3 Defenders = Broken?

[AI-brahimovic]

I'm an avid fan of 3 ATB formations and I can't help but feel as soon as I run 3 ATB for an entire season, I start seeing more results like 5-2, 4-3, 3-3, etc. Almost never do games end in a common 1-0 or 0-0 result running 3 ATB formations right now. Is it just me? I've tried it in 4 completely different leagues, different players, 3-5-2, 3-4-3, sometimes even with a DM in front of my defense line and defenders still seem to act SO passive all the time. Even when my wing backs drop back, which is exactly what they're supposed to do against the ball, even with a defensive chain of 5-6 players, I still concede the easiest of goals, because they would either:

- Drop far too deep and passively stand in front of the keeper in their own box => allowing numerous long shots
- Won't look for a challenge and tackle when they clearly should do it

Reason I'm making this post is because I don't see these problems in a classical 4 ATB formation. I don't see it when playing with 2 Full Backs in a 4-3-2-1, 4-4-2 or 4-whatever else. What's your experience with 3 ATB in FM 24 so far? I don't understand what I'm doing wrong. I have attached one example but just to tell you this advance before you tell me I will leave too much space in central positions with both central midfielders attacking ... I view every goal in 3D and it's usually what I described above. Solid back 5 or even 6 players behind the ball, still, opponents get to shoot because they're not really challenged much. I'm usually testing these formations with a team strength comparable to the best 4-8 teams in a league btw. 

Edited November 15, 2023 by AI-brahimovic

[Mik_Fe]

it's a problem of ME.. can you find the post in the thread in this forum

 

[markoconnell]

Following this thread closely as I too am experiencing the same issues with the OP. Players seem to let the opposition cut through even with 'Get Stuck In' on.

 

Edited November 15, 2023 by markoconnell

[dzek]

Its a bug of ME since FM23 so it has nothing to do with 5 at the back or 4. Maybe 4 at the back can position themselves slightly better than 5.

[crusadertsar]

Incidentally, I was seeing big score sheets with my own 3-4-2-1. Could be fun sometimes but definitely not when you tie big Champions League game against Copenhagen 3-3. Now since switching to 4-3-3 the games have gotten a lot less exciting and seeing more conservative score sheets. So it might be a issue with positioning for more than 2 CBs in backline. 

[Mik_Fe]

2 minuti fa, crusadertsar ha scritto:

Per inciso, vedevo risultati importanti con il mio 3-4-2-1. Potrebbe essere divertente a volte, ma sicuramente non quando pareggia una grande partita di Champions League contro il Copenhagen 3-3. Ora, da quando siamo passati al 4-3-3, le partite sono diventate molto meno entusiasmanti e i risultati sono più conservativi. Quindi potrebbe trattarsi di un problema con il posizionamento di più di 2 CB nella backline. 

in my 433 sometimes happened the same things.. passive cb and dm when they are close into little area... pass at thew limit of the area and opponent are free and my defenders looks birds or the beautiful sky.. they dont go to push they away from this dangerous area.. but they remains passive..

it is possible that is a ME problem..

[crusadertsar]

1 minute ago, Mik_Fe said:

in my 433 sometimes happened the same things.. passive cb and dm when they are close into little area... pass at thew limit of the area and opponent are free and my defenders looks birds or the beautiful sky.. they dont go to push they away from this dangerous area.. but they remains passive..

it is possible that is a ME problem..

Dunno if it's ME issue. I'm not good enough with analysis to spot that and don't really watch matches in full, otherwise would take me ages to finish a season. All I know is that I wanted to try something different with 3-4-2-1 and then it backfired and bit me in the butt. So now I'm back to my old and trusty 4-3-3 and couldn't be happier 

[Mik_Fe]

8 minuti fa, crusadertsar ha scritto:

Non so se è un problema mio. Non sono abbastanza bravo con l'analisi per individuarlo e non guardo le partite per intero, altrimenti mi ci vorrebbe un secolo per finire una stagione. Tutto quello che so è che volevo provare qualcosa di diverso con il 3-4-2-1 e poi mi si è ritorto contro e mi ha dato un calcio nel sedere. Quindi ora sono tornato al mio vecchio e fidato 4-3-3 e non potrei essere più felice 

@crociato i've the same things 

I start a career with West Ham and i want to make a 3421 possession tactic.. but, or i dont understaind nothing of tactic (i dont think nothing, i'm not sure a master, but i'm not a completly idiot  ) or the problem are real..

I change 3-4-2-1 to 4-3-3 and i see your same things, better results and better performance..

it's a shame beacuse the game this year it s seem good... but i think that i need to wait next or next one patch to resolve this.. career with Roma without 3-4-2-1 isn t a career for me this year 

[crusadertsar]

41 minutes ago, Mik_Fe said:

@crociato i've the same things 

I start a career with West Ham and i want to make a 3421 possession tactic.. but, or i dont understaind nothing of tactic (i dont think nothing, i'm not sure a master, but i'm not a completly idiot  ) or the problem are real..

