Need some help on a downloaded tactic

[Hieberflab]

Hi all,

I have been using this Arsenal recreaction tactic I have downloaded for my Arsenal save on FM22, this tactic was made for FM23 but the formation, player roles and instructions and team instructions are the same except for High Press which I change to Standard LOE as that does not exist on FM22

So the problem with this tactic is my team seems to be under pressure a lot from opposition team mainly Man City, Liverpool but even weaker team like Sheff Wed or Brentford in the FA Cup I almost lost. They will get a lot of shots in and puts Ramsdale under a lot of pressure. The only positive is that I have good possession of the ball.

Another issue is that my winger and striker can't seem to score goals, the ball either is shot long or into the keepers hand most of the time.

I have tried Balanced mentality, Work Ball Into Box but don't seem to work that well.

I have stopped playing the game until I can figure out what is wrong

[Draakon]

The first part of your question might have something to do with midfield roles.

Against big teams or away games where you seem to struggle, you might try Odergaard as APs instead of RPMs. Too much roaming could be counter-productive, because teammates should be able to find him with passes and if he gets isolated, he can't build up attacks.

Not so sure about your left flank, though - how is Xhaka doing as IWBa? It seems he might run into Aubameyan (IFs) because they occupy same space. Might work in some games, but not with others.

 

If you use CFs you have to accept that he's not going to score too many goals. Yes, around 10-20 per season is expected, but he's more of a provider and you shouldn't get downhearted by that statistics. The same with IFs. 

What I'd do is switch your IFs to IFa - it would include a clear attacking-minded runner to your attack who could feed off support from CFs. Having attacking players on both sides of CFs has proven to work well for me in the past.

Another option is to switch Odergaard to MCa or APa, to move him closer to your CFs. 

An orthodox approach claims that having two playmakers (RPM/AP and DLP) in midfield is counterproductive, because they tend to link up a lot between themselves. It could help to keep your possession stats up, but it's not very productive in building attack. You could just switch Rice to DMCd and add specific PI-s (switch ball to other flank trait is preferrable when his role is to circle the game around or 'take more risks' and 'more direct passing' PI if he's an excellent passer and could spot a runner up front.

[Cloud9]

4 hours ago, Hieberflab said:

Hi all,

I have been using this Arsenal recreaction tactic I have downloaded for my Arsenal save on FM22, this tactic was made for FM23 but the formation, player roles and instructions and team instructions are the same except for High Press which I change to Standard LOE as that does not exist on FM22

So the problem with this tactic is my team seems to be under pressure a lot from opposition team mainly Man City, Liverpool but even weaker team like Sheff Wed or Brentford in the FA Cup I almost lost. They will get a lot of shots in and puts Ramsdale under a lot of pressure. The only positive is that I have good possession of the ball.

Another issue is that my winger and striker can't seem to score goals, the ball either is shot long or into the keepers hand most of the time.

I have tried Balanced mentality, Work Ball Into Box but don't seem to work that well.

I have stopped playing the game until I can figure out what is wrong

So the core problem here is that you've adopted a high lines tactic to a midblock without making the changes it would need to work. 

If you want to play a midblock you must put pressure back on the opposition.

• Easiest way to do this is with an AF. He'll stop their backline from walking all the way up the pitch. 
• Tis are not setup for a midblock. Counter press in particular needs to go, but I'd get rid of play out from the back as well.

Width is an issue for you. IWB(a) wants inside space, you'll need to create it for him.

• IWB(a) is a role your tactic should be built around if you're going to use it. Xhaka can't play the role well on the left as he is left footed, which will mess with his ability to invert. He's also not mobile.
• IWB(a) not a great option for most midblocks.

Also your backline does not have pace.

• Combine this with a high defensive line while inviting pressure = goals conceded.

4 hours ago, Draakon said:

If you use CFs you have to accept that he's not going to score too many goals. Yes, around 10-20 per season is expected, but he's more of a provider and you shouldn't get downhearted by that statistics. The same with IFs. 

IF(s) are primarily goal scorers, not providers. They will take less direct routes to goal than their attack counterparts, but both are selfish forwards. Most support roles in the game are facilitators/providers, but the IF(s) is a notable exception to the rule   

Edited July 14, 2023 by Cloud9

[bosque]

17 minutes ago, Cloud9 said:

If you want to play a midblock you must put pressure back on the opposition.

