The FM22 AMC Thread

[Numenor]

Looking at your gifs, your players seem to pass it shorter and moving in to space, which will not happen for me. All my players are 100% fluid in the tactic and roles i play them in, but for some reason they rather make that long pass that noone will ever reach, and they dont seem to want to run in to space to get the ball. What is wrong? 

The only change i did was flip it, so the IF and FB-A got on the right side because my best player is left-footed.

Edited June 20, 2022 by Numenor

[Johnny Ace]

19 hours ago, Numenor said:

Looking at your gifs, your players seem to pass it shorter and moving in to space, which will not happen for me. All my players are 100% fluid in the tactic and roles i play them in, but for some reason they rather make that long pass that noone will ever reach, and they dont seem to want to run in to space to get the ball. What is wrong? 

Hmm, I'm not sure, I don't use shorter passing or anything. Which GIF are you talking about specifically or is it just any of them? I don't do anything special really . How good are your players? I'm only hand picking snippets remember 

19 hours ago, Numenor said:

The only change i did was flip it, so the IF and FB-A got on the right side because my best player is left-footed.

I wouldn't flip just a couple of roles, I'd flip the whole thing, leaving the channel on the winger's side is important for the CM(S) and the CD(D) defends the side of the pitch with the most offensive fullback

To be honest, I'd prefer if no one P&Ped my tactic, by all means, try it out, learn from it, see how things work out. I evolved it over many seasons and have made changes since I last posted a screenshot of it. It was more to show how I do things and share tactical ideas (plus it's helpful for me because I'm forgetful ).  I was hoping more folks would do the same, like a community type thread because of how awkward AMCs have been over the years     

[Johnny Ace]

I think moving forward, I want to ditch the AF(A) and Poacher type roles up front, I've used either one of those for the whole of my main FM22 career, and focus on Support strikers. I'm doing a Youth Academy Challenge in another save which uses a DLF(S) but I don't use an AMC, it's a 4-3-3, which I've had a lot of fun with this year. I use a Mezz(A) there which is probably the role of FM22 for me   

I'm a bit bored at Stuttgart so come the end of this season, either another suitable job will crop up or I'll flat out quit. Basically, I want the AMC to be the main goalscorer. Spearhead strikers and IF's are a bit easy to achieve, a bit more straight forward. I even got a Raumdeuter to be the top scorer this year, which I was delighted with to be honest but an AMC, haven't done that yet  

There's no chance of that happening with another goal scoring role on the field, I'm thinking something along the lines of what I played around with in FM19 (I think it was): 

                                                                 F9(S)

                                          IW(S)              SS(A)                  IW(A) 

                                                      CM(D)           CM(S)

                                         FB(A)     CD(D)           CD(D)      FB(S)

 

Wether it's a bit one dimensional and blunt, I'm not sure. The False 9 would have to a Bobby Firminho type player, completely about teamwork and unselfish, where I'd want the opposite for the SS, a 100% goalscorer and preferably freekick and penalty talker 

 

[bosque]

hace 2 minutos, Johnny Ace dijo:

one dimensional

Why would you think is one dimensional? In my opinion it has movement and players moving between lines or overlapping

[Johnny Ace]

6 minutes ago, bosque said:

Why would you think is one dimensional? In my opinion it has movement and players moving between lines or overlapping

It could funnel too much to the SS but even if he has a bad day there's the F9 and IW's to pick up the slack, I'm just mulling over in my head how it would play out and team instructions. I'd miss the width, so I'm thinking about double DM's and sending the fullbacks forward to stretch out play a bit more, but then double DM's with a SS......

 

Something to experiment with  

 

How are you getting on with your AMC @bosque?

[Freakiie]

Just play strikerless, guaranteed not to have a striker as your top scorer!

[bosque]

hace 23 minutos, Johnny Ace dijo:

It could funnel too much to the SS but even if he has a bad day there's the F9 and IW's to pick up the slack, I'm just mulling over in my head how it would play out and team instructions. I'd miss the width, so I'm thinking about double DM's and sending the fullbacks forward to stretch out play a bit more, but then double DM's with a SS......

 

Something to experiment with  

 

How are you getting on with your AMC @bosque?

It wasn't working sadly. I tried to use him as AM(s) with an AF upfront, a winger on one side and an IW/IF on the other. Both wing roles on support. But we were barely creating chances, almost all goals came from set pieces. So I decided to take a little break because I had little success with tactics lately 😔

[Johnny Ace]

33 minutes ago, Freakiie said:

Just play strikerless, guaranteed not to have a striker as your top scorer!

