Simple crafting of a 4-3-3 DM

[HanziZoloman]

Haha no Problem with you being honest. How do you think about the fact that (even in VNS) we only play with one attack duty @Johnny Ace?

and thanks 

[Johnny Ace]

8 minutes ago, HanziZoloman said:

Haha no Problem with you being honest. How do you think about the fact that (even in VNS) we only play with one attack duty @Johnny Ace?

and thanks 

Don't worry about the number of D, S or A roles you have, if watching the match you don't feel you have enough or that you can exploit something, go for it  

[HanziZoloman]

I will post my tactic here as well, because I am crazy overperforming with a squad that is overwhelming candidate for relegation. Of course we play a very simple 433 variant as our players have weaknesses like passing 2 or decision 5 or dribbling 5. 

Here is the tactic: 

Before Samuel Martin plays as a MEZ(S) but I changed it into a simple MC(S) with take more risks and more direct passing because I want his incredible vision 14 to shine upon my poacher. You could argue that the left MC(S) is again a boring role with nothing special and of course a great BWM would be of help but the player is again more like a ball distributer and is rather slow (acceleration 4) but a lot of vision and passing and teamwork. Also the MC(S) stay close to my A(D) (PI short passes/ passing 4) who is really confident with the absolute basics of the role and with two MC(S) close to him they're always take the challenges together which is important. I chose two flying WB(S) because my FB options are either slow but without any braveness which is stupid or fast without any other skills so fast without anything else is it. This will give my wide attackers the possibility to cut inside. My front three are my best players they should do what they know best. The IW(S) will play through balls and help the team with his high workrate / teamwork and the left one is quick, composed, has enough vision, passing and finishing to play as a IF(S) which is important, a fact I kept ignoring before and just put any player in that role. Of course TI need to be compact and simple a kind of soak up pressure with the CD and the A(D) and then hit the counter. The WB(S) help a lot in that scenario with acc 13 and pace 13 and they can really shine in their most important skill despite having passing 2 and other deficits. Note that there is only one A duty.

Spoiler

The results are amazing this autumn. I never had a run like this in all those years (11th season now running):

Spoiler

Thanks for all the help here. I enjoy that run while it lasts, I'm sure it will not be forever.

[Captain_T]

vor 7 Stunden schrieb HanziZoloman:

I will post my tactic here as well, because I am crazy overperforming with a squad that is overwhelming candidate for relegation. Of course we play a very simple 433 variant as our players have weaknesses like passing 2 or decision 5 or dribbling 5. 

Here is the tactic: 

Before Samuel Martin plays as a MEZ(S) but I changed it into a simple MC(S) with take more risks and more direct passing because I want his incredible vision 14 to shine upon my poacher. You could argue that the left MC(S) is again a boring role with nothing special and of course a great BWM would be of help but the player is again more like a ball distributer and is rather slow (acceleration 4) but a lot of vision and passing and teamwork. Also the MC(S) stay close to my A(D) (PI short passes/ passing 4) who is really confident with the absolute basics of the role and with two MC(S) close to him they're always take the challenges together which is important. I chose two flying WB(S) because my FB options are either slow but without any braveness which is stupid or fast without any other skills so fast without anything else is it. This will give my wide attackers the possibility to cut inside. My front three are my best players they should do what they know best. The IW(S) will play through balls and help the team with his high workrate / teamwork and the left one is quick, composed, has enough vision, passing and finishing to play as a IF(S) which is important, a fact I kept ignoring before and just put any player in that role. Of course TI need to be compact and simple a kind of soak up pressure with the CD and the A(D) and then hit the counter. The WB(S) help a lot in that scenario with acc 13 and pace 13 and they can really shine in their most important skill despite having passing 2 and other deficits. Note that there is only one A duty.

  Inhalt unsichtbar machen

The results are amazing this autumn. I never had a run like this in all those years (11th season now running):

  Inhalt unsichtbar machen

Thanks for all the help here. I enjoy that run while it lasts, I'm sure it will not be forever.

Did you play with that tactic from the beginning of the season?

