4-2-3-1 Formation

[Finknottle]

Hello all,

As you all know, I'm a 4-4-2 man. But I'm quite interested to see how people believe that the 4-2-3-1 formation should be set up in FM as it is currently the most fashionable system at the top level.

I'm of the opinion that the tactical interface isn't quite sophisticated enough to make a 4-2-3-1 like the top sides are playing at the moment. Perhaps I am wrong about this though.

Wikipedia has this to say about the formation:

Wikipedia also includes a diagram of the formation including two Defensive Midfielders.

Most of the versions of 4-2-3-1 I have seen on this forum involve two MCs, AMR/AML, FC, which seems to me to be extremely attacking in its nature.

Most of the top sides using 4-2-3-1 are quite sophisticated in their off the ball, on the ball movement. I wonder if this is another case of FM not quite having the tools to create a real life dynamic defensive and attacking shape?

Anyway, being a 4-4-2 man, and a supporter of a club who mainly plays 4-4-2, I certainly don't consider myself an expert on 4-2-3-1 and so I would be interested to read the opinions of those who have more experience with it in real life and in the game.

C.

Hello again "C", long time no speak, what! You may/may not remember that I tried using a 4-2-3-1 system in FM'09. I used two defensive midfielders in front of the back four, with a modicum of success, with Chester City and Hull City and playing strictly according to "Hoyle". I am thinking along the same lines with FM'10 implementing the in game "4-2-3-1 deep" system. As you know I am no tactics pundit but I feel that the way to get the system working is thus.

The two wingers are paramount as are the two defensive midfielders. The system needs two Aaron Lennon, James Milner types. The only problem with wingers is that generally, by definition, they are inconsistent. The two defensive midfielders need to be able to play equally well as midfielders as I see them of paramount importance in holding the whole centre of the system together. The two wingers have to get forward and support the lone striker, otherwise we see a Fernando Torres situation, where he usually makes his goals himself.

There is also a role for the central attacking midfielder. I see him as being a supporting player, not getting too far forward so that he is available to continue the work started by the midfielders behind him. I'm not too sure yet whether or not this will be able to be interpreted with any succes in FM'10. I am sure that if I play as Chester City it will be a non starter but it could be possible using Hull City. Forgive my being absent for so long but my health is suffering a little of late. I hope that this will give you food for thought and be of some small assistance to you and others who are far more adept at tactics within the game.

[crouchaldinho]

Interesting post flumen and thanks for sharing.

[crouchaldinho]

Hello again "C", long time no speak, what!

What ho, what ho! You remind me of Bertie Wooster, Oescus.

Great to hear you are still FMing. Don't you think that 'FMing' or 'to FM' should be a verb? I think I might have just coined a neologism.

You may/may not remember that I tried using a 4-2-3-1 system in FM'09. I used two defensive midfielders in front of the back four, with a modicum of success, with Chester City and Hull City and playing strictly according to "Hoyle". I am thinking along the same lines with FM'10 implementing the in game "4-2-3-1 deep" system. As you know I am no tactics pundit but I feel that the way to get the system working is thus.

The two wingers are paramount as are the two defensive midfielders. The system needs two Aaron Lennon, James Milner types. The only problem with wingers is that generally, by definition, they are inconsistent. The two defensive midfielders need to be able to play equally well as midfielders as I see them of paramount importance in holding the whole centre of the system together. The two wingers have to get forward and support the lone striker, otherwise we see a Fernando Torres situation, where he usually makes his goals himself.

There is also a role for the central attacking midfielder. I see him as being a supporting player, not getting too far forward so that he is available to continue the work started by the midfielders behind him. I'm not too sure yet whether or not this will be able to be interpreted with any succes in FM'10. I am sure that if I play as Chester City it will be a non starter but it could be possible using Hull City. Forgive my being absent for so long but my health is suffering a little of late. I hope that this will give you food for thought and be of some small assistance to you and others who are far more adept at tactics within the game.

Your analysis sounds spot on Oescus and hopefully you will have more luck in translating your ideas into FM using the new tactics wizard.

Feel free to PM me if you want to discuss anything tactical. I'm a football nerd and I always enjoy having conversations about tactics. Alternatively, if you start a thread on the tactics forum, I (and I'm sure others) will be sure to reply. It's always good to bounce ideas around and so on and so forth.