I did try strikerless, was pretty good  That was back in the Beta though 

[Johnny Ace]

25 minutes ago, bosque said:

It wasn't working sadly. I tried to use him as AM(s) with an AF upfront, a winger on one side and an IW/IF on the other. Both wing roles on support. But we were barely creating chances, almost all goals came from set pieces. So I decided to take a little break because I had little success with tactics lately 😔

With a Support AMC or Trequartistsa, give inverted wide players a try, try mixing it up with one IW(S) and an IF(S). AM's on Support stay back a bit when you're moving up field so I always found having the wide men cut in gave the team more options. Even a wide APM could work out great here. It could be great in a short passing or possession system    

[bosque]

hace 7 minutos, Johnny Ace dijo:

With a Support AMC or Trequartistsa, give inverted wide players a try, try mixing it up with one IW(S) and an IF(S). AM's on Support stay back a bit when you're moving up field so I always found having the wide men cut in gave the team more options. Even a wide APM could work out great here. It could be great in a short passing or possession system    

That sounds logical and I was actually trying to play a possession with intent style. I will try that out

[Johnny Ace]

3 minutes ago, bosque said:

That sounds logical and I was actually trying to play a possession with intent style. I will try that out

Fullbacks, IWBs and anything other than the Wide Target Man and Wingers are good fits for possession type systems. Just think, Wingbacks and Wingers run on the ball a lot, look to cross and stretch the pitch, which is the opposite to what you want, you want players in closer to together to a) make it easier to find one another with passes b) win the ball back easier and congest central areas. Then they also dribble and cross a lot which are risks and could lose the team possession.  Talking in general here of cause because you could use a Winger and combine it with an Inverted Wingback, there's always a balance to be found  

[bosque]

hace 9 minutos, Johnny Ace dijo:

Fullbacks, IWBs and anything other than the Wide Target Man and Wingers are good fits for possession type systems. Just think, Wingbacks and Wingers run on the ball a lot, look to cross and stretch the pitch, which is the opposite to what you want, you want players in closer to together to a) make it easier to find one another with passes b) win the ball back easier and congest central areas. Then they also dribble and cross a lot which are risks and could lose the team possession.  Talking in general here of cause because you could use a Winger and combine it with an Inverted Wingback, there's always a balance to be found  

It makes a lot of sense, My thinking behind using a Winger on support was to create space for the AM(s). I thought that with two inverted players he would have little space to operate. But it's true as soon as the Winger receive the ball he was running out and wide to cross.

Edited June 21, 2022 by bosque

[Johnny Ace]

38 minutes ago, bosque said:

It makes a lot of sense, My thinking behind using a Winger on support was to create space for the AM(s)

My observations were that on Support, they weren't far enough forward to take advantage of that space, so having the extra incutting wide man helped make up for it.

Generally, on Support, when you're in the final third, they'll hang around the outside of the box, the wide players cut in to provide numbers in the box. If a player's staying wide, you might only have two players in the box (the striker and opposite flank player). That's why I have a Winger with my SS tactic, the IF, AF & SS occupy the box, the winger provides width. If I have him cutting in too, I could have 4 players in the box and accompanying defenders. 

This is theory, of course, the players aren't robots, even an Enganche will enter the box at points and I shout at my Anchor Man when he ventures that far forward  

  

[bosque]

hace 4 horas, Johnny Ace dijo:

My observations were that on Support, they weren't far enough forward to take advantage of that space, so having the extra incutting wide man helped make up for it.

Generally, on Support, when you're in the final third, they'll hang around the outside of the box, the wide players cut in to provide numbers in the box. If a player's staying wide, you might only have two players in the box (the striker and opposite flank player). That's why I have a Winger with my SS tactic, the IF, AF & SS occupy the box, the winger provides width. If I have him cutting in too, I could have 4 players in the box and accompanying defenders. 

This is theory, of course, the players aren't robots, even an Enganche will enter the box at points and I shout at my Anchor Man when he ventures that far forward  

  

Here you are talking about the AMC, right?

[Johnny Ace]

13 hours ago, bosque said:

Here you are talking about the AMC, right?