• Easiest way to do this is with an AF. He'll stop their backline from walking all the way up the pitch. 

Why the AF and not the PF(a) to put pressure on the opposition? I mean, the PF closes down more

Edited July 14, 2023 by bosque

[Cloud9]

3 minutes ago, bosque said:

Why the AF and not the PF(a) to put pressure on the opposition? I mean, the PF closes down more

The two roles operate similarly, but the PF is a better fit for a high lines system. The AF excels with space to run into. 

• The PF(a) won't give you that constant pressure/threat to the opposition backline due to his pressing.
• The AF is single minded and will literally just hangout on the CB's shoulder, giving that constant threat (and importantly pushback) that you can't get with the other roles.

[Johnny Ace]

20 minutes ago, Cloud9 said:

IF(s) are primarily goal scorers, not providers. They will take less direct routes to goal than their attack counterparts, but both are selfish forwards. Most support roles in the game are facilitators/providers, but the IF(s) is a notable exception to the rule   

Not sure I 100% agree with that. Yes, they're pretty attacking but I'd still class them as a creator/scorer role rather that a full on goal scorer. IF(A) is 100% a goal scorer but I'd go with 70 to 80% for an IF(S), they will look for players in better positions than themselves  

[Johnny Ace]

4 minutes ago, Cloud9 said:

The two roles operate similarly, but the PF is a better fit for a high lines system. The AF excels with space to run into. 

• The PF(a) won't give you that constant pressure/threat to the opposition backline due to his pressing.
• The AF is single minded and will literally just hangout on the CB's shoulder, giving that constant threat (and importantly pushback) that you can't get with the other roles.

I think you're talking about two different things here, in and out of possession. Out of possession the Pressing Forward will press more than most striker roles but in possession they hang off the shoulder of the CB's like an AF, a Poacher will too 

[Hieberflab]

29 minutes ago, Cloud9 said:

So the core problem here is that you've adopted a high lines tactic to a midblock without making the changes it would need to work. 

If you want to play a midblock you must put pressure back on the opposition.

• Easiest way to do this is with an AF. He'll stop their backline from walking all the way up the pitch. 
• Tis are not setup for a midblock. Counter press in particular needs to go, but I'd get rid of play out from the back as well.

This FM23 tactic is actually a High Block if I am not mistaken as it was using High Press for Line Of Engagement. FM22 doesn't have this option so I assumed it looked like Standard LOE to me.

29 minutes ago, Cloud9 said:

So the core problem here is that you've adopted a high lines tactic to a midblock without making the changes it would need to work. 

If you want to play a midblock you must put pressure back on the opposition.

• Easiest way to do this is with an AF. He'll stop their backline from walking all the way up the pitch. 
• Tis are not setup for a midblock. Counter press in particular needs to go, but I'd get rid of play out from the back as well.

Width is an issue for you. IWB(a) wants inside space, you'll need to create it for him.

• IWB(a) is a role your tactic should be built around if you're going to use it. Xhaka can't play the role well on the left as he is left footed, which will mess with his ability to invert. He's also not mobile.
• IWB(a) not a great option for most midblocks.

I actually used Xhaka in the IWB role as Tierney is injured and Taveres is still young and not physcially strong to take on a strong team like Liverpool.

[Cloud9]

23 minutes ago, Johnny Ace said:

I think you're talking about two different things here, in and out of possession. Out of possession the Pressing Forward will press more than most striker roles but in possession they hang off the shoulder of the CB's like an AF, a Poacher will too 

I agree that they operate similarly when looking to score goals

But in terms of why the AF works so well on a mid block, it's that constant threat to run in behind (while the PF has other duties) that makes him a better fit. A Poacher would also struggle to apply that threat in a mid block.

Edited July 14, 2023 by Cloud9

[Cloud9]

14 minutes ago, Hieberflab said:

This FM23 tactic is actually a High Block if I am not mistaken as it was using High Press for Line Of Engagement. FM22 doesn't have this option so I assumed it looked like Standard LOE to me.

I actually used Xhaka in the IWB role as Tierney is injured and Taveres is still young and not physcially strong to take on a strong team like Liverpool.

