Experimenting with a 4-3-3 that plays as a 3-2-5 in attack - looking for advice

[CVass]

Hey guys, I am playing as United in my second season and doing well, but I want to tweak my tactics. I started with a vertical tiki-taka style with a Pep-like influence but a tad more direct. My question is, is anyone playing a back 3 in build-up like this, and do they have any tips for getting the back 3 completely stable in possession? I realize having two BPD-D might be the issue, but Martinez likes to bring the ball out, and Silva has good passing range. I have Kayode on Take Fewer Risks and Dribble Less. I posted the ideal team when everyone is fit and would love to hear your thoughts! This is my first experiment with getting into 3-2-5 build-up shapes.

My question is, do you have any advice for the back 3 here to maximize effectiveness?

My second question is: Fernandes and Mount aren't particularly good dribblers (being nice here), so do you think this may hinder the tactic from being as good as it can possibly be? Does turning on dribble less have an adverse effect?

Lastly, would you advise making Kayode the IWB and Shaw as the IFB? I did this the previous season, but his get-forward/run with the ball down the left traits would disrupt the shape a bit. But I had someone else tell me to take a look at it, so I am throwing this out there!

Thanks so much!

Edited April 14 by CVass

[CVass]

P.S. I Would love some feedback @Rashidi. Also, where can I view all of your tactic writeups? I read this article and was BLOWN AWAY

 

[DeepThought]

I'm hardly an expert, but there's a few things which stand out to me:

Firstly, if you're looking to change your shape in possession why have you gone with the 'hold shape' instruction for transitions? 

Secondly, Fernandes and Mount might not excel in dribbling but it's not a single digit attribute and you're asking them to dribble less anyways to mitigate it. You can tweak it with player instructions further. The only thing is, I believe the Mez role will dribble more into the channels, so it might be something to consider if it's causing you problems. 

Finally, if Shaw has traits which will encourage him to do the opposite of what you want it doesn't make sense to make that change. 

[CVass]

1 hour ago, DeepThought said:

I'm hardly an expert, but there's a few things which stand out to me:

Firstly, if you're looking to change your shape in possession why have you gone with the 'hold shape' instruction for transitions? 

Secondly, Fernandes and Mount might not excel in dribbling but it's not a single digit attribute and you're asking them to dribble less anyways to mitigate it. You can tweak it with player instructions further. The only thing is, I believe the Mez role will dribble more into the channels, so it might be something to consider if it's causing you problems. 

Finally, if Shaw has traits which will encourage him to do the opposite of what you want it doesn't make sense to make that change. 

Thanks for the insight!

I put hold shape so they don’t counter when they lose the ball and get into the new shape. Maybe I am not fully understanding what it does.

Second, although it’s not a single digit, Mount is a 10, and Bruno is an 11, and it has caused problems. Maybe I am overthinking it, though.

Lastly, Shaw’s traits negatively affect both the IWB and IFB roles. If I play him on Wing Back, it ruins the 3-2-5 shape I am trying to use to build up. I felt like playing him at IWB was better because he was more creative there than Dalot and Wan Bissaka were as an IWB. I guess I could flip it and put Kayode as the IWB, and put Shaw as the IFB. I just felt it was more problematic for him to roam forward as part of a back 3, than part of the middle 2, in the 3-2-5. Again, I could be completely wrong!

Thank you for your response and for giving me some things to think about!

[DeepThought]

2 hours ago, CVass said:

Thanks for the insight!

I put hold shape so they don’t counter when they lose the ball and get into the new shape. Maybe I am not fully understanding what it does.

Second, although it’s not a single digit, Mount is a 10, and Bruno is an 11, and it has caused problems. Maybe I am overthinking it, though.

Lastly, Shaw’s traits negatively affect both the IWB and IFB roles. If I play him on Wing Back, it ruins the 3-2-5 shape I am trying to use to build up. I felt like playing him at IWB was better because he was more creative there than Dalot and Wan Bissaka were as an IWB. I guess I could flip it and put Kayode as the IWB, and put Shaw as the IFB. I just felt it was more problematic for him to roam forward as part of a back 3, than part of the middle 2, in the 3-2-5. Again, I could be completely wrong!

Thank you for your response and for giving me some things to think about!

No worries, like I say I'm no expert so I'm not just asking questions then saying I definitively know how it works ! 

My understanding of hold shape is that you'll be asking them to maintain their formation for longer which is counter what I believe you want. I think you could trial just not having either counter or hold shape ticked. 

