Attacking player roles, seeking advice (AMs, Treq, Eg, APa)

[thizaum]

Hello,

I've been playing a wide 4-2CM-3-1 with a certain success and would like some help on tweaking the formation.

I play with CMd, BBM / Ws, APs, IFa / CFa

The APs is the main question here. I'm using Parejo for this and wouldn't want him to be too offensive. His role should be link the play from the CM to the 3 attackers (the wingers and the strikers). That's why I'm using him on APs and my runner stays on the CM.

But, I've been seeing the CF get way too isolated up ahead and he scores less than I wanted. And when he does, it always seems like an individual effort.

So, I've been thinking about 2 ways of improving this:

- tweaking the creator: I thought of changing his role to either AMs, Treq (not really his kind of game), Eg or APa. If I switch him to AMs, I'd change the BBM to DLPs.

- tweaking the scorer, change his role to DLFa. I have never used this, but I really prefer the shorter and faster strikers, instead of the Mandzukics and Lewandowskis out there. Those are the ones that I have on my squad.

What do you guys think? I'm in the last third of league, cup and Europa fighting for titles... I can't waste matches on gambles, but I see this area of need of improving.

[Ryknow]

I struggled with getting the best out of the AMC when I moved to Dortmund. I managed at Rangers for 12 seasons using mainly 4-3-3 (4-1-2-2-1). I decided on changing the roles around to include my AMC in he goal scoring instead of just creating. Simply changing AP(s) to AP(a) helped greatly. Initially it was changed to T(a) but I wanted more defensively from him.

Anyways I use:

-------CF(a)----------

-IF(s)-AP(a)---W(a)-

---CM(d)--DLP(s)----

CF(a) with PI 'Moves into channels' is important to produce that space for the AMC. Ofcourse it all depends on how else your team plays, the system, players, etc. but try using AP(a) and watching his movement. My AMC generally feeds throughballs for the striker or wide men (between the CB and FB), attacks near post for crosses and runs into the space the striker makes to then score. In addition he's protected and supported by the midfield partnership behind him.

Last seasons tally:

[llama3]

Why is your forward getting isolated? Is his attack duty preventing him from linking up? Is he constantly trying to run in behind? You only have 1 real outlet for a quick forward - your AP(S) - and he may be quite static given the BBM running from deep and IF(A) coming inside. He may need more room to move, so an Enganche or Trequartista may help that. Why do you feel it is not Parejo's game? As for width - a W(S) tends to hit earlier crosses - which arent as suitable for a quick, but aerially deficient forward - so you may need to make sure you are delivering cross to and from the right areas.

[Jenesis33]

I would say CF(S)-AP or AM(A) is better combo.. maybe W(A) as well..

and how the hell a AMC with 10 finishing get 30 goals lol.. compsusre is only 15 too (not godly high)

this game is so broken...

[llama3]

and how the hell a AMC with 10 finishing get 30 goals lol.. compsusre is only 15 too (not godly high)

Great technique, strong decisions, good long shots. That's may be why?

[Cleon]

Great technique, strong decisions, good long shots. That's may be why?

Not to mention the fact he might have someone creating space for him that gives him great chances to score.

[thizaum]

I struggled with getting the best out of the AMC when I moved to Dortmund. I managed at Rangers for 12 seasons using mainly 4-3-3 (4-1-2-2-1). I decided on changing the roles around to include my AMC in he goal scoring instead of just creating. Simply changing AP(s) to AP(a) helped greatly. Initially it was changed to T(a) but I wanted more defensively from him.

Anyways I use:

-------CF(a)----------

-IF(s)-AP(a)---W(a)-

---CM(d)--DLP(s)----

CF(a) with PI 'Moves into channels' is important to produce that space for the AMC. Ofcourse it all depends on how else your team plays, the system, players, etc. but try using AP(a) and watching his movement. My AMC generally feeds throughballs for the striker or wide men (between the CB and FB), attacks near post for crosses and runs into the space the striker makes to then score. In addition he's protected and supported by the midfield partnership behind him.

Last seasons tally:

Hey, thanks for the reply.

After a few tries with an attacking dutied AMC (APa, EG and Treq), I realised that I was giving up much more space on defense, so I was conceding more goals. And attacking wise, it wasn't helping much more.

I guess the difference might be in using the BBM and you're using DLP.

I ended up deciding on keeping the APs, trying the DLFa and coincidentally I also set him for the "move into channels", which helped him A LOT!

Thanks very much and I'll surely give a go on the APa / CFa thing... It can be a little more offensive minded against defensive sides.

[thizaum]

Why is your forward getting isolated? Is his attack duty preventing him from linking up? Is he constantly trying to run in behind? You only have 1 real outlet for a quick forward - your AP(S) - and he may be quite static given the BBM running from deep and IF(A) coming inside. He may need more room to move, so an Enganche or Trequartista may help that. Why do you feel it is not Parejo's game? As for width - a W(S) tends to hit earlier crosses - which arent as suitable for a quick, but aerially deficient forward - so you may need to make sure you are delivering cross to and from the right areas.

