Jump to content

Need help to improve my 442 with both strikers scoring most of the goals


Recommended Posts

Hello guys and girls,

 

I want to make a 442 where my both strikers will score most of the goals.

I usually playing a 4231 tactic and it is fine, but having Haland and Moukoko, I need a two type striker formation where they will be my main goalscorers.

 

This is how I setup at first but it isn't good. Was trying both strikers on AFa but was not satisfied with that.

 

My playstyle would be aggressive-possesion based and prefer short play than direct passing. I also prefer having one FB more defensive oriented like in my case right FB and one more attacking oriented like my left FB.

 

PI are:

 

- both FBs have shoot less often.

- my DLPd has tackle harder

- my left IW has hold up ball, more direct passes, take more risks.

 

Any advice is welcome.

 

Cheers! :)

Borussia Dortmund_ Overview.png

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bakiano said:

Hello guys and girls,

 

I want to make a 442 where my both strikers will score most of the goals.

I usually playing a 4231 tactic and it is fine, but having Haland and Moukoko, I need a two type striker formation where they will be my main goalscorers.

 

This is how I setup at first but it isn't good. Was trying both strikers on AFa but was not satisfied with that.

 

My playstyle would be aggressive-possesion based and prefer short play than direct passing. I also prefer having one FB more defensive oriented like in my case right FB and one more attacking oriented like my left FB.

 

PI are:

 

- both FBs have shoot less often.

- my DLPd has tackle harder

- my left IW has hold up ball, more direct passes, take more risks.

 

Any advice is welcome.

 

Cheers! :)

Borussia Dortmund_ Overview.png

So, the first thing that comes to mind is that you're first in the Bundesliga in May, and rule no. 1 for tactic creation imo is if it ain't broke don't fix it. 

Having said that, by the sounds of it the 4231 is what got you this success and wanting to switch to a 442 is the issue? 

My go-to 442 looks something like this:

         CFa-CFs

WMa CMs CMs WMa

FBs CBd BPDd FBs

On a balanced or positive mentality, and then I go from there. I would then tweak the roles depending on personnel- for example I would not play two attacking centre mids as CMs as they will both naturally go forward. But a player with the right traits e.g. hold position, dictate tempo, stay back perhaps can perfectly well play alongside a B2B type in the middle.

What does your (successful by the looks of things) 4231 look like? You could very easily use that as a base and then tweak it into a 442 with similar structures. In fact, it looks liek you might have started to do that already by the name of the tactic.

Playing Haaland as a PFs is a waste imo. Surely he should be your main goal machine and if you want him playing a more all-round role should be at the least a DLFa or CFa? I also don't really like the Mezzala running into the same space Haaland will be looking to play in. If I were you I would keep the 4231 and rotate Mokoko as he is still very much under 18 in this save going by the year as well. Or if Mokoko has the skill set to play as e.g. a SS or IFa then that could work. 

Although it is a tactical no-no in some circles I think dual AFa or duel CFs or CFa or PFa can work very well in the right set up, and possibly something like that should be what you look too go with if you really want to play 442.

Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Flußkrebs said:

So, the first thing that comes to mind is that you're first in the Bundesliga in May, and rule no. 1 for tactic creation imo is if it ain't broke don't fix it. 

Having said that, by the sounds of it the 4231 is what got you this success and wanting to switch to a 442 is the issue? 

My go-to 442 looks something like this:

         CFa-CFs

WMa CMs CMs WMa

FBs CBd BPDd FBs

On a balanced or positive mentality, and then I go from there. I would then tweak the roles depending on personnel- for example I would not play two attacking centre mids as CMs as they will both naturally go forward. But a player with the right traits e.g. hold position, dictate tempo, stay back perhaps can perfectly well play alongside a B2B type in the middle.

What does your (successful by the looks of things) 4231 look like? You could very easily use that as a base and then tweak it into a 442 with similar structures. In fact, it looks liek you might have started to do that already by the name of the tactic.