With the dribbling, I think you just play and see. They're not going to stop dribbling completely so it depends if it's causing problems when they are. All you can do is select options to limit them doing it - their roles, team instructions, player instructions and traits.  

Maybe a solution to the dribbling and the Shaw issue would be too have Shaw play as a more traditional and attacking wb and letting him play to his strengths. The left winger is already inverted to leave that wide space (could ask them to sit narrower if need be as well) and could have the lcm position mount currently occupies as one which holds and is more static. Could just start with a CM support tweaked with player instructions and start from there. 

 

[CVass]

7 hours ago, DeepThought said:

No worries, like I say I'm no expert so I'm not just asking questions then saying I definitively know how it works ! 

My understanding of hold shape is that you'll be asking them to maintain their formation for longer which is counter what I believe you want. I think you could trial just not having either counter or hold shape ticked. 

With the dribbling, I think you just play and see. They're not going to stop dribbling completely so it depends if it's causing problems when they are. All you can do is select options to limit them doing it - their roles, team instructions, player instructions and traits.  

Maybe a solution to the dribbling and the Shaw issue would be too have Shaw play as a more traditional and attacking wb and letting him play to his strengths. The left winger is already inverted to leave that wide space (could ask them to sit narrower if need be as well) and could have the lcm position mount currently occupies as one which holds and is more static. Could just start with a CM support tweaked with player instructions and start from there. 

 

I will give this a try, thank you!

[Chapman7]

11 hours ago, DeepThought said:

I'm hardly an expert, but there's a few things which stand out to me:

Firstly, if you're looking to change your shape in possession why have you gone with the 'hold shape' instruction for transitions? 

Secondly, Fernandes and Mount might not excel in dribbling but it's not a single digit attribute and you're asking them to dribble less anyways to mitigate it. You can tweak it with player instructions further. The only thing is, I believe the Mez role will dribble more into the channels, so it might be something to consider if it's causing you problems. 

Finally, if Shaw has traits which will encourage him to do the opposite of what you want it doesn't make sense to make that change. 

Hold shape is the build up shape, which is more used for possession football for patient build up

"Hold shape will ask the players to adopt a more considered and patient approach, keeping the ball and retaining their formation, before then building an attack"

[Cloud9]

21 hours ago, CVass said:

Hey guys, I am playing as United in my second season and doing well, but I want to tweak my tactics. I started with a vertical tiki-taka style with a Pep-like influence but a tad more direct. My question is, is anyone playing a back 3 in build-up like this, and do they have any tips for getting the back 3 completely stable in possession? I realize having two BPD-D might be the issue, but Martinez likes to bring the ball out, and Silva has good passing range. I have Kayode on Take Fewer Risks and Dribble Less. I posted the ideal team when everyone is fit and would love to hear your thoughts! This is my first experiment with getting into 3-2-5 build-up shapes.

My question is, do you have any advice for the back 3 here to maximize effectiveness?

My second question is: Fernandes and Mount aren't particularly good dribblers (being nice here), so do you think this may hinder the tactic from being as good as it can possibly be? Does turning on dribble less have an adverse effect?

Lastly, would you advise making Kayode the IWB and Shaw as the IFB? I did this the previous season, but his get-forward/run with the ball down the left traits would disrupt the shape a bit. But I had someone else tell me to take a look at it, so I am throwing this out there!

Thanks so much!

Double IFB(d) + a Libero(d) is a more stable shape than using an inverted wingback (s), which creates a weak point for the opposition to attack.

[crusadertsar]

40 minutes ago, Cloud9 said:

Double IFB(d) + a Libero(d) is a more stable shape than using an inverted wingback (s), which creates a weak point for the opposition to attack.

That's been my favourite back four set up in FM24. Works very well in both 433 and 4231. And allowed to take my Real Sociedad to the next level in competing with the big three in La Liga.

I'm in 2029 now, and good newgen IFBs are much easier to find than good WBs or IWBs. I just retrain CBs and strong DMs mostly. It's very helpful when playing with Basque-only policy.

Edited April 15 by crusadertsar

[CVass]

1 hour ago, Cloud9 said:

Double IFB(d) + a Libero(d) is a more stable shape than using an inverted wingback (s), which creates a weak point for the opposition to attack.

Makes sense, but isn't it all the same if you are in a 3-2-5 build up? Just different people in different spots? I don't know about Lisandro Martinez or Antonio Silva playing Libero, what do you think?

Do you play this shape? If so, how do you adjust it against different formations?