Thanks llama!

Personally, I evaluate his average position compared to the 3 players behind him and the number of shots and passes he gets. If there's a big difference, I'm concluding that he's too isolated. But, I might be missing something here.

I think the EG is more like Parejo, as he's more technical and "slower".

I also have Feghouli, which is my IFa. He would be more suited for a Treq. But, then again, I'm humbly saying I might be wrong.

I'm also seeing that a attacking dutied player there is making me concede more. I always see Parejo coming back to help.

Is the gain greater than the loss here? What should I do to remedy this?

[thizaum]

Maybe I could try something like this:

http://lineupbuilder.com/?sk=3h32v

[Ryknow]

I would say CF(S)-AP or AM(A) is better combo.. maybe W(A) as well..

and how the hell a AMC with 10 finishing get 30 goals lol.. compsusre is only 15 too (not godly high)

this game is so broken...

Great technique, strong decisions, good long shots. That's may be why?

Not to mention the fact he might have someone creating space for him that gives him great chances to score.

What Llama and Cleon said. My system revolves around him getting as much space as possible, which sees him ghost into the penalty area as CBs are pulled away. Majority of his goals come from cut backs or squared balls in the penalty area, so finishing isn't much of a concern as they normally are solid chances. Note his high shots on target stat.

Took me a while to get this right. His first season with us saw him claim only 4 goals and 12 assists, all comps (Played a lot in the CM role though). Then I wanted to try and replicate his international goal scoring form, where Klopp was using him in his 4-2-3-1 system.

Note: The season stats pictured was the season he took over as the main free kick taker. He scored around 8-10 in all comps, and assisted many others.

[Ryknow]

Maybe I could try something like this:

http://lineupbuilder.com/?sk=3h32v

That looks solid. Similar to mine (besides ST and AMC) but my positions are flipped. That back four and double CMs should provide plenty of cover, depending on your philosophy, mentality, shouts. Shame that you found you conceded more with an AP(a). However, it takes time and each season changes depending on who comes in. For instance before I signed Günther the system was set up for the striker to feed the wide men, who would score. My new system means the two CMs rarely assist or score goals, my DLP is very much of a Gündogan type mould, including reflecting his real life stats (low amount of assists). This is because he's generally the one who makes the pass before the assist. It's all about making sacrifices to get what you want and find the right balance, imo.

[thizaum]

That looks solid. Similar to mine (besides ST and AMC) but my positions are flipped. That back four and double CMs should provide plenty of cover, depending on your philosophy, mentality, shouts. Shame that you found you conceded more with an AP(a). However, it takes time and each season changes depending on who comes in. For instance before I signed Günther the system was set up for the striker to feed the wide men, who would score. My new system means the two CMs rarely assist or score goals, my DLP is very much of a Gündogan type mould, including reflecting his real life stats (low amount of assists). This is because he's generally the one who makes the pass before the assist. It's all about making sacrifices to get what you want and find the right balance, imo.

I don't really use any shout. The ones I've used, always got the team working worse than before. I tend to start the match without any and tweak according to what I see and what the assman tells me. Sometimes I use work ball into box and retain poss.

Do you have any suggestions?

Standard mentality and fluidity. With the DLF and BBM, I was using fluid.

My main scorer is supposed to be the striker.

[aderow]

I've been using an AP-a, intermittently, for some time now (I play a 4411. My 2 CMs behind the AP-a). My only gripe with the role is that my AP-a sees way more of the ball than I want him to. Now the 2 CMs are a CM-d and CM-s respectively. I figured adding another playmaker role to one of them would take some of the emphasis off of the AP-a.

I tried a DLP-d next to the CM-s. The team played well, but the CM-s was almost nonexistent; barely seeing the ball or taking part in build up/attacking moves. I tried both a DLP-s (and then an AP-s) next to the CM-d. Things were more balanced, but I feel like there was too much of a gap between the CMs and the players ahead of them.

Right now I'm leaning towards having the AP-s next to the CM-d. But part of me feels like I should leave it as is despite my concern about the AP-a seeing as much of the ball as he does.

[Jenesis33]

Why dont you run AM(A) instead of AP(A) if you dnt want to see him 'see' that much of the ball. as AM(A) is not a spelicized playmaker..

If you dont like CM(S).. try CM(A)? considering you are playing 4-4-1-1.. defensive wise even with CM(A) it should be solid.. or just go B2B(S).. which contributes even more than CM(S) if you got the right player...

Like DLP(D)-B2B(S)-AM(A).. or DLP(D)-CM(A)-AM(S)

[Jenesis33]

I stil disagree.. I mean its great job by you to make him score that much.

