sonnevillejr
-
Posts
155 -
Joined
Content Type
Forums
Articles
FAQs
Online Manual
Support: Blocks
Support: Games
Bug Tracker
SIGames Manual (beta)
Profiles
Posts posted by sonnevillejr
-
-
On 22/05/2023 at 11:35, XaW said:
Scouting reports will give you scouts take on it:
Hey guys, I don't know why but I don't receive this report anymore so I never know what formation/roles/style of play my opponent will use
When I go to the data hub and "next opponent", I can only see this screen :
Is there a way to fix this problem? In my previous save, I remember seeing the report but it has stopped for no reason as well, I thought it was a bug but in this new save I just never received the report
0 -
4 minutes ago, ObeLisk said:
I mean, not what they mean. Why are there two different instructions that do the same function?
Aren't the lowest tier of the left instruction and the "drop deeper" instruction on the right exactly the same? If so, why are there two of the same instruction?
The names of the instructions have been change since, now it's "drop off more" and "step up more", if you play a standard DL with "drop off more", your defenders will position themselves accordingly to your DL instruction (standard). If the opposite ball carrier is free to progress the ball, your defenders will be more likely to anticipate a long ball so they will retreat, with the risk of leaving too much space in front of them. If you choose "step up more", they will be more likely to step up and limit the space in front of them
1 -
You can set your DL to higher, in this way your DL will be closer to your midfielders in order to have a compact block.
With the "drop off more" instruction, your CDs will be more inclined to manage the space behind them. That's useful if you want to play a mid block with a higher DL (compact block) but are still worried about the pace of a striker for example
1 -
18 minutes ago, Cloud9 said:
Players moving into the same area of the pitch isn't negative. You can have a problem with too many players trying to move into the same channel, but that's not an issue with a MEZ(s) and a CF(s) who will float around. I'd even think about putting that MEZ on Attack duty (tons of space on the right hand side to attack).
Some suggestions @Spartak Trigger to consider:
- If you've built a squad of playmakers (ie the midfield 4 have that profile) they all have the attributes of playmakers (and traits) even if they're in more workman like positions. This will cause problems.
- AF/SS isn't a great role combination, especially on a high line system.
- Not crazy about the attacking mentality.
- Perfect set up for a Halfback instead of the DLP.
Yes, the MEZ could be on attack duty, at least he'll attack the space while the CF drops, but IMO a MEZsu and CFsu on the same side is too much
0 -
I think your CFsu and your MEZsu are on each other’s way, so I would swipe the strikers.
In that way, the CFsu would have enough space and could work with the Carrilero, while the WBat attack the space.
On the other side, the AF will push high up the pitch and will free some space for your MEZsu and your WBsu so that they can work with each other1 -
I use the same mentality for every games, especially when I want to impose my style.
For instance, I’m playing a possession based system at the moment and, even against better opposition, I use the positive mentality. The only things I might do to adapt against these teams away is to remove counter press and perhaps play with a mid block.
If I’m losing at the end of the match, I raise the mentality to attacking, and if I want to preserve a result, I prefer to use TIs such as dropping the rythm, time wasting and things like that rather than changing the mentality1 -
You could use an simple Inverted Winger (on support), this role will be positioned in the half-space. And if you want him to act like a winger (apart from the wide position), you can use a right-footed player so that he uses his preferred foot more often and maybe teach him a trait to make him run wide with the ball.
1 -
31 minutes ago, MattBert said:
Can you expand a little bit regarding the left back role and specially the tighter marking?
The WBs is far more attacking than the FBa? The guy is not a very good dribbler by the way, he lacks some physicality to it.
The tighter marking thing is what really intrigues me. I've never made a tactic without that instruction and i don't know what it really does. Why'd you use it and why not?
The WBsu is actually less aggressive than the FBat (look at the individual mentalities), and the FBat is more likely to cross the ball while the WBsu will provide the width and will be more likely to recycle possession. Also, 2 attack duties on the same flank is too risky to me.
The tight marking instruction instructs your player to be closer to the opposition players. Personally I never used this instruction, especially coupled with a more urgent pressing since your players will chase them. I would use this instruction in a low block for exemple, when you don’t want to disrupt your shape too much and don’t want to let them play easily (that’s my interpretation)
This instruction doesn’t event exist anymore as a TI in FM23.
