Bellyfish

Are you pressing high? If so how about a pressing forward on defend/support? They'll hold up the ball and feed your IF or CM(A). Agree though its annoying how many of the forward roles have move into channels hardcoded.

This is what I'm using for my league 2 mid table predicted team. High defensive line and trap inside are situational depending on the opposition, but rest of instructions remain the same game to game. Not sure if you were looking for a tactic without gegen style, but I think a 4-4-3 should have some element of high/more often pressing due to its shape.

As others have said the FB(s) may not be getting forward on the left but I personally see no issue with that, add stay wider to the IW(a) and he'll make use of the width. Advanced forward seems odd here, you are pushing high and often. Pressing forward seems a better role if you want an attack minded striker. Also I'd remove counter TI since you have the high press. You probably need another player attack the box. I imagine right now the IW(s) receives the ball and if he cant make a pass to the striker he'll make backwards pass to midfield, allowing the opponent to get back in numbers. Perhaps swap MEZ(S) -> MEZ(A)? Though I'd prefer a CM(A) instead.

It was mentioned earlier in the thread, but I wanna say I'm suprised how effective the 'generic' roles can be when setup right with PIs. This is my current setup that's dominating all competitions. I don't think I've ever used a Full Back defend before, figured it was too negative. However I've told him to specifically mark any AMLs and he currently has the most interceptions for my team. Its the same with the DM support, I'd default throw in a DLP or half back usually. Yet he does exactly what I need him to do with this role: shields the defence, provides passing options and progresses the ball without being too fancy This threads been really eye-opening for me to keep it simple when building a tactic.

I've got a top 6 opposition team in my current save who run with a 4-4-2. Each time I play them they seem to be able to score the typical long through ball goal. Using a 4-3-3 on positive with higher defensive line by default. What changes should I make to defend better against this particular formation? So far I drop the defensive line to standard and try and press their midfield players to give them less time for the killer pass.

Do you need the DLF on attack? I'd assume you main goal threats to be the IF(A) and CM(A). I'd play a supportive striker in this setup as I want him to feed those two players. I've seen a lot of screenshots here of people using BPDs and I always want to ask; why? 4-3-3 provides nice passing to progress from defence to midfield, so why would you want a defender to bypass this with a risky ball to the advanced wingers? Again everyone seems to have counter on by default. I'd take it off here and let the players decide. You are pushing high so its not going to be particular effective anyways.

I'm not surprised, neither or those roles will dribble much and so there main option to progress the ball is gunna be a longish ball forwards. AM is pushing higher (attack mentality) and likely to be marked by a DM and so there best bet is to lump it wide and see what your AML or AMR can do with it. Maybe consider making one DM a volante and changing the AM -> AP (or at the very least change them to support duty) In your current 4231 I think you'll struggle to do this as he is competing with both the AM and CF as a scoring option. Your main creator role is the IW and he's gunna have a much easier time finding passing for the AM and CF than he will the IF. To make an IF-A the main goal threat you'll need players to make space for him and also players to spot his runs to then find him with a killer ball. If I were doing this I'd would most certainly switch to a 443 and use a supportive striker with a playmaker role in central midfield.

Played half a season and I'd agree with both these points. CM(D) and REG often were too close and the REG wasnt running wild with his roam from position. The tactic worked but was more likely due to being a top team. The below heat map was pretty similar for all the games. The CM(D) (number 6) could definately afford to push up a bit which should give the REG a better passing option. I'll try CM(S) this season in that spot

Great thread, trying to perfect a 4-3-3 for a dominant team right now so its been helpful. One question I'd like to ask though is how do inverted wingbacks fit (if at all) into a 4-3-3? In my current tactic I'm trying to make use of the regista role (which is hardcoded to roam). My thought process was that an IWB(D/S) will move centrally as the regista roams and provide cover along with my CM(D) on the other side. However the majority of DM roles don't roam or get further forward, so an IWB won't move centrally if I were to use a DLP and instead just play like a normal wing back. Is my thinking right here?

In the end I went with a support striker though I annoyingly realised that the majority of them have 'Take More Risks' by default which I didnt want. So was trying out a targetman (only other option would be pressing forward (s/d)). This is what I was using for half a season. I feel it was working as I wanted. Sitting two points off Europe with majority of losses from big teams. 7th lowest conceded goals, lots of passes and posession. Flat midfield worked well, the AMC was very hit and miss tho. Goal conversion wasn't great and still felt it was too easy for my opponents to waltz down the wing. But I guess thats to be expected in a narrow tactic and without world class wingbacks I don't think there was much more I could change. Unfortunetly I've now been poached by a struggling big club and will likely abandon this tactic but its been interesting to try and get it to work.

I do, with great jumping reach. So perhaps I should be inviting crosses instead. Thinking something like this Dropped the mentality down to balanced, will see how the affects the attack but im hoping that will reduce the amount of turnovers we have. Another thing I've realised is that both my CARs have the 'get further forward' trait, which may be contributing to all the oppenent's left side assists. May need to find a more conservative player for this role.

Hi, I'm looking for some advice to improve my tactic defensively. We had a good first season in the champions league reaching the semi-finals however in the domestic league we flumped mid-season and finished disappointingly 7th (goal was to qualify for the europa league). Goals were never an issue but we conceded far too much for my liking (got a disappointed status for the defensive football club culture). Tactic was largely the below for the season with minor tweaks based on opponent. Notable PIs are close down more for the full backs, CAR and MEZ. I did also ask my anchor to close down less which may or may not have been right. Obviously a narrow formation will have issues on the flanks, so its no suprise that is where the main opponent assists came from. Will need to revise my corner defence but clearly my opponents are having success attacking from the flanks. My thoughts so far: Move my anchor to the midfield, probably as a CM(d). Will push the outer CMs further wide and hopefully make them better placed to engage the wide areas Remov force inside, dont think this is working as I expected Higher defensive line, opponent AML/AMR are getting the ball with a lot of freedom, if I push my line higher perhaps the defence will be closer to react Anyone got any suggestions how I can improve here?

How much importance should I give the extra attributes for a sweeper keeper (i.e first touch, acceleration, rushing out)? Above is a screenshot of my new keeper who the game suggests could play sweeper keeper support. However with 6 first touch and middling rushing out and acceleration values I don't think its a good idea.

This is the sad truth of it all. Why would they rock the boat when they already have a proven, successful business model? Update the database, add a couple of features to increase the bloat and ship it. What's a shame is that maybe some of these new features are actually good and I'd enjoy them. But I'm so aware of all the existing features that annoy me match day to match day that I can't really justify the purchase to myself.

Higher line of engagement + prevent short GK distribution is going limit the ability to play counter-attack football. You're encouraging the opponent defence to stay in their half and hoof it long, leaving no space to counter into. AF is going to be isolated. Either change him to a TF/DLF or consider a supporting AM to thread balls to him. Play out of defence and direct football can work, see this thread about it. I imagine what those cultures are asking for is some sort of low-block counter attacking tactic. You sit back, win the ball and then ping it over the defence for your AF to run onto and score. 442 could meet those cultures for example. As direct football and counter attacking cultures are of low importance I'd personally ignore them, achieve the other goals and try and neogiate them out at the next opportunity.