Tactical Tweaks to get to the next level

[joey7]

Hi

About to start my 3rd season with Leeds, finished 5th both years, but thanks to MCFC winning CL, this year I get a CL spot.

The tactic is somewhat dull, its as dull as dishwater sometimes and is difficult to watch the clock tick by with no highlights... especially when we've gone behind.

So Ive created this.... using the same shape and some new additions (Roque, Fratessi), im hoping to get some advice on this new tactic and hope it can go to next step of maybe finishing 4th... or continue to finish 5th... its all good.

[Cloud9]

7 hours ago, joey7 said:

Hi

About to start my 3rd season with Leeds, finished 5th both years, but thanks to MCFC winning CL, this year I get a CL spot.

The tactic is somewhat dull, its as dull as dishwater sometimes and is difficult to watch the clock tick by with no highlights... especially when we've gone behind.

So Ive created this.... using the same shape and some new additions (Roque, Fratessi), im hoping to get some advice on this new tactic and hope it can go to next step of maybe finishing 4th... or continue to finish 5th... its all good.

Looks like a solid starting point

• You've got both midfielders roaming, that's not necessarily a problem: just something to keep in mind. Might want a more defensive midfielder than a DLP behind that.
• No BPD sticks out to me with the quality in your squad, I would run at least one to play line breaking passes.
• Consider flipping the FB(a) to FB(s).
• DLF is a better forward for a high lines system in my experience.
• Focusing play down a side will tire the players out, better to turn that on in moments of matches.
• I wouldn't run a high defensive line with a midblock.

Are you trying to counter attack? If so make sure you have players with "take risk" or "pass into space" ticked. 

Here's an on going thread on the 4-3-3:

 

[joey7]

On 19/05/2023 at 05:34, Cloud9 said:

Looks like a solid starting point

• You've got both midfielders roaming, that's not necessarily a problem: just something to keep in mind. Might want a more defensive midfielder than a DLP behind that.
• No BPD sticks out to me with the quality in your squad, I would run at least one to play line breaking passes.
• Consider flipping the FB(a) to FB(s).
• DLF is a better forward for a high lines system in my experience.
• Focusing play down a side will tire the players out, better to turn that on in moments of matches.
• I wouldn't run a high defensive line with a midblock.

Are you trying to counter attack? If so make sure you have players with "take risk" or "pass into space" ticked. 

Here's an on going thread on the 4-3-3:

 

Thank you, Ive never used a midfield with 2 supporting roles and 1 defense, its always been 1 att, 1 sup and 1 def... think I need to broad my scope a bit.

I put the suggestions you made into practice and we moved the ball around a lot better and players went looking for space for a pass too. Think Ive gone too gung ho with wing backs too instead of looking at FB's

[HUMBL3B33]

Try these:

1. Change one of the roles in CM strata to defend role. This will help you retain the ball longer.

2. Since you're looking to play shorter passes i assume you want to keep the possession. I think you should keep one of your FB to defend duty. Preferably the one on the opposite flank than the role you are going to change to defend in midfield. 

These changes will give you a easier outlet to retain the ball on each flank and center in case your attacking players run into a cult-de-sac. Additionally you'll have enough players in the midfield strata to keep your defenders safe. Giving your attacking players the confidence to attack without too much of an issue. This is known as your rest defence. Used by a lot of top teams. 

3. Change your defensive line according to the opposition team, see if they're going to play a counter attacking game then lower it. If they're not so fast and is probably playing with a single striker you might get away with a high backline. But more often than not, a high backline is going to burn you at least once in a game. Maybe giving up a crucial goal. Hence, be cautious with it.

Try these and share the results. 

[Cloud9]

1 hour ago, HUMBL3B33 said:

Try these:

1. Change one of the roles in CM strata to defend role. This will help you retain the ball longer.

2. Since you're looking to play shorter passes i assume you want to keep the possession. I think you should keep one of your FB to defend duty. Preferably the one on the opposite flank than the role you are going to change to defend in midfield. 

These changes will give you a easier outlet to retain the ball on each flank and center in case your attacking players run into a cult-de-sac. Additionally you'll have enough players in the midfield strata to keep your defenders safe. Giving your attacking players the confidence to attack without too much of an issue. This is known as your rest defence. Used by a lot of top teams. 

3. Change your defensive line according to the opposition team, see if they're going to play a counter attacking game then lower it. If they're not so fast and is probably playing with a single striker you might get away with a high backline. But more often than not, a high backline is going to burn you at least once in a game. Maybe giving up a crucial goal. Hence, be cautious with it.

Try these and share the results. 

Sorry to contradict you here, but a couple issues with this advice:

• FB(d) is a poor role, if you want a holding FB you can check it in the PIs of a FB(s). FB(d) comes hard coded with "cross from deep" and "take fewer risks."
  • Basically the FB(s) is just fully customizable and comes without the baggage. 
• A holding CM in the midfield Strada can cause problems in a 4-3-3 and lead to isolating the the front players.
  • You're better off running a double pivot 4-2-3-1 if you'd like two holding midfielders, who won't leave you asymmetrical and exposed when the MEZ goes forward. FM23 did a big rework on double pivots, so if you want two holding midfielders take advantage of that. 
  • If you keep the 4-3-3: the MEZ pairs really nicely with the Winger on the right hand side so I'd only change the BBM if you're going to swap out one of the front two. A BWM(s) or a CM(s) might be good non roaming alternatives, but the BBM is a defensive first roamer so I would watch how it plays in the ME before making any changes. 