But even you say 10 goals from freekick.. tahts still like 1 goal in every 2 games (ignoring all FKs goals)

Which is very very high for even a pure striker..many world class player (striker) cant even score on that ratio...

Like for me stat wise15 is top team level.. 10 is only meidcore (like not even first division level.. first division level is like 13 for me)

So for me its a player with finishing of 2nd division.. regardless how good is his decision/technique/whatever..

With a such bad finishing.. he should not be getting goal every 2 games..

I want to compare this to ozil... everyone know ozil has great technique and decent compsure/decision... (maybe he is bit weaker mentally)

But he doesnt score much.. .bec his finishing is just bad.. and he chose (bec of high decision ) to play in others rather than go for glory himself...

Similar for Inestia.. master of the ball. god like decision/compsure/technique/off the ball.. but you dont see him score 30 goals a season

I know ppl will say barcelona doesnt let him socre.. all chances are feed to messi..

However my point is.. with a 10 finishing that god like AMC should look to play in his teammate more than try to score himself.

Like if you have world class level dribbling/passing.. and only 2nd division lvl finishing.. I think most ppl will chose to pass rather than shot themselves.. 10 finishing should just tell me he is not comfortable/confident at taking those chances... so he will chose to pass to another teammate to finish..

I mean your AMC still has 27 assist which is great of course.. but i think it should be more like 20 goals (10 from freekick according to you) and 40 assist..

So what i am saying is not you did a bad job.. quite the opposite... this is amazing.. But the ME is not doing good job simulating the game matching up to the player stats.

I m not bashing the game is broken (it was more a joke).. but I am far from believing this game is perfect.. so no. i dont jump to its defence every time.

[aderow]

Why dont you run AM(A) instead of AP(A) if you dnt want to see him 'see' that much of the ball. as AM(A) is not a spelicized playmaker..

If you dont like CM(S).. try CM(A)? considering you are playing 4-4-1-1.. defensive wise even with CM(A) it should be solid.. or just go B2B(S).. which contributes even more than CM(S) if you got the right player...

Like DLP(D)-B2B(S)-AM(A).. or DLP(D)-CM(A)-AM(S)

AM(A) becomes to disconnected with my CMs. A CM(A) would do the same tbf. Next to the DLP(d), the same thing would happen to a BBM; he'd rarely see any of the ball.

Tbf, I don't think I really want to run a DLP-d. I feel like it asks too much of the players I use in that part of the pitch.

[Jenesis33]

oh well if you have AM(A) and CM(A) then woudlnt DLP link with CM / Wingbacks. who can link with AM(A)?

Or you can try AM(S).. anyway i hold my logics.. if you dont want Ap seeing that much of the ball then go with AM or Treq .. even SS..

If you dont like DLP(D).. then yeah go with CM(D).. i mean other CM has to be a runner.. so you need either B2B(S)/CM(S)/CM(A). maybe even Ball winner (S).. again not much other option

Sry this comment is for 4-2-3-1. with AM..

If you are unhappy with CM been too far away from AM (which to be honest i cant imagine this to be a problem.. ) then you should introduce a more reserved role for AMC.

Having AP(S) with get further forward (which is defualt on) for one of your MC.. and maybe a Treq or AM(S) should be able to link up together.. however i do worry about your lack of pentration

AS none of your MCs or AMCs are attack duty... to push forward.. you dont have AML/R (they are ML/R) which naturally doesnt push that further forward.. I assume you going to ask your ST to drop back too considering if your AMC drop back and if ST doesnt. there is no link from AMC to ST then..

WHere is the pentration going to come from???

And i dont like the idea of "he is not doing anything"

In footabll just because you are not directly assisting or scoring goals.. doesnt mean you are useless..

Like Xavi is a prime example.. A few years ago when Barcelona was donimating.. Xavi was probably getting 5 goals a season plus mayeb less than 10 assists.

Can anyone say he is useless? yes it feels like he is not doing anything.. just pass run pass run pass.. but without him.. barcelona falls apart.

The aim of B2B(S) or CM(S) is to hold link up/ recylce poessession. maybe provide a late surge into box. .

and always be there for attack to pass back to.. so you dont loss the ball.. and can keep the passing option open.. (Thats why xav is so important .. he keep running keep beening that outlet for everyone else to pass to)

[aderow]

Both wide men are on attack; they get plenty forward constantly; as much as an AML and AMR would. They penetrate plenty. As does the CF. As does an AP(a) more times than most people realize.

You're right; the other CM should be a 'runner'; I was hoping the AP(s) would be more mobile; would at least venture closer to the box. But alas no. My issue with having the AP(s) as a CM behind an AP(a) as my AM was that it constantly lead to gaps between the CMs and the players ahead of them. Ended up playing too many long passes for my liking.

