Nothing works

[trueblue9877]

My tactics always seem to get countered by the AI can someone show an example of a tactic that they would use as an underdog?

[toshimitzou1]

If you post a screenshot I could try and give you some help. I've been having 'relative' success with a range of tactics when playing as an 'underdog' but they are by no means 'plug n play' and are specifically tailored to the teams I manage.

[Zemahh]

4 hours ago, trueblue9877 said:

My tactics always seem to get countered by the AI can someone show an example of a tactic that they would use as an underdog?

Your tactic can't really get "countered". AI can only adapt its approach based on manager preferences and pre-match expectations (and possibly some other factors), but it certainly can't read or adapt to your tactic.

If you need advice, it's best if you post a screenshot of your current tactic, so people can tell you where things are possibly going wrong.

[trueblue9877]

12 hours ago, toshimitzou1 said:

If you post a screenshot I could try and give you some help. I've been having 'relative' success with a range of tactics when playing as an 'underdog' but they are by no means 'plug n play' and are specifically tailored to the teams I manage.

This is my current set up.

[who_is_it]

Too much support duties IMO

The right winger IMO need an attack duty. Same thing for the left full back. 

This is my point of view

 

https://community.sigames.com/forums/topic/513829-pairs-combinations-the-ultimate-guide-released/

Edited May 3, 2021 by who_is_it

[trueblue9877]

13 hours ago, toshimitzou1 said:

If you post a screenshot I could try and give you some help. I've been having 'relative' success with a range of tactics when playing as an 'underdog' but they are by no means 'plug n play' and are specifically tailored to the teams I manage.

It would probably go better than mine have been.

[CARRERA]

6 hours ago, trueblue9877 said:

Well, at first i would clear out all instruction and become clear of how i want my team to play and then set up the mentality, formation as well as roles and duties. As you might already be way into the season hera are a few things to take into consideration.

Balanced mentality is a good starting point for a team like wigan as its neither too aggressive, nor too defensive. 4-2-3-1 is a fairly aggressive formation with most players up the pitch offering the ability to press aggressively and transition quickly from back to front. Another thing to think about is how you want to distribute responsibilities around your players. Are you looking for a more fluid style where players share defensive and offense resposibilities which would require quite a few support duties, or do you want to be clear on who is attacking and who is defending which leads to more defend/attack duties?

After having that in mind you need to make your choice about the roles. Once again we have to be clear about our formations strengths and weaknesses. 4-2-3-1 has one big problem: it has no DM covering for potentially more aggressive fullbacks attacking the flanks. So be careful about that. Also you are playing with only 2 central midfielders who need to provide both defensive cover and pressure. While a defend duty in CM is enough to cover, one CM with support is not enough to provide enough preassure for central midfield. So you migh consider looking for a BWM as a Support duty to provide more preassure to the opponent in midfield while the defend duty can cover for a fullback being more aggressive. Another idea could be using 2 support duties to share both resposibilities in a more fluid manner. A DLP on support combined with a CM on support is also great as they both share responsibilities, but also providing a little cover for a fullback, especially on the DLP's side of the pitch.

Another consideration is about where/if and how to use a playmaker. While having a deep playmaker at the CM position can be quite favourable for playing possession based football as he is the perfect player to recycle possession, playing without a playmaker or one higher up the pitch can be more useful for quick transitioning styles of football.

Also be clear of how your wingers work. While IF's act more like a creative striker moving inside when your team is in possession, a IW does act more like a classic winger staying wide until he has possession. Generally spoken inside cutting players on the flank do favour more possession and attacking oriented styles, classic wingers do favour quick transitions and direct play.

When making a choice about your striker once more think about your final product. Do you want him to be involved into phase of build up which can both suit possession and direct style of football, or do you want him to be the outlet primarily looking for direct goal scoring opportunities. 

If you made all those choices, go play some games and see how it plays out and then make adjustments to your favour with further team instructions. Quicker transitions? increase tempo or add counter TI. want to keep the ball on the ground? shorter passes. not pressing aggressively enough? increase your defensive block and pressing intensity. 

Edited May 3, 2021 by CARRERA

[toshimitzou1]

As above with the following thoughts in mind.

You mention you are an 'underdog' yet have deployed a very aggressive set of team instructions (counter-press, high block, more urgent pressing and offside trap). Are your players well suited to this approach? Also, the tactic employs aggressive roles all over the pitch, with the CM Defend the only player willing to hold position whilst the rest of the players race by him. In addition, your player roles and duties are identical on both wings;  whilst this can be effective against far inferior opposition, the lack of variety will struggle when facing experienced opposition. 