22 minutes ago, MattBert said:I also think in the stay on feet as a way to reduce risk. My way of thinking is the following: if a guy tackles and get passed we are cooked because the tactic is already risky, and i also want my guys to push wide the opponent on the ball and letting him cornered and making him rush. But i rotate a lot between the two tackling option as both of them seems to have a logical sense to me
When you look at teams that press high, they all prefer to foul players high up the pitch if the opposition bypass their press. If you ask them to stay on feet, I think the opposition can bypass your press more easily and you will concede more counter attacks. Personally I wouldn’t tick any of the tackling instructions
0 -
I would change :
- IWBsu -> IWBde
- FBat -> WBsu
- possibly CMat -> MEZat
Regarding TIs, I would remove « overlap left » since it will affect the mentality of your IFat but you want him as your main goalscorer. I would also remove « tighter marking » because it’s unnecessary risky and « stay on feet » because you want to put pressure and recover the ball as quickly as possible
0 -
I’m playing a 4231 with AS Roma in 2026, I use a RPM and a BWM on defend as DMs, but the RPM often becomes a Regista when I play with a player with less physical. I like the combination of Regista and BWM on defend since the BWM holds position but will step up more and get stuck in to compensate the lack of defensive work from the regista.
Up front I have a false 9 paired with a shadow striker and 2 inverted wingers (the support one on the same side as the regista) and it works wonders
0 -
I played almost 2 seasons since the update, I like the fact that it’s quite difficult to know who’s going to have the opportunity to score at the start of the highlight.
However I noticed penalties are almost impossible to score, and there are too many soft passes. Even if I don’t lose the ball, when a midfielder passes the ball to a defender, the opposition’s striker is often close to intercept it. I don’t mind if it happens to players with poor attributes but it shouldn’t happen as often with players comfortable with the ball0 -
5 minutes ago, Mik_Fe said:
did you think that DM with "go forward" is a choice? or only SV?
I never use PIs so I can’t tell if it would be enough, but SV is not the only role you can use, you can also play with a RPM or a Regista for instance
0 -
2 hours ago, Mik_Fe said:
Nice, but SV haven't the PI "hold position", i want a role that can i active the Pi if i need, and the DM have this, know what i mean?
Yes but I think you can afford to have a more attack-minded player since you have 3 CDs + 1 BWM. Like in a 433, at least one of the midfielder has to provide enough support otherwise the front 3 can be too isolated.
In your case, the BWM won’t be too adventurous when you have the ball but that’s fine since you have a support duty in front of him. Regarding the left side, your left AM is on attack duty so he will be further forward, therefore you might need a player who brings the ball out of defense on that side
0 -
I like to keep things simple, personally I would remove all PIs, and change your left DM to a more attack-minded role, such as segundo volante for example, since your left AM is on attack duty.
And if you want you could put your right WB to an attack duty
0 -
22 minutes ago, ObeLisk said:
While I was thinking about it a while ago, I also thought of exactly the items 1,2 and 4 that you wrote
As you said, when I put IWB (s) behind Mez (A), there isn't enough cover in that area.
When I played with Bellingham and Zaracho in existing roles, I realized that I was very fragile in midfield. I'll probably put Laimer in the BWM(s) role alongside Bellingham, putting a DLP(S) in the defensive midfield.
Normally, I don't play two attacking players on the same wing, but I thought if I could send Gaya to attack more, I could get Reus to run behind the defense.
In tactics made by many publishers such as RDF, the role of IF works exactly as I want it to, but when I do the same, the result is frustration
Yeah I think it's a bit hard to have a wide player as your main goal scorer in FM
If you play with a IWBde, I since you could be a bit more adventurous with your left CM since you'll have a DM and a defending right back. I think a BWMsu doesn't contribute much in the attacking phase. Personally I used this set-up :
F9
Wsu IFat
MEZat RPM
DMsu
IWBde BPDde CDde WBsu
SKsu
1 -
I played with almost the same set-up as yours and won the league :
- Regarding the IWBsu and Wsu combination, I noticed they were in the exact same position in my pass map, and I can see in the screen you provided that both your RW and RB have low ratings. Therefore, since I wanted to keep the MEZat/Wsu combination, I changed my IWBsu to a IWBde and it fixed the issue.
- With this change, I changed my DM duty to a support one since I have enough cover.
- I personnally wouldn't play with 2 attack duties on the same side, so I would put Gaya on support
- Since you have a MEZat (the most attacking role in CM strata), I wouldn't put an AP next to him, but any other role who can defend as well (CMsu, B2B, RPM...)