Delighted to hear from you and do hope you are on the mend and feeling better.

Regards,

C.

[7Bestie7]

Strangely enough once I got past the old 4-1-3-2 of CM world I have always gravitated towards the 4-2-3-1 formation because of the wing play. I prefer my teams to play out wide and drive the team forward, giving my opponents less time to react and defend. However in the last 5 versions of FM (06 - 10) I've never allowed myself to get caught into truly defining what 4-2-3-1 is and I think that is the problem with what most people who look to do when we end up on these discussions.

The framework is 4 defenders, 2 central midfielders, 3 attackers and 1 focal point. In my opinion that's the sum total of what the generic 4-2-3-1 is. Everything else is personal choice, just look at Wilson's article on the differences between the European and Brazilian http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/blog/2009/jun/24/the-question-brazil-4-2-3-1. The formation is what you make of it.

So defensively you can have the two CMs as holding, with one a deep playmaker if you want. Otherwise you can have one holding and one attacking which is the style I prefer. The three ahead of them are again down to opinion. You can have the wingers as "Giggs" types or the Ronaldo/Messi version. Again I've used both depending on the players I've used. With the striker you can have a focal point like Drogba or a "point of the lance" like Rooney. It's all down to the manager.

[crouchaldinho]

Yes, you are right there 7Bestie7. One team's 4-4-2 is very different to another team's 4-4-2 and the same could be said about 4-2-3-1.

[crouchaldinho]

By the way, someone has reported the AM and ST positioning issue as a bug on the bugs forum: http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php?t=153992

Perhaps this is something that will get looked at and hopefully the 4-2-3-1 in the match engine will improve in the future.

Right now, it is something that is putting me off playing around with the 4-2-3-1.

Regards,

C.

[7Bestie7]

Crouchaldinho

Do you think that is a major bug considering the ambiguous nature of having 1-up top and 1-behind? As much as I would love for the players to line up how I set them on the screen, with the 1-and-1 system the two players need to be able to move around a bit to gain space. Sure it's a bug but one which helps with the overall "fluidity" of the 4-2-3-1. At least for me anyways.

[crouchaldinho]

I do think that the AM should generally move laterally across the pitch, as should the ST, without having their movement defined by footedness.

Their movement should be in some way connected perhaps but they should have intelligent movement, particularly the AM who may well roam on a free role, as opposed to a movement rigidly defined by their preferred foot.

C.

[TheMister]

Have you guys been trying this with '10?? Any success?

[djkid85]

Evening TheMister, I have continued to use 4-2-3-1 in FM10. To great success, I personally feel that is.

Although I must admit that the tactics creator slightly confused me at first, having to define roles for each and every player was a hassle especially when I was used to sliders in FM09. But I think overall, it did give a quick framework for me to do my tweaking.

Here are my settings of roles for my team if it is of interest to you:

GK : Goalkeeper (Defend)

DR : Fullback (Automatic)

DL : Wingback (Automatic)

DC : Central Defender (Defend)

DC : Ball Playing Defender (Defend)

MC : Box to Box Midfielder (Support)

MC : Ball Winning Midfielder (Defend)

AMR : Winger (Attack)

AML : Winger (Attack)

AMC : Advanced Playmaker (Support)

ST : Advanced Forward (Attack)

Philosophy : Fluid

Starting Strategy : Attacking

I must add that there were a number of tweaks I did make, as I felt that the pre-settings after I had completed Tactical Wizard was quite ludicrous. Therefore, I toned down Closing Down for most of my defensive personnel to prevent them from continuously leaving their positions to chase after balls; and I also slightly toned down Creative Freedom and Long Shots for my attackers.

One problem I have been quite irritated with, and I am not sure whether it is the settings for my Ball Winning Midfielder or the Match Engine, but I cannot seem to be able to get him to track the opposition midfielder's run into the box. I decreased his Closing Down so that instead of technically being a Ball Winning Midfielder, I tweaked other settings to make him try and perform more like an Anchorman, to a relative degree of success, but time and time again, I see opposition midfielders run past him and into the box, thereby causing problems for my defence.