[HanziZoloman]

vor 13 Stunden schrieb Captain_T:

Did you play with that tactic from the beginning of the season?

No (I believe it was the Margate game) I first played the right MC(S) as a MEZ(S) and the left WB on attack which produced good results against teams less capable than mine but was devastating against top teams. The moment I switched the moment it got better. I think the MEZ got away from the triangle especially the A(D) too often which creates gaps in midfield, keeping them tight together is good and the WB(A) could not cross which comes by default (cross more often) with a WB(S) the player plays more through balls into the IF(S) which is exactly what’s suits my players better. But I thought I can’t play with just one A duty.

But my team is used to a 433 since years we are well adjusted to this style of football and still we are relegation candidates number one we don’t dominate against every team but we are giving even top teams a hard time.

Next matches against Bath (a league above) we’re a draw at home and a close loss away (1:0) the game was dominated by Bath but could go either way.
 

Edited August 9, 2023 by HanziZoloman

[Lemon_Head]

I was wondering if you can do a short segment on using an IWB on a 433? I'm really curious to see what's your philosophy on it and how you would set it up?

[Johnny Ace]

5 minutes ago, Lemon_Head said:

I was wondering if you can do a short segment on using an IWB on a 433? I'm really curious to see what's your philosophy on it and how you would set it up?

I touched on it a little in the CF(A) 4-3-3 DM post @Lemon_Head

It's not a role I use very often to be honest but I'll see if I can come up with something interesting over the weekend, they're usually a bit of fun to play with  

[Johnny Ace]

For @Lemon_Head...

The 4-3-3-DM - Inverted Wingback (Attack)

Just a quick run down, starting at the back, WB(S) gives us width on the right so I can invert the right forward 

Of course, the IWB(A) 

There's plenty of jive out wide so not much happening in midfield, I could be tempted with a BBM(S) over on the right but not much more

Up top, the left Winger gets forward and provides the width giving plenty of space to the IWB, the DLF drops deep which helps the IWB keep up with play, IF(A) over on the right, this could easily be on (S), the DLF too, an F9 or CF(S) could be a nice touch

You can see, the main event here is the flanks, the midfield trio just let them get on with it

Spoiler

Some bonus GIFs for fun

You can see him here move from the LB position and run into an acre of space for the goal

Spoiler

Here he gets forward and again they fail to pick him up to create a goal

Spoiler

 

Starts off an attack and finishes it 

Spoiler

 

[HanziZoloman]

Nice touch @Johnny Ace if FB is wrong footed but capable to play right/ left I even could try it with Ricay 

but: two attacking duties on one side plus the roaming BWM is no problem (?) How to create close to this movement but with more security (?) put the W on (S) ? or MC(S) ?

Edited August 12, 2023 by HanziZoloman

[Mutumba]

13 hours ago, Johnny Ace said:

For @Lemon_Head...

The 4-3-3-DM - Inverted Wingback (Attack)

Just a quick run down, starting at the back, WB(S) gives us width on the right so I can invert the right forward 

Of course, the IWB(A) 

There's plenty of jive out wide so not much happening in midfield, I could be tempted with a BBM(S) over on the right but not much more

Up top, the left Winger gets forward and provides the width giving plenty of space to the IWB, the DLF drops deep which helps the IWB keep up with play, IF(A) over on the right, this could easily be on (S), the DLF too, an F9 or CF(S) could be a nice touch

You can see, the main event here is the flanks, the midfield trio just let them get on with it

  Reveal hidden contents

Some bonus GIFs for fun

You can see him here move from the LB position and run into an acre of space for the goal

  Reveal hidden contents

Here he gets forward and again they fail to pick him up to create a goal

  Hide contents

 

Starts off an attack and finishes it 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

I cant seem to find it now but you recommended a FB-A role along with a W-s, and how beutiful they combine. Is it applicable in your IWB-A tactic do you think? Even tho it would mean two wingers and no IF? Maybe use a CMat?

I.e:

gk

FBa Cd Cd IWBa

A

CM BWM

Ws Wa

??