Tierney and Tavares are also left footed I think? You might consider just going with a normal WB on the left hand side.

[Johnny Ace]

1 minute ago, Cloud9 said:

But in terms of why the AF works so well on a mid block, it's that constant threat to run in behind (while the PF has other duties) that makes him a better fit. A Poacher would also struggle to apply that threat in a mid block.

I'm interested, what makes you say that? As far as I'm concerned, when attacking, all 3 operate similarly when playing with a mid block 

[Hieberflab]

Just now, Cloud9 said:

Tierney and Tavares are also left footed I think? You might consider just going with a normal WB on the left hand side.

But the role description does not say the strongest foot has to be on the opposite side the player is playing like the IF and IW role.

[Johnny Ace]

27 minutes ago, Hieberflab said:

But the role description does not say the strongest foot has to be on the opposite side the player is playing like the IF and IW role.

I'm pretty sure the OG modern Inverted Wingback, Phillip Lahm was right footed coming inside from right back. It just depends what you want from them, most people like them to come inside on their stronger foot 

[bosque]

14 minutes ago, Johnny Ace said:

I'm pretty sure the OG modern Inverted Wingback, Phillip Lahm was right footed coming inside from right back. It just depends what you want from them, most people like them to come inside on their stronger foot 

I read somewhere it helps if the Inverted Fullback plays on the side of his stronger foot because is the foot he will use to tackle when defending.

Edited July 14, 2023 by bosque

[Cloud9]

48 minutes ago, Johnny Ace said:

I'm interested, what makes you say that? As far as I'm concerned, when attacking, all 3 operate similarly when playing with a mid block 

They're strong anyways but excel as that focal point when you drop your lines back.

• Vs a PF(a)
  • While the PF(a) runs around horizontally a lot w/defensive pressing, I find it's actually the AF that provides more defensive stability by providing that threat of running in behind to the opposition. You invite less pressure and typically score more goals as well.
  • The AF is in position to run in behind when the ball is turned over, which isn't always the case for the PF(a).
  • He's fresh, CBs tend not to run around a ton and he really just needs to be quicker than them. 
• Vs a Poacher
  • I think I've had the most success with poachers in a striker pairing in my own saves, but it's a role I quite like.
  • They've got "dribble less" on them, which I don't want on the focal point of the attack in a midblock. AF come w "move into the channels" and I think they've got a bit more under the hood as well to get them running in behind. 
  • Not a bad option, I just find the AF an exceptional one. 

I don't mind a facilitating forward on a midblock if you're trying to do something interesting with your tactic, but in terms of a focal point of the attack: I've found it frustratingly difficult to get away from the effectiveness of the AF in my own testing. 

They're ultimately better at consistently getting into goal scoring positions from deep than the other two. 

46 minutes ago, Hieberflab said:

But the role description does not say the strongest foot has to be on the opposite side the player is playing like the IF and IW role.

It's one of the roles in the game where I'd prioritize footedness. I was noticing players who had same foot on the same side would take the ball wide onto their preferred foot instead of inverting at times. Since he's on attack duty that could be a pain. 

A same footed IWB will change the way he plays, so up to you

Edited July 14, 2023 by Cloud9

[Cloud9]

1 hour ago, Johnny Ace said:

I'm pretty sure the OG modern Inverted Wingback, Phillip Lahm was right footed coming inside from right back. It just depends what you want from them, most people like them to come inside on their stronger foot 

Little side note of the PF I forgot to add: 

• Him turning over the ball up high on the pitch (on high lines) creates a really dangerous situation for the opposition, usually leading to a high XG chance. That same payoff isn't there isn't there on a midblock when you're farther away from goal. 

Edited July 14, 2023 by Cloud9

[Johnny Ace]

34 minutes ago, Cloud9 said:

They're strong anyways but excel as that focal point when you drop your lines back.

