Creating 2 strikers from a 1 striker tactic

[GonzaloFlores]

I was wondering whether anyone has had any success with creating a tactic that formation wise is a 1 striker tactic (4231, 433 etc.) but when in possession it becomes a 2 striker tactic?

I generally use a slow possession based style and with roles like IFB, IWB, LIB, HB etc. I feel confident that I can make almost any shape with the defensive side of my team but I've found it impossible to get a 2nd player to join my striker when in possession of the ball. I thought IF(a), SS(a) or CM(a) would be the best options but I find they all like to arrive into the box late rather than get in there be there during the build up phase. Am I using the wrong roles or am I trying to do something that the current match engine just isn't able to do at the moment?

Any help/advice would be really welcome.

 

[crusadertsar]

The best way to create that is probably just a basic 4-4-1-1 with DLF (or False 9) and Shadow Striker in AMC position. Had good success with that so far. Although mind you my AMC is not even traditional SS role, just a generic AM(A).

Edited February 28 by crusadertsar

[Englishhammer]

In a 433 I find an IF on A works as my second striker, especially with traits to cut inside/get in to the box etc. Or even an IW on A can work. 
Just make sure you have someone covering behind to support that side. Personally I like a Carrilero and then a WB/FB on support/defence.

Edited February 28 by Englishhammer

[crusadertsar]

2 hours ago, Englishhammer said:

In a 433 I find an IF on A works as my second striker, especially with traits to cut inside/get in to the box etc. Or even an IW on A can work. 
Just make sure you have someone covering behind on support on defence. Personally I like a Carrilero and then a WB/FB on support/defence.

When you play Inside Forward on attack, what role do you play your primary central striker in? Surely not attacking one like AF? Otherwise they would be occupying the same area, contesting the space, no?

[thizaum]

12 hours ago, GonzaloFlores said:

I was wondering whether anyone has had any success with creating a tactic that formation wise is a 1 striker tactic (4231, 433 etc.) but when in possession it becomes a 2 striker tactic?

I generally use a slow possession based style and with roles like IFB, IWB, LIB, HB etc. I feel confident that I can make almost any shape with the defensive side of my team but I've found it impossible to get a 2nd player to join my striker when in possession of the ball. I thought IF(a), SS(a) or CM(a) would be the best options but I find they all like to arrive into the box late rather than get in there be there during the build up phase. Am I using the wrong roles or am I trying to do something that the current match engine just isn't able to do at the moment?

Any help/advice would be really welcome.

 

I think CM(a) is not an option.

AM(a), SS, Treq and IF(a) should all be good options.

Are you familiar with the "partnerships" article from Guide to FM? There's the concept of "creator" and "scorer", and there are different ways of achieving this. One of them is the number 9, the number 10, the false 9 and the false 10.

I get the impression that you are insisting on having a number 9 and a false 10 (so a 10 that acts as a 9) at the same time.

What you are looking for is having a false 9 and a false 10. So, as others said, your CF needs to be more of a creator (most likely, a support duty) and less of a scorer.

The treqs are kinda of an exception in this case, because they are both creators and scorers. So in theory, you could have both player (a CF and an AM, center or wide) as Treqs.

[Englishhammer]

2 hours ago, crusadertsar said:

When you play Inside Forward on attack, what role do you play your primary central striker in? Surely not attacking one like AF? Otherwise they would be occupying the same area, contesting the space, no?

Loads of “what ifs” depending on formations etc tbf. But generally due to players at my disposal (I rarely play outside of favourite teams) I usually go F9 with IFa and CMa or SS. Sometimes the striker and SS work better asymmetrical with the IF. 
However I have had success with an AF, I just go more conservative on the left and down the middle. It seems to even out with movement. 

Edited February 28 by Englishhammer

[GonzaloFlores]

10 hours ago, thizaum said:

I think CM(a) is not an option.

AM(a), SS, Treq and IF(a) should all be good options.

Are you familiar with the "partnerships" article from Guide to FM? There's the concept of "creator" and "scorer", and there are different ways of achieving this. One of them is the number 9, the number 10, the false 9 and the false 10.

I get the impression that you are insisting on having a number 9 and a false 10 (so a 10 that acts as a 9) at the same time.

What you are looking for is having a false 9 and a false 10. So, as others said, your CF needs to be more of a creator (most likely, a support duty) and less of a scorer.

The treqs are kinda of an exception in this case, because they are both creators and scorers. So in theory, you could have both player (a CF and an AM, center or wide) as Treqs.

What I'm trying to do is create a 3-2-3-2 formation when in possession but from a tactic that only plays 1 natural striker so that when I am defending I can still defend in a 4231/433 shape and not leave 2 strikers up top. The closest I've got is using a 4231 with an IF(a) and a WB(s/a) behind them but I find the IF tucks in with the AM rather then partnering the striker so I end up in a 3241 shape instead.