Edited August 12, 2023 by Mutumba

[Johnny Ace]

1 minute ago, Mutumba said:

I cant seem to find it now but you recommended a FB-A role along with a W-s, and how beutiful they combine. Is it applicable in your IWB-A tactic do you think? Even tho it would mean two wingers and no IF? Maybe use a CMat?

I.e:

gk

FBa Cd Cd IWBa

A

CM BWM

Ws Wa

??

I think that was in the  4-2-3-1 DM thread. I wouldn't use a FB(A) on the same side of the pitch as a CM(A) unless the DM and defence is absolutely phenomenal. CM(S) would be fine, give it a try out 

[Lasson]

I'm possibly addicted to creating and playing around with tactics in this game. This is my new 4-3-3 variant with an attempt to make some sort of box midfield implementing a IWBs on the left hand side. Ws on the left and WBa on the right are tasked with keeping the width on the sides while the IWBs and IFs goes on adventures on the inside.

Edited August 12, 2023 by Lasson

[77charisma77]

22 hours ago, Johnny Ace said:

For @Lemon_Head...

The 4-3-3-DM - Inverted Wingback (Attack)

Just a quick run down, starting at the back, WB(S) gives us width on the right so I can invert the right forward 

Of course, the IWB(A) 

There's plenty of jive out wide so not much happening in midfield, I could be tempted with a BBM(S) over on the right but not much more

Up top, the left Winger gets forward and provides the width giving plenty of space to the IWB, the DLF drops deep which helps the IWB keep up with play, IF(A) over on the right, this could easily be on (S), the DLF too, an F9 or CF(S) could be a nice touch

You can see, the main event here is the flanks, the midfield trio just let them get on with it

  Reveal hidden contents

Some bonus GIFs for fun

You can see him here move from the LB position and run into an acre of space for the goal

  Reveal hidden contents

Here he gets forward and again they fail to pick him up to create a goal

  Reveal hidden contents

 

Starts off an attack and finishes it 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

What's the reason behind SK(a)?
 

The same for the W(a) - why not W(s)? The W(a) is paired  with the attacking duty IWB on the left flank, and also forms an all attacking trident up front with the DLF(a) + IF(a) 

[Johnny Ace]

10 minutes ago, 77charisma77 said:

What's the reason behind SK(a)?

I had a SK(A) and was playing a high line 

10 minutes ago, 77charisma77 said:

The same for the W(a) - why not W(s)? The W(a) is paired  with the attacking duty IWB on the left flank, and also forms an all attacking trident up front with the DLF(a) + IF(a) 

The Winger stays wide of the IWB(A), could easy be on Support though 

[Johnny Ace]

Last one now, I put this together a while ago and just didn't get around to posting it, kind of a fun base with a possession based style in mind

I could go through each strata but I'd be repeating myself, but just looking at them, you'll get the idea of what I was trying to do

This one includes a F9 and a Mezzala (Attack) with a top team in mind 

Spoiler

 

[Cal585]

I'm looking for some advice on recreating Melbourne City's old 4-3-3. Trying to form overloads on the left (IW + MEZ + WBA + Focus Left), with the striker being the main goalscorer and the RW being the 2nd striker or out ball with the idea to isolate him 1v1 with the FB. They would often build up down the left, and either combine through the spaces there or draw the opposition in and switch the play while the striker was always ready to break in behind. The right sided FB would be more conservative for balance reasons, while the right sided midfielder would push out to support the right once the switch was made. In my testing I'm struggling to make the RW effective. Any suggestion as to roles?

I've toyed with making ST a Poacher, going a double Mez in the middle, DM or DLP in behind, an IWB on the right and a whole host of roles for the RW who currently has Stay Wide PI. Suspect a Raumdeuter might be better than an IF, though I've also experimented with a WTF but while this achieves the out ball option I want, don't think it helps with the left overload. Winger (A) would also be good if he was left footed...