I never said the CM(s) didn't do anything. I said he rarely saw the ball. Personally I don't like that. And Xavi isn't a good example. He's always had a large influence on what Barcelona have done. He's arguably their most important playmaker and constantly controlled what they did.

[Jenesis33]

I had your comment confused with OP posted..

But anyway.. If you think pentration is fine.. then there is no problem. as you know your game the best..

You can give AP(S) roaming so he move around more.. i still like CM(A) (MC) then AP(S)/AM(S) AMC much better.. and i really dont expect this would have linking problem.. but anyway like i said before you know your team/game the best..

Of course your CM(S) is not going to see much more the ball.. you have AP(A).. I dont know whats your widemen's role.. but the whole idea of AP is a playmaker so of course he is going to get the ball most..

I would look at pass stats of each game. i dont believe CM(S) will fall too far behind your other players... Personally i use 4-3-2-1 (Xmas tree!) with B2B-DLP(D)-B2B then have SS(A)-CF(S)-SS(A)

And my DLP has highest pass of course.. but both B2B has a lot as well. by simply helping DLP to recyle possession and control the game.

Anyway I dont like using AP a lot.. but thats just me. (playmaker in general).. i use a DLP(D) so he can hold position and drop back to bring ball out of defence.. but in final 1/3 i rely on quick exchange b/w players and a lot of postion swapping/roaming to create chances. rather than dedicated playmaker..

TLDR: your CM(S) probably doesnt see much ball bec there is an AP in fornt of him.. that explain your 'long ball' issue too.. the team will try to find your AP.. and bec he is quite high (Attack duty) team will launch long ball to find him...

To fix this i think B2B(S)-AM(S)-CM(D) is a good mid trio balance.. but again thats just my view..

[aderow]

I've thought about it a little more. I think what I'm gonna go with DLP(d) CM(s) AP(a). Tbf, as long as I have a player with good passing and decent decision making, he should do just fine as a DLp-d.

Cheers for helping me think this all out

[Jenesis33]

I often play holder as DLP(D).. like to be honest they dont need to be super star like Pirlo.. most of my DLP just play short/medium simple pass into more advanced players .. not like 40 yard defence splitting through ball... So a decent rating in passing compsoure.. and decision maybe anticpation too.. so mostly mental stats should be enough..

Thats only my view though.

Last note is your CM(S) is going to see not much ball bec having a DLP and AP.. but that doesnt mean he cant do much.. he will still provide some running/defence cover and control to the game.

[Ryknow]

I stil disagree.. I mean its great job by you to make him score that much.

But even you say 10 goals from freekick.. tahts still like 1 goal in every 2 games (ignoring all FKs goals)

Which is very very high for even a pure striker..many world class player (striker) cant even score on that ratio...

[snip]

I m not bashing the game is broken (it was more a joke).. but I am far from believing this game is perfect.. so no. i dont jump to its defence every time.

I totally get where you're coming from but that was a one off season remember. Everything just 'clicked' for him and he ended up winning the Ball'on Dor because of it. But as I say again, most of the chances he gets are inside the box, even in the 6 yard box so that's why he had an impressive 50% of shots on target in the Bundesliga. Even with finishing of 10 he was bound to get 15-20 goals per season as everything revolves around him being the main threat and we are a very attacking side. Timo Werner, the striker ahead of him, sacrificed himself for the team by pulling defenders away and constantly moving. He still got 20 goals, but in all comps.

You are saying he should choose to pass due to his stats, but when he finds himself with the ball in the box it's hardly an opportune time to pass when he can easily shoot. I'm sure if I had him on AP(s) then he'd have a far greater assist tally, but that's not what I wanted from him. If Klopp got him scoring for Germany, including the last World Cup where he scored 7, then I could.

[Jenesis33]

Which echo my comments of the ME is not doing a good job showing his style of plays..

I guess its really hard to put into word.. i m more thinking in real life these kind of players (like Ozil / inestia) will simply just not play this way....

I can understand your tatics and good job on getting him on scoring that much.

Like i said before. im slightly disappointed with the way this is reprsented in ME thats it... Its more a joke to start with anyway..

[aderow]

I often play holder as DLP(D).. like to be honest they dont need to be super star like Pirlo.. most of my DLP just play short/medium simple pass into more advanced players .. not like 40 yard defence splitting through ball... So a decent rating in passing compsoure.. and decision maybe anticpation too.. so mostly mental stats should be enough..

Thats only my view though.

Last note is your CM(S) is going to see not much ball bec having a DLP and AP.. but that doesnt mean he cant do much.. he will still provide some running/defence cover and control to the game.

Yep. I'm not expect any more from him at this point.

[Kawee]

It's very hard to get all 3 players in central midfielder (be it a 2-1 or a 1-2) to shine, without building the entire team around it. I've found that if you want your strikers and wingers to be the star of the show, you can't then expect the central midfielders to also be that. Someone has to do the underrated yet vital jobs.