Edited April 15 by CVass

[R0ca]

1 hour ago, CVass said:

Makes sense, but isn't it all the same if you are in a 3-2-5 build up? Just different people in different spots? I don't know about Lisandro Martinez or Antonio Silva playing Libero, what do you think?

Do you play this shape? If so, how do you adjust it against different formations?

I highly recommend you have a read of this thread which should contain a lot of info your looking for. 
 

 

 

[Cloud9]

5 hours ago, crusadertsar said:

That's been my favourite back four set up in FM24. Works very well in both 433 and 4231. And allowed to take my Real Sociedad to the next level in competing with the big three in La Liga.

I'm in 2029 now, and good newgen IFBs are much easier to find than good WBs or IWBs. I just retrain CBs and strong DMs mostly. It's very helpful when playing with Basque-only policy.

It's so good, I hate playing against it when I'm counter attacking. Love going against an IWB setup in a 4-3-3 though  

4 hours ago, CVass said:

Makes sense, but isn't it all the same if you are in a 3-2-5 build up? Just different people in different spots? I don't know about Lisandro Martinez or Antonio Silva playing Libero, what do you think?

Do you play this shape? If so, how do you adjust it against different formations?

The difference is that the IWB(s) will be inside playing as a 6 when the ball is turned over. This will create a gap down his side of the pitch that can be exploited. In terms of playing against it..stick your quick, dribbly winger on that side and have a field day w/ a direct transition. 

The double IFB(d) on the other hand, cover both sides of the pitch in and out of possession. In possession the Libero(d) will step into midfield as a 6, if the ball is turned there's a foundation of 3 defenders behind him without that clear weak point before he moves back into position. If you want a 4-3-3 IWB formation I'd recommend a CAR on the IWB(s)'s side to babysit him (I'd still go double IFB, see Man City's approach compared to Liverpool's with Trent).

On my takes on a 4-3-3 like this:

I would recommend running two traditional or off footed wingers to stretch the pitch. The stability the double IFB(d) gives the time and space to pull apart the opposition. Wide attackers can stretch the pitch for the inside overloading runners to exploit, while your midfield 4 controls the tempo of the match. 

I like the DM(s) you've got on your 6. On roles for your two 8's...usually I prefer a bit of height on a CM(a), but it's not necessarily deal breaking if the rotation is working well for you. I'd prefer a BBM on Mount over the MEZ(s).

On adjusting vs other shapes, I'd recommend trimming the TI's so you can use them as in match tweaks. In general your team is good enough (and the formation is stable enough) that I would focus on playing your own game as much as possible and dictating to the opponent what will happen.

• Against teams parking the bus:
  • Utilize overloading central runs, wide width, low tempo and wide attackers pinning the fullbacks. I like to hit crosses early to catch them out before they get too settled. 
  • If a team is coming out to play against you, hitting the ball into space isn't a terrible idea with the pace on Rashford/Hojlund (particularly if his defender is slow). Moving the tempo up against higher quality teams will give you less control, but will have more fruitful returns than against a side who are happy to play out of possession and wait for the counter attack.
• Biggest change for me would be pace to the backline (either of the IFB, you'd like one to be rapid vs counter attacking approaches) and different profile 8's who you can bring on to do different things. You need to find your Kyle Walker to really shore things up (watch Rodrygo run past Akanji for fun in the Champions League). 
• You'll also want to adjust your width a bit to help you break down weaker opposition and scale it back a little bit against more challenging opposition. 

Finally on your 9: I would say PF(a) is great against difficult opposition. He gives you a threat in behind and will run the channels while working hard for the team out of possession. However, against weak teams that sit in...I would prefer to utilize him as a Poacher. This will see him sit in the box and primarily finish off the moves the team produces (leading to less turnovers) which will help you break down the deep lying defense more efficiently. 

Edited April 15 by Cloud9

[R0ca]

3 hours ago, Cloud9 said:

It's so good, I hate playing against it when I'm counter attacking. Love going against an IWB setup in a 4-3-3 though  

The difference is that the IWB(s) will be inside playing as a 6 when the ball is turned over. This will create a gap down his side of the pitch that can be exploited. In terms of playing against it..stick your quick, dribbly winger on that side and have a field day w/ a direct transition. 

The double IFB(d) on the other hand, cover both sides of the pitch in and out of possession. In possession the Libero(d) will step into midfield as a 6, if the ball is turned there's a foundation of 3 defenders behind him without that clear weak point before he moves back into position. If you want a 4-3-3 IWB formation I'd recommend a CAR on the IWB(s)'s side to babysit him (I'd still go double IFB, see Man City's approach compared to Liverpool's with Trent).

