Robson 07

Pretty much the same question I asked on the previous page on October 15th last year.

Adding more to this quote. I think of it as an overload instruction. When most people here talk about overloads, they overload a flank. Exploit the middle brings defenders and defensive midfielders forward. Personally I think its misunderstood by the community. When teams are sitting back against you, give it a try. Should mean more people joining the attacking phase and more passing options. Weirdly just read this thread and people told him to remove the instruction. Left them to it but not sure it was the right advice for him. That's the trouble with forums, eventually too many opinions or certain voices too frequent or loud. Hard to tell wood from the trees. I'm sure what I've said here will be disagreed with by some.

Agree a fair bit here with @Tom8983. My advice would be to try some of his suggestions.

Speed, speed, speed. Drop lower tempo and work into box. Distribute quickly, maybe throw it out.

Who are you expecting to be the source of goals? I only see the pressing forward as an outlet. Every other player (barring CDs and GK) look to have creator type roles. So who they creating for? I'd try to get the AMC running into the box and maybe go as far as one of the midfielders as a Mezzala as they are quite attacking. Just think you need to have two if not three players with the purpose of getting in the box and/or the half spaces to have the chance of getting more goals.

Hi Below is the 2nd of the 2 tactics you posted. I've highlighted some things to consider. You use 2 strikers with the more attacking one having an attack duty. The attack duty means that he as an individual will have an attack mentality and take up positions high against the oppo central defenders. Defensively as his job is a Pressing Fwd, he will harass defenders and press them. However you have asked your fwd line to have a much lower line of engagement. I believe that's a conflict. Similarly your fullbacks are on support. They will support attacks. But defensively you want them to drop back, and keep dropping back, to a much lower defensive line. They have too much ground to cover. If you want defenders to play with a really deep line then I think they should have a defend duty. They need to be disciplined and in position. You can not risk any gaps playing very deep. So again I believe this is a conflict in your set up. I could also have highlighted that you are attacking narrow but have selected a winger role. That's a role that wants to beat players on the outside, hug the line and cross from wide areas. Personally the more narrow I play then I become inclined to change that role to something like a wide midfielder. Hope these things help, good luck.

I think there a quite a few styles to add. Styles tend to come and go with eras and different regions or countries. I will probably do 1 or 2 more myself but would welcome anyone just having a bash. Here are a few additional suggestions. Total Football. Already mentioned, good shout. Wingless Wonders. Samba football. Other references to it such as Ginga or Joga Bonito. Positions of Maximum Opportunity (i.e. some sort of crossing, target man style. associated as traditional British football in the last century) Strikerless. Is that a style? Not sure, possibly? Plus maybe a style that is aimed specifically for 3-man defences and wingbacks made famous by Germany. Or something Argentinian perhaps around the no.10 role as the central fulcrum of he side.

@Kuchiki Hi. Is this in the correct part of the forum? Looks like it might sit better in the FM Career Updates section?

Thanks for the reply @sparkyunited and I'm not inclined to disagree with your comments at all. As you said mine is a broad representation, I don't mind that one bit. Hope you have a little play around with the ideas, let us know how you get on.

I can't remember seeing a thread where people posted and discussed variations of preset styles. You know the ones we have in the game for Gegenpress, Tiki-Taka, Wing Play, Park The Bus and so on. There must be lots of alternatives and I dare say that SI may introduce more of their own with the release of FM20. Anyway, this an opportunity to throw a few ideas of our own around. I'll get things started... A style that I think is missing is what I've called the Italian Game which would not be dissimilar to Zona Mista. Italian football had a post Catenaccio reputation for the dark arts. Teams were dirty, cynical and tough. I think this period is more 80's and 90's and Trapatonni is someone you'd associate with the style. To put a FM 'spin' on this I looked up the thread, "Lines & Diamonds" in the guide section of this forum. Specifically in section 8.6 there's what the author called a disruptive tactic. For an abbreviated post drop down to the style below. TL;DR. I basically used the above as an inspiration for this idea. New preset style, Italian Game, as images below. This picks out a few things that seem reasonable for what I'm attempting. Then I've gone with a 4141, basically to be a bit defensive shape wise and midfield heavy. Someone may kindly point out that Italian teams have never really used wingers a lot and I'd fully accept that. Please remember though I'm attempting to lay down a style, not copying any specific manager or recreating a particular team. Slight difference I hope. So there it is, the Italian Game. Medium block, tough tackling, harassing and a little unpleasant to the eye. Please feel free to use this thread to put up lots of other styles or just pick this one apart, lol. And before anyone asks this one is severely untested. Lets say it's conceptual for now.