Playing Haaland as a PFs is a waste imo. Surely he should be your main goal machine and if you want him playing a more all-round role should be at the least a DLFa or CFa? I also don't really like the Mezzala running into the same space Haaland will be looking to play in. If I were you I would keep the 4231 and rotate Mokoko as he is still very much under 18 in this save going by the year as well. Or if Mokoko has the skill set to play as e.g. a SS or IFa then that could work. 

Although it is a tactical no-no in some circles I think dual AFa or duel CFs or CFa or PFa can work very well in the right set up, and possibly something like that should be what you look too go with if you really want to play 442.

This is my 4231 tactic where I won the bundesliga and Haland scored a lot of goals though.

 

You're kinda right, I should just stick to my 4231 tactic and maybe just change my right winger to IF on attack duty and put Moukoko there. He has attributes to play there but first must retrain the position.

 

Will try to have a BBM over mezzala and dual PFa in the attack to see are there any improvements.

 

Thanks for the suggestions!

received_513946723103076.webp received_2982293172053582.webp

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you are so keen on replacing the 4231 with a two-striker system, then I think a diamond version of the 442 would be a better idea than the classic 442.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

If you are so keen on replacing the 4231 with a two-striker system, then I think a diamond version of the 442 would be a better idea than the classic 442.

Hmm.. something like this maybe:

 

          PFa PFa

             AMs

IWs                   Wa

            DLPd

WBa CDd  BPDd FBs

             SKa

 

DLPd on DMC position and wingers on ML/MR.

 

What do you think?

Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Bakiano said:

Hmm.. something like this maybe:

 

          PFa PFa

             AMs

IWs                   Wa

            DLPd

WBa CDd  BPDd FBs

             SKa

 

DLPd on DMC position and wingers on ML/MR.

 

What do you think?

I don't know what's the idea of that setup in terms of playing style, so it's impossible to offer any specific opinion. 

And you also failed to provide instructions. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

I don't know what's the idea of that setup in terms of playing style, so it's impossible to offer any specific opinion. 

And you also failed to provide instructions. 

Well, it is the same like in my classic 442. 

Borussia Dortmund v Kaiserslautern_ Tactics.png

Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly, I don't like it (for the most part), but that does not mean the tactic cannot work (given that every ME has its flaws). I don't like your initial tactic either, but it has obviously worked for you :)

Test it, see what happens and report back if you still need help.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

Honestly, I don't like it (for the most part), but that does not mean the tactic cannot work (given that every ME has its flaws). I don't like your initial tactic either, but it has obviously worked for you :)

Test it, see what happens and report back if you still need help.

I will give it a try, but I am also not a fan of these tactics, without at least two central midfielders.

 

Oh, what do you dont like about my initial tactic? You mean my 4231? Or this 442?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think FM has been raising the impact of formations on the style we play and this is a very important point. Let´s say, if you want to play attacking football, maybe you should have at least 3 men upfront to start pressing your opponents since they do their buildup. But when you use an "open midfield" like the second formation and try to attack - which means more pressing upfront - your three men will start pressing and, if they fail, there is a high change your other players will also try to move out of positions to press, leaving huge gaps behind as the distance between them is fairly high.

If you want to play attacking football, I would really consider a diamond 442 as already suggested here, or maybe 4-2-3-1 / 4-1-4-1 DM Wide, maybe using press instructions as PIs on some players. It´s not so complicated to transform a 442 into a 4231 and it can work very well, and you avoid overcomplications.

Edited by Tsuru
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Bakiano said:

Oh, what do you dont like about my initial tactic?

It's simply opposite to how I approach tactical creation, including extreme aggressiveness out of possession + the asymmetric formation.

But that does not mean it's a bad tactic. If it works for you, then it's certainly good :thup: 

 

2 hours ago, Bakiano said:

You mean my 4231? Or this 442?