 

[Johnny Ace]

I've already covered pretty much everything in your tactic throughout the thread @Cal585

Mezzala's, Overloads, IF(A), PF(A), midfield and the fullbacks 

There's an index here to quickly find them rather than trawl through the pages

 

[Cal585]

31 minutes ago, Johnny Ace said:

I've already covered pretty much everything in your tactic throughout the thread @Cal585

Mezzala's, Overloads, IF(A), PF(A), midfield and the fullbacks 

Sorry, I had somehow missed the Overloads part, which is quite similar to what I'm trying. I'm just making it harder on myself with a less supportive FB and an attacking striker which kinda takes away from the overload theory unfortunately. Do you find that play narrower is a useful team instruction for this? I hadn't thought to try it. Also was there a reason you ended up going IF(A) over Raumdeuter?

Also, really appreciate your various musings in the thread which I don't think I've said yet!

[Johnny Ace]

3 minutes ago, Cal585 said:

Sorry, I had somehow missed the Overloads part, which is quite similar to what I'm trying. I'm just making it harder on myself with a less supportive FB and an attacking striker which kinda takes away from the overload theory unfortunately.

Exactly!  I think using the overload to focus on a wide attacker is worthwhile when you want that wide attacker to be the main scorer 

5 minutes ago, Cal585 said:

 Do you find that play narrower is a useful team instruction for this?

For the wide attacker it can help bring them in toward goal a little more, playing wider can get them on the ball more but with more work to do to get to goal, it's worth experimenting with though

6 minutes ago, Cal585 said:

 Also was there a reason you ended up going IF(A) over Raumdeuter?

I'm not keen on the RMD this year, I thought it was great in FM22  IF(A) is the next best goal scoring wide attacker 

8 minutes ago, Cal585 said:

Also, really appreciate your various musings in the thread which I don't think I've said yet!

Thank you, I hope it's of some use 

[Lasson]

Just took a quick screenshot of my team having the ball. I really like the shape we are achieving.

It's kinda like a 2-6-2 with a box midfield.

[Chiravilla]

Hi Johnny! How do you see the setup with the Raumdauter? I think 433dm has great potential for this role and I am curious about midfield area + opposite winger in a simple way.

Cheers!

[Johnny Ace]

8 minutes ago, Chiravilla said:

Hi Johnny! How do you see the setup with the Raumdauter? I think 433dm has great potential for this role and I am curious about midfield area + opposite winger in a simple way.

Cheers!

I gave up on the RMD, he's more like a winger now than a wide striker whenever I've used it, but my RMD tactic from 2021 and 2022 was pretty much this one

I used a DLF(S) because I didn't have a F9 and the RMD instead of the IF(A). I used an IW because that's what I had and used a Winbgack but there's no reason not to use a Winger 

[bosque]

On 20/08/2023 at 10:23, Lasson said:

Just took a quick screenshot of my team having the ball. I really like the shape we are achieving.

It's kinda like a 2-6-2 with a box midfield.

Can you share the camera settings? I really like that view

[Lasson]

On 21/08/2023 at 15:39, bosque said:

Can you share the camera settings? I really like that view

Sure.

[ejleal]

Set-up I'm currently using with braga in my second season. What do you think @Johnny Ace?

The mezzala and inverted winger were changed from support to attack duty to be more agressive, since I was already playing with high lines and previous changes to positive mentality weren't too great.

Edited August 25, 2023 by ejleal

[Johnny Ace]

3 minutes ago, ejleal said:

Set-up I'm currently using with braga in my second season. What do you think @Johnny Ace?

I'd probably use a Wingback on the left and an IW(S) on the right, but try it out and see what you think 

[ejleal]

7 minutes ago, Johnny Ace said:

I'd probably use a Wingback on the left and an IW(S) on the right, but try it out and see what you think 

You dont think the mezzala in attack and the IW in support could get in each others way?

[Johnny Ace]

Just now, ejleal said:

You dont think the mezzala in attack and the IW in support could get in each others way?