The only time I was able to get 2 scoring central midfielders (2 CMs, one as BBM and the other as CMa) was when I built my team to feed them. It was a fun tactical exercise although, not something I would attempt in a competitive multiplayer game. I had 2 support wingers, and a support striker feeding these 2 deep runners, and they end up with 20+ goals each.

[aderow]

It's very hard to get all 3 players in central midfielder (be it a 2-1 or a 1-2) to shine, without building the entire team around it. I've found that if you want your strikers and wingers to be the star of the show, you can't then expect the central midfielders to also be that. Someone has to do the underrated yet vital jobs.

The only time I was able to get 2 scoring central midfielders (2 CMs, one as BBM and the other as CMa) was when I built my team to feed them. It was a fun tactical exercise although, not something I would attempt in a competitive multiplayer game. I had 2 support wingers, and a support striker feeding these 2 deep runners, and they end up with 20+ goals each.

I wasn't trying to make every player the star of the show. I just didn't want the player I was concerned about to be completely anonymous. At the end of the day there are likely other factors that could've led to that. But what's done is done and I'm happy with where I'm at now.

[thizaum]

Hey guys, OP here... lol.

I just wanted to say that I tried a few matches last night with the DLPs-CMd / Wa - Treq - IFs / CFa (channels).

The team is playing really well. I've had a couple of bad results, but mostly unlucky strikes or defender fails. Generally my team always has more shots on goal, more poss and better passing avg.

The front 4 are playing really well, but the Treq and the CF have been playing way above their average.

The team is also scoring a lot.

Anyways, thanks Ryknow and llama... The team is definately better now.

[llama3]

Magic, hope it continues to work its magic. Good logical set up, the movement looks to complement each other well.

[thizaum]

Well, actually, I got a little more gameplay last night and got another disappointing result.

So I went back to check the numbers: I conceded in 8 of 9 of the matches with the tweaked formation, but also scored more.

The problem was in those games that I had like 20 chances and scored 1 goal and the opp had 8 chances and scored 2.

So I decided to had a little testing friendly against Chelsea during a weekend break.

I played the 1st half with FBa-CBd-CBd-FBs / CMd-B2B / Ws-APs-IFa / DLFa (channels) / Fluid.

Got to 1-0, but the interesting part is that I had 20 shots on goal against 5.

2nd half: FBs-CBd-CBd-FBd / DLPs-CMd / Wa-T-IFs / CFa (channels) / Balanced.

Got to 2-0, but the shots on goals count ended on 25 to 20.

I know shots on goal doesn't mean too much if most of them are from way too far, but this really shows what I was afraid: the older formation with the DLF implemented is much safer.

I went ahead and played the next league match with it and... won 3-0, restricting the opp to 4 shots on goal during the whole match!

I guess what I'm thinking here is: do not concede. We'll probably score 1 or 2 goals and get the 3pts.

[Ryknow]

Any reason you chose to use the RB on defend mentality in the second half? Seems to be inviting the opposition down that flank as the fullback stays back. Plus, the Treq is likely to defend less than the AP(s). Even my AP(a) in the CAM role defended more than when I had him as a Treq in the initial stages of making my tactic. I probably played 15-20 matches with him as a Treq and wasn't happy with his defensive contribution.

The first half setup looks to have pushed them on the back foot, or maybe they changed something in the second half? Have you tried your second half setup with an AP instead of a Treq?

During parts of the game you might want to test your first setup and use the AP(a) instead and monitor the amount of defensive work he does versus the amount of forward penetration he'll give you. Then change back if leading or it's not working. These things can take a while though (eg. Need a bigger sample size to make proper judgements due to the variables).

[thizaum]

Any reason you chose to use the RB on defend mentality in the second half? Seems to be inviting the opposition down that flank as the fullback stays back. Plus, the Treq is likely to defend less than the AP(s). Even my AP(a) in the CAM role defended more than when I had him as a Treq in the initial stages of making my tactic. I probably played 15-20 matches with him as a Treq and wasn't happy with his defensive contribution.

The first half setup looks to have pushed them on the back foot, or maybe they changed something in the second half? Have you tried your second half setup with an AP instead of a Treq?

During parts of the game you might want to test your first setup and use the AP(a) instead and monitor the amount of defensive work he does versus the amount of forward penetration he'll give you. Then change back if leading or it's not working. These things can take a while though (eg. Need a bigger sample size to make proper judgements due to the variables).

Ryknow, I'm really sorry. It was FBa (typo).

Actually I just flipped the sides because I wanted to keep the IF on the right and the W on the left. The change is on the duty: in one is attack-back and support-front and vice-versa. You get it, right?

I understand what you're saying about the Treq vs AP (a or s). I didn't really try the APa... I'll give it a go during matches, setting the striker to CFa too.