Another problem I am having on a not so regular basis, would be the the issue of my Central Defender, leaving his position to try and help my Fullback close down the opposition's winger, when there is already 1 striker in front of my Central Defender lurking around. Now I can understand if the opposition is playing with a single striker formation, it would be pretty much alright if my Central Defender left his position to help the Fullback with the opposition's winger, leaving the opposition's striker with the other Central Defender. But if the other team is playing with 2 Strikers, it makes no sense for him to leave his position to try and help out the fullback when it doesn't seem like my Fullback is in any immediate trouble.

I do understand it may be the stats of the defender in question/ my tactics/ Match Engine, so my tactics are still Work In Progress. But other than these 2 problems, the passing and quality of goals have been good, and I am pretty much satisfied with what I am seeing so far.

[TheMister]

I've never tried the 4231 before - I've been solely 433 since coming to FM from CM 18 months ago. I've tried 433 this time and it's working fine, I've just taken a notion to try 4231 for some reason!

GK : Goalkeeper (Defend)

DR : Fullback (Automatic)

DL : Wingback (Automatic)

DC : Central Defender (Defend)

DC : Ball Playing Defender (Defend)

MC : Box to Box Midfielder (Support)

MC : Ball Winning Midfielder (Defend)

AMR : Winger (Attack)

AML : Winger (Attack)

AMC : Advanced Playmaker (Support)

ST : Advanced Forward (Attack)

Great - that's what I thought, with a few exceptions. Fullbacks I'm not liking on automatic, I like to decide for myself (maybe I'm a bit retentive :o)

I'm going to go with DMCs rather than MCs. Would that maybe help with your problem here? -

Another problem I am having on a not so regular basis, would be the the issue of my Central Defender, leaving his position to try and help my Fullback close down the opposition's winger, when there is already 1 striker in front of my Central Defender lurking around. Now I can understand if the opposition is playing with a single striker formation, it would be pretty much alright if my Central Defender left his position to help the Fullback with the opposition's winger, leaving the opposition's striker with the other Central Defender. But if the other team is playing with 2 Strikers, it makes no sense for him to leave his position to try and help out the fullback when it doesn't seem like my Fullback is in any immediate trouble.

And I'll be going with a set rather than tweaking the one tactic (that's my retention again!). Regarding that - I think it might be beneficial to change the DMC configuration between the philosophies. What I have in mind is - counter and balanced: anchor and def mid, def and sup; control and attack: 2 def mids, def and sup. Something like that.

Thanks for your input mate, the confirmation has pushed me towards giving it a go. Even if it doesn't work out, it's no hardship to revert to my 433 from a 4231

EDIT: something I've been wondering about (I've not tried the formation yet), is with the SC on attack and the AMC on support, isn't there too big a gap there? The SC isn't too isolated??

[djkid85]

I do think reverting my MCs to DMCs would be able to solve the issue as mentioned. But I do not like to have a 4-2-3-1 with 2 DMCs, I somehow have an aversion to that as I think that my defensive midfielders are too far away from my offense to provide support (I may be wrong here). At times, I would move my ball-winning midfielder back to DMC position to tighten up the area that the key opposition AMC is operating in. Often times, when I am do this, I find myself losing the midfield battle, because I am left with 1 MC versus 2 of the opposition MCs. And to counter this again, I might move my AMC back to MC position just to help out, which in effect, reverts me to a 4-3-3. I will continue tweaking to see if I can get my MCs to track the opposition midfielder's runs into box on a more consistent basis, just like Darren Fletcher does for Manchester United does in real life.

With regards to your question of the differing mentalities of my SC and AMC, I do not find there to be any noticeable gap or any isolation of the SC occurring. Once in a while, my SC does get ratings of 6.0 or 5.9 midgame, so I try to tone down their mentality, to get them more involved in play. Other than that, my strikers seem to be doing well with the current settings I have for them, scoring goals inside and outside the box, and linking up with play. The AMC that is currently in my first team, Antonio Cassano, seems almost perfect for this position and settings, steady goals and assists. Constantly involved in play and staying back to rebuild attacks when the ball is hooved out and attacks break down.

I would definitely recommend you give 4-2-3-1 a go TheMister.