Yeah yeah 

[bosque]

hace 7 horas, Johnny Ace dijo:

Yeah yeah 

Thanks for enlightening. You are very good at explaining. Now I think I know a bit more about roles 

[Johnny Ace]

1 hour ago, bosque said:

Thanks for enlightening. You are very good at explaining. Now I think I know a bit more about roles 

You're welcome sir! It's worth taking note of ,with any shape, how many players you're sending forward, how many you're keeping back and who's sort of hanging in-between, keeping themselves available to recycle the ball. You can always adjust things if you feel you have too many forward or not enough back. I think that's the problem some people have, they send too many forward which clogs up play and makes things difficult 

[bosque]

hace 2 minutos, Johnny Ace dijo:

You're welcome sir! It's worth taking note of with any shape, how many players you're sending forward, how many you're keeping back and who's sort of hanging in-between, keeping themselves available to recycle the ball. You can always adjust things if you feel you have too many forward or not enough back. I think that's the problem some people have, they send too many forward which clogs up play and makes things difficult 

Yeah, I think I lack some football and football manager knoledge about this. For example, I don't know how many player going forward is enough. I know it depends but is hard for me to know on what depends  And regarding FM Knowledge, different things confuses me with players going forward or not.

For example, the Inside Forward on support duty has "goes forward" hard coded. Is that enough? He goes forward? He goes forward but not too much?

Another example is the Deep Lying Playmaker on support. He has "hold position" hard coded but I can see him bombing forward when we are attacking without having any trait about that.

I suppose all these questions are answered by watching the games and beeing more careful with the observations instead on rushing it.

Sorry for the off topic!

[Johnny Ace]

20 minutes ago, bosque said:

For example, the Inside Forward on support duty has "goes forward" hard coded. Is that enough? He goes forward? He goes forward but not too much?

It's up to you and how you want to play I guess, the IF is a great role but keep your eye on him, if he's not doing what you want, experiment a bit, try an IW. I find just an IF(S) is plenty aggressive enough for me most of the time 

23 minutes ago, bosque said:

Another example is the Deep Lying Playmaker on support. He has "hold position" hard coded but I can see him bombing forward when we are attacking without having any trait about that.

I had a grumble about that  Any hold position role in the DM or CM slot will go forward when they see fit (depending on their footballing intelligence) , Anchor Men will do it, right up to the Enganche. If a move goes long enough, an Anchor can get as far forward as the penalty area. Player movement is really fluid this year 

27 minutes ago, bosque said:

I suppose all these questions are answered by watching the games and beeing more careful with the observations instead on rushing it.

Yeah, your best bet is watching the players and how the tactic plays out, after a bit, you'll know the player movements in your tactic off by heart 

28 minutes ago, bosque said:

Sorry for the off topic!

It's all good 

[Christopher S]

2 hours ago, Johnny Ace said:

I had a grumble about that  Any hold position role in the DM or CM slot will go forward when they see fit (depending on their footballing intelligence) , Anchor Men will do it, right up to the Enganche. If a move goes long enough, an Anchor can get as far forward as the penalty area. Player movement is really fluid this year 

Too fluid, imo. The instruction 'Hold Position' really loses impact when the players are routinely ignoring it. Maybe it's just me, but it annoys me more often than not to have all these instructions available only to have the players ignore them 80% of the time.

[OJ403]

Looking to implement the AMC in my Derby County save. Its 2030 now, we overperformed last season finishing 4th. The xG table had us 7th, a fair assessment would be that we probably are in the top 7 best but not top 4 sides - think Leicester of recent years and West Ham. We've played a counter attacking 4-1-3-2 up until now but we're suffering an inability to control games as opponents adapt to our increased reputation.

I'm looking to convert us back to the 5-2-2-1 ("3-4-3") that I actually started the save with in season one, albeit that quickly became a flat front three. I've tested it in recent games and have something along these lines: 

My two best players are both natural AMCs, one more creative (??) and one a more natural scorer (SS-A) although they both have elements of the other to their game. So far they have been inconsistent, which hasn't been helped by the uncertainty of my AMCRs role. I've ran AM on both duties and a trequartista to inconsistent effects. In spite of this the football has been promising for the stage of development the system is in.

I was wondering how this looked to those who have used AMCs more in recent years? As I say signs have been promising for the system, but underwhelming for my AMCs - who ought to be the stars of the side.