I'd prefer a Winger but it isn't a deal breaker 

[ejleal]

7 minutes ago, Johnny Ace said:

I'd prefer a Winger but it isn't a deal breaker 

i've seen that the IW ratings tended to suffer a bit when in support duty and the mezzala in attack, as opposed to both in support for example

Edited August 25, 2023 by ejleal

[Johnny Ace]

Just now, ejleal said:

i've seen that the IW ratings tended to suffer a bit when in support duty and the mezzala in attack, as opposed to both in support.

If they're doing what you want them to do, don't worry about ratings, if they're not and the ratings are poor, change it up 

[Puluzu]

I haven't read through the entire thread yet, but how have you guys liked CM/a so far if you've tried it? I'm in my first season of FM23 and went with Real Madrid for an easy save to start off. I've been using a midfield triangle of BWM(s) at DM, DLP(s) and CM/a. Valverde won player of the year (in Dec/Jan so six months into the save) even though he played second string to Milinkovic-Savic in that role haha. Both have been lighting it up with both goals and assists when I have Benzema as DLF(a) up front, but understandably the production was considerably lower with an AF upfront when Benz got injured and I played Rodrygo there. It's still good, but not "striker level good".

[ejleal]

3 hours ago, Johnny Ace said:

I'd probably use a Wingback on the left and an IW(S) on the right, but try it out and see what you think 

Wingback on support or attack duty?

[Johnny Ace]

2 minutes ago, ejleal said:

Wingback on support or attack duty?

Support with the DM(S) 

[eXistenZ]

Hoping for some advice as well. Started a new career as boavista. Doing reasonably well, but in part to sporting having a bad season and a highest rated goalie + striker outperforming their xg. Also the shedule was fairly kind, spreading out the difficult matches as to avoid a morale downward spiral

But I often run into games like this. Decent possession (usually more than this), but very poor shots on goal ratio. The two wide players can sometimes have terrible offdays and sink to 6.4 within the first 25minutes. very few highlits. And they are usually for the opposition

Also I heard BTN say on one of his recent streams that the 433 this year is one that produces not great output/xg in general, Which is my experience as well but then again I havent toiled around with many systems this year

Edited August 26, 2023 by eXistenZ

[Lasson]

11 minutes ago, eXistenZ said:

I don't see many problems with your setup. There's a couple of things I would do:

1. IW(a) to W(s)

2. DM(d) to DM(s)

[bababooey]

Just wanted to drop in and say how great this thread is. 

Forgive me if someone has already mentioned this, but, I'm curious what folks think about using 2 inverted wide men on a single flank?  So,  IWB-S / IW-A OR IWB-A / IF-S, for example.  And, if this is considered to be too extreme / lacking width, wouldn't it help if you added a player instruction for the more advanced player to "stay wider" ?  

Cheers

 

 

 

[Johnny Ace]

35 minutes ago, bababooey said:

Just wanted to drop in and say how great this thread is. 

Cheers pal 

35 minutes ago, bababooey said:

Forgive me if someone has already mentioned this, but, I'm curious what folks think about using 2 inverted wide men on a single flank?  So,  IWB-S / IW-A OR IWB-A / IF-S, for example.  And, if this is considered to be too extreme / lacking width, wouldn't it help if you added a player instruction for the more advanced player to "stay wider" ?  

Cheers

It's not for me to be honest, I don't even like using IFs/IWs with FBs but there's nothing to say you can't, best thing is to give it a try and see what you think 

[bababooey]

15 minutes ago, Johnny Ace said:

Cheers pal 

It's not for me to be honest, I don't even like using IFs/IWs with FBs but there's nothing to say you can't, best thing is to give it a try and see what you think 

Could you expand a bit on why that is? Is there a theory behind it or is it just from experience?

[Vladis]

9 hours ago, bababooey said:

Just wanted to drop in and say how great this thread is. 

Forgive me if someone has already mentioned this, but, I'm curious what folks think about using 2 inverted wide men on a single flank?  So,  IWB-S / IW-A OR IWB-A / IF-S, for example.  And, if this is considered to be too extreme / lacking width, wouldn't it help if you added a player instruction for the more advanced player to "stay wider" ?  