[TheMister]

I do think reverting my MCs to DMCs would be able to solve the issue as mentioned. But I do not like to have a 4-2-3-1 with 2 DMCs, I somehow have an aversion to that as I think that my defensive midfielders are too far away from my offense to provide support (I may be wrong here). At times, I would move my ball-winning midfielder back to DMC position to tighten up the area that the key opposition AMC is operating in. Often times, when I am do this, I find myself losing the midfield battle

I'm hoping to receive FM10 today (fingers crossed) so I'm just going on my thoughts of a formation that's alien to me at the moment.

Regarding the above - I've actually been wondering if the shape with 2 DMCs like I suggest is actually a counter attacking tactic, simply because of the effect you mention, losing the midfield battle. Just looking at the layout, to me, the back 6 want to defend and front 4 want to attack - it doesn't even look like a formation suitable for possession (that's not a problem for me - goals win games, not possession LOL). I actually recall a manager (it was said around 15-20 years ago, but the manager was actually from the 70's) saying he didn't know what a midfielder was when he coached his teams, he had players to keep the ball out his net and players to put it in the other one!

So I'm wondering if that might be the strength to play to with the 2 DMCs, rather than possession? Defend, then a quick direct ball?

EDIT: I suppose that could be used solely as a counter formation along with the 'normal' set-up that you like. It wouldn't be too hard to pull those MCs back because I imagine they'll be quite defensive ones anyway, despite being in the more advanced role.

[Golden_Team]

Hello All

Sorry for english, but i want to know, what attibutes needed perfect Deep Playmaker?

I want to play with two MCs, one as central mid ( defend ) and one is deep laymeker to support.

[GRE23]

Hi all, I am suppose to imitate a 4-2-3-1 Panathinaikos plays.

So with no top flight individuals (except Ninis, Cisse & G Silva) I have some troubles in making it work right, so here are some remarks

1. Formation: flat four in defense, two MCs, 3 AMCs, 1 ST

2. Roles: DCs normal, DL/R play as FBs in auto, one MCd, one MCa, AMC R/L play as attacking midfielders, AMC plays as advanced playmaker, Striker plays as target man

3. Duties: Here comes trouble....too many options make dramatic difference...

The fullbacks need to help in offense, overlapping, giving width etc. They need good pace, stamina, crossing, passing. They are on automatic

The MCd should be on defensive as a Ball Winner. The problem is that if he likes going forward, he WILL get forward and into the box.

The MCa could be either a box-to-box man or a deep lying playmaker on support. This is pretty straightforward.

The side AMCs could either play as AML or AMR. If played as AMCs they are on attacking. I tried many variations so far. Leto is actually an AML so I told him to hug the line in wide play. He does not perform very well...Ninis is an AMRC, so either told to cut inside or told to play wide or move into channels, he is a storm trooper. I also tried to swap sides between the two, play them wide and set them as inside forwards. Did not work very well.

The AMC is Karagounis, IRL he is a deep playmaker who likes to carry the ball, roam like hell, try long shots. I have him on support as an advanced playmaker...

The Striker could be set up as support target man or poacher. Cisse plays better as poacher I guess, however if caught under pressure I need him on a supportish role to help the attack build up.

What intrigues me the most is the hundreds of variations this formation offers. Also sideline shouts play a very big role. I usually start in control strategy, telling the team to play wide and exploit the flanks. Short passing cautious play may get you too many triangular passes between the back 6, so maybe a shout to get the ball forward could really help accelerate things.

I have seen many times a gap between my DCs and MCs. The team presses too high and the 2 AML/R do not participate very much in the defensive play. My AMC if played attacking and the ST as support they often fall one onto the other. Overall I guess I will change back to 4-4-2 because of the high maintenance of 4-2-3-1 and the countless tweaks and twists I must make in every game.

However, I have managed to beat Dinamo home, draw away (switched it to 4-1-4-1) and Anderlecht home, so I am on my way to ECL groups. Not bad

[Gdawg69]

Without trying it in great depth, this is the most attractive looking tactic for me aesthetically(sp?).

It has the combination of advanced wingers/midfieders, fullbacks AND a player in the hole as well as two central midfielders which is very attractive to me.

However the amount of space it gives the other team to attack my fullback area's is increasingly frustrating obviosuly and I have still to find a balance. I could of course place my MC's in the DMC position but this would not be as natural to one of my important MC's and it would also increase the gap between Central midfielders and my advanced midfielders.

I could, as above suggests move my ATT MID centre back one, but i feel this would take away from his strengths that he has in a more advanced role.