[HurkaDurk69]

3 hours ago, Christopher S said:

Too fluid, imo. The instruction 'Hold Position' really loses impact when the players are routinely ignoring it. Maybe it's just me, but it annoys me more often than not to have all these instructions available only to have the players ignore them 80% of the time.

Should go to the bugtracker and put this up if you think it should be fixed

 

I definitely agree with you sometimes, If I want a DM to stay back to hold defensive shape, I want him to hold

[Johnny Ace]

8 hours ago, HurkaDurk69 said:

Should go to the bugtracker and put this up if you think it should be fixed

Has already been done, it's supposed to be like that so we have to live with it 

[Johnny Ace]

8 hours ago, OJ403 said:

I was wondering how this looked to those who have used AMCs more in recent years? As I say signs have been promising for the system, but underwhelming for my AMCs - who ought to be the stars of the side.

I've not used dual AMs myself, I think I did for a bit with Chelsea in the Beta but never stuck with it

The SS role isn't all that offensive with its Take more Risks PI hardcoded so there's an element of creativity to the role. You could go with an AM(A) with Move into Channels and Dribble More as PIs to try and make a slightly more selfish SS. Something to try and see how it compares

The AMRC could be an AP(A) but from your tactic it looks like you want a more direct running role so maybe another AM(A) with Dribble More, you could sort of turn him into a false play maker with Take More Risks and Shoot Less Often  

Your striker role will have an impact on your AMCs here too, if you use a spearhead role, one that looks to get behind the defensive line (P(A), AF(A), PF(A)) he will literally be the spearhead for the team and the player furthest forward most of the time getting on the end of the majority of the team's moves

The F9 is probably the most supportive striker role and will drop the deepest then you work your way up through the roles DLF(S)- Treq(A)- CF(S) and so on up to the Poacher (the role with least movement and most aggressive). Something else to experiment with and something you might need to change depending on who you're up against  

[Freakiie]

@OJ403From my experience with 3 at the back systems, creativity up front is pretty pointless. You want pace up front, creativity behind them and you'll score a boatload from your fast players running onto whipped passes from half field. Add some height to your players that arrive later in the box and if you have good wing backs you'll notch up a solid number of goals from headers as well.

My system (and roles) look very similar to yours, except that I run a 1-2 instead of a 2-1 up front, with a AF/F9/SS trio. The F9... honestly he's just there because I need 11 players to start the match. Put someone with pace there and he will get his name on the score sheet, but even with someone like Müller in that position I failed to get any assists out of him. Ironically, Lewandowski as the AF though? 17 assists in all competitions, I don't think I ever managed that with Müller in FM21 where the creative 10 was much stronger than it is in FM21!

Same story with my strikerless variant where I run AM(A)/SS/AP(A) (Used to be SS/Treq/SS, but that didn't work anywhere near as well as it did in FM21 for me), the AP is just there to fill names on the team sheet and if you put a fast player on that position he will grab his goals simply from running past the defence and receiving long passes from deeper positions. Had a RWB newgen in my journeyman save using that tactic that got 20 assists in 28 La Liga games (without taking corners!), as he was a solid passer and just kept pinging sharp whipped balls from the halfway line that my AM/SS would run onto. Meanwhile, my AP has less assists than my AM and SS, as they get a ton of assists from making those runs, getting pushed too wide to take a shot, so they play a simple cut back or ball across the box for someone else to slot home. Meanwhile, my AP just wanders around in no mans land and wonders what happened to the whole "I'm a playmaker, I should attract the ball" part, as play seems to completely ignore him.

[chewbaccaloveaddiction]

@OJ403

I've been mostly playing 3412, 3421, 343 and now 3430 systems in fm22. 

This is the system I'm currently using:

Spoiler

 

Like most strikerless tactics it's super solid defensively, (I finished last Serie A season with 115 goals for and 15 against). In terms of creativity, shadow strikers have take more risks hard coded and they do get a lot of assists. You can also see the DLP at the top with most key passes. 

 

 

At least for my team, the 10 role that worked best is the AM(a), I guess because the role doesn't have take more risks, he get's less assists, but his goal output is better than a SS. Also as a playmaker either AP or T, he got marked out of the game too often.

 

Other things I've tried: 2 SS, Poacher/AF; SS AM(a) F9/AF; T/AP SS and AF/P all work. If you want to play gegenpressing, a proper CF is needed. But for counter attacking I definitely recommend a 3430. But you can't go wrong with a SS, AM, AF either. 

