Halbraum

Attack-duty AMCs do it more often than their support-duty equivalents. However, unfortunately we can't tell players "specifically occupy this space or do this movement every time." in FM yet. I hope we will get something like "attacking shape- defensive shape-pressing shape" kinda settings in the future

Ohh noo i completely missed the fact that you got promoted I though you said top-table, not top flight Then it's the opposite of what i said. Less defensive risk vs. more attacking risk. He's still a number 6 tho. SV(s) and WB(s) together is completely okay in my experience. If you are familiar with Cleon's legendary 4-2-3-1DM thread, he used SV(at) and WB(s) on the left side with great success. I define the RPM as a "playmaker BBM". The role's not necessarily more solid when it comes to solidity. I hope everthing goes well in next season for you. Good luck!

In that case, first thing i'd do is to use a runner DM role on the more defensively solid side of the pitch, it's the left side in your tactic. A Segundo Volante would offer good support for both the AP and the IFat. Don't worry about the WBsu, he's more of a late runner and stays in line with the ball most of the time, unlike a WBat. Offering the team another outlet when building up from the back is the way to go in this issue imo. For example, an IW(s) drops deeper in build-up and bombs forward less aggressively compared to an IF(s). He becomes another option, also acts as a screen for an WB(att). The right side overlap will become more emphasized too. Let's think about it in terms of "risk": Since you're a better team now, some teams will be more cautious against you which means they will be taking less attacking risk. By dropping your defensive TIs/PIs, you are going to take less defensive risk. It's completely counter-productive in my opinion. But some people go for less aggressive defensive instructions to pull the opposition slightly away from their box and they succeed with this. I guess you have to try the old method which is "trial and error" Btw, congrats on your success! Looks like everything's going well. These advices are just for giving food for thought. If it works, it works. Sometimes it's better to not get confused and stay loyal to the status-quo

Loved the thread! Congrats. Also i loved how Müller rose from the ashes under Flick back then How do you like the idea of using an attack-duty AMC in order to encourage him more to explore that left channel? They still join transitions and build-up rather than acting like a CF. I guess you're utilizing an AM(sup) to achieve the 3-1-5-1, respectable

Looking at the core, to me it seems like your problem is not mainly tactical. These bunch lacks quality for any style of football on Premier League level. I guess you have to hope for the best in this season. Transitioning into a real force in tier-1 football is as hard as a rock Beside the quality, only thing i can say about the tactic is that the play is so congested in the centre. You need at least someone who offers real width. You have a defensive pivot, you might want to try a more adventurous fullback role that will occupy the wide spaces when IW or IF comes narrow. Other than that, the tactic looks solid to me.

Not Johnny but i hope you don't mind me giving an opinion I've been experimenting with an almost identical tactic. What i've seen is that AF role becomes much more isolated in a direct passing system as a lone striker, compared to slow build-up tactics when all the AM roles are on support duties. It's probably because the attacks are less progressive and quicker. Support duties drop deep, someone plays the ball to AF early then he's 1v2/3 if there's not much space behind. So i use agressive AMC roles to patch the isolation, gives me 4-4-2ish patterns AF moves into channels to create space centrally and the AMC bombs forward to penetrate that space.

Do you really want to use a TF in this tactic? He attracts early long balls. I'd be cautious to use the role In a patient posession tactic that wants to utilize overloads. Also, your distribution TIs contradict with that style either. So, to me, your tactic looks like you're telling your players "Try everything broskis!"

I'd prefer a support duty striker/AMC if i wanted the IFat as my main threat, especially against teams that sit deep. Actually i don't see this as an issue. If opponents are unaffected by him, your players can easily overload them deep thus create space eventually. Maybe WBiB hinders the pattern you want to see?

It's even more scarier than REG+SVs to me If you want to utilize an aggressive role in a double-pivot, you need other role to be more responsible in providing cover while your team's attacking. For example; DLPs+SVs, DMd+SVat etc.

No they don't. They only stay wide until the final third. So they don't stay HIGH and wide. Among the images you uploaded, there was only one screenshot that your players were in advanced positions, and surprise! Wingers were in the half spaces.

I don't see any big issue either. Even though i dislike that double-pivot pairing, doesn't mean it can't work well Your main problem might be your out of possession instructions though. High lines/high press on a high mentality is a risky business. You need great defenders that have good pace and good intelligence. Positioning, concentration and anticipation are key attributes in that regard.

That's why you utilize the high tempo and direct passes: to bypass their press quickly and penetrate the space behind. This is the reason why defensive teams use a Target Man type of striker, to pump the ball to him and expect the best result for keeping the possession. Your tactics looks good to me, except one thing: Dribble Less TI is completely contrasting instruction for the playing style you're trying to implement. Players already take less risks in lower mentalities, so they're already less willing to make risky dribbles. Also you don't want to hinder and offset "Dribble More" roles.