My next worry is against hard teams away, will I have to change the formation do you think every 2nd week in order to get a result or do you think this formation can also work in a defensive counter format?

I am so determined to make this tactic work as it can believe it can be a devastating tactic once corrected in both results and the actual build up play.

I for one will be reading this thread like a hawk and hopefully putting some input myself, none as in depth or as worthy as some of you guys on here im afraid though.

[7Bestie7]

Gdawg69,

Don't forget that you can change the way your full-backs are set up. This is the key for me on the defensive, use your full-backs as support or defensive players unless you are comfortable with who you are playing against. Even defensively the full-backs can supply a good amount of ammunition to the wingers. Or if you prefer, change your CMs into defensive minded players with the full-backs still supporting the wingers. This creates a good bank of two and two defenders (centre-backs and central mids) with your midfielders able (or they should be) to push wide and help cover the full-backs running forward. Like you this formation ticks every box for me in regards to what I want from my team.

Bestie.

[ZdlR]

I'm using this after promotion as Newcastle. I needed to crowbar Smith, Nolan and Barton into my midfield and this works nicely. Nolan is an AMC, Smith a ball-winner or DMC and Barton and support MC or box-to-box mid.

This formation is very flexible - you can drop the two MCs back to screen the defence and/or spread the wide AMCs to AML/R and have wingers / inside forwards. I thought I would have trouble defending the flanks but the MCs go wide to win the ball back and the AMCr/l track back with a fluid philosophy. Very happy so far

[Gdawg69]

I also don't think it help me that I'm rangers and have placed the old firm in the premier league for a new challenge, and a challenge it is btw.

I believe I have a strong middle to front, but my defense is weak, and thats my problem trying to fit a weak defense in a defensively fragile formation - but I want to play with it, so i will find a way.

--------------Palermo----------

Vukcevic(sp?)---Di Maria----Skillful AMRLC FC from holland

---------Mendes/thomson--Davis--------

Papac-----Bougherra---Reignesson(sp?)-----Belletti

[djkid85]

TheMister with regards to your question, i think Liverpool is an example of this. I think in page 1 of this thread, someone mentioned the merits of using 2 DMCs as opposed to 2 MCs, you might want to take a look there, although it might have been meant for FM09, i think you can translate it to FM10 settings pretty easily.

But if you were to take Liverpool as an example, the pairing of the 2 DMCs, Alonso (before he was sold) and Mascherano, was perfect. Mascherano would be the ball winning midfielder, while Xabi Alonso would be the one who distributes the passes. So you might want to use their stats as a template for you to work around with when searching for suitable players. It remains to be seen how Aquilani will complement with this formation and pairing with Mascherano, as he is a totally different kind of player from Xabi Alonso.

[novicehack]

Finally I found this great thread. Just like you all, Im a huge fan of 4231 with 2 MCs and in the previous version (FM2009) I had a great success with Arsenal. However, in the version, I dont seem to be able to make it work like the previous one (I think Im too stupid to understand the new tactic system, guess I better revert to the classic one)

Djkid85

I experienced the same problem with 'my MCs do not track back the opposition MCs'. Thats why I struggled a lot when playing against Chelsea (Lampard/Essien) and MCity (Hamsik/Montolivo). until now, I find no solution for that.

[Finknottle]

Hello, "C", Bertie again, What Ho! A little frivolity first methinks, 7Bestie7, I have come across your recent post in which you type " one up and one behind". I would like to remind you that this is a family show and that senior citizens may be watching! Now back to the serious stuff. "C", as you know, I have been an enthusiast of the 4-2-3-1 system but using the "deep" version. That is having two DMC's in front of the back four.

As I am unsure if the alleged 4-2-3-1 bug has been rectified yet I am unwilling to use that system at the present. Anyway, 4-2-3-1 is soooooo last year!!! I have , for the time being, reverted to my other favourite, 4-1-3-2 [narrow]. I have only played seven friendlies, three league games and one League Cup game. Won one, drawn one and lost one. Beat Walsall in the League Cup. I have,up to now, used only the "default" settings for my team and players. It is my intention to now "go boldly where no man has gone before". Yes!!! you've guessed it. I am going to listen to a Des O'Connor record! I digress. I am going to try to customise my team and player instructions, using the "tactics wizard" as my guide.