Edited June 23, 2022 by chewbaccaloveaddiction

[Flußkrebs]

2 hours ago, chewbaccaloveaddiction said:

@OJ403

I've been mostly playing 3412, 3421, 343 and now 3430 systems in fm22. 

This is the system I'm currently using:

  Hide contents

 

Like most strikerless tactics it's super solid defensively, (I finished last Serie A season with 115 goals for and 15 against). In terms of creativity, shadow strikers have take more risks hard coded and they do get a lot of assists. You can also see the DLP at the top with most key passes. 

 

 

At least for my team, the 10 role that worked best is the AM(a), I guess because the role doesn't have take more risks, he get's less assists, but his goal output is better than a SS. Also as a playmaker either AP or T, he got marked out of the game too often.

 

Other things I've tried: 2 SS, Poacher/AF; SS AM(a) F9/AF; T/AP SS and AF/P all work. If you want to play gegenpressing, a proper CF is needed. But for counter attacking I definitely recommend a 3430. But you can't go wrong with a SS, AM, AF either. 

+1 for the SS-AMa-SS combo. Had a lot of success with that in prior version of match engine (22.2 or 22.3 I think) but haven't tried recently.

I was running a set up kinda like 

       SS-AM-SS

DW-CM-CM-DW

  WCB-CB-WCB

And it resulted in lots of lovely through ball goals, often plays where the AM would pick the ball up, play it through to the SS, then make a run from deep to finish the move off in the box. Used it at lower league level as well as it's pretty straightforward and works well if you don't have a proper no 9 type, but relies on pace/stamina/off the ball from your SS (and AMa) as they'll be making a LOT of runs. 

Edited June 23, 2022 by Flußkrebs

[chewbaccaloveaddiction]

2 hours ago, Flußkrebs said:

+1 for the SS-AMa-SS combo. Had a lot of success with that in prior version of match engine (22.2 or 22.3 I think) but haven't tried recently.

I was running a set up kinda like 

       SS-AM-SS

DW-CM-CM-DW

  WCB-CB-WCB

And it resulted in lots of lovely through ball goals, often plays where the AM would pick the ball up, play it through to the SS, then make a run from deep to finish the move off in the box. Used it at lower league level as well as it's pretty straightforward and works well if you don't have a proper no 9 type, but relies on pace/stamina/off the ball from your SS (and AMa) as they'll be making a LOT of runs. 

 

I was really struggling to make the AMC score with 3 SS and the AM(a) made all the difference. 

[OJ403]

All echoing my thoughts cheers guys. Maybe an AM-A would be better than the SS - I hadn't appreciated him taking more risks. It almost sounds as though my roles could have been the wrong way around if anything. Im tempted to try either one of the playmaker roles or an altered AM-A for my more creative AMC given whats been said.

The sort of football we are looking to play is a fairly generic modern day style. Short passing, quick counters and relative amounts of pressing, as with most teams these days. Ideally, I think my striker should be a goal scoring number 9, maybe a poached or AF would be most effective.

[chewbaccaloveaddiction]

At some point in my save I was actually upset he was only scoring goals and not getting enough assists as a trequartista behind 2 strikers but now he's unstoppable. 

 

 

 

[jens_dewit]

I'm intrigued (and inspired) by the ideas around here regarding strikerless systems. But you all seem to use 3 ath the back systems, is there any specific reason? I was thinking of maybe trying out something inspired by Liverpool, but with an AMC instead of a F9:

The idea would be for the AMC to supply the wings + IWB who attacks from (way) deep. (Sorry for the IWB I just love that one this year)

[Johnny Ace]

I messed around with a strikerless setup, just for fun, I'll post it later @jens_dewitIt was pretty much a 4-2-3-1 with no striker and a DM  

[Freakiie]

Well initially I just wanted to try something different for once so I went for 3 at the back, then you realize it's actually busted in this ME, so you win a lot, you like it and you keep using 3 at the back.

[chewbaccaloveaddiction]

2 hours ago, jens_dewit said:

I'm intrigued (and inspired) by the ideas around here regarding strikerless systems. But you all seem to use 3 ath the back systems, is there any specific reason?

 

I occasionally used 3 at the back tactics in older fms but they were very old school and boring. At the same time I admire Gasperini and how he transformed Atalanta into a brilliant attacking team with a formation that was very defensive for decades and really wanted to use WCB like that in FM. A back 3 is not mandatory for strikerless tactics, you can play a 4330 like Spain in 2012. It should work with the right roles and instructions. 