On my takes on a 4-3-3 like this:

I would recommend running two traditional or off footed wingers to stretch the pitch. The stability the double IFB(d) gives the time and space to pull apart the opposition. Wide attackers can stretch the pitch for the inside overloading runners to exploit, while your midfield 4 controls the tempo of the match. 

I like the DM(s) you've got on your 6. On roles for your two 8's...usually I prefer a bit of height on a CM(a), but it's not necessarily deal breaking if the rotation is working well for you. I'd prefer a BBM on Mount over the MEZ(s).

On adjusting vs other shapes, I'd recommend trimming the TI's so you can use them as in match tweaks. In general your team is good enough (and the formation is stable enough) that I would focus on playing your own game as much as possible and dictating to the opponent what will happen.

• Against teams parking the bus:
  • Utilize overloading central runs, wide width, low tempo and wide attackers pinning the fullbacks. I like to hit crosses early to catch them out before they get too settled. 
  • If a team is coming out to play against you, hitting the ball into space isn't a terrible idea with the pace on Rashford/Hojlund (particularly if his defender is slow). Moving the tempo up against higher quality teams will give you less control, but will have more fruitful returns than against a side who are happy to play out of possession and wait for the counter attack.
• Biggest change for me would be pace to the backline (either of the IFB, you'd like one to be rapid vs counter attacking approaches) and different profile 8's who you can bring on to do different things. You need to find your Kyle Walker to really shore things up (watch Rodrygo run past Akanji for fun in the Champions League). 
• You'll also want to adjust your width a bit to help you break down weaker opposition and scale it back a little bit against more challenging opposition. 

Finally on your 9: I would say PF(a) is great against difficult opposition. He gives you a threat in behind and will run the channels while working hard for the team out of possession. However, against weak teams that sit in...I would prefer to utilize him as a Poacher. This will see him sit in the box and primarily finish off the moves the team produces (leading to less turnovers) which will help you break down the deep lying defense more efficiently. 

This is a fantastic post and one I high recommend, I'm not tactical guru but cloud clearly is. 

 

The point being, the set up he's described is very close to what I'm playing and it's producing both great football to watch but also dominates the ball (when set up to do so) and defends well.

 

[CVass]

3 hours ago, Cloud9 said:

It's so good, I hate playing against it when I'm counter attacking. Love going against an IWB setup in a 4-3-3 though  

The difference is that the IWB(s) will be inside playing as a 6 when the ball is turned over. This will create a gap down his side of the pitch that can be exploited. In terms of playing against it..stick your quick, dribbly winger on that side and have a field day w/ a direct transition. 

The double IFB(d) on the other hand, cover both sides of the pitch in and out of possession. In possession the Libero(d) will step into midfield as a 6, if the ball is turned there's a foundation of 3 defenders behind him without that clear weak point before he moves back into position. If you want a 4-3-3 IWB formation I'd recommend a CAR on the IWB(s)'s side to babysit him (I'd still go double IFB, see Man City's approach compared to Liverpool's with Trent).

On my takes on a 4-3-3 like this:

I would recommend running two traditional or off footed wingers to stretch the pitch. The stability the double IFB(d) gives the time and space to pull apart the opposition. Wide attackers can stretch the pitch for the inside overloading runners to exploit, while your midfield 4 controls the tempo of the match. 

I like the DM(s) you've got on your 6. On roles for your two 8's...usually I prefer a bit of height on a CM(a), but it's not necessarily deal breaking if the rotation is working well for you. I'd prefer a BBM on Mount over the MEZ(s).

On adjusting vs other shapes, I'd recommend trimming the TI's so you can use them as in match tweaks. In general your team is good enough (and the formation is stable enough) that I would focus on playing your own game as much as possible and dictating to the opponent what will happen.

• Against teams parking the bus:
  • Utilize overloading central runs, wide width, low tempo and wide attackers pinning the fullbacks. I like to hit crosses early to catch them out before they get too settled. 
  • If a team is coming out to play against you, hitting the ball into space isn't a terrible idea with the pace on Rashford/Hojlund (particularly if his defender is slow). Moving the tempo up against higher quality teams will give you less control, but will have more fruitful returns than against a side who are happy to play out of possession and wait for the counter attack.
• Biggest change for me would be pace to the backline (either of the IFB, you'd like one to be rapid vs counter attacking approaches) and different profile 8's who you can bring on to do different things. You need to find your Kyle Walker to really shore things up (watch Rodrygo run past Akanji for fun in the Champions League). 
• You'll also want to adjust your width a bit to help you break down weaker opposition and scale it back a little bit against more challenging opposition. 