This morning shall be spent poring over T&T'10 and by lunchtime my team of superstars will be ready to put the fear of the Almighty into the rest of the FM'10 world. I am trying to do all of this with Hull City. I have ticked the "no transfer" budget, at the beginning of the game. By the cringe! Haven't I noticed the difference. I now have to sell to buy, if you get my drift. What I have already noticed is that no matter which formation that I look at, it seems difficult to play all of Hull's better/best players in their better/best positions within the one team. However, if at first, you don't succeed. Give up!!!!To those of you who think that this is a load of old rubbish, my apologies, though you may well be correct! To the rest of you all of your comments are most gratefully appreciated. Kind regards to you all.

[Finknottle]

Forgive the little bit of "spamming", please. I have jusy read about the "no transfer budget in first window"in the general forum. I hadn't realised that it was all covering. I thought that it was a way of you making the game a little more difficult. I assumed that it would not stop you from firstly, selling players, so that you then had a transfer fund self made. I had wondered why none of my listed players had been sold. Ah! well, back to the drawing board.

[michelco]

They still haven't got the fluid movement of the wingers correct in this version either. If you want wingers to move with alot of freedom (like most 4231 IRL) then you need to play 4-4-1-1. Have their wide play set to Cut Inside and you can and will see your left winger pop up on the right side of the box etcetc.

I think the problem lies in that the 4231 the wingers are already far up the pitch. And the ME cannot yet replicate wingers needing to back down and inside to find space so therefor you need to play 4411 in order for the wingers to find space ahead of them

[7Bestie7]

oescus,

On a side note, good chap, I must say that don't forget with your wonderful 4-1-3-2 that you can move one of your "3" out on the wings (either as an M or W) to provide you with a lop-sided 4-3-3 if you have say a Ronaldo-esque player but not much else to balance it out.

Bestie.

[dankrzyz]

Last night I was testing an idea from another thread, but was using a possession/short passing 4-2-3-1... was playing a comparable opponent and found the holding midfielders (I used 2 MC(d)s) to effectively provide that pivot base for the four attackers. Was having trouble with the wingers running up the pitch and getting "stuck" in the corners, without a cross and without opportunity to carry out their "cut inside" instructions (and yes, they were opposited footed wingers). They got trapped, then had only one pass back to the fullback. This happened with different wingers versus different opponents with different formations. Just very frustated with the cutting winger not playing as I envision.

FYI... the two holding midfielders' roles were deep-lying playmaker and ball-winning midfielder, both on "defend" roles. they played well on offense, providing the base from which to attack. On offense, the two support fullbacks pushed up in a line with the holding midfielders and created a "middle four" to support the attacking midfielders and striker. They also frustrated the opponent just outside our box and didn't allow them to mount effective attacks.

[Finknottle]

oescus,

On a side note, good chap, I must say that don't forget with your wonderful 4-1-3-2 that you can move one of your "3" out on the wings (either as an M or W) to provide you with a lop-sided 4-3-3 if you have say a Ronaldo-esque player but not much else to balance it out.

Bestie.

Bestie! Where you looking over my shoulder? I have just been looking at this with the wizard and making written notes about that very idea. I am thinking that this will be the best option for me with the current crop of players that I have. Good thinking, old bean! Kind regards.

[Finknottle]

Sorry, Bestie, I forgot. Just as a point of interest. I don't know if you have noticed this. If you use the tactic wizard to make your tactic, scroll down to the 4-1-3-2 tactic and click it. Then, if you move the R&L CM's out to the wings, making a 4-1-3-2 [wide] tactic the wizard will alter the title 4-1-3-2 to 4-4-2 but you will still have your DMC in his rightful position. Good Lord, I'm a mine of useless information.

[7Bestie7]

Haha, Keep up the useless information. I enjoy it!

In all honestly Oescus I have decided not to look at the wizard's numbering of my formations. Different people will put different numbers on formations and it doesn't hold the truth of the tactics involved in the setting up of the players. Take your 4-1-3-2, moving your outside midfielders wide most people will see it as a 4-4-2 with a DM and flat three (which it is in some regards). But if you keep the "3" setup on the players, ie attacking midfielders/inside forwards even at a deeper position, then it's a wide version of 4-1-3-2 and nothing like a 4-4-2 w/DM.