[jens_dewit]

On 24/06/2022 at 14:23, Johnny Ace said:

I messed around with a strikerless setup, just for fun, I'll post it later @jens_dewitIt was pretty much a 4-2-3-1 with no striker and a DM  

If you still have a screenshot of that, I'd love to see how you put it to work  

[_mxrky]

How do I get this guy to replicate prime Messi. Best newgen I've ever had. I still can't get him to average over 7.5 in a season 

 

Currently using as a shadow striker to replicate false 9. He scores around 25 league goals a season But i feel i need to utilise his ridiculous passing more. I use this 325 currently 

 

Edited June 26, 2022 by _mxrky

[Freakiie]

@_mxrky

As a SS he's going to push the line in your set up, as he's your most aggressive player. Add to that, only the IF will make aggressive runs into the box (while having his mentality lowered due to the overlap instruction), so his passing options are pretty limited and if he sits deeper he'll have an actual playmaker right next to him that will attract the ball, as the DLP plays quite high up the pitch on Support duty (despite having hold position hardcoded).

I also feel that your formation overall is pretty passive. Assuming that you've turned Southampton into a solid club seeing how you can keep hold of a player like that, I would definitely up the aggression overall. That right flank is incredibly passive (and has a CM(De) covering it on top of that?) and you only have 2 roles attacking the box. No idea how many goals you score in general, but perhaps increasing the aggressiveness of your team overall might give your guy a bit more room and options to truly shine?

 

[_mxrky]

18 minutes ago, Freakiie said:

@_mxrky

As a SS he's going to push the line in your set up, as he's your most aggressive player. Add to that, only the IF will make aggressive runs into the box (while having his mentality lowered due to the overlap instruction), so his passing options are pretty limited and if he sits deeper he'll have an actual playmaker right next to him that will attract the ball, as the DLP plays quite high up the pitch on Support duty (despite having hold position hardcoded).

I also feel that your formation overall is pretty passive. Assuming that you've turned Southampton into a solid club seeing how you can keep hold of a player like that, I would definitely up the aggression overall. That right flank is incredibly passive (and has a CM(De) covering it on top of that?) and you only have 2 roles attacking the box. No idea how many goals you score in general, but perhaps increasing the aggressiveness of your team overall might give your guy a bit more room and options to truly shine?

 

Thanks for that. Scored 89 goals in the league last season so not bad, but nothing special. I'm trying a positional play style so attempting to maintain width especially in the wide areas. I should have mentioned he has comes deep to get the ball so IF probably is more aggressive. 

Thinking of trying either 

A)

or B where i'll be using him at false 9 instead. BBM has get further forward PI so, 5 players will be getting into the box. Main issue is I've never really had much success with f9 on fm

 

or C) with the amc on get further forward and the shadow striker

 

[Freakiie]

I would probably go for C, have him still push the line, get the ball from deep and then make passes from inside the box. Can't say I've had much success with players dropping in the hole and spraying passes from where you generally expect a 10 to operate, seems to be a bit of a dead zone in this ME (really not a fan of drop deep on him or any player in the attacking strata for that reason as well). Not sure about your TIs with exploiting the flanks though. you'd want Manassero on the ball as much as possible. I'd also test it without WBIB to see if it's really necessary for getting the tactic to work how you want it to.

[Johnny Ace]

20 hours ago, jens_dewit said:

If you still have a screenshot of that, I'd love to see how you put it to work  

Yes mate, sorry I forgot. I only used it for bit but I'll try and remember for tonight 

[Johnny Ace]

Here it is @jens_dewit

 

Try it out at your own risk, I only played around with it for a couple of games 

[_mxrky]

22 hours ago, Freakiie said:

I would probably go for C, have him still push the line, get the ball from deep and then make passes from inside the box. Can't say I've had much success with players dropping in the hole and spraying passes from where you generally expect a 10 to operate, seems to be a bit of a dead zone in this ME (really not a fan of drop deep on him or any player in the attacking strata for that reason as well). Not sure about your TIs with exploiting the flanks though. you'd want Manassero on the ball as much as possible. I'd also test it without WBIB to see if it's really necessary for getting the tactic to work how you want it to.