4-3-3 is a pretty balanced and versatile formation. You don't need to change your formation if the 4-3-3 is the most suitable formation for you squad. Being deep and vertically compact are main ways to deny space to opponents. This can be done by either choosing lower mentalities or low risk TIs such as deep defensive line, low press, stay on feet etc. I'd avoid to use overlapping/underlapping role combinations since your transitions will be much quicker and less proggessive. For example, FBsu+Wat is better than WBat+IWsu in this case imo. Roaming roles might be detrimental to direct attacking too. Also, having one advanced player who hold up ball to wait for support after receiving a long ball is great. @Cloud9 gave great advices, however i have to disagree on the "Pass into space". Think about the roles that are more suitable for the direct attacking such as TF, Wingers etc. None of them have "Take more risks" PI. But most of the short-passing style roles have it (F9, AP, IFsu...). Even though Pass Into Space is a decent choice for lower mentalities, more direct passing is already a high-risk TI, so combining it with risky passes makes harder to keep possession effectively. All these advices are 20% of beating the City, the rest 80% is luck So good luck @ultrAslan

What i like about this formation is that it's so versatile and balanced. It's suited to both short and direct styles, also you are able to use a wide variety of roles in defense/midfield compared to the classic (in FM world) 4-2-3-1. Build-up is easier either since the double pivot starts deeper and overload the middle while bringing the ball from the back. Your double pivot is less safe for my taste, i usually prefer to combine one defensive workhorse with a role that is able to support and connect play with advanced players such as SV,RPM etc. I only use Half Back if i want to send the other midfielder and a fullback to forward more aggressively (SVat and WBat for example).

Almost every role operate around the channel in the final third, including Winger. Only difference will be that they attack the channels in a more diagonal manner rather than pulling wide like it's shown in the image. Still, Wingers do the movement you want when on the ball. The actual challenge is the RW imo. There is no way you could replicate its positioning in FM. All wide roles come into half-spaces when you camp into opponent's half, don't matter whatever role,PPM,TI combination you use. Wingers on CM strata somehow do it, but even they come narrow than wanted eventually.

A masterpiece as always Cleon! Thank you. Kinda off-topic but I want to say something on this point here. It's completely possible to play direct football in a progressive, dominant, attacking manner. When people try to replicate Mourinho's Madrid, i see that they always select most negative TIs possible. Lowest lines, lowest mentalities, lowest pressing settings etc alongside all hoofball instructions. They confuse being vertical with counter-attacks. Madrid under Mourinho was one of the most ball-dominant sides in Europe, just after Barca and Bayern. And they used to press high, set their DL so high either.

Treq of course. He might drop even deeper than F9 from time to time since the role has ball orientation. DLF on attack doesn't have "Get Further Forward" locked in. So DLFat doesn't actually drop deep much but will be less willing to bomb forward compared to other attacking roles. Due to "Hold Up Ball" he indirectly creates overlapping movement by other players.

Neither the IFat nor even Wsu hold the width in the final third unfortunately. They come into half-spaces. So the shape won't be like you thought most of the time. I know the app that you're using says the IFat can stretch the play by himself but it's only true for the real life, not for FM ME. I wish it wasn't like this, it's been so many editions that the SI didn't solve the problem.

Actually yeah, but it's mostly a chance-creator role. Probably "Roam from position" and "Hold up ball" instructions cause the pattern you've shown. He drops deep, holds up play thus allow overlaps from others. However your average positions map displays that he is the most advanced player by far. I rarely use the role since it's so demanding in terms of attributes. Don't get me wrong, i asked the question out of genuine curiosity, i don't want to overcomplicate things for you

Even Poachers do that every now and then, but like we always say for the game: If it works, it works

Can you explain how he creates space for the IW(at)? He creates more for AP(s) and IW(s) by pushing and pinning the opposition CBs thus increasing space between the lines if you ask me.

Thanks for the great work! I've enjoyed reading it so much. I got three suggestions, i hope they'll make sense to you. Move Into Channels instruction is something most of us get confused with, can you visually show purposes of it? It'd be great if you display more examples on how to create space in the final third, especially for lone-striker systems. I have been seen that people mostly stick to "deep-dropping ST and IF(at)" and don't know how to create space in another ways, by using AF for example. Pulling opposition DMs out of position is another common struggle too.

False Nine used to have the MIC instruction but DLFs didn't, now it's vice versa. For what reason SI decided to change that? I don't believe it was based on real-life training of the said roles. But i completely agree with the second point you made. Full customization would create a mess, however i think "Move Into Channels" should not be something that is locked-in for vast majority of ST roles.