And talking about using wingers with the 4-1-3-2, in my 09 game I have around 5 different versions of the tactic. Sometimes my side midfielders will be pushed into the wings with the same settings, sometimes one of them, sometimes they are the attacking players with the playmaker directly ahead of the DM and sometimes the outside midfielders are box players with the central midfielder being the more attacking of the three. It's a beautiful formation to play with.

Bestie.

[SPDtrip]

Hello All

Sorry for english, but i want to know, what attibutes needed perfect Deep Playmaker?

I want to play with two MCs, one as central mid ( defend ) and one is deep laymeker to support.

You can find this out in the game by selecting a player and choosing the role you want him to play. The opposing screen will show all his attributes and highlight the ones that are particularly important for his role.

For Deep Playmaker the important attributes are :

First Touch, Passing, Tackling, Technique, Marking, Composure, Creativity, Decision, Off the ball, Positioning, Team work and Strength.

Hope this helps.

[Finknottle]

Haha, Keep up the useless information. I enjoy it!

In all honestly Oescus I have decided not to look at the wizard's numbering of my formations. Different people will put different numbers on formations and it doesn't hold the truth of the tactics involved in the setting up of the players. Take your 4-1-3-2, moving your outside midfielders wide most people will see it as a 4-4-2 with a DM and flat three (which it is in some regards). But if you keep the "3" setup on the players, ie attacking midfielders/inside forwards even at a deeper position, then it's a wide version of 4-1-3-2 and nothing like a 4-4-2 w/DM.

And talking about using wingers with the 4-1-3-2, in my 09 game I have around 5 different versions of the tactic. Sometimes my side midfielders will be pushed into the wings with the same settings, sometimes one of them, sometimes they are the attacking players with the playmaker directly ahead of the DM and sometimes the outside midfielders are box players with the central midfielder being the more attacking of the three. It's a beautiful formation to play with.

Bestie.

I first got involved with the 4-1-3-2 formation in around 1955/7, while serving in Her Majesty's Royal Navy. We had an Argentinian sports officer. He introduced our football team to it. Remember of course, that this was long before "formations" became de rigueur in this country. As the GK, I was introduced to being a "sweeper keeper". It took us about half a season to work out what he wanted from us within the formation. The first full season that we used the 4-1-3-2 we won the Victor Ludorum League and Cup and were unbeaten in twenty four games. No one could work out how we played and could not get near us. One opposing sports officer even went as far as to complain that we were cheating. He said that the GK wasn't allowed to come out of his area and that the centre forward should stay upfield so that his team had a fair chance of marking him. Sub Lieutenant Martin

if memory serves. I conceded only five goals all season. Our "deep lying" centre forward scored around forty/fifty goals. His nickname was Lofty as his real name was [and I hope] still is Dave Small. He will be about seventy now.

[dankrzyz]

Not to cut off good conversation... but here's a thread about the 4-1-3-2. Those folks might want to hear about your experiences, too.

[Finknottle]

Not to cut off good conversation... but here's a thread about the 4-1-3-2. Those folks might want to hear about your experiences, too.

Thanks dankrzyz!

[7Bestie7]

Oescus,

First of all, thank you for serving Her Majesty. Second of all, it sounds as if you have been able to watch the growth of the obsession with defining tactics and formations grow down the years. Do you think it's gotten too far to the extreme in that attempt?

Congratulations (albeit late) on the way you play, it sounds like it would be a joy to play in that type of setup. Personally I was never good enough to play, not even at school level, but the tactical setup has always come easy to me. You should see my wife shudder when I attempt to use my football tactical brain on her NFL!

Bestie.

[Finknottle]

Thanks Bestie! I don't think that formations/tactics etc have gone too far. All tactics are of the fashion of the day. Rafa started on the 4-2-3-1 and was roundly critised by the Knowalls in the press. Now it is the be all and end all for some managers. Soon , someone will come along with a "new" idea and that will be the saviour. It matters not what tactics /formation that you want to play, if your players are not good enough they will always fail! Examples 1&2. Manchester Utd. No Ronaldo, no exciting free fowing football like last season. Sir Alex will soon address that, though, in the January window. 2. Liverpool. No Alonso, no more defence splitting short and long range passing. I'm not sure about Aquilani, good player though he is. I seem to remember Bill Shankly wouldn't even talk to an injured player, never mind buy one! Kind regards.