Hope that helps  

Edited May 23, 2023 by Cloud9

[vrig]

On 23/05/2023 at 07:18, Cloud9 said:

Sorry to contradict you here, but a couple issues with this advice:

• FB(d) is a poor role, if you want a holding FB you can check it in the PIs of a FB(s). FB(d) comes hard coded with "cross from deep" and "take fewer risks."
  • Basically the FB(s) is just fully customizable and comes without the baggage. 
• A holding CM in the midfield Strada can cause problems in a 4-3-3 and lead to isolating the the front players.
  • You're better off running a double pivot 4-2-3-1 if you'd like two holding midfielders, who won't leave you asymmetrical and exposed when the MEZ goes forward. FM23 did a big rework on double pivots, so if you want two holding midfielders take advantage of that. 
  • If you keep the 4-3-3: the MEZ pairs really nicely with the Winger on the right hand side so I'd only change the BBM if you're going to swap out one of the front two. A BWM(s) or a CM(s) might be good non roaming alternatives, but the BBM is a defensive first roamer so I would watch how it plays in the ME before making any changes. 

Hope that helps  

Have to disagree on FB(d) being a "poor role". Whatever PI's you add to a FB(s), you won't get the deeper positioning and safe passing. Using one at the moment and they are literally always in bags of space to recycle the ball. Very useful in a possession style for me.

[Cloud9]

3 hours ago, vrig said:

Have to disagree on FB(d) being a "poor role". Whatever PI's you add to a FB(s), you won't get the deeper positioning and safe passing. Using one at the moment and they are literally always in bags of space to recycle the ball. Very useful in a possession style for me.

Without seeing your system: if you're running a possession based tactic give the FB(s) a go. He'll provide a passing outlet to the center back which moves the ball forward and won't isolate the wide player on his side. Otherwise you'll end up with lateral passing with very little ability to build up and you'll see more long balls (which is what you're trying to avoid).

Specifically in the tactic above, swapping the FB(a) for a FB(d) isolates the winger/MEZ going forward and the fullback ends up being a bit of a passenger, which you want to avoid with any role. 

If it's working for you that's great, just something to keep in mind  

Edited May 26, 2023 by Cloud9

[joey7]

Well... 1W and 3L... think its back to the drawing board 

Its creating more, but the players are blazing over or just timid shots into the GK.

[allyc31]

I should be upfront and say that I’m not a tactical genius 

 

but one thing I’ve found help me in 23 is removing counter press. I find unless You have a world class midfield it just wrecks your shape. 

[joey7]

58 minutes ago, allyc31 said:

I should be upfront and say that I’m not a tactical genius 

 

but one thing I’ve found help me in 23 is removing counter press. I find unless You have a world class midfield it just wrecks your shape. 

 

Yeah, I completely agree, thats one thing ill be removing, probably counter too.

Ive never got Mezzala to work for me, so just going to swap for an advanced playmaker.

Looking at the mezzala and the 433 debate thread that was linked by Cloud9, they go with a striker or creative striker, ive combined both and added a mezzala and ended up with a mess... So thats another issue I need to look at.

Full backs are working fine though.

[Cloud9]

3 hours ago, joey7 said:

 

Yeah, I completely agree, thats one thing ill be removing, probably counter too.

Ive never got Mezzala to work for me, so just going to swap for an advanced playmaker.

Looking at the mezzala and the 433 debate thread that was linked by Cloud9, they go with a striker or creative striker, ive combined both and added a mezzala and ended up with a mess... So thats another issue I need to look at.

Full backs are working fine though.

Tactical familiarity is pretty low in first screenshot, w the changes: might be your over tinkering and it's difficult on the players. 

If you're really struggling, I'd check morale, team dynamics, and fatigue levels in the squad. Those are the three biggest factors in your squads success imo. 

 

[joey7]

On 03/06/2023 at 18:55, Cloud9 said:

Tactical familiarity is pretty low in first screenshot, w the changes: might be your over tinkering and it's difficult on the players. 

If you're really struggling, I'd check morale, team dynamics, and fatigue levels in the squad. Those are the three biggest factors in your squads success imo. 

 

Yeah, im completely going nuts on everything.

If im wanting the IF to have more of an impact and want the FB and W to have more space, going narrow would create space out wide?

[Cloud9]

44 minutes ago, joey7 said:

Yeah, im completely going nuts on everything.

If im wanting the IF to have more of an impact and want the FB and W to have more space, going narrow would create space out wide?

Width is tricky, and I'm certainly no expert on it, so I'd just try it out and see how it works for you in game

I usually set the width based on how good/fast my players are and how defensively compact I'd like them to be. Since I'm counterattacking in most of my saves I play as wide as I can to better attack the wide/open spaces in behind. The better my team the more I look to stretch the pitch.

If you're playing a front foot formation, there's not space in behind so it changes how I'd look at width. In a wide setup where you're controlling the game, the players holding the width provide space in the center of the park for underlapping runs that are really dangerous to the opposition (For example: a IWB work best on a wide possession based formation). A narrow setup on the front foot will leave space out wide for the FB/WB, but since the opposition is sitting back, it's quite a different situation to when you're attacking wide in a counter attack and you might struggle to break down opposition if they go compact. 

Since the IF will be making an inside run to score his goals, I'd recommend playings wide to get the best out of him. In a wide attack you also have the option to drop the tempo, hit crosses early, and stretch the opposition to break them down, which can be quite nice. It sets you up to shift gears into a high tempo/counterpress if necessary as well.