The asymmetric one from your opening post. 

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

I think FM has been raising the impact of formations on the style we play and this is a very important point. Let´s say, if you want to play attacking football, maybe you should have at least 3 men upfront to start pressing your opponents since they do their buildup. But when you use an "open midfield" like the second formation and try to attack - which means more pressing upfront - your three men will start pressing and, if they fail, there is a high change your other players will also try to move out of positions to press, leaving huge gaps behind as the distance between them is fairly high.

If you want to play attacking football, I would really consider a diamond 442 as already suggested here, or maybe 4-2-3-1 / 4-1-4-1 DM Wide, maybe using press instructions as PIs on some players. It´s not so complicated to transform a 442 into a 4231 and it can work very well, and you avoid overcomplications.

The thing is, I wanted to play from start and Haland and Moukoko together, so 442 would be the best formation.

 

But it is hard to play the way I want because both Haland and Moukoko are similar type of strikers.

 

Don't like the 442 diamond to be honest, like I said in earlier post, I don't like to play without at least two central midfielders.

 

21 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

It's simply opposite to how I approach tactical creation, including extreme aggressiveness out of possession + the asymmetric formation.

But that does not mean it's a bad tactic. If it works for you, then it's certainly good :thup: 

 

The asymmetric one from your opening post. 

That is only my inital setup for this asymmetric tactic. I am using 4231 and it is going very well but wanted to play with two strikers.

 

I want to involve Moukoko more but can't replace him with Haaland because you can see in pics below why I can't.

received_445118849900199.jpeg

received_513946723103076.webp

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Bakiano said:

That is only my inital setup for this asymmetric tactic. I am using 4231 and it is going very well but wanted to play with two strikers.

 

I want to involve Moukoko more but can't replace him with Haaland because you can see in pics below why I can't

The formation with 2 strikers that is the most similar to the 4231 is obviously the 424. So you may try that one. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

The formation with 2 strikers that is the most similar to the 4231 is obviously the 424. So you may try that one. 

That could work if I set it right.

 

If I would choose this formation with these roles:

          PFa   PFa

IWs                          Wa

          DLPd   BBm

WBa CDd      BPDd  IWBs

                 SKa

 

What TIs to use?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hora atrás, Bakiano disse:

The thing is, I wanted to play from start and Haland and Moukoko together, so 442 would be the best formation.

 

But it is hard to play the way I want because both Haland and Moukoko are similar type of strikers.

 

Don't like the 442 diamond to be honest, like I said in earlier post, I don't like to play without at least two central midfielders.

You have other good options to play on a more proactive style and use 2 strikers. You can use a 424, traditional or deep - both can be very nice if well set up -, a 4312 argentinean style, or maybe a 32212 (three CBs, two wingbacks, two midfielders, one AM and two strikers), maybe this one wouldn´t be suitable as it is more similar to a 442 diamond.

You can also adapt one of the strikers to be a wing foward and play with inverted foot cutting inside. 

I believe that part of a good attacking game in FM is to press more the opponents during their buildup. If you have at least 3 men upfront (striker/winger/AM), it will be more effective and easier for you. The majority of the teams have a 4 or 3 men defensive line and do the buildup with 3-5 players. When you have three or four men pressing a line of three, four or five, the chance of being outnumbered is lower than if you only have two. And the chance they make a mistake and you have more players to take advantage on that is also higher.

An attacking system can work on a traditional 442, but I believe it is more difficult.

Edited by Tsuru
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Bakiano said:

If I would choose this formation with these roles:

          PFa   PFa

IWs                          Wa

          DLPd   BBm

WBa CDd      BPDd  IWBs

                 SKa

 

What TIs to use?

What's the idea with such setup? It looks very much gung-ho and is therefore certainly not suited to a possession-oriented style, but is even less suited to defensive football. So I would suggest instructions that encourage more of higher-tempo/fast-transition play within an attack-minded style of football. 