I change 3-4-2-1 to 4-3-3 and i see your same things, better results and better performance..

it's a shame beacuse the game this year it s seem good... but i think that i need to wait next or next one patch to resolve this.. career with Roma without 3-4-2-1 isn t a career for me this year 

Yeah I know managing in Italy without being able to use a good 3 in the back tactic is terrible haha 

[Domoboy23]

There's a huge lack of tackles (standing, sliding) and blocks

[RDF Tactics]

The passiveness still happens with a 4atb tactic, maybe just not as often or so obvious. I can only guess (or speculate lol) that is down to simply having more defenders. I feel defenders are passive, and players genuinely in some defensive situations are too passive. Not tracking runs, not tackling are all evident in a 4atb too. In my 4-2-3-1, many times the DM are sitting on top of our CBs, and AI striker in front of my DM easily receives a pass.

I tend to only use a 4atb and the passive defenders is something that can get to me lol. Especially defending in the wider areas, we tend to just run side-by-side despite us trapping them right on the touchline. It should be an easy tackle but my defenders tend to stand aside the winger and let the winger do as he pleases.

This also makes balls into channels and absolute killer. The wider CBs can be too reluctant to defend that area. A successful ball in between my CB and FB then it's game over because the CB doesn't also track back into his box - it usually ends with them pulling the ball back to an unmarked ST for a tap-in.

[Mik_Fe]

3 ore fa, RDF Tactics ha scritto:

The passiveness still happens with a 4atb tactic, maybe just not as often or so obvious. I can only guess (or speculate lol) that is down to simply having more defenders. I feel defenders are passive, and players genuinely in some defensive situations are too passive. Not tracking runs, not tackling are all evident in a 4atb too. In my 4-2-3-1, many times the DM are sitting on top of our CBs, and AI striker in front of my DM easily receives a pass.

I tend to only use a 4atb and the passive defenders is something that can get to me lol. Especially defending in the wider areas, we tend to just run side-by-side despite us trapping them right on the touchline. It should be an easy tackle but my defenders tend to stand aside the winger and let the winger do as he pleases.

This also makes balls into channels and absolute killer. The wider CBs can be too reluctant to defend that area. A successful ball in between my CB and FB then it's game over because the CB doesn't also track back into his box - it usually ends with them pulling the ball back to an unmarked ST for a tap-in.

In your opinion, with experience of FM 22 (if i remember correclty) next patch will solve this ME bug?

[warlock]

7 hours ago, crusadertsar said:

managing in Italy without being able to use a good 3 in the back tactic is terrible

And yet, just a few threads down, there's this one:

Back-to-back Serie A titles and added the Champions League in season 2. 

I've rarely used a 3-at-the-back system, but there's evidence to suggest it can be done.

Edited November 16, 2023 by warlock

[Cloud9]

5 hours ago, warlock said:

And yet, just a few threads down, there's this one:

Back-to-back Serie A titles and added the Champions League in season 2. 

I've rarely used a 3-at-the-back system, but there's evidence to suggest it can be done.

As the best side in Italy, few teams will be willing to take the game to this tactic (even on a mid block). I think that contributes to covering up the issues others are experiencing with defenders in the current ME.

Edited November 16, 2023 by Cloud9

[Fraser]

I had success with a back 3 in FM23 but the exact same formation (with a very similar team) isn't as effective.

Players not putting in challenges, even with instructions to "Get stuck in" and press more, appears to be a problem all over the pitch in FM24 but the biggest issue I had with a back 3 is the central DC's tendency to go walkabout.  I think the outside DC's maybe cover wide more, and if the central DC pushes up or chases the ball then there is a giant gap right in the middle of the defence.

I think a Stopper role in the centre is a complete no-no this year and maybe a back 5 either needs the 'wing backs' to start on the Defensive line rather than the Defensive Midfield line OR to be on defend duty.

What's interesting is that, although the tactical presets have seen minimal changes, more of them are now using mid-block in FM24 and the default roles for some of the full-backs and wing-backs are either more defensive or more geared towards them playing inside. 

For example:

• The main Gegenpress presets for 4231 and the 424 have a Wing Back on Defend at DL, where last year it was a Wing Back on Support. 
• The main Control Possession presets for 4231 and 433 have an Inverted Full Back on Defend at DR, where last year it was a Wing Back on Support (and the DL in the 433 is now a Inverted WIngBack on Support when it was also a Wing Back on Support last year). For the 523 then it's an Inverted Wing Back on Support at WBL, when it was a WBS last year.
• The main Tiki-Taka presets and Vertical Tiki-Taka are seeing the same pattern.

