Hi, I am lurking in this forum and follow some threads with great interest. Normally I do not comment, but Strikerirs tactics are quite similar to the tactic I use currently at Borussia Dortmund. So I thought it might help as an example..
For me the tactic works great to solve some of the very defensive Bundesliga sides. In the CL, I make some changes depending on the opponent (these involve often: lower LOE, Pass into space, or switch mentality to balanced; but never all at the same time). Other than that I often just tweak the tactic by using different players: f.e.: I have a DLP-type and a BWM type, I use them both as CM (s) and they behave completely different. The only real role changes I make are that I use an anchor man against very strong sides and an ap(a) instead of cm(su) against very, very defensive sides..
However this is my general set up:
FB (s) CD (d) CD (d) WB (s)
CM (a) CM (s)
W(s)* IF (s)
I have very few PIs: the front five press more, both FB have less crosses and less risk and the AMR roams from position.
The Mentality is usually positive to start the game. TIs are Pass it shorter, play out of defence, counter press, much higher DL, Much higher LOE, offside trap, prevent short GK distr.. (They are almost the same as the set up from the user above...)
*The AMR role is tricky. I use Jadon Sancho with the trait cuts inside. I used him as IF sometimes, but mostly as W and it works quite ok, he decides when to dribble and when to cut inside. I think other roles (IF(a) or RMD) would occupy the same space as the CM (a). But I am still trying things out, because I am not yet happy with him.
The build up play is amazing with the generic roles, the only problem I sometimes have are stupid crosses and not enough through balls. But that is a result of the very defensive sides I face.
However, the point is: As you already have pointed out, a slight change in the player roles make a huge difference in the play. Even if I have the same TIs and the same formation as Strikerirs, it probably looks completely different on the pitch. The CM(a) uses the space in the box better than the AP(a). I love the CM(su) role: together with the DLF(su), the WB(su) and the IF(su), he creates overloads before he switches the ball to the other flank. The DM(d) plays very cautious and his job is to pick up loose balls, cover the defensive line and to play simple passes. So the first take away from this comparison is probably how simple generic roles are perfect for possession football.
The second takeaway is how important player attributes and traits are. My players are overqualified for the roles they play. The central defenders are high quality ball playing defenders, the DM(d) could play as a DLP(d) with his skillset. The CM(s) has dictate tempo, and switch ball to other flank, the CM(a) has gets into oppositions area. Both the CM(a) and the IF(su) have try play killer passes, the DLF(su) has comes deep to get the ball and almost all offensive players and fullbacks have play one-twos. While the tactic looks very basic and similar on paper to Strikerirs, the player traits and attributes change the actual football played quite a lot...
This tactic is far from perfect. I win most of the games, but I don't like the way we play in the final third:
- the left wing back crosses too often. I think a player that cuts into the left halfspace would be perfect. This way he would have a passing option inside. A quite radical solution would be to change the system to a 4-2-3-1, so that the am(a)/Shadowstriker can provide these runs. Another option would be a mezzala(a) on the left, but both options would probably lead to difficulties in the defensive transition. If I had better wingbacks, I would probably play them as IWB(s) just to stop the stupid crossing... this way both CMs could play more attacking and cut in the half spaces...but that would also be a completly different tactical approach. I think the most logical solution would be a change in central midfield. The cm(su) could play on the right, and the CM(a) could play on the left as a Mez(a). I might try this in the next offseason.
- the AMR is often isolated. I do not really know which role would be good for him. Maybe just W(su) (with cuts inside as player trait). He would leave space for the CM(a) and provide width, while still cutting inside sometimes. However, if i change up the CMs (see above), I could probably just play him as an IF(at)
- there are very few through balls. Most of my goals come from an overlap on the left, followed by a switch to the AMR who deliveres the ball inside for the AML (in fact my main goal scorer is Reus) or an early cross from the LWB and a direct volley from sancho.. If I see throughballs they are either from the DLF(su) or the AML to the CM(a) or the W(a)..
I hope this post helps a bit, and at the same time: if you have some advice for me please share.