Whether such tactic/style would suit your team/players is an entirely different question though.

I personally would set up (some) roles and duties differently, but that's just me ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Tsuru said:

You have other good options to play on a more proactive style and use 2 strikers. You can use a 424, traditional or deep - both can be very nice if well set up -, a 4312 argentinean style, or maybe a 32212 (three CBs, two wingbacks, two midfielders, one AM and two strikers), maybe this one wouldn´t be suitable as it is more similar to a 442 diamond.

You can also adapt one of the strikers to be a wing foward and play with inverted foot cutting inside. 

I believe that part of a good attacking game in FM is to press more the opponents during their buildup. If you have at least 3 men upfront (striker/winger/AM), it will be more effective and easier for you. The majority of the teams have a 4 or 3 men defensive line and do the buildup with 3-5 players. When you have three or four men pressing a line of three, four or five, the chance of being outnumbered is lower than if you only have two. And the chance they make a mistake and you have more players to take advantage on that is also higher.

An attacking system can work on a traditional 442, but I believe it is more difficult.

Thanks for suggestions, I will try to put Moukoko on rigth wing in 4231 tactic as IFa or even Ramdeuter.

 

2 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

What's the idea with such setup? It looks very much gung-ho and is therefore certainly not suited to a possession-oriented style, but is even less suited to defensive football. So I would suggest instructions that encourage more of higher-tempo/fast-transition play within an attack-minded style of football. 

Whether such tactic/style would suit your team/players is an entirely different question though.

I personally would set up (some) roles and duties differently, but that's just me ;)

I just put it randomly, but want to have the left FB attacking and the right one defensive. Left winger would be more the creative playmaker and the right winger to be the dribbler. And two attacker of course haha.

 

 

So what is your role setup? I am curious. 😁

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bakiano said:

I just put it randomly

Well, that's exactly the problem. 

 

1 hour ago, Bakiano said:

So what is your role setup? I am curious

PFat    DLFsu

IWsu                               Wat

DLPde  BWMsu

FBat   CDde  BPDde   IWBde

SKsu

As an example.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

Well, that's exactly the problem. 

 

PFat    DLFsu

IWsu                               Wat

DLPde  BWMsu

FBat   CDde  BPDde   IWBde

SKsu

As an example.

Never used BWM before but will give it a try and see are there any improvements.

 

Thank you for your help and suggestions as always. Cheers! 😎

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Bakiano said:

Never used BWM before but will give it a try and see are there any improvements

I did not say that you should use that particular setup, because I don't know your players. So that was just one possible example of a 424 setup. 

The selection of instructions also matters, as they need to match the setup of roles and duties.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would set up a little bit different, specially on a lower division (or with a smaller team) and considering a quick, proactive style.

I always think that Wingbacks are rare to find on those teams, they are not good enough to be more adventurous and always let my defence exposed, so I prefer fullbacks. Although the wingers may lack some support, specially the attacking one, this is a fast attacking setup and his role is to put the ball quickly into the area, so it matters less than on a possession style for example (in which he would hold the ball more and would need more support).

I also don´t like the BWMs, TBH I kind of avoid them at all costs, they tend to lump the ball randomly and make the team more fragile defensively, I prefer the basic CM Su, the DLP or the BBM.

And I would not raise the risk with a SK-Su, I don´t have enough good goalkeepers for that.

@BakianoI posted this just as another example of what Experienced Defender said, that is, there are many different possible setups and they depend on many factors including the players you have and the playstyle, there is no right and unique way when you are doing this.

When you progress on the game, you can test and see what works for you, then you can find your "tactical school" and it will be easier to set up your own teams on the future, because you will know that you will and will not like.

 

AFat    DLFsu

WSu                               Wat

CM/DLPde  BBM/CM/DLPsu

FBat   CDde  CDde   FBSu

SKDe/GKDe

 

Edited by Tsuru
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

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

Create an account

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

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...