Finally on your 9: I would say PF(a) is great against difficult opposition. He gives you a threat in behind and will run the channels while working hard for the team out of possession. However, against weak teams that sit in...I would prefer to utilize him as a Poacher. This will see him sit in the box and primarily finish off the moves the team produces (leading to less turnovers) which will help you break down the deep lying defense more efficiently. 

This is all GREAT information! I had Mount on a BBM but moved him to a Mezzala. Why do you like the BBM more for him? Lack of dribbling?

[Poison]

11 hours ago, Cloud9 said:

The difference is that the IWB(s) will be inside playing as a 6 when the ball is turned over. This will create a gap down his side of the pitch that can be exploited. In terms of playing against it..stick your quick, dribbly winger on that side and have a field day w/ a direct transition. 

While this is technically true, the transition would have to be very very fast and the guy who passes the ball must first find space and get past the opponent who counter-presses (because he does) to actually execute that pass. It's not that simple.

 

@CVass Only thing I would change is getting Hojlund out of the box sometimes in a support role, he would be more useful linking people than just sitting up front. He certainly has the attributes to achieve this.

[Cloud9]

9 hours ago, R0ca said:

This is a fantastic post and one I high recommend, I'm not tactical guru but cloud clearly is. 

I am no guru either, but thank you  Cool to see you've got a RPM as the 6 in that tactic, it's a role I always mean to use more but never actually do. 

9 hours ago, CVass said:

This is all GREAT information! I had Mount on a BBM but moved him to a Mezzala. Why do you like the BBM more for him? Lack of dribbling?

It will play to the individual player's strengths a bit more. Mount is not that creative in FM and I usually look for a MEZ(s/a) who can carry the ball and break lines w/his passes (and Fernandes is the more creative 8 of the two). I think an industrious up and down runner will benefit you in and out of possession while providing a strong goal threat in the central spaces. 

• I also prefer MEZ's who are played on the side of their strong foot and Mount is right footed I believe. 
• Mount's big strengths are his off the ball and ability to run himself into the ground for the team, BBM (or SV) lets you get the best out of those imo and pairs well w/Fernandes.

Maybe you could try Fernandes as a RPM next to him? That sounds fun, altho the CM(a) I'm sure is just fine anyways.

1 hour ago, Poison said:

While this is technically true, the transition would have to be very very fast and the guy who passes the ball must first find space and get past the opponent who counter-presses (because he does) to actually execute that pass. It's not that simple..

It's not definitive, it's just a weakness of the IWB(s) in a 4-3-3 that doesn't exist w/ the double IFB(d) variant. 

If your side is not built to transition the ball quickly or attack space then you won't be able to exploit that weakness as effectively. It doesn't mean you score every time the ball turns over against a 4-3-3 IWB(s) but it does mean there's a gap in their defensive structure you can get at consistently on turnovers. 

Edited April 15 by Cloud9

[CVass]

3 hours ago, Poison said:

While this is technically true, the transition would have to be very very fast and the guy who passes the ball must first find space and get past the opponent who counter-presses (because he does) to actually execute that pass. It's not that simple.

 

@CVass Only thing I would change is getting Hojlund out of the box sometimes in a support role, he would be more useful linking people than just sitting up front. He certainly has the attributes to achieve this.

Would the Pressing Forward (his strongest role) do some of this without going on a Support role?

[CVass]

2 hours ago, Cloud9 said:

It will play to the individual player's strengths a bit more. Mount is not that creative in FM and I usually look for a MEZ(s/a) who can carry the ball and break lines w/his passes (and Fernandes is the more creative 8 of the two). I think an industrious up and down runner will benefit you in and out of possession while providing a strong goal threat in the central spaces. 

• I also prefer MEZ's who are played on the side of their strong foot and Mount is right footed I believe. 
• Mount's big strengths are his off the ball and ability to run himself into the ground for the team, BBM (or SV) lets you get the best out of those imo and pairs well w/Fernandes.

Maybe you could try Fernandes as a RPM next to him? That sounds fun, altho the CM(a) I'm sure is just fine anyways.

Again, such great information. Thank you so much. I have learned so much just from this thread. 

[R0ca]

3 hours ago, Cloud9 said:

I am no guru either, but thank you  Cool to see you've got a RPM as the 6 in that tactic, it's a role I always mean to use more but never actually do. 