I'm looking for any advice on creating a 3-2-3-2 formation when in possession from a 1 striker tactic. Think of my question as how do I turn a 4231 into a 3232 when in possession. Hopefully I'm explaining that a bit better.

[thizaum]

15 hours ago, GonzaloFlores said:

What I'm trying to do is create a 3-2-3-2 formation when in possession but from a tactic that only plays 1 natural striker so that when I am defending I can still defend in a 4231/433 shape and not leave 2 strikers up top. The closest I've got is using a 4231 with an IF(a) and a WB(s/a) behind them but I find the IF tucks in with the AM rather then partnering the striker so I end up in a 3241 shape instead.

I'm looking for any advice on creating a 3-2-3-2 formation when in possession from a 1 striker tactic. Think of my question as how do I turn a 4231 into a 3232 when in possession. Hopefully I'm explaining that a bit better.

Okay...

Is this too far from what you are looking for? Surely it depends on TIs and mentality, but mainly I think that in order to achieve exactly what you are looking for, you'd need to tweak the PIs and be careful with the preferred moves.

[Lordluap]

Ok, so, base of 

 

3-4-3

****-WCB-BPD-WCB-****

WBS-CMS-DLPS-WBS

IFA-****-****-APS

******-DLFS-******

Ask the IFA and APS to sit narrower.

Possibly offset the DLFS to the slot on the side of the APS, to make space for the IFA to freely move in to - a bit like Mbappe at the World Cup.

Set the Team Width to Narrow to exacerbate the narrowness of the APS moving centrally and the the IFA moving up into the box.

Possibly fiddle with how Play Out of Defence TI works with regards the IFA's starting position?

[GonzaloFlores]

8 hours ago, thizaum said:

Okay...

Is this too far from what you are looking for? Surely it depends on TIs and mentality, but mainly I think that in order to achieve exactly what you are looking for, you'd need to tweak the PIs and be careful with the preferred moves.

That explains it perfectly. Whatever roles or instructions I use though seem to end up with a 3241 setup instead.

I find I then don't have enough of a threat up top so the midfield end up just rotating possession too much and the IF(a) takes up space that AM/AP would benefit from having to be the more creative force.

As you said, it might be that I need to play around with the PIs and the players traits rather than altering the tactic or roles being used.

I imagine someone like Salah would be a perfect candidate to try and get that movement from so I might do a bit of a trial with Liverpool to see if I can get that shape to work with them.

[Lordluap]

Player Traits such as Gets into Opposition Box and Gets Forward at all Times and Runs With ball Through Centre would be beneficial.

 

[thizaum]

11 hours ago, GonzaloFlores said:

That explains it perfectly. Whatever roles or instructions I use though seem to end up with a 3241 setup instead.

I find I then don't have enough of a threat up top so the midfield end up just rotating possession too much and the IF(a) takes up space that AM/AP would benefit from having to be the more creative force.

As you said, it might be that I need to play around with the PIs and the players traits rather than altering the tactic or roles being used.

I imagine someone like Salah would be a perfect candidate to try and get that movement from so I might do a bit of a trial with Liverpool to see if I can get that shape to work with them.

Hey,

 

Yes, I think PIs and Traits need to be tweaked. But I also said TI, which I'd guess might be the biggest problem.

First of all: your tempo cannot be too high. I'm not saying it needs to be very slow, but it cannot be super high in order to allow time for the movement.

Secondly, there's a setting that increases the mentality of the wide players. You need to check your IF(a)'s mentality in comparison with the rest (it needs to be very attacking).

And thirdly, your PF needs to (s), not (a). This depends on your overall mentality, but I think it's a must.

[Duracellio]

I find the IF (either on support or atack) very bad offensively to do this types of movement we're looking for to emulate this system.

Although you can make it work at times, I don't think there is really a true role on this version of the game so far, to emulate this kind of behaviour of a second striker, defending on the flanks but positioning himself on central areas, next to the striker, when attacking. The IF does this at times, depending on a lot of other less desirable settings, as for example attacking narrower, but it's not perfect.

Using a central player with SS or AM roles works better emulating the offensive movements although doesn't defend the flank as good as intended.

I tried it in so many diferent ways because it's the my style of football, using one of the two wingbacks as a winger when the team is attacking, using the other wb as a inverted fullback to creat the 3 at the back shape plus the defensive midfielder, gives you a very good rest defence. It's the perfect setup for me, you keep the width with 2 wingers, you get 2 strikers and 3 midfielders, it's the best way to attack. Athough this kind of system relies a lot on the way your team behave once they loose the ball, but that's another discussion.

The only hope for FM25 is that they can emulate a unique role for this type of behaviour or they re-invent the IF playstyle.

Edited March 2 by Duracellio