The other thing that we aren't talking about here is the switch on the W and IF. My goal here was to give a plan B for finishing with the IFa. Also, an IFs would go too near the AMC on creating.

Here's the final setup on the ball:

Supporting: left winger, adv playmaker on AMC and right full back.

Surprise element: B2B midfielder

Finishing: DLF and IFa on right wing.

The CMd holds position and the left full back helps sometimes.

Off the ball, pretty much everybody helps except for the striker.

I'm really happy with this setup now...

About the sample size, I don't think they changed during HT and the other matches I played like that always restricted the opp's chances.

I'll try more matches like that and test the APa.

[delra]

In the setting of having two players behind him, and two to his sides, with one striker in front of him, I think the best AM setting is to Enganche, because he'll actually stay in that pocket between all those moving players and direct gameplay from there. So if the guy has the skills for it, i think it'd be easiest to go with an Enganche tehre.

[Ryknow]

Ah, I got you thizaum. Makes sense. Your set up is fine to me, considering what you want. I seem to recall you want your striker to be the main scorer, so make sure you keep a close eye on him if you use AP(a). He might work more at making space and the AP(a) will finish off the move. That's what happens in my system.

If you want the AMC to be the creator and more central then delra makes a good point about the Enganche. I have rarely used this role so I can't comment much on how it will work in that setup.

You're right about the IF(s) and AP(s) clashing in terms of moving into similar spaces. I think one needs to be on attack and the other on support, like you have done. So in my system the AP(a) roams a lot and advances to the point where he's a second striker sometimes (when we're in possession and attacking). This is because the CF(a) moves into channels, giving him space. The IF(s) now has a tonne of space to utilise in the middle as the CAM area is vacant and the CMs hold the centre as outlets. Not to mention he has a FB(a) bombing down the flank to assist him for width.

The W(a) doesn't always stay wide and is often played in by the IF(s) or the AP(a). The season just finished the W(a) scored 20 goals in all comps. So despite last season, where I pictured Günther's stats, this season has been more balanced. Each player in the front four contributed similar amounts. Günther got less goals but more assists, and my IF(s) and W(a) scored and assisted similar amounts. The striker was hit and miss because I was constantly rotating. Something that will change next season due to a big signing up front.

So your system, you're looking for the goals to come from IF(a) and CF(a)? If so, maybe the AP(a) won't work as that will have three players vying for similar goal scoring positions. At least it's an option though if you need to try something different during a match (ie. Change AP(s) to (a) and IF(a) to (s)). It might catch your opponents out.

As I'm typing this I'm beginning to think that AP(s) or Eng is probably the best as you use a BBM. My CMs are disciplined and form an 'anchor' to clean up the pieces and recycle possession. They constantly play triangles with the AP(a) around opposition midfielders. So your overal play will differ as the CM(d) offers the anchor and the BBM starts to venture forward. He might link up well with the AP(s).

You seem to be on the right track anyways. Just try some tweaks here or there to see what you prefer and want your players to do.

[thizaum]

Ryknow, I'm really enjoying this discussion. Thanks!

The season has just finished and now I'm thinking of ways to use my best players, to their full potential.

The AP-a is more of a scorer than and Eg or Treq? These guys are pure creators? The (a) just means they basically do not defend?

Also, I've never done this, but I'm starting to think about treating IF and W according to the player's pref foot, instead of what I want the team to do. I don't really have only right footed right wingers and right footed inside left forwards, so I need to mix them up. Should I follow this rule that "correct foot = W / opp foot = IF"?

If I wanted my CAM to have attack duty, maybe I should ask my wingers to help defensively. Here's what I'm thinking: If I had 2 IF, both on support, and an Eg or Treq, and say an AF (without channels), do you think the CAM area would get way too crowded?

I'd then add only one FBa on the same side as the CMd. The other CM would be DLPs, also preventing him from occupying the same area.

The inspiration here is Bayern from 2 years ago, with Robben and Ribery cutting inside, Muller in the middle, Gomez scoring, Schweinsteiger and Luiz Gustavo holding position, and Lahm bombing forward. The only thing is that my strikers aren't tall, but I guess this goes well with cutting inside forwards (don't look to cross the ball so often).

And, when I used the subs, I'd switch the IFs to Wingers according to the pref foot. I need to see what happens with the whole IF-IF or IF-W and W-W thing.

Do you think I would need another scoring option? I mean, Robben would probably be an IFa, not an IFs.

Just to clarify, this would be the list of priorities:

Primary scorer: striker

Secondary scorers: both inside forwards

Terciary scorer: CAM

Primary creator: CAM

Secondary creators: both inside forwards + DLP + both FB

[Ryknow]

Ok, first off I'd avoid using two IF with an AMC, unless he roams like a nomad. It can be done, but you would have to play wide and rely on your fullbacks to stretch the opposition. The opposition would just need to defend narrow and you'd find no real way through their defense, especially if they play deep.

