward PI that will make them occupate the same space forward earlier? To not talk the mentality will make them even more forward orientated. Why WB on attack when you can have him on support and do something similar, more safe, and probably more effective as he makes runs from a little deeper (even coupling it with PPMs and overlaps)? These are some questions you should ask that I don't see answered, and thats where most people fail with the game. 

I suggest starting from scratch only with some TIs and roles. Understanding space is essential and how to explore it. Plus, don't be too hard on the team thinking you can succeed easily in the Championship playing very slow build up, because you probably won't without addapting your ideas. Also, I learned some years ago from Cleon to not use things you don't know how it works, or you can't comprehend on the pitch. Being simple for some reason is harder for many people. 

Edited February 2, 2021 by Razor940

[Christopher S]

45 minutes ago, Jaye said:

Wingers have acted that way in the AML/R slots for a few editions now. As far as the game is concerned, anyone playing in those positions are forwards, therefore they will come inside to support the attack, especially when you're playing with a lone forward. The key difference in the roles is how they behave in possession. Wingers take the ball out wide and cross early (on support) or try to drive for the byline (on attack), whereas the Inverted Winger and Inside Forward cut inside with the ball. 

As someone who played a 4-3-3 with two Wingers (one support, one attack), I can tell you it's not as big an issue as made out. Firstly, they only tuck in when the ball is approaching the penalty area. In other phases of play, they do keep the width. Secondly, they attack the byline close to the outer sides of the penalty area, which is a more dangerous space to attack. They still stretch defences, even if the ME doesn't really show it all that well. 

If you use Wingers in the ML/MR spots, they will stay much closer to the touchline, but during the penetration phase they'll hang deeper than they would as AML/R. You can still get them coming in at the back post to finish chances.

If you want to play a possession-based style, load up the Tiki-Taka or Vertical Tiki-Taka presets and have a look at the roles/duties and TIs. They'll give you an idea on how to build the style. Then you get tweak them to suit your team better. 

I tried using a Winger in the MR position instead of the AMR, the Winger is nr. 14. 

Same thing happens. And please note, the player even has the 'Hugs Touchline' PPM. 

Please look at this, and tell me how this is acceptable and not an issue? A player with 'Stay Wide' PI hard coded, and 'Hugs Touchline' PPM. There is MOUNTAINS of space on the flank, and he ignores it to cut inside off the ball. 

This is what the game should produce with those sorts of instruction, but somehow, that just isn't possible. 

Edited February 2, 2021 by Christopher S

[Christopher S]

23 minutes ago, Razor940 said:

Although the opposition is not the best, your players aren't the best to play this style either. If you cap them with a lot of TIs and PIs, you will pretty much need world class players to pull it off, even playing against teams of low level. From my understanding you are trying to throw the cheese to the knife and expecting it to be sliced, and that won't happen. 

Taking the first screenshot you posted, does you AP have the off ball to give lines of pass as he's the playmaker? Does the AP have the positioning and tackle to balance the midfield? Does your IW have the off the ball to play with roam from position? Why couple IF(a) with Mezz(a), and attacking mentality, as both have the bomb foward PI that will make them occupate the same space forward earlier? To not talk the mentality will make them even more forward orientated. Why WB on attack when you can have him on support and do something similar, more safe, and probably more effective as he makes runs from a little deeper (even coupling it with PPMs and overlaps)? These are some questions you should ask that I don't see answered, and thats where most people fail with the game. 

I suggest starting from scratch only with some TIs and roles. Understanding space is essential and how to explore it. Plus, don't be too hard on the team thinking you can succeed easily in the Championship playing very slow build up, because you probably won't without addapting your ideas. Also, I learned some years ago from Cleon to not use things you don't know how it works, or you can't comprehend on the pitch. Being simple for some reason is harder for many people. 

This is the playmaker in the AP role  (later swpaped to DLPs). Attribute wise, he should be more than qualified:

After all, he's averaging over 14 in each of these attributes. On top of that, all other relevant attributes should be more than enough for a Championship player. 

This is the IWs. His OTB attribute isn't perfect, but you have to consider the reasoning I added 'Roam from position' in the first place. I told him to 'Sit Narrower', which he simple wasn't doing. 

Quote

Why WB on attack when you can have him on support and do something similar, more safe, and probably more effective as he makes runs from a little deeper (even coupling it with PPMs and overlaps)? These are some questions you should ask that I don't see answered

I've explained that several times in this thread. To reiterate: my experience is that supporting duty fullbacks simply do not move into space in attacks, at all. That's why I chose attack. 

Quote

Also, I learned some years ago from Cleon to not use things you don't know how it works, or you can't comprehend on the pitch. Being simple for some reason is harder for many people. 