It certainly can be achieved. 1105 passes. 96% completion.

What I mean is that both the game's built-in presets that you can choose and you mention, both play on a cautious mentality. The in-game fluid counter version also uses six outfield roles on a support duty and the team intensity is defined as Fluid. It is literally fluid counter-attack as described. Your version uses a positive mentality; has five outfield support duties. In the same literal sense it is flexible control-attack. To that end I think you are missing the point and are interpreting things in your own way (which is absolutely fine) but have modified something into a different system and have then given it a confusing label. While we are here the comparison between a direct counter and a fluid counter is quite interesting. Put the defence to one side for a moment. In the direct version I think you should be after using a defend role at deepest point of midfield i.e. the DM and an attack duty role as the most advanced attacker. It creates maximum vertical space from midfield axis to furthest point in attack. Then use direct passing to cover this stretched space. In a fluid version I think it interesting to consider using support roles at DM and Striker (as part of that overall fluid team shape) to shorten the formation and then use short passing to circulate the ball. However. There is though one slight problem and that is in a truly fluid system the team needs to be in possession for a long time to allow the fluidity (player movement) to take place. This is why fluidity and possession are linked. So finally in that sense you could say the whole thing is something of a mute point because counterattacks require the opposition having the majority of play and fluid systems require possession. In that way the two things are oil and water and we should call the whole thing off, lol.

Interesting thread. Its nice to see someone neatly articulate that perspective about the game. FM can have a lot of layers and sometimes the more deeply you look into things the more rabbit holes you find to fall down. There are a few things which posters seem to find obligatory to tick every year. Pressing, work ball into box and possession all coupled this year with high lines and counter-press. These seem to be tactical staples but then you get the threads about why does the AI counterattack me so effectively or why does the AI park the bus? The answer of course to both is partly buried in the way nearly everyone looks to play. My other minor frustration relates to roles. I think their importance is overplayed out. Hard to put that into words other than saying too often it seems that FM is like a jigsaw where the pieces only fit exactly right if laid down a certain way. E.g. that role needs to be a wingback but only on a support role otherwise this and that will or won't happen. Its a bit much at times. Anyway good luck with the topic. It'll be interesting to see what the other responses bring you.

With one or two possession-keeping aspects to it, I think you need to clear up your definition of both fluid and counter. The tactic looks alright but as per feedback you're already getting about playing from the back, working into box, holding up the ball with overlaps and sending attacks through a playmaker there are hints of it only be counterattacking by name and ticking that transition option. What are passing stats and possession stats like?

A couple of observations , maybe questions, regarding counter-press. What are people's views on formation? To work optimally would you say that there is a minimum of players required in the top two tiers? I have a save at the moment using two tactics depending on who is available. I favour a 4231 that works really well with counterpressing. 4 players in the top tiers making it top heavy. However when my AMC is unavailable I use a 4141, just the 3 players in top 2 tiers and it seems a little less effective. ***** Also when saying counterpressing can become risky with more urgent pressing. I just wanted highlight a small observation that any movement of the pressing intensity bar makes no impression on the overall tactic intensity. To make that clearer, this -> has no impact on this -> However moving the 'line of engagement' line up makes your tactic more intense. Moving it down makes it less intense. So I wondered whether where the LOE is positioned when counterpressing is just an as important consideration as pressing intensity?