Regarding TIs, I wouldn't play narrow since you have an IWB and 2 'attacking' CMs and I wouldn't pass into space. OOP, I would be less aggressive, especially against good sides
2 -
1 hour ago, Prolix said:
My understanding is that playmaker roles are coded to "show" for the ball more, i.e. move into space towards a teammate who is on the ball. For a DM during the buildup phase, this would naturally mean moving into deeper positions.
I even tried a DMde/DMsu combination, and the DMsu is always the deepest player
0 -
Hi everyone,
I'm playing with a 4231 at the moment and I'm currently 1st in Ligue 2 with a relegation candidate.
However I'm playing with a tactic that I don't really find "balanced" : I started the season with a DLPsu and DMde pivot because I thought it would allow my wingbacks to go higher with decent cover but got poor results. I then switched the DLPsu for a RPM but it didn't get any better. Here's what I tried to use :
Everytime I played with a defend duty in midfield, I noticed that he always had a higher position than my support duty midfielder. Like you can see in the following picture, the player next to the referee is my defend duty midfielder and the one in front of my CBs is my RPM :
I always got poor results when using a defend duty player in midfield, but since I switched him to a support duty, I started winning regularly and he has a lower position than the defend duty. It's the exact opposite of what the descriptions says and I always thought that 2 midfielders with support duties (with a roaming one) offer less defensive cover than at least 1 holding midfielder.
Is this a bug or something that I don't understand?
1 -
2 hours ago, Danarouso said:
This is very helpful. I appreciate the explanations and advice - its very much appreciated.
I tried this as a counter-attacking tactic away at Arsenal and got absolutely smashed 3-0. We never looked like scoring or doing anything meaningful with the ball when we had it (67%-33% possession in favour of them). I assume it is another tactical fault, or should I simply accept that there's some games where we will lose in this manner? I think not because this didn't feel sustainable in any way.
Strujik and Koch had another poor game together and now the 'don't play well together' line has finally appeared. Although that didn't help, I still don't think this tactic is sustainable due to the lack of productivity.
You play with 3 DMs and all of them are asked to hold their position, you'll have a really big gap between them and your striker. Try to get back to more common formations and decide which style of play you wish to use. For example, if you wish to play counter-attacking football, you'll need players who attack the space regularly (if the striker is used to link up play, you'll need more aggressive role around him such as inside forward on attack duty rather than inverted winger) and also players who will support them. In your current tactic, I can imagine your front three left without any support by the rest of the team and none of them is purely focused on scoring goals
1 -
3 hours ago, schackss said:
Hi,
I'm a big fan of Losc and the tactics used by Paulo Fonseca. I've been looking for weeks for an fm 23 tactic based on the same game principles and unfortunately I can't find any... Would you be willing to share your tactic? that would be really cool...
Hi,
As a big fan myself, I tried to replicate the tactic many times. Lately, I noticed that I was perhaps wrong in my interpretation of the tactic. I'm playing on another save at the moment so I don't play with Lille anymore (for now). After I saw your post I decided to give it a go so I started a new save to have the real players. I only played a few friendly games so I don't certify this tactic will work.
As you can see, I changed the duty of Bafode Diakite : I noticed that IRL, he's kind of fluid, when the ball is in our half, he can form a back three but he doesn't necessarily hold his position. And by changing him to a support duty, I see that kind of movement. This change allows the right Winger to be on attack duty. Even if you play with Edon Zhegrova or Adam Ounas, this is the right role because they'll hold the width like in real life and, since they're both left-footed, they'll still cut inside with the ball regularly.
Personally I like to have at least 3 defend duties including the CBs, so now the 3rd one is Andre Gomes. It will allow him to better cover Ismaily but you can experiment with a support duty if you like.
Since it's not possible to instruct the number 10 to shift only on the right hand side, I shifted him manually. The left winger will occupy the left half-space so you will get some kind of 3421 shape.
Regarding the team instructions, you might consider "drop off more" since Jose Fonte is really slow.
Again, I don't guarantee it will work since I didn't test this tactic during an entire season but I think it looks like this
1 -
Maybe something like this when Wout Weghorst’s playing?