• Vs a PF(a)
  • While the PF(a) runs around horizontally a lot w/defensive pressing, I find it's actually the AF that provides more defensive stability by providing that threat of running in behind to the opposition. You invite less pressure and typically score more goals as well.
  • The AF is in position to run in behind when the ball is turned over, which isn't always the case for the PF(a).
  • He's fresh, CBs tend not to run around a ton and he really just needs to be quicker than them. 
• Vs a Poacher
  • I think I've had the most success with poachers in a striker pairing in my own saves, but it's a role I quite like.
  • They've got "dribble less" on them, which I don't want on the focal point of the attack in a midblock. AF come w "move into the channels" and I think they've got a bit more under the hood as well to get them running in behind. 
  • Not a bad option, I just find the AF an exceptional one. 

I don't mind a facilitating forward on a midblock if you're trying to do something interesting with your tactic, but in terms of a focal point of the attack: I've found it frustratingly difficult to get away from the effectiveness of the AF in my own testing. 

They're ultimately better at consistently getting into goal scoring positions from deep than the other two. 

Interesting, I'm probably more used to Poachers in LLM as there's an abundance of them and find so long as they have a bit of Acceleration plus decent other Poacher attributes they will perform the task of breaking the defensive lines. It's the first line of the role's description so it's one of their primary tasks 

Then in the box, I want that selfishness of staying central and taking as many shots as possible   Sometimes an AF can be off in a channel somewhere wide of goal 

5 minutes ago, Cloud9 said:

Little side note of the PF I forgot to add: 

• Him turning over the ball up high on the pitch (on high lines) creates a really dangerous situation for the opposition, usually leading to a high XG chance. That same payoff isn't there isn't there on a midblock when you're farther away from goal. 

Yeah, that's true, a midblock can still make use of that though if the PF has an attacking partner 

[Cloud9]

40 minutes ago, Johnny Ace said:

Interesting, I'm probably more used to Poachers in LLM as there's an abundance of them and find so long as they have a bit of Acceleration plus decent other Poacher attributes they will perform the task of breaking the defensive lines. It's the first line of the role's description so it's one of their primary tasks 

Then in the box, I want that selfishness of staying central and taking as many shots as possible   Sometimes an AF can be off in a channel somewhere wide of goal 

Yeah, that's true, a midblock can still make use of that though if the PF has an attacking partner 

Nice! I think the main turnoff on a mid block poacher for me has always been the lack of ability to carry the ball, which can lead to some award situations in transition. That makes sense though, particularly on their ability to hug the box when in it   if you're playing with low quality players, giving them just one job to do sounds smart. 

Agree on the partner for the PF, you can build a really defensively compact 4-4-2 like this where you get the best of both worlds. 

 

I've been trying to get off footed wingers on attack w/beat the offside trap/move into channel traits to create a more interesting setup in a midblock, which hopefully can free up that central striker role. They end up operating more in that wide half space, which I think is a better emulation of how quick wide strikers are usually deployed IRL. It's still a little tricky to get that pushback on the opposition backline though.

Edited July 14, 2023 by Cloud9

[Johnny Ace]

20 minutes ago, Cloud9 said:

Nice! I think the main turnoff on a mid block poacher for me has always been the lack of ability to carry the ball, which can lead to some award situations in transition. That makes sense though, particularly on their ability to hug the box when in it   if you're playing with low quality players, giving them just one job to do sounds smart. 

Yeah the Poacher won't run the channels like an AF or PF, it's not part of his job. He'll run onto the ball rather than with it and that's fine, it's part of his duties  (or lack of ). If he finds himself in an awkward spot where he doesn't have a sight of goal, he'll just lay the ball off to a teammate.

All striker roles offer something different, wether it's off the ball, on the ball in attack or defence but all of the aggressive "Spearhead" roles will be looking to run into the space beyond the backline     

[Draakon]

On 14/07/2023 at 17:39, Hieberflab said:

But the role description does not say the strongest foot has to be on the opposite side the player is playing like the IF and IW role.

Well, all roles CAN be played by players regardless of their stronger foot. In some situations it benefits them, in others it doesn't matter much. 

For IWB I suggest it's perhaps more important when he's under pressure by opposition and has to pass the ball somewhere and there are more teammates in the middle of the park, so more passing options on his stronger foot.

However, I've experimented a fair amount with IF and IW roles with different players (rigth-footed, left-footed, two-footed). Every now and then attacking players get into situations where being 'wrong-footed' is actually benefitial. You might say that having a IF and IW who have the strongest foot on the opposite side is slightly better in the long term, but wrong-footed player can do well in this role as well.