[josh.miller92]

I have been experimenting with low intensity using 2 libs on D and a CD C (operating like a traditional sweeper slightly ironically).

early signs are more positive defensively however I am using Liverpool so I suspect any formation would work! 

Will update in due course. 

[avenger22]

Play 3 x BPD on D, 2 MEZZ(a), 2 WB(A), 2 AF(A) And high press, much more often intensity, get stuck in, prevent gk, high line and you will win easily at least majority

[Rashidi]

Playing a back 3 system with Gloucester and essentially steamrolling past the sides now after a dodgy start to the league where I lost the two opening games. While I agree that conversion rates are high, I love the fact that I need to adjust small little things to counter opposing sides levelling against me after leading with a 4 goal margin.

I wouldn’t set up my formation like the OPs cos it’s just asking so for trouble.  As an underdog I get sides taking the game to me and it requires me to actively manage my cross management and traps. And I also need to target specific opposition players via OIs. 
 

The OPs backline set up had me scratching my head, the stopper CD combination is a bad idea that will most likely lead to premature pulling of the defence out of position. Then there is the use of low crosses which is really only useful when you can camp for extended periods of time, then we have the central midfield combination that has the potential of being out of shape when you have consolidated the midfield. 
 

With the higher than normal conversion rates for mid table sides, this tactic is gonna be castrated by halftime. I am sorry but I need to call a spade a spade. Before one leaps and generalises that all back 3 systems are dead one should step back and ask if the system they are using is decent to begin with.

[Cloud9]

5 hours ago, Rashidi said:

Playing a back 3 system with Gloucester and essentially steamrolling past the sides now after a dodgy start to the league where I lost the two opening games. While I agree that conversion rates are high, I love the fact that I need to adjust small little things to counter opposing sides levelling against me after leading with a 4 goal margin.

I wouldn’t set up my formation like the OPs cos it’s just asking so for trouble.  As an underdog I get sides taking the game to me and it requires me to actively manage my cross management and traps. And I also need to target specific opposition players via OIs. 
 

The OPs backline set up had me scratching my head, the stopper CD combination is a bad idea that will most likely lead to premature pulling of the defence out of position. Then there is the use of low crosses which is really only useful when you can camp for extended periods of time, then we have the central midfield combination that has the potential of being out of shape when you have consolidated the midfield. 
 

With the higher than normal conversion rates for mid table sides, this tactic is gonna be castrated by halftime. I am sorry but I need to call a spade a spade. Before one leaps and generalises that all back 3 systems are dead one should step back and ask if the system they are using is decent to begin with.

Would you recommend avoiding Stopper/Cover combos altogether in a defence first setup? I was utilizing a BPD(st), CD(co), BPD(st) on a high defensive line + low block w/an inside pressing trap (trap inside, stop crosses, step up more) & dribble more on the BPD. 

My typical 3 at the back setups feature a flat back three for the stability (usually via a mid block that lets the midfield do most of dirty work and leaving the backline structured), but was trying to experiment/add an extra element with them. I'd gone with the two BPD to provide a counterbalance of stability in the backline compared to the WCB(s), while still being able to intercept/progress the ball. 

Edited November 20, 2023 by Cloud9

[Louisking1992]

On 15/11/2023 at 13:35, Mik_Fe said:

it's a problem of ME.. can you find the post in the thread in this forum

 

Can you link the post to me please?

[Mik_Fe]

In questo momento, Louisking1992 ha scritto:

Can you link the post to me please?

 

[Louisking1992]

Been using a 3ATB system for 2 seasons and ive noticed loads of goals being scored/conceded in games. When we go 3-0 up you better believe we're conceding atleast 2 goals in the game

[crusadertsar]

14 minutes ago, Louisking1992 said:

Been using a 3ATB system for 2 seasons and ive noticed loads of goals being scored/conceded in games. When we go 3-0 up you better believe we're conceding atleast 2 goals in the game

Please report this to bugs section of forum with relevant save data if you want this to be looked it. From all the accounts I keep hearing about similar 3-at-the-back systems there might definitely be something there. Personally I have had the opposite with 4 in the back system. Very few goals conceeded this season against elite teams. So it might be something specifically related to how 3 CBs are playing this year. 

Edited November 20, 2023 by crusadertsar

[lied90]

On 20/11/2023 at 19:26, Louisking1992 said:

Been using a 3ATB system for 2 seasons and ive noticed loads of goals being scored/conceded in games. When we go 3-0 up you better believe we're conceding atleast 2 goals in the game

From what you posted you seem more likely to concede 0-1 goals when having scored 3+, than conceding 2+.