You need to address a few fundamental questions.

Out of possession: How can we prevent the opposition from creating good goal scoring opportunities?

In transition: Where do we expect to win possession of the ball?

In Possession: How do you expect to create goal scoring chances?

 

 

[glengarry224]

7 hours ago, trueblue9877 said:

This is my current set up.

As others have written, this is an aggressive tactic. 

Generally speaking, many experts -- certainly I am not one -- advise that regular underdogs, as opposed to good teams who are underdogs in a few games, do better with two strikers, who can play off of each other.  This is because as an underdog, you will inevitably end up with most of your players spending a lot of time defending in your own half, and that will create gaps between your midfield and strikers.  That might not happen with your current tactic but this tactic will get picked apart by superior teams.  You can accomplish that by having the second forward attack from the attacking-midfield strata instead of positioning him on the striker level:  for example an AMC on SS(a) or a winger on IF(a).

In addition to your too aggressive team instructions, you have both fullbacks set to WB.  This is very aggressive.  Especially without a DM, and with a high defensive line, and with 'offside trap,' and with both wingers positioned high up the pitch.  I would switch one to FB(s) or FB(d) and maybe even try the other on FB(a) which is a little less aggressive than WB(s).  If you do use two DMs, especially if one is a HB, DM or A, you can try to be more aggressive with the fullbacks but watch closely during games.

Also, most regular-underdog, counter-attacking strategies generally have 2 (maybe 3) players on attack duty and try to get the ball to those two players quickly, while your opponent is out of position (therefore, no 'play out of defense' and maybe no playmaker roles).  If one of your fullbacks is good at getting up the field and crossing, and also has the work rate to track back, maybe him on FB(a) and a striker for him to cross to:  AF(a) is fine, plus another striker/forward to attack or support him.

If you want to stick with 4-2-3-1, as others have suggested, I would certainly switch the two CMs to DMs.

Just to illustrate, here is a tactic which I used to take Vallecano to promotion and the top 5 of La Liga (I did adjust it when I promoted to La Liga but don't recall how the First Division formation was different).  I think that I would also turn on 'overlap right' and use the PI 'stay wider' on the RB but it was a long time ago.  Note that it is not plug-and-play because I am not an expert and you need certain strengths in certain positions, for example a good target man and center backs who are good in the air (but fyi, they were very slow too), but it does illustrate a lot of what I learned reading the forums and watching videos, particularly Rashidi/Daljit:

Note that I do have my RB on WB(a) but that I also have a HB(d) on the same side.  Also, against teams with far superior wingers/fullbacks I would make adjustments, like switch the RB to FB(a), have my wingers man-mark the fullbacks or wingers (switching my AMR to IW), etc.  The team instruction 'stay on feet' is iffy.  I had a lot of players who were bad at tackling and would often create problems when they tried to tackle much quicker players with good ball skills, but it might be better to just put that instruction on individual players. 

I would switch instructions like 'stay on feet', 'more urgent pressing' and 'narrow' attack on/off depending upon my opposition and I had other v similar formations to switch to.  Formations like this do have the problem that there is often a big gap between the DM and the attacking midfield strata, which can make transitions difficult.  You could switch the wingers to the CM-strata if you're getting over-run in the midfield and/or can't get the ball upfield

[silentwars]

8 hours ago, trueblue9877 said:

This is my current set up.

Your tactic looks set for a team expected to do well, not an underdog.

Firstly, do you really want to have higher lines when the opposition is likely to have the majority of play and are better than you? For an underdog it's better to be compact and organised.

Play out from the back and the short distribution could harm your chances on the counter which is probably going to be essential to your success. Also look at your defenders are they composed enough to be playing out or will they likely give the ball away if put under pressure.

I'd have another player in the final third on attack, so somebody else is getting further forward to support your striker and possibly switch one of the wingbacks to a fullback so you have more cover at the back.

As an example, the screenshot below is my underdog tactic that I've had some success with

[trueblue9877]

On 04/05/2021 at 00:43, silentwars said:

Your tactic looks set for a team expected to do well, not an underdog.

Firstly, do you really want to have higher lines when the opposition is likely to have the majority of play and are better than you? For an underdog it's better to be compact and organised.

Play out from the back and the short distribution could harm your chances on the counter which is probably going to be essential to your success. Also look at your defenders are they composed enough to be playing out or will they likely give the ball away if put under pressure.

I'd have another player in the final third on attack, so somebody else is getting further forward to support your striker and possibly switch one of the wingbacks to a fullback so you have more cover at the back.

As an example, the screenshot below is my underdog tactic that I've had some success with

That looks very solid.