The focus on the flanks is to have my midfielders move towards the flanks to exploit the half spaces. I suppose I could just remove that. I actually meant to remove wbib 

 

I’ve found false 9 just simply isn’t as creative as it should be to be honest 

[Freakiie]

2 hours ago, _mxrky said:

The focus on the flanks is to have my midfielders move towards the flanks to exploit the half spaces. I suppose I could just remove that. I actually meant to remove wbib 

 

I’ve found false 9 just simply isn’t as creative as it should be to be honest 

Yeah, like I said, the area where you'd expect the F9 or traditional 10s to operate in just feels like a dead zone in FM22. Meanwhile, Lewandowski has been hitting double digit assists for me playing as an AF with simple passes within the box, simply because he gets the ball in dangerous areas all the time and when he's pushed too far wide to take a shot he turns around, lays off the ball to one of the players running from deep and it nets him a ton of assists. In my strikerless formation the same thing happens with my SS as well, pushes the line, gets the ball in the box and when he can't shoot he looks for the lay off.

[jens_dewit]

15 hours ago, Johnny Ace said:

Here it is @jens_dewit

 

Try it out at your own risk, I only played around with it for a couple of games 

Thanks for that. I'm getting so many different ideas, it's very hard to settle on one at the moment  I'm trying 4 players in the AM strata, 1 player in a 4141, this formation... They all work for about 3 games and then it falls apart. I'm probably just trying too many things at the same time. Maybe it's time for a break  

One of the things that do stand out to me is, even if you're trying to play your AMC as your main player/striker, it's hard to achieve. (I think you said that already?) My IF's seem to be a lot easier to set up that way. In the end, I think going for a front 3 where the AMC is the controller of the game, doling out assists and key passes will be most productive - but which role would you recommend to achieve that? Still SS or rather AM(a)?

[Johnny Ace]

15 minutes ago, jens_dewit said:

One of the things that do stand out to me is, even if you're trying to play your AMC as your main player/striker, it's hard to achieve. (I think you said that already?)

Yep. It's difficult, I'm actually going to try something for the season in my current save 

15 minutes ago, jens_dewit said:

I think going for a front 3 where the AMC is the controller of the game, doling out assists and key passes will be most productive - but which role would you recommend to achieve that? Still SS or rather AM(a)?

I'd say a playmaker role if you want him as an orchestrater, an AP(A) or a Trequartista?  You could try either or those roles from wide too 

[jens_dewit]

24 minutes ago, Johnny Ace said:

Yep. It's difficult, I'm actually going to try something for the season in my current save 

I'd say a playmaker role if you want him as an orchestrater, an AP(A) or a Trequartista?  You could try either or those roles from wide too 

Ideally the forward trident would all attack and pass with the AMC at the center of it all. I'm going to run some tests to see which combinations might work best. Because of balance I thought it would be along the lines of this:

IF(s)-AMC-IF(a)

But playing both IF on attack seems to give more attacking pressure. Playing with the left one on support created a lot fewer chances. Perhaps an IW on attack could then add some unpredictability. Enigmatic puzzle this game is.

[Johnny Ace]

6 minutes ago, jens_dewit said:

Ideally the forward trident would all attack and pass with the AMC at the center of it all. I'm going to run some tests to see which combinations might work best. Because of balance I thought it would be along the lines of this:

IF(s)-AMC-IF(a)

But playing both IF on attack seems to give more attacking pressure. Playing with the left one on support created a lot fewer chances. Perhaps an IW on attack could then add some unpredictability. Enigmatic puzzle this game is.

If you go IW(A) AMC IF(A) I'd try the Trequartista or the opposite end of the scale, an Enganche basically maximum movement vs the minimum 

[jens_dewit]

Have you ever had good results with a Treq? I'm hesitant as I tried it a couple of years ago, but never got it ticking. I'll give it a run later today and see how that goes. Thanks anyway for the tips.

[Johnny Ace]

1 hour ago, jens_dewit said:

Have you ever had good results with a Treq? I'm hesitant as I tried it a couple of years ago, but never got it ticking. I'll give it a run later today and see how that goes. Thanks anyway for the tips.

Yeah, the Trequartista is an awesome role if you use the right sort of player and system  

The Messi GIFs on page one are him playing as a Trequartista, he was awesome 

[zZzZzZzZzZzZzZz]

Speaking of getting certain roles to work, does anyone have any experience with the enganche? Been playing with a narrow 4-2-3-1 for a few days and only realised just now that it might be the perfect time to try out that role, should I manage to find a suitable player.