That's fine and all, but as I've explained in this thread a couple of times already; I seemingly don't know how anything works. From my point of view, no instruction, mentality or setting has any predictable or consistent outcome. There is no tangible feedback loop. Instructions are largely ignored by your players, regardless of what you tell them. As I've said before, it's a me-problem, but it's still a problem. A tactics creator that has no semblance of predictability essentially means it's gambling. Most, if not all, the instructions do not mean what they say in short, nor what the tooltip explanation say. I'm not saying it should a cut and dry 'Do X to get Y every time', but there has to be a middle point between that and what we have. Right now, the game feels like a "transfer simulator" more than anything, as your players will rarely do what you tell them to anyway.

So sure, I can create a system with no TIs (because I don't know how they work). Then what? I identify an issue, add the instruction that the game tells me should adress that issue - and then nothing is changed because the instruction doesn't actually do what it says, or because my players choose to ignore the instruction all together. Then what? 

Edited February 2, 2021 by Christopher S

[frukox]

6 minutes ago, Christopher S said:

This is the playmaker in the AP role  (later swpaped to DLPs). Attribute wise, he should be more than qualified:

After all, he's averaging over 14 in each of these attributes. On top of that, all other relevant attributes should be more than enough for a Championship player. 

This is the IWs. His OTB attribute isn't perfect, but you have to consider the reasoning I added 'Roam from position' in the first place. I told him to 'Sit Narrower', which he simple wasn't doing. 

I've explained that several times in this thread. To reiterate: my experience is that supporting duty fullbacks simply do not move into space in attacks, at all. That's why I chose attack. 

That's fine and all, but as I've explained in this thread a couple of times already; I seemingly don't know how anything works. From my point of view, no instruction, mentality or setting has any predictable or consistent outcome. There is no tangible feedback loop. Instructions are largely ignored by your players, regardless of what you tell them. As I've said before, it's a me-problem, but it's still a problem. A tactics creator that has no semblance of predictability essentially means it's gambling. Most, if not all, the instructions do not mean what they say in short, nor what the tooltip explanation say. I'm not saying it should a cut and dry 'Do X to get Y every time', but there has to be a middle point between that and what we have. Right now, the game feels like a "transfer simulator" more than anything, as your players will rarely do what you tell them to anyway.

So sure, I can create a system with no TIs (because I don't know how they work). Then what? I identify an issue, add the instruction that the game tells me should adress that issue - and then nothing is changed because the instruction doesn't actually do what it says, or because my players choose to ignore the instruction all together. Then what? 

Your IW is not that intelligent and roaming requires good doses of work rate,decisions, otb and anticipation. He can only dribble consistently and pass the ball safely. So a simple WMS/WMA, WS or WA for me. Sit Narrower encourages the player to position himself in the half-space and pass the ball inside, btw.

[frukox]

22 minutes ago, Christopher S said:

I tried using a Winger in the MR position instead of the AMR, the Winger is nr. 14. 

Same thing happens. And please note, the player even has the 'Hugs Touchline' PPM. 

Please look at this, and tell me how this is acceptable and not an issue? A player with 'Stay Wide' PI hard coded, and 'Hugs Touchline' PPM. There is MOUNTAINS of space on the flank, and he ignores it to cut inside off the ball. 

This is what the game should produce with those sorts of instruction, but somehow, that just isn't possible. 

Try a DLPS on at least Balanced with a WA there? 

[Christopher S]

1 minute ago, frukox said:

Your IW is not that intelligent and roaming requires good doses of work rate,decisions, otb and anticipation. He can only dribble consistently and pass the ball safely. So a simple WMS/WMA, WS or WA for me. Sit Narrower encourages the player to position himself in the half-space and pass the ball inside, btw.

I KNOW! And as I've said repeatedly, he doesn't do that when instructed. Hence why I added 'Roam from Position' in hopes that he'd randomly wander into that space. I'm sorry for caps locking, but I'm trying really hard to add context to all my decisions here. 

[Christopher S]

Just now, frukox said:

Try a DLPS on at least Balanced with a WA there? 

Huh? How does that matter? The issue is that wide players drift inwards regardles of what they are told to do. #8 is positioned fine, it's #14 that is in the wrong spot. 

[frukox]

1 minute ago, Christopher S said:

I KNOW! And as I've said repeatedly, he doesn't do that when instructed. Hence why I added 'Roam from Position' in hopes that he'd randomly wander into that space. I'm sorry for caps locking, but I'm trying really hard to add context to all my decisions here. 

I understand your frustration but adding that instruction doesn't guarantee he's going to do that. It mostly depends on his attributes and whether he knows where and when to move.

[Christopher S]

Just now, frukox said:

I understand your frustration but adding that instruction doesn't guarantee he's going to do that. It mostly depends on his attributes and whether he knows where and when to move.

I know, and I would be fine with him occasionally failing to do it. In this scenario, there was literally no difference between having the PI on and off. 

[frukox]

1 minute ago, Christopher S said:

Huh? How does that matter? The issue is that wide players drift inwards regardles of what they are told to do. #8 is positioned fine, it's #14 that is in the wrong spot. 

A DMD is less attuned to play that ball but DLPS may try a risky pass there and no14 goes after the ball to square the ball back inside for a key pass or an assist. Who knows?