It will play to the individual player's strengths a bit more. Mount is not that creative in FM and I usually look for a MEZ(s/a) who can carry the ball and break lines w/his passes (and Fernandes is the more creative 8 of the two). I think an industrious up and down runner will benefit you in and out of possession while providing a strong goal threat in the central spaces. 

• I also prefer MEZ's who are played on the side of their strong foot and Mount is right footed I believe. 
• Mount's big strengths are his off the ball and ability to run himself into the ground for the team, BBM (or SV) lets you get the best out of those imo and pairs well w/Fernandes.

Maybe you could try Fernandes as a RPM next to him? That sounds fun, altho the CM(a) I'm sure is just fine anyways.

It's not definitive, it's just a weakness of the IWB(s) in a 4-3-3 that doesn't exist w/ the double IFB(d) variant. 

If your side is not built to transition the ball quickly or attack space then you won't be able to exploit that weakness as effectively. It doesn't mean you score every time the ball turns over against a 4-3-3 IWB(s) but it does mean there's a gap in their defensive structure you can get at consistently on turnovers. 

Yea, the roaming playmaker is probably my favourite role in the system, he's the heart beat of the team, and the IFB CD LIB IFB set up really creates a platform for him to shine due to the central overloads the system naturally creates. You should give it a try when you get the chance. 

[CVass]

4 minutes ago, R0ca said:

Yea, the roaming playmaker is probably my favourite role in the system, he's the heart beat of the team, and the IFB CD LIB IFB set up really creates a platform for him to shine due to the central overloads the system naturally creates. You should give it a try when you get the chance. 

I will give it a shot. How long would it take for a player like Bruno Fernandes to learn the role? Is that something I could switch to and try out without fully retraining him for the role?

[Rashidi]

On 14/04/2024 at 22:20, DeepThought said:

My understanding of hold shape is that you'll be asking them to maintain their formation for longer which is counter what I believe you want. I think you could trial just not having either counter or hold shape ticked

If you choose counter then at higher mentalities the team is willing to risk trying to push the ball forward to risk a counter even if it’s a bad idea. So you could get rushed chances. If you choose hold shape the team will try to keep a more cohesive shape allowing it to move the ball in hopes of prying a defence open, this could lead to better goal scoring options if are playing on mid tempo settings as well. If you elect not to use either instruction leaving the option unchecked then the team will exercise its decision making attribute to determine whether it should counter or not.

Ultimately the roles and duties you choose and having players with “stop ball” and “dictates tempo” will influence this further. 
 

AI generated counters will still happen under any option too.

 

Personally I play it unchecked for most cases and only opt for counter when I am playing a low block.

[Rashidi]

59 minutes ago, CVass said:

I will give it a shot. How long would it take for a player like Bruno Fernandes to learn the role? Is that something I could switch to and try out without fully retraining him for the role?

It’s learning a position and having the attributes to play a role. When you train a player in a new position it takes time. Any player can play in any role, how well he does that depends on his attributes. Best option train him in the role, but if he has capped his CA then over time you might see a small redistribution of attributes towards the role that is being trained. I would suggest playing in the role he is most suited to.  The CM(A) role is fine if your goal is to make him do third man runs into the box and become a late threat.

[R0ca]

2 hours ago, CVass said:

I will give it a shot. How long would it take for a player like Bruno Fernandes to learn the role? Is that something I could switch to and try out without fully retraining him for the role?

A couple of things to be aware with the set up I have and the role selection. 
 

1, I can get away with this set up because I’m the dominant team in the league, this set up was borne out of being inspired by other players and creators. I was fixed on having players holding width but in the wrong manner, (I’d always default to wingbacks and wingers which are fine but I wanted a most possession based approach.)

2, We are set up to defend with the ball, I want possession it’s my first line of defence (I’m defending before I lose the ball by holding on to it) the second line of my defence is the counter press we want to regain the ball right away. 
 

These things being said, if you want to try a roaming play maker by all means go ahead but you will need to consider your defensive structure and how it functions as he’s going to go where he likes and leave a hole. 

[CVass]

1 hour ago, Rashidi said:

It’s learning a position and having the attributes to play a role. When you train a player in a new position it takes time. Any player can play in any role, how well he does that depends on his attributes. Best option train him in the role, but if he has capped his CA then over time you might see a small redistribution of attributes towards the role that is being trained. I would suggest playing in the role he is most suited to.  The CM(A) role is fine if your goal is to make him do third man runs into the box and become a late threat.

Do you think that, in a 3-2-5 build-up shape, something like Advanced Playmaker would be better for Bruno as a CM? 