Ok, first question. In my experience the AP(a) in AMC position is more of a goal scorer than the other two. I rarely if ever use AM or SS roles in the AMC position so I can't comment on the differences there, but I'd expect them to be even more of a goal threat. However, that's not what I want. I need a creator and someone who'll be inside the box for cut backs and the like. Especially because there is another creator behind him.

In my experience the AP(a) will defend. And more than the Treq. Iirc the Treq has little or no closing down setting, whereas the AP(a) will close down a lot more. However, depending on your mentality he won't continue to drop deeper and defend. For instance, on Standard I see him defending, on attack he wants to be further forward.

Two IFs on support and a Eng, Treq or AP(s) could get very messy in the centre. I'm sure at least one of those players will suffer due to congestion. So you're not going to be getting the best out of them. One W(s/a) will help stretch the opposition allowing more space for the AMC to feed in the striker or IF. The W will also supply the ST and IF(back post).

Regarding footness, a left footed IF on the left will still work, depending on how you play. It's hard to find a quality inside forward in later years (newgens) so most of the time you convert a striker who already has a wide position, then train him to make it natural. However, many wide men will have a good degree of strength on their 'weaker foot'. At the end of the day, a right footed IF on the left performed ok for me by cutting in on the left and scoring on his right, but most of the times he was ushered out, ala Robben. Many of my goals from my Rangers counter and my Dortmund flashy attacking tactic come from through balls between the opposition FB and CB. Depending on how deep in the op. half it happens, it's actually easier having the shot on your other side (right footed IF on right/left on left). The shot is taken for the far post, across goal. Sometimes near post to catch the keeper, but doing so puts you and the on rushing CB between the ball. If you receive the ball in an advanced area, say on the edge of the box or even in it, (as a left footed IF on right, right on left) turning your body to then put it on your stronger foot means your body is no longer between the CB and the ball. Much easier for the defender to tackle or block the shot. Of course each situation is different, but FM isn't like FIFA where you can keep taking finesse shots outside the box from the left with the right footed IF.

Basically what I'm saying is yes, your IF can still be very effective even though his strong foot is that of the side he's playing on. Shooting from an advanced role and tight angle is far easier if right foot on right. For instance, try and remember all the times Robben and RVP have the ball on the right hand side of the goal, from a very tight angle. They often stand there waiting for an option or try and jinx the player with a quick touch onto their left for a shot. This rarely, if ever, happens in FM. The player is normally tackled and tricks and such aren't really in the ME yet. Compare that to how effective Müller is in the RW role. He's a right footed player and still scores many goals and offers that aerial threat on the back post (from Ribery or Alaba cross from the left).

So...in short, I've had my most effective IFs having their strong foot on the same side they play. Of course they all have had a reasonably strong other foot though.

For me, the best Bayern in recent years was Heynckes last season in charge. The Schweinsteiger and Martinez midfield pairing. I found that as more of a 4-2-3-1 DEEP, with the CMs as DMs. I use a similar system with Argentina, whom in 2030 have more DMs than CMs. I've won the Copa America and just lost the 2030 World Cup final to Germany, on penalties They've won it 3 in a row now!

Anyways, even after just under 4 years with the national team I'm still tweaking it to find the right balance in midfield. (Eg. Fixing that large gap that can form between MID and ATT). Would you play that type of system? Because in that season Alaba was basically a winger and Lahm didn't hold back either. So the DMs would serve much better protection for the back line, especially Martinez's role.

Everyone will have different opinions but for me Robben is IF(a) and Ribery W(s). Then put Alaba as attacking as possible. Depends who's in your team though and whether the players fit. But you can have a target tactic. Something you want to build towards.

---------------CF(a)---------------

--W(s)--------AP(s)-------IF(a)-

-----------------------------------

----------DM(d)----DLP(s)-------

-CWB(a)--CD(d)--CD(d)---FB(s)-

Something like that could work. LB and LDM can easily be different roles, also the striker role could change. I'd change RB to FB(a) too, against weaker opposition. Will provide plenty of width. I think that could fulfil your priorities. I use very similar with Argentina, but use LB as FB(a), and used ST as AF(a) for a while. Main scorer was the ST, then the IF. W still gets goals, but more of a provider. Then it's up to you what instructions, mentality and fluidity you have in mind.

Hope any of that rambling helps. Discussing through it also helps me identify aspects in my systems.

[thizaum]

Of course it helps! Thanks!

I think that, after all, I'll end up going with pretty much your Dortmund formation from the 2nd post.

During the offseason, I'll been playing around in friendlies. I've even tried lots of PIs, which I've never done before.

I wanted to use 2-IF+CAM thing because of the players I have.

