Cloud9

The big change is how it will operate in a pivot in terms of rotations or lack there of, but in a 4-3-3 or a diamond you're going to see it play similarly to previous versions. In a 4-3-3, in possession he's going to drop back between the centerbacks and out of possession he's going to operate as an aggressive sweeper stepping into the space in front of him. The HB will push the CB's wide and your two wingbacks forward. If he plays the ball short to the CBs it will almost always progress down the wings. Roles like the CAR can help cover the aggressive wingback choices. Even a double WB(s) will see fairly aggressive wingback play due to this rotation back. I would suggest the biggest difference to a HB system would be the use of BPD or CD. CD's will see a lot of wing play, good BPD who can carry the ball can see more dynamic build up phases. I see people saying what works and work doesn't work with the HB. I'm not sure if I agree with a lot of those statements. There's no problem having wide attackers in a HB system and players combining in the same space is actually a plus. It's only when players are attempting to move into the same channel or make the same goal scoring run that you can run into redundancies. The role has been a powerful choice with the right profile player over the past few versions and that hasn't changed this FM. You could play it in a direct counter attack or a more progressive system with plenty of success. Again the use of BPD who can carry the ball or CD who will just lay off simple passes will dictate a lot of your 4-3-3 halfback plays out. You could also try utilizing a HB in a 3-4-2-1, if you don't like the 4-2-3-1. If you wanted to try to make something like you mention work I would recommend putting together a tactic, testing it out and having people look at it.

I wouldn't worry about it on FM24. The game is tinker heavy and changing roles to tackle the oppositions setup is incredibly powerful. If you're concerned about tactical familiarity just set your three tactics to variations of the same concept with the tis, roles etc. you wish to use the most frequently. Also make sure you're not confusing tactical familiarity with role suitability (which has no impact on the game and is just a guideline offered).

The halfback is a great role, it will just emphasize wing transitions as compared to controlling/building up through the center. I'd recommend going with two very aggressive wingback roles to pair with the HB in a 4-3-3. Also, don't feel pressured to play on a specific mentality. I've been playing on "balanced" a lot this year but always enjoy a good "defensive" approach as well. Higher mentalities help the team move the ball forward quickly and take more risks, so it's a much down to the play style you'd like to see on the pitch as anything else. I prefer a lower mentality as it helps my team pick and choose their moments a bit better than playing on "attacking," while allowing more space for in match changes to ramp things up. Attacking mentalities are a good user friendly option, or if attacking just fits the tactic you're using, as they ensure you're transitioning the ball forward into dangerous areas frequently. Patient approaches have a few more pitfalls but can be just as rewarding with a little time

IF(a)'s direct inside movement can get at the wide central defenders in a 3, esp if they're using wide centerbacks that go forward. I wouldn't worry too much about familiarity when making role tweaks. @Rashidi posted this a little bit ago. Details some tweaks you can make with a similar approach which you might find useful as a reference point. The use of an expansive 6, and/or a Libero(s) will leave you with less defensive structure but could help you towards a 3-1-6 if that's the goal. I would prioritize role changes to the frontline and leave the defensive foundation of your tactic the same in most scenarios. In most cases I find the Libero(d) to be my preferred option compared to a Libero(s) for the stability the role offers.

Have players and roles that can take advantage of the wide spaces. Think your frontline lacks synergy as well, all attack roles and lots of turnovers with your TIs.

A lot of your tactic will result in less patient build up, like using "counter." Try using "hold shape" or leave it unchecked. Try running a 9 that will offer you an option to cross to, F9 is great but will offer you movement that pulls the opposition around instead of a physical target. I don't see too many players to cross the ball to atm except for the IF. DLF offers a more direct option for your build up play. What foot are your Mezzalas?

Mezzala role

If you're using the 3-2, then you can simply copy City's approach. Quick wide players to force the opposition out of their defensive shape with a Poacher and progressive 8's inside. The use of a MEZ will be particularly deadly here, hitting the half space that's been opened by the wide attackers.