[Rashidi]

You have IWs and a mezzala. Those are creative roles and you are adding a playmaker to that too. Try it out see what happens and learn from it. Choose the role for the style of play you want and find the player to fit the role. If you want to use him as a AP then give him options to do something with the ball. A wide winger to stretch play or an IF to get behind the defence. Different roles give you different outcomes. 

[Poison]

12 hours ago, CVass said:

Would the Pressing Forward (his strongest role) do some of this without going on a Support role?

Nvm, just saw that you already have him as pf-su, it's perfect!

[CVass]

11 hours ago, Poison said:

Nvm, just saw that you already have him as pf-su, it's perfect!

What's funny is, I usually play with AF-A and I was experimenting.

[CVass]

I briefly touched on this earlier in the thread, but I was wondering how teams that build up in this formation adjust to different defensive shapes. I know I read one article that said if the author came up against a 4-2-3-1, they would go from playing through the middle with underlaps on to playing through right/left and turning the underlaps off. 

What other defensive shapes would necessitate a change in tactical approach or instructions? I know that some teams will change to a 3-1-6 build-up against certain formations or a diamond (3-Diamond-3). When does this usually take place? I am trying to learn the "if-then" of some tactical approaches.

[Cloud9]

1 hour ago, CVass said:

I briefly touched on this earlier in the thread, but I was wondering how teams that build up in this formation adjust to different defensive shapes. I know I read one article that said if the author came up against a 4-2-3-1, they would go from playing through the middle with underlaps on to playing through right/left and turning the underlaps off. 

What other defensive shapes would necessitate a change in tactical approach or instructions? I know that some teams will change to a 3-1-6 build-up against certain formations or a diamond (3-Diamond-3). When does this usually take place? I am trying to learn the "if-then" of some tactical approaches.

There are so many variations of a tactic that it's difficult to say, "I'm going up against a 4-2-3-1 so I will do X." They could be a high pressing 4-2-3-1, a double IWB 4-2-3-1, or a midblock counter attack 4-2-3-1 etc.

I would try to stick to your game plan when possible and play to your strengths to start out. Look at the empty space on the pitch when you have the ball / don't have the ball and make adjustments based on that. Watching matches in full for the first 15-20 minutes can help you get a feel of if you need to make tweaks and see how your side plays. Pace is a real killer, these are player's capable of exploiting that empty space and can demand tactical changes to exploit/prevent their ability.

How you make changes isn't a rock paper scissors scenario, but about nullifying threats (what is their game plan/how do they score goals) and exploiting tactical or player weaknesses in the opposition. Role changes (looking at role combinations) are a nice way to do this along with finding TI combos you find effective for in match changes.

Pass maps and match momentum are two in game tools I'd highlight as well.

Edited April 18 by Cloud9

[bosque]

On 17/04/2024 at 22:24, Cloud9 said:

Look at the empty space on the pitch when you have the ball / don't have the ball and make adjustments based on that.

Big empty space behind a high defensive line is an obvious empty space, but which could be other examples of empty space?

[Cloud9]

6 hours ago, bosque said:

Big empty space behind a high defensive line is an obvious empty space, but which could be other examples of empty space?

For @CVass the space in behind the opposition will be key for tweaks. He's got pace on his own frontline and if Hojlund is on a PF(s) there will be games where you'd want him to just run in behind. Same with Rashford, IW's gets involved with buildup play, a W(a) + Pass into space TI would let him go in behind. There will always be space behind his own defensive line, but that's an issue to address with recruitment. A 3-2-4-1 is really stable and doesn't have too much tinkering to do in the defensive unit (esp. compared to a back 4 with fullbacks). 

• Space in behind (or lack there of) is a strong indicator of how you need to change your attack to score goals against the opposition defence. Most player's need space to score goals. If that space exists naturally, exploit it, if it doesn't you'll need to create it for them. 
• Using Wingers in the 3-4-2-1 formation will create space centrally against opposition who park the bus by pinning the fullbacks wide. Inside runners can then attack those gaps.
• In my counter attacks: if I'm setup to defend & counter and there is no space in behind (ie. the opposition is sitting back as well) I have to change my game plan if I want more than a draw from the game. 

You'll also want to check if there's space out wide or centrally. Against exposed midfield pairings (non narrow 4-4-2's etc.) you can just go through the space in the middle of the park and overwhelm the pivot. Opposition who play on wider settings will leave more space between players, which can help you play through them. 