I think Dalot is usually the inverted wing back (maybe in attack duty?) but AWB is a simple wingback imo
0 -
6 minutes ago, blejdek said:
Hmmm, a very interesting take on my tactic. Its very different from the perspective of @Cloud9. I actually wanted to make more like tiki taka play, where i would own the possesion, but I was so lost from all the losses it transfered to direct counter attack, which i actually despise in fm
If I look at your very first tactic I can see you wanted to create a possession heavy tactic, if I were to change it, here’s what I would do :
- More balance on the left hand side so less attack duties to encourage your player to keep the ball on this side. For exemple, change your IWat into a IWsu with stay wider (and if you have the player you could consider an inverted wing back in support to take occupy the MEZ’s place
- If you want to keep a striker focused on scoring goals, consider a pressing forward on attack duty : with an AF, your players will look primarily for him and sacrifice possession. With a PFat, your player will help you get the ball back quicker and still occupy the CDs for your players to play between the lines, without the focus on him
- Move your defensive CM to the DM strata because there is no need to increase the space between the CDs and the midfield
- Remove the focus play TIs (or at least the left one, you can keep the right one since your playmaker is on that side and you have a WB and an IF on support duties who will create overloads)
- Remove pass into space because it suits teams who look to exploit space behind the DL but your aim is to keep the ball
- Perhaps remove higher tempo to help you to keep the ball and to wait for players to get into more advanced positions
- Play with a higher DL to press slightly higher and to encourage your defenders to stay higher to put more pressure on the opponent. If you are confident regarding your team, you could also raise your line of engagement and prevent short GK distribution to let them less time with the ball and therefore improve your possession
1 -
41 minutes ago, blejdek said:
Last 3 matches where I tried to implement yours advice, I know its not a big sample but still, at least I should see some improvements or ? I watch matches on comprehensive and its like i watch kinder garten vs pros.
Have any other advice ?? Or could you maybe dl my save (i upload it on top) and try yourself how would you play with my team _o_
Both your CMs are defensive minded players and your advanced forward will not link up play so you need at least one CM more attack minded : for example your Carrilero could become a Mezzala on support.
Also, you seem to play a direct counter attacking style, but only your striker will attack the space (your inside forward won’t necessarily have the time to be in position), so you should change your IWsu and let him be on attack duty to attack the space regularly. If you play him with a mezzala, he will have enough support but you should ask him to stay wider.
IMO, you don’t need a half back in a direct counter attacking style since you want to exploit the space quickly, so there’s no need to ask him to drop between the CDs. (Also, a half back works better with wing-backs)In the style of play you wish to achieve, there is also no need to rely on overlapping full back since there won’t be enough time for them to be effective. So imo you should consider wing backs/full backs (safer) on support duty or WBsu/FBsu on the left and keep your right full back as a FBat.
In this way, you could imagine your inside forward, your DLP, and your right WB work together to unleash your left hand side with an IW who attacks the space supported by your MEZ
Regarding your TIs, you want to be solid defensively, and by asking your back line to stay lower, you might lack of support when you attack and also create more space between your players for your opponent to exploit. So my advice is to raise your DL to standard or higher
1 -
46 minutes ago, Yisz said:
Intresting read!
Thank you!
46 minutes ago, Yisz said:about the red dot in the heatmap: my interpretation is that that’s where the ball is most of the time. You play a possession type system and focus play down the right hand side. Your players will not take too many risks which makes the ball go through your rcb/right fb a lot
Yes but I had the exact same issue without this instruction... I wonder if it didn't come from the fact that my left back was too high too early, and since the DLP was on support duty he didn't drop enough to fill the gap so the ball could not be switched to this side, because since I use a WBsu, I didn't notice this issue anymore
46 minutes ago, Yisz said:Have you given the LCB stay wider? You can form a more traditional back 3 that way with 2 cb and one fb
No I didn't give him this PI, I could try. I didn't because since there is neither a defend duty ahead of him nor a central DM, I was afraid the right central defender would not be central enough to fill the gap
0
Save my Wide Playmaker Tactic
in Tactics, Training & Strategies Discussion
Posted
Maybe you could try to swap the strikers? I think that in this edition, CMs on defend duty will drop even deeper when there’s no DM. This + the fact that your striker in front of him is an advanced forward, there will be a huge gap (even when defending). The swapping may create an overload to the left side (WP+DLF+WB) to release the right side (AF and IW)
Or you could also try to swap the CMs instead of the strikers, and see what happens with the WP and the CMsu. You could play with a BWMsu instead, if you are afraid that your CMsu will be too close to your WP. If you do this, I would change use a WBsu on both side