Cheers

 

 

 

I use successfully IWB(S) on the flank with IW(A) and CM (A). IW has instruction to stay wider. And I also use TI "stay wider". This combination of PI and TI helps to ensure that we could still stretch the opposition defense and at the same time have numerous superiority in central area. Works like a charm.

[Johnny Ace]

11 hours ago, bababooey said:

Could you expand a bit on why that is? Is there a theory behind it or is it just from experience?

I like to try and cover as many channels as possible and the wide roles are the only roles that cover the outer channels, so inverting two of the wide roles on one flank loses having a player on the outer channel, just personal preference 

[bababooey]

7 hours ago, Johnny Ace said:

I like to try and cover as many channels as possible and the wide roles are the only roles that cover the outer channels, so inverting two of the wide roles on one flank loses having a player on the outer channel, just personal preference 

Okay, I see. That does make sense!  I'm in the middle of a Dortmund save rolling with a 4-3-3, taking inspiration from this thread.

[Lasson]

1. I do think that it can work with an IW in front of an IWB. 

2. I do not think it can work with an IF in front of an IWB.

The reason behind my thinking is that, in my mind, the IF comes inside even without the ball to occupy the half space. The IW will hold the width a tad better, coming inside with the ball. 

I would imagine it works the best with a W, though, and that is also what I've been using in my current 4-3-3. 

[Skywalk3r83]

Here is my 4-3-3, most of the player roles are from a tactic from this thread somewhere as I read this again yesterday and today.
Any suggestions? Maybe on the team instructions? Thanks!

PS. No player instructions are used.

[bababooey]

1 hour ago, Skywalk3r83 said:

Here is my 4-3-3, most of the player roles are from a tactic from this thread somewhere as I read this again yesterday and today.
Any suggestions? Maybe on the team instructions? Thanks!

PS. No player instructions are used.

Well, it depends on what type of football you want to play.  You named the tactical "kejinball" - so, what exactly do you want that to look like?

[Skywalk3r83]

6 hours ago, bababooey said:

Well, it depends on what type of football you want to play.  You named the tactical "kejinball" - so, what exactly do you want that to look like?

Don't mind the tactical style, that's from a previous tactic that morphed into this one. 

I just want to play with a minimal set of team instructions and came up with this setup. 

[HanziZoloman]

The AP(A) + W(S) combination is good, with Ajax you should play decent football with that tactic. Maybe you‘ll need to tweak a bit to address all those deep sitting teams against you in Eredivisie.

Lucca could easily be a DLF(A) 

Edited August 30, 2023 by HanziZoloman

[Johnny Ace]

Looks good to me @Skywalk3r83 and I agree with @HanziZoloman Lucca to DLF(A) is an option 

[Skywalk3r83]

23 minutes ago, Johnny Ace said:

Looks good to me @Skywalk3r83 and I agree with @HanziZoloman Lucca to DLF(A) is an option 

Thanks! I will give it a go tonight! Lucca is playing because Tadic is injured for 3 months, but he scores a lot of goals from set pieces.
Still toying a bit with the team instructions, want to use work ball into box but with Lucca it isn't an option at this moment. Maybe i'll add Hit early crosses.

[HanziZoloman]

vor 40 Minuten schrieb Skywalk3r83:

Thanks! I will give it a go tonight! Lucca is playing because Tadic is injured for 3 months, but he scores a lot of goals from set pieces.
Still toying a bit with the team instructions, want to use work ball into box but with Lucca it isn't an option at this moment. Maybe i'll add Hit early crosses.

With Ajax you could really try and recreate movements from the bigger clubs. Like what is described in the total football thread by @crusadertsar to add some spice. Or with Lucca you could also recreate the Son - Kane partnership which is described here earlier on.

[Skywalk3r83]

15 minutes ago, HanziZoloman said:

With Ajax you could really try and recreate movements from the bigger clubs. Like what is described in the total football thread by @crusadertsar to add some spice. Or with Lucca you could also recreate the Son - Kane partnership which is described here earlier on.

Thanks for the suggestion! I'll look into it, i'm not a tactical genius so it's mostly trial and error but we will see.
Kane as DLFa and Son as an IFa?