You can then take a look on an individualized role basis. If the opposition is primarily defensive and using roles that cut inside, they will leave space you can get after (WP, IWB etc.). Aside from clear cut situations like role movement, a 4-3-3 w/ a selfish attacking winger on one side will often stay high exposing his fullback. This isn't always a space to exploit if the fullback is equipped to hold down the fort solo, but if he isn't I would look to create an overload to exploit that space. The positional play feature offers a lot of upside to knowing how a role will function and how to tweak your own roles to exploit that. 

Many roles with "roam" on them can leave space as they leave their defensive structure in favor of individualized movement (roam doesn't work the same on all roles, some roam defensively). Same goes for a player with traits that could see him continually give you a space to exploit.  

Edited April 20 by Cloud9

[gokalpcakir1]

 

When I find a good quality  6, I will use it as dlp.

 

[CVass]

On 20/04/2024 at 15:25, Cloud9 said:

For @CVass the space in behind the opposition will be key for tweaks. He's got pace on his own frontline and if Hojlund is on a PF(s) there will be games where you'd want him to just run in behind. Same with Rashford, IW's gets involved with buildup play, a W(a) + Pass into space TI would let him go in behind. There will always be space behind his own defensive line, but that's an issue to address with recruitment. A 3-2-4-1 is really stable and doesn't have too much tinkering to do in the defensive unit (esp. compared to a back 4 with fullbacks). 

• Space in behind (or lack there of) is a strong indicator of how you need to change your attack to score goals against the opposition defence. Most player's need space to score goals. If that space exists naturally, exploit it, if it doesn't you'll need to create it for them. 
• Using Wingers in the 3-4-2-1 formation will create space centrally against opposition who park the bus by pinning the fullbacks wide. Inside runners can then attack those gaps.
• In my counter attacks: if I'm setup to defend & counter and there is no space in behind (ie. the opposition is sitting back as well) I have to change my game plan if I want more than a draw from the game. 

You'll also want to check if there's space out wide or centrally. Against exposed midfield pairings (non narrow 4-4-2's etc.) you can just go through the space in the middle of the park and overwhelm the pivot. Opposition who play on wider settings will leave more space between players, which can help you play through them. 

You can then take a look on an individualized role basis. If the opposition is primarily defensive and using roles that cut inside, they will leave space you can get after (WP, IWB etc.). Aside from clear cut situations like role movement, a 4-3-3 w/ a selfish attacking winger on one side will often stay high exposing his fullback. This isn't always a space to exploit if the fullback is equipped to hold down the fort solo, but if he isn't I would look to create an overload to exploit that space. The positional play feature offers a lot of upside to knowing how a role will function and how to tweak your own roles to exploit that. 

Many roles with "roam" on them can leave space as they leave their defensive structure in favor of individualized movement (roam doesn't work the same on all roles, some roam defensively). Same goes for a player with traits that could see him continually give you a space to exploit.  

This is fantastic, thank you again.

If I am playing against a back 5, and I want to get an extra attacker in my setup to get into a 3-1-6, what would be the best way to do this in my current setup without drastically changing formations & roles and reducing familiarity.

[w_x]

3 hours ago, CVass said:

This is fantastic, thank you again.

If I am playing against a back 5, and I want to get an extra attacker in my setup to get into a 3-1-6, what would be the best way to do this in my current setup without drastically changing formations & roles and reducing familiarity.

Luke Shaw as a more CWB or WB getting forward, Rashford tucking inside?

Or, Fantasista10 made a 3-1-6 from a 433 shape, with the holding midfield player used as a RPM getting forward and a Libero stepping in

https://gyazo.com/f2d088fe5d626100196676c1624e95fd

 

[Cloud9]

9 hours ago, CVass said:

This is fantastic, thank you again.

If I am playing against a back 5, and I want to get an extra attacker in my setup to get into a 3-1-6, what would be the best way to do this in my current setup without drastically changing formations & roles and reducing familiarity.

IF(a)'s direct inside movement can get at the wide central defenders in a 3, esp if they're using wide centerbacks that go forward. I wouldn't worry too much about familiarity when making role tweaks. 

@Rashidi posted this a little bit ago. Details some tweaks you can make with a similar approach which you might find useful as a reference point. The use of an expansive 6, and/or a Libero(s) will leave you with less defensive structure but could help you towards a 3-1-6 if that's the goal. 

I would prioritize role changes to the frontline and leave the defensive foundation of your tactic the same in most scenarios. In most cases I find the Libero(d) to be my preferred option compared to a Libero(s) for the stability the role offers. 

Edited April 24 by Cloud9