For @CVass the space in behind the opposition will be key for tweaks. He's got pace on his own frontline and if Hojlund is on a PF(s) there will be games where you'd want him to just run in behind. Same with Rashford, IW's gets involved with buildup play, a W(a) + Pass into space TI would let him go in behind. There will always be space behind his own defensive line, but that's an issue to address with recruitment. A 3-2-4-1 is really stable and doesn't have too much tinkering to do in the defensive unit (esp. compared to a back 4 with fullbacks). Space in behind (or lack there of) is a strong indicator of how you need to change your attack to score goals against the opposition defence. Most player's need space to score goals. If that space exists naturally, exploit it, if it doesn't you'll need to create it for them. Using Wingers in the 3-4-2-1 formation will create space centrally against opposition who park the bus by pinning the fullbacks wide. Inside runners can then attack those gaps. In my counter attacks: if I'm setup to defend & counter and there is no space in behind (ie. the opposition is sitting back as well) I have to change my game plan if I want more than a draw from the game. You'll also want to check if there's space out wide or centrally. Against exposed midfield pairings (non narrow 4-4-2's etc.) you can just go through the space in the middle of the park and overwhelm the pivot. Opposition who play on wider settings will leave more space between players, which can help you play through them. You can then take a look on an individualized role basis. If the opposition is primarily defensive and using roles that cut inside, they will leave space you can get after (WP, IWB etc.). Aside from clear cut situations like role movement, a 4-3-3 w/ a selfish attacking winger on one side will often stay high exposing his fullback. This isn't always a space to exploit if the fullback is equipped to hold down the fort solo, but if he isn't I would look to create an overload to exploit that space. The positional play feature offers a lot of upside to knowing how a role will function and how to tweak your own roles to exploit that. Many roles with "roam" on them can leave space as they leave their defensive structure in favor of individualized movement (roam doesn't work the same on all roles, some roam defensively). Same goes for a player with traits that could see him continually give you a space to exploit.

Could always try something like this, but I agree w/ @crusadertsar that MEZ on narrow is what you're looking for. MEZ(s), compared to attack, can see him progress the play more in line with his teammates around him if you're looking for combinations like an overlap.

Sounds like the result of playing on a high tempo. I would also examine your choice of striker if this is happening.

I would go Halfback + double wingback (a) for something like this. Maybe a MEZ(S) + CAR? Mix things up a little A back 5 w/a libero is another option here, a 3-4-2-1- is a very defensively solid formation which would address some of your out of possession issues.

There are so many variations of a tactic that it's difficult to say, "I'm going up against a 4-2-3-1 so I will do X." They could be a high pressing 4-2-3-1, a double IWB 4-2-3-1, or a midblock counter attack 4-2-3-1 etc. I would try to stick to your game plan when possible and play to your strengths to start out. Look at the empty space on the pitch when you have the ball / don't have the ball and make adjustments based on that. Watching matches in full for the first 15-20 minutes can help you get a feel of if you need to make tweaks and see how your side plays. Pace is a real killer, these are player's capable of exploiting that empty space and can demand tactical changes to exploit/prevent their ability. How you make changes isn't a rock paper scissors scenario, but about nullifying threats (what is their game plan/how do they score goals) and exploiting tactical or player weaknesses in the opposition. Role changes (looking at role combinations) are a nice way to do this along with finding TI combos you find effective for in match changes. Pass maps and match momentum are two in game tools I'd highlight as well.

This can work fine! I wouldn't use it every game you play though. I also think you will struggle with this on shorter passing. It's a style that is built to absorb pressure and then hit the opposition team in transition, you might consider an all attack role frontline for something like this. This can work on a high press or lower lines system but it's reliant on the opposition being willing to come out and play. I'd leave "hold shape" unticked as well. If they park the bus or are letting you dictate the tempo of the match, then I would prefer a different approach. No need to drop the DM(s) but I might want a hard working profile or role for the AP or CM(a).

I am no guru either, but thank you Cool to see you've got a RPM as the 6 in that tactic, it's a role I always mean to use more but never actually do. It will play to the individual player's strengths a bit more. Mount is not that creative in FM and I usually look for a MEZ(s/a) who can carry the ball and break lines w/his passes (and Fernandes is the more creative 8 of the two). I think an industrious up and down runner will benefit you in and out of possession while providing a strong goal threat in the central spaces. I also prefer MEZ's who are played on the side of their strong foot and Mount is right footed I believe. Mount's big strengths are his off the ball and ability to run himself into the ground for the team, BBM (or SV) lets you get the best out of those imo and pairs well w/Fernandes. Maybe you could try Fernandes as a RPM next to him? That sounds fun, altho the CM(a) I'm sure is just fine anyways. It's not definitive, it's just a weakness of the IWB(s) in a 4-3-3 that doesn't exist w/ the double IFB(d) variant. If your side is not built to transition the ball quickly or attack space then you won't be able to exploit that weakness as effectively. It doesn't mean you score every time the ball turns over against a 4-3-3 IWB(s) but it does mean there's a gap in their defensive structure you can get at consistently on turnovers.