Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

7 "What we've got here is a failure to communicate"

About Hartplatz

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

80 profile views
  1. To be honest, my biggest gripe would be your selection of roles and duties. Both flanks look very vulnerable, even more so as you play with a lot of risk. Your forwards could also do with a few tweaks. 1. On your left, your LB is going to bomb forward a lot, while the AP is not going to be able to offer enough protection. Particularly as the overlap instruction futher enhances your LB's aggressive mentality. You should turn your LB into something a little more conservative, perhaps a FB(a). You might also want to consider turning your AP to a DLP, and switch off the overlap TI. 2. On
  2. Actually you're right @Jaye, in terms of roles and duties, it really is just a few tweaks. But I would also turn one or possibly even both BPDs to standard CDs, otherwise they're going to lump the ball forward too much, particularly with higher tempo and counter. Plus, with the current ME, I would switch the keeper to SK-De to avoid an overkill of long kicks (he's still going to do it, but less), thus increasing the chance that you're instructions are actually followed. Also, I'd suggest lowering the LoE to standard to increase compactness (higher LoD would also be an option). I also
  3. Could you post a screenshot of your tactic? This would make things so much easier. As @Hilly1979 already mentioned, your cm is way too shaky, and while it's okay to pair a runner with a holding player, a mezzala is much too aggressive. If you opt for a runner in cm in a 4-2-3-1, the fullback on the side where the runner is placed needs to be more conservative, pairing a FB-At with a mezzala is a recipe for disaster.
  4. Agree with everything that's been said. On a sidenote, there might also be an issue with squad building and dynamics. Five years in, you've literally replaced your entire squad except for DCL which is asking for trouble in terms of cohesion if you don't set up your training schedules correctly. But then again, I sometimes feel the game is a little too lenient on people going overboard with signings, so you might just get away with it. And it certainly looks like you've been doing okay. But as others have said, your tactic needs an overhaul, I'm afraid. What did your original tactic l
  5. In terms of roles and duties, it still doesn't look great I think. In this particular setup, especially with your striker on support, there needs to be more bite to your central midfield. @Experienced Defenderalready mentioned central penetration. One option would be to switch one of your CMs to CM-At, provided you have the right player. This of course means that some of your other roles need to be slightly tweaked as well. One of your fullbacks has to be more conservative in order to offer defensive protection, possibly even an IWB. So for instance, one possible option for your left flan
  6. As @biglew90 already mentioned, you might want to try and tweak some of the roles and duties in your cm. In your setup, runners from deep could either be CM-At, MEZ-At or MEZ-Su on CMR. CM-At would be conventional wisdom, but MEZ-At could also work really well against sides that line up defensively against you and will offer some nice interplay with your winger. But you're going to have to slightly adapt your other midfielders as well: DLP-Su MEZ-At/CM-At DM-D If this is too far away from your original plan, another option would be to just switch your W-Su to W-At whic
  7. I don't think I'm more knowledgable than you, and I sometimes struggle with similar issues, but looking at your tactic, two things come to mind: 1. Get stuck in as a TI. It doesn't suit Mbappe with his average work rate and low aggression, and it also doesn't suit your possession-minded setup with much shorter passing. You want to stay on your feet as much as possible. 2. You might have to lower your expectations. In your tactic, Mbappe is not set up to be your main goalscoring threat, and you might just decide that within the context of your obviously successful tactic, that's fine.
  8. In terms of roles and duties, it looks much more balanced now. What do you think, @Experienced Defender? But don't go overboard with instructions, much shorter passing, lower tempo and play through the middle really sounds like possession overkill. I'd suggest getting rid of lower tempo and focus play and increase passing length a notch to shorter passing. Oh, and there's no need for the overlap left instruction, you now have a natural overlap on the left which should work fine on its own. Additional issues might be the AP-At which I think is not ideal for possessions based football
  9. Look, I know ratings were flawed before the recent hotfix, but in this case, I don't think we can draw any conclusions. Not yet anyway. We simply don't know if the AP works fine or not. An AP-At is all about swift attacks, whereas the OP is set up for possession oriented football. Plus, Tielemans is an average dribbler by Premier League Standards, so he might concede possession (AP-At has dribble more). And playmakers are not just about assists, the second to last pass is equally important, and he might struggle to deliver in that particular setup. So even if the AP has plenty of assists
  10. I don't deny that's still an issue of course and it might well be part of what the OP is seeing. But as I said, it might be worth having another look at his tactic, I'm not conviced an AP-A suits his setup, even if Tielemans has lots of goals and assists. The playmaker role should not be looked on in isolation and this might very well contribute to the OP's rating problems, stat collection aside.
  11. Depends on the quality of your player, I would think, with good physicals and mentals, it could work. See how it plays out. Personally however, I'd go for something a little more conservative such as Carrilero or CM-Su. Another option would be to turn your RB to a WB-De to offer more protecting for your roaming BBM and tell him to stay narrow.
  12. With your current tactic, your left flank looks extremly shaky and vulnerable, there is literally no defensive protection when your LB is bombing forward, which he's going to do an awful lot because the overlap left instruction is going to further enhance his aggressive mentality. I would suggest turning the LB to a WB-Su and also switch the attack duty on your IF to support. Or else, if you decide to keep the WB-At, move the AP-A to the center of the pitch, place a holding player on CML to offer defensive protection and turn the If-At to If-Su, thus creating a nice natural overlap. Also,
  13. Well, why do you insist on using an AP on an attack duty in the first place? It doesn't really suit the style of football you're trying to play with shorter passing, higher LoE, and aggressive pressing. Ideally, an AP-A fits counter attacking systems, and it doesn't look like that's what you're trying to achieve, so this might be part of your problem. Plus, an AP-A is hard coded to dribble more, but Tielemans is a pretty average dribbler I think, so just use him as a DLP instead or maybe even as a customized CM-Su with more risky passing ticked.
  • Create New...