Frustrated with patchy form and leaking goals.

[Grayhatz]

Im playing a save with Bristol City

im in the third year and have finished 13th and 13th twice in a row,

invested heavily in the summer and replaced sold assets,

was happy with investment, but no matter what i do form is incredibly patchy- it feels like in FM23 everything is always:

WWWWDLLLLLLDWWWWDLLLLL, repeat

this has transcended all of my saves so far this year- it just feels so hard to hold onto momentum and form.

i also find that i keep bottling 2/3 goal leads, no matter which formation or tactics i attempt.

Anyone have any advice? :)

[Johnny Ace]

17 minutes ago, Grayhatz said:

Anyone have any advice?

Starting from the top, I don't think you need 3 of the 4 advanced players on Attack, at least one of the wide players could be on Support

Two BWMs in midfield could be problematic with their closing down and hard tackling, even having the one in a two man midfield might let you down

The Full backs look really tame to me but I barely ever use a FB on Defend, you could move him up to Support and the right back to Attack, the right CM will sit a little deeper and help cover the forward movement of the FB

The TIs are aggressive, maybe overly so for a mid table Championship team     

[GonzaloFlores]

Personally, I don't mind the 3 attack duties up top but, as a Birmingham City fan, I will say that Chong always seemed to do incredibly well for me as a IW(s).

The CM looks to be a big problem for me. The game generally recommends a double pivot in the DM strata so I would drop them to that if the players can play there and I would not play 2 BWM. When you lose the ball, they are both looking to go hunting for the ball. They will do this even when you are winning by 2/3 goals. The opposition will probably have thrown more players forward at this point but your midfield are still going missing and potentially leaving you exposed. If you are wanting Massengo to hold his position (I'm assuming this by him being the one on defend) then I would switch his role to CM(d) or DM(d) if you take my other advice.

I agree with Johnny's point about the full backs as well. Them both being slightly higher up the pitch means they are in a better position to try and stop a counter attack. If you like some of the PI's that you have with FB(d) then you can always manually add them to them to the FB(s). FB(s) gives you more scope to play around with these to find the right balance.

[Grayhatz]

2 hours ago, Johnny Ace said:

Starting from the top, I don't think you need 3 of the 4 advanced players on Attack, at least one of the wide players could be on Support

Two BWMs in midfield could be problematic with their closing down and hard tackling, even having the one in a two man midfield might let you down

The Full backs look really tame to me but I barely ever use a FB on Defend, you could move him up to Support and the right back to Attack, the right CM will sit a little deeper and help cover the forward movement of the FB

The TIs are aggressive, maybe overly so for a mid table Championship team     

Thanks

i'll try and take this onboard

Im not usually one for FBs on defend either but i tried it basically in reaction to our softness at the back, even though i'd rather have FBs offering support.

[lied90]

On 31/05/2023 at 14:10, Grayhatz said:

Anyone have any advice?

 Drop CMs to DM. You get more defensive cover and there are no drawbacks to it. Get the FBs forward instead by making them WBs or FB on attack duty (or add get further forward PI). Remove Step Up More, it can be a disaster in certain games so better just avoid it if you don't know what you are doing. Make the PF and AF, he will press almost the same but AF is better at attacking space and you are using pass into space.

You might want to make a version of the tactic that conserves a bit of energy, to use at the end of games when you are winning. Aggressive tactics are great, but your team can get run to the ground with all the games in the championship.

[Cloud9]

11 hours ago, lied90 said:

 Drop CMs to DM. You get more defensive cover and there are no drawbacks to it. Get the FBs forward instead by making them WBs or FB on attack duty (or add get further forward PI). Remove Step Up More, it can be a disaster in certain games so better just avoid it if you don't know what you are doing. Make the PF and AF, he will press almost the same but AF is better at attacking space and you are using pass into space.

You might want to make a version of the tactic that conserves a bit of energy, to use at the end of games when you are winning. Aggressive tactics are great, but your team can get run to the ground with all the games in the championship.

Just to jump in quickly:

• Reworked double pivots do function differently in the CM Strada vs DM Strada, even though they adjust back/forward. A DM double pivot helps against the counter attack, while the CM Strada can be a useful choice if you're looking to win the ball back higher up the pitch (keeping your BWM away for your box) or pin the opposition in their half. I'd consider it specifically for a high possession style. I prefer the DM Strada in my tactics but that's just my personal preference. 
• PF attack is actually a better fit in a high lines tactical approach than the AF, there's very little space for him to run into. I'd recommend keeping the PF(a) and removing "pass into space."

Totally agree with you having a starting point that you can adjust from energy wise. Playing with "Counter Press" off going into matches can be a good starting point. 

Edited June 3, 2023 by Cloud9