I have Dani Parejo, Gastón Ramirez (which was a bargain and I was trying to get him to play striker, but it didn't go as planned), and Rodrigo De Paul, who developed into a very nice player. All 3 play best as CAM.

I could go with narrow 4-2-3-1, but I didn't want to change the shape and the reserves are wide players.

So I thought about using Ramirez on the right and De Paul on the left.

But I understand what you said and also saw that it didn't work.

I'll probably move one of them to the bench, keep the other as IF and use a W(a). I have Feghouli and Figueiredo (I think he's a newgen, 5-star PA, 3-star CA, started as striker, but I developed him as a winger) on the right and Bernat and Cartabia on the left. It'll probably be better like that.

I've been using the CAM as AM(s), but I want him to be the creator, not the runner. So I'll go with the AP(a) because of the defensive settings and scoring that you mentioned. It makes more sense in my head than the Treq or Eg.

I'll keep the DLP(s) behind him. I can't really use the 2-DM setting because of the players. I've used it with plenty of success in Brazil last year. It looks a lot like your ARG.

About the striker, I'm using AF now, because I have more players playing higher and because my strikers are better AFs. I've switched the "move into channels" to the "roam from position", because I want him to find space and drag defenders out of position for the 3 men behind him without droping deep. Does this make sense? So far I've been getting a good rating for the striker.

[nenshoua]

If you set Parejo to trequartista, he will run into the box a lot, often with the ball at his feet.He will basically play like a striker.Not what you are looking for i think, specially with parejo.If you want him to hang back more, i would say go AM with support duty but personally i think AM with A is best for this as it might provide you more presence in the area when you need it.I am assuming your inside forwards/wingers are doing what you want so i'd suggest tweaking your striker's duties.If he is simply too static, he might not be scoring as much as he could, but he might be causing the defense to focus on him and he might play balls for your IFs and even the AM.Is he doing that ? is it what you want ? You could have him play a more mobile type of role where he tries to lose the markers more and get into a scoring position more.If i remember parejo well, i'd say he would be better as support and not attack.Personally i prefer the AM with an attack duty, but both are fairly valid.For what you are saying, you might want him to play support.

[thizaum]

If you set Parejo to trequartista, he will run into the box a lot, often with the ball at his feet.He will basically play like a striker.Not what you are looking for i think, specially with parejo.If you want him to hang back more, i would say go AM with support duty but personally i think AM with A is best for this as it might provide you more presence in the area when you need it.I am assuming your inside forwards/wingers are doing what you want so i'd suggest tweaking your striker's duties.If he is simply too static, he might not be scoring as much as he could, but he might be causing the defense to focus on him and he might play balls for your IFs and even the AM.Is he doing that ? is it what you want ? You could have him play a more mobile type of role where he tries to lose the markers more and get into a scoring position more.If i remember parejo well, i'd say he would be better as support and not attack.Personally i prefer the AM with an attack duty, but both are fairly valid.For what you are saying, you might want him to play support.

I see... Thanks!

I'm between AP-a and AM-s now... Obviously, it might depend on who's playing, as it won't always be Parejo. I'll try them both.

About the striker, what do you think of AF-a with "roam from position"? I want him to stay high, but move sideways looking for space and dragging defenders, providing space for the other 3.

Does AF-a with "move into channels" make sense?

[Ryknow]

AF(a) with "Moves into channels" works well. It's exactly what you want, that sideways movement. "Roam from position" might be too risky as he could wander off in an area that isn't helpful, or just get in the way. "Moves into channels" is your best bet with an AP(a) or AM(a/s) behind him. He'll still cause havoc and score plenty due to the creative aspect of the AP(a) and your IF(s), not to mention the help from out wide with the W(a).

[thizaum]

AF(a) with "Moves into channels" works well. It's exactly what you want, that sideways movement. "Roam from position" might be too risky as he could wander off in an area that isn't helpful, or just get in the way. "Moves into channels" is your best bet with an AP(a) or AM(a/s) behind him. He'll still cause havoc and score plenty due to the creative aspect of the AP(a) and your IF(s), not to mention the help from out wide with the W(a).

Alright then!!!

Thanks guys, I really appreciate it!

I'll come back with the results later.

[nenshoua]

I think roam from position/move into channels AF or Poacher will do just fine for that.Just keep in mind that all the pieces of the puzzle are connected.If you change the striker's behaviour, it will also change things for the AM/IFs indirectly.I can't know what is going on within your tactic, how you are scoring goals and how the player movement is, in general.If you change your striker to these instructions and set up the AM with a support duty, you might see the striker move around more and the AM will either jump into the box (due to the space the movement from the striker will create) more often than you'd like, or less (due to being support and not attack)..or just enough.It might make it harder for your IFs to find space if he is moving to the sides, dragging the markers with him, but it might leave more space in midfield at times.Gotta experiment with it and keep an eye on things.