Complete Forward (CFa) and realistic alternatives

[Draakon]

I play as Ajax with  'control possession' style and a 4-2-3-1 formation. In the beginning of my save my tactics looked roughly like this

 

I'm doing fairly well with it and I've started to like that CFa-AMa partnership that works really well in attack. At the start of the Ajax save I had two players who are capable of playing as CFa - Haller and Tadic - both fill the role exceptionally. The problem is - I play my save as youth only, and from my youth teams there are little or no 'pure-breed' strikers that are remotely CF material (my coaches report gives them usually just silver stars for the CF roles and advises to use them as advanced forwards or pressing forwards or something similar.

 

Now the point of discussion - as far as I know there are two key factors that make a player good complete forward:

1. he has to have a good passing and vision, to create chances for players around him
2. he should be a danger from everywhere on the pitch - he should be a good finisher, but also strong in the air and with a good long shot

What I noticed is that my coach reports always dismiss a striker as a CF if he has low aerial ability. Always. Could it be that he still excels in this role in my tactics if he has a good vision and I just accept that he can't be an aerial threat? I have WBIB and 'low crosses' instruction on anyway, so my CFa doesn't often take a shot from distance. Sebastien Haller is a threat aerially, that I have to give, but could it be that another striker will still be a good CFa even though my staff thinks otherwise?

[Johnny Ace]

8 minutes ago, Draakon said:

What I noticed is that my coach reports always dismiss a striker as a CF if he has low aerial ability.

That'll be because the role requires the strength and aerial ability of a Target Man, I'd say if you're not playing direct and getting loads of crosses in, I wouldn't worry about if the player's good at everything else 

[prched55]

1 hour ago, Draakon said:

my coaches report gives them usually just silver stars for the CF roles and advises to use them as advanced forwards or pressing forwards or something similar.

The star rating for CF role suitability/ability also includes their reputation. So a higher reputation player will have more stars in CF than a lower reputation player even if their attributes are the same. 

[Johnny Ace]

11 hours ago, prched55 said:

The star rating for CF role suitability/ability also includes their reputation. So a higher reputation player will have more stars in CF than a lower reputation player even if their attributes are the same. 

That's interesting, I'm trying to see the sense in it  

[fc.cadoni]

13 hours ago, prched55 said:

The star rating for CF role suitability/ability also includes their reputation. So a higher reputation player will have more stars in CF than a lower reputation player even if their attributes are the same. 

That's not true about reputation and star role. I have edited a player with 20 in key attributes for CF At role with 1 in reputation - other attributes and gave me a CA 200 player.

[fc.cadoni]

Gave 1 in blue key attributes as well and now it's rated 4* star CF role ability. Same reputation, but this time has been dropped to CA 139

So, reputation for CF role does not play a role.

Players have weighting for each position, for each attribute.

[Johnny Ace]

7 minutes ago, fc.cadoni said:

So, reputation for CF role does not play a role.

I did think that made zero sense 

[prched55]

8 hours ago, fc.cadoni said:

So, reputation for CF role does not play a role.

I thought I heard or read that somewhere and  I went looking and couldn't find it. Thank you for doing that research.

[sirgiorgio]

My young striker Kaio Jorge is rated 2* for every attacking position except CF(s) where he's rated 4 gray stars for no apparent reason. I actually saw this happening a lot for young / low reputation players, so there must be something going on other than attributes. 

[Draakon]

4 hours ago, sirgiorgio said:

My young striker Kaio Jorge is rated 2* for every attacking position except CF(s) where he's rated 4 gray stars for no apparent reason. I actually saw this happening a lot for young / low reputation players, so there must be something going on other than attributes. 

In my experience that's because to most of the young strikers have decent finishing, pace, composure, off the ball rating and technique on the ball. Strengths and weaknesses vary a little.

But to be a good CF (for the game evaluation system that hands out ratings in stars) you need to have a few specific attributes that most young strikers don't have:

- long shots (pretty rare)

- jumping and aerial ability (half of the strikers are rather short)

- vision and passing (some young strikers are good finishers, but their passing is way below 10

 

It's pretty rare that you get a regen striker that has it all from the start. The best case scenario is that he lacks a few points in some attributes (eg. passing or long shots) and it can be improved with individual training. I've seen that enough in FM that when striker has 3-4 seasons good training for U-19 team and some first team experience, he develops the necessary attributes and the CF rating gets more favourable. But sometimes it's almost impossible to turn around, for example when he is short.

Here's when you're tactics kick in.

I've reached to conclusion that in my 4-2-3-1 formation (see above) the main quality of the CFa would be off the ball movement, finishing, passing and vision - he needs to move to the channels and he often creates chances for others with well-timed through balls. So these qualities he needs to have.

Long shots doesn't matter much, because we play mostly WBIB, so he rarely shoots outside of the box anyway

Height and aerial ability might matter, because we crowd the area and ability to win duels against defenders will reflect in number of goals. That weakness could be somewhat limited by whipped crosses or limiting crossing whatsoever, but in my experience my CFa gets into situations when his size matters.

 

[sirgiorgio]

I wasn't talking about a regen, but anyway: if he wasn't strong and tall enough to be a CF(s) then he wouldn't be rated 2* for target forward, right? And if he was lacking from a technical point of view, he wouldn't be rated 2* for DLP/Trequartista, etc. Conversely, Dybala, who certainly is not strong and tall enough to be a CF, has CF as his best position. Also, my young striker is rated 2* for CF(a) but he's useless as CF(s)? 

I understand a CF is like the ultimate striker: scores, makes assists, helps the team, etc. so he can't just be your average player. But this is also true for other roles (eg a no-nonsense fullback should be useless, if not dangerous, if played as CWB, a BWM with dreadful technical attributes can't be a playmaker, a GK with no passing and vision can't be a sweeper keeper, etc.) whereas the game seems to be particularly picky only for this particular role and, apparently, the rating for this role are not based purely on the player's attributes.

 

[kingjericho]

7 minutes ago, sirgiorgio said:

the game seems to be particularly picky only for this particular role and, apparently, the rating for this role are not based purely on the player's attributes.

already proven above that's not true.

the CF role is quite demanding from the player, he must be good at everything so it's natural to see youth players still not meeting all the requirements.

you can still play them there though and they'll do many things well according to their attributes, but the role requires a bit of everything so they'll get some things right and others not 

[sirgiorgio]

9 minuti fa, kingjericho ha scritto:

already proven above that's not true.

Not really. The screenshots above show a player who's rated 5* (first screenshot) and then 4* (second screenshot) for every attacking role. It's only natural he's rated 4/5* for CF too, since it's like the sum of all attacking roles. I'm talking about a player who's rated 2* for every attacking role, support and attack, including CF(a). Is there a logical reason why he isn't rated 2* for CF(s)?

[fc.cadoni]

Again, reputation has nothing to do. Player position, has different weighting for attributes for each position.