[RossoneriGunner]

Do you find that zonal marking is better than man marking in 4-2-3-1. I find that with man marking players can tend to get pulled out of position.

[dankrzyz]

I've been using zonal in my 4-2-3-1... had good luck with the midfielders, even wingers, closing down along the sidelines; also the holding midfielders stuffing opponents outside the box in the middle. If I were to use even some man-marking, where would it best be applied? Or is zonal clearly better?

[7Bestie7]

Oescus,

I've never understood buying an injured player nor selling one who is such a vital part of your tactical setup without a replacement already at the club unless you're changing your style of play.

RossoneriGunner,

I never use man-marking anymore. I want my defenders to defend where I put them, not half-way across the pitch because I'm up against an extremely talented player.

Bestie.

[RossoneriGunner]

Yes I agree Bestie, I certainly dont use man marking anymore.

[RossoneriGunner]

I am looking at playing around with the Asymmetric version and this will be my first venture into 4-2-3-1 as I usually like the W_M formation. So I dont know if anyone has tried this yet.

[7Bestie7]

Ross,

I'm actually attempting to have a game recreating the old formations. It's in the challenges forum, I just haven't gotten around to posting my first update yet.

Bestie

[RossoneriGunner]

Cheers Bestie will keep an eye open for that. I have used W_M with some success and tried the Italian 'Metodo' or W_W and was looking at Catenaccio as well, but I want to actually play FM10 instead of using it as an experimental tool.

[drewan79]

i found a good 4321 formation it has gk sweeper, 2 fullback auto, 2 cd 1 stope 1 cover , 2 cm ball wining def, 3 am playmakers support and 1 complete forward.

[Pawel_lfc]

If anyone has a 4-2-3-1 tactic they are having success with in FM 10.1 could they please upload it?

[vince89]

I won the Serie A comfortably with Juventus with this 4-2-3-1 setup. I made no signings.

GK

DL (full back automatic)

DR (full back automatic)

DC (centre back defend)

DC (centre back defend)

MC (ball winning midfielder defend)

MC (box to box midfielder support)

AMCr (inside winger attack)

AMCl (inside winger attack)

AMC (trequartista attack)

ST (deep lying forward support)

fluid, everything else default. use the right match strategies thats key.

your trequartista and striker will score alot of goals because the whole midfield attack as a unit and they move the ball around really well. ideally you want your AMC and ST to be two very good technicians, physical stats not so important.

I used Del Piero as ST and at 35 years with 9 pace he scored 39 goals in all competitions.

[Pawel_lfc]

I won the Serie A comfortably with Juventus with this 4-2-3-1 setup. I made no signings.

GK

DL (full back automatic)

DR (full back automatic)

DC (centre back defend)

DC (centre back defend)

MC (ball winning midfielder defend)

MC (box to box midfielder support)

AMCr (inside winger attack)

AMCl (inside winger attack)

AMC (trequartista attack)

ST (deep lying forward support)

fluid, everything else default. use the right match strategies thats key.

your trequartista and striker will score alot of goals because the whole midfield attack as a unit and they move the ball around really well. ideally you want your AMC and ST to be two very good technicians, physical stats not so important.

I used Del Piero as ST and at 35 years with 9 pace he scored 39 goals in all competitions.

Just had 0-0 draw and 0-1 loss with this. Probably good when you are the weaker team, but not when your team should be winning.

[Finknottle]

With reference to the 4-2-3-1 AMC/CF/ST bug. Am I the only "balloonhead" who wasn't aware that it had been rectified in the 10.1 patch? If not, then welcome to the "Official FM'10 Balloonheads" club. Kind regards.

[vince89]

Just had 0-0 draw and 0-1 loss with this. Probably good when you are the weaker team, but not when your team should be winning.

Which team are you? Who were you playing and watch match strategy did you use?

[7Bestie7]

If anyone has a 4-2-3-1 tactic they are having success with in FM 10.1 could they please upload it?

Are you looking for a plug-and-play tactic or one that will work with your team?

Bestie.

[RossoneriGunner]

Are you looking for a plug-and-play tactic or one that will work with your team?

Bestie.

It gives you great satisfaction when you make your own tactic.