How to set up a 5-2-1-2/3-1-4-2?

[displaced_seagull]

So in the buildup to FM16 I have been trying to work out where I want to start.

Inspiration

I then came across an article on Fabio Capello's 3-4-1-2 at Roma ( http://www.zonalmarking.net/2010/02/09/teams-of-the-decade-10-roma-2000-01/ ) which gave me something of a basis.

I put the basic shape into the game and it calls it a 5-2-1-2, which is fair enough as the two wide players are wingbacks.

What I've done so far

It looks like this;

TI; Work Ball Into Box

Specific Player Instructions; Goalkeeper - Distribute To Wingbacks; (Both) Wingbacks - Run Wide With Ball

So far, I have just the one TI to start with, that being Work Ball Into Box, in a bid to utilise the wingbacks offensive potential. That has been a positive, with both regulars creating 12 goals each. I often find myself adding 'Clear Ball to Flanks', especially if the opposition are pushing up, in a bid to try and get in behind them. Early Crosses has been added occasionally as well, again to try and get the ball in early to the front men.

I have been using a Standard Shape to start games, switching to Counter if I see us struggling. For the vast majority of the season, I've been using a Fluid mentality, but a snippet in the (FM15) Lines & Diamonds Thread suggested that this can mean attacking fullbacks won't join the attack until late in the move, so have very recently switched to Structured. The only other change has been in the midfield, where after starting with a Trequartista in the AMC strata, I quickly changed in preseason to firstly Advanced Playmaker/Support when it became evident that my players didn't have the ability to make the most of the role.

Why did I do it and What Do I want to Achieve

I am someone who values a clean sheet. I'd certainly rather win 1-0 than 4-3, for example. I felt that this formation would give a solid backbone to the team, with three central defenders forcing the majority of opposition attacks to come from out wide, inviting crosses which, with three who are good in the air as well as a defensively minded midfielder and a playmaker who sits as well, I am reasonably confident of clearing. To be fair, this has been backed up by the results - where we've lost, it has mostly been by the odd goal.

Attacking wise, I was brought up on quick, exciting wingers racing down the flanks to cross for a towering centre forward, and that's what I want to see - that solidity in the middle seeing us seize control before slipping the ball to one of the wingbacks to get down the line and deliver a cross. As every system needs a 'Plan B', I moved one of the midfielders up into the AMC role so that we can also attack through the middle.

How I'm doing

I have now been playing for a few months, it is just after Christmas in the first season and my Torquay United side sit 13th in the National League with 8 wins, 7 draws and 8 defeats. Goals for 33, against 30 - so pretty even. This for a team with a media prediction of 11th and a diktat from those who must be obeyed to finish top half. In a nutshell - We are doing alright - nothing groundbreaking, but not hopeless either.

What do I want help with

With some tweaking, I think we could do really well in the second half of the season - As mentioned in the last section, I feel we are doing alright . Obviously, I want to push on from there.

As yet I haven't really touched some pretty major areas of instruction - Defensive Line, Tempo, Width, Passing Length etc - all left to default. Whilst I've been playing FM/CM as was since the beginning (Play a 4-3-1-2 with Pass To Feet in CM93, you'll not go wrong ), it's fair to say I've not always been the most tactically astute of managers.

and finally...

I hope my narrative makes sense and this way of setting out a thread isn't too pompous! - I am really, really enjoying the Beta so far, the game seems so smooth and in all honesty more polished at this stage than it has done for some years. I've seen some terrific goals and some great football, both by myself and the opposition. I can't wait for the full release

[displaced_seagull]

OK, so my first change having loaded again this morning is to change the AP/S to AMC/A

The reason I have done this is that previously, we had two attacking duty players, one up top and one of the wingbacks. In game I have seen the AP/S sitting too deep to really have an impact in and around the box, so hopefully giving him a more advanced role will allow him to contribute more in this area.

[ajsr1982]

My take on things:

You're asking an awful lot of your wing backs. You're rolling the ball out to them, and they're also your primary supply line to your forwards. They need to be amongst the best players in your team to cope with this - with good work rate and stamina. When they have the ball, what are their options? They look a little isolated, particularly the LWB. The RWB will do his best to get the ball to the DLP as soon as he can, then he's going to bomb forward.

Good call on changing the AM duty, I think. You needed that extra person trying to get on the end of things. I wonder if you need a creator higher up the pitch, especially with a Structured system and Work Ball Into Box enabled. Given that the DLF is going to be hanging back anyway, it may be worth trying him as a Treq?

[displaced_seagull]

Thanks for that. Could an idea then be to move the DLP into the DM strata (using either a DLP or Regista), and pull the AM back to the midfield, using a MC/A to still provide the forward penetration?

[GriffiN94]

I've been using the same formation myself and started with more or less the same roles. I had a CM S where you have the BBM and both my wing backs were CWB A and I had the best defence in the league 2 years running with a team who was predicted bottom and then mid table.I've since changed it to a 3 man midfield instead and it goes a lot better.

[displaced_seagull]

I've been using the same formation myself and started with more or less the same roles. I had a CM S where you have the BBM and both my wing backs were CWB A and I had the best defence in the league 2 years running with a team who was predicted bottom and then mid table.I've since changed it to a 3 man midfield instead and it goes a lot better.

Thanks for that, I had wondered about having them both as CWB's. What roles did you use for the midfield three?

[displaced_seagull]

Just been sacked after a poor run ended with a 3-3 draw against Forest Green. I did feel things were moving in the right direction in the last couple of games, and I want to start my career on the full release with Torquay, so I will be trying again.

I think we'll go with the same formation again in my next job to try and get it right.

[GriffiN94]

Thanks for that, I had wondered about having them both as CWB's. What roles did you use for the midfield three?

RCM AP S , CM BWM D & LCM CM A. Also have sweeper keeper and a BPD D in the middle of defence.

[displaced_seagull]

Thanks for that, it's certainly another idea.

I've started again now - Changed the shape slightly with a DM this time and I'll also be starting with a Counter strategy

I may well train a 'flat midfield' version as another option.

[2calvin]

Any luck pal? I'm trying my best to work a 3142 with defensive wingers

[displaced_seagull]

Any luck pal? I'm trying my best to work a 3142 with defensive wingers

Second time around, I'm doing alright again - nothing spectacular, but not awful either.

Current setup is the same as the one in the post above, with a Regista in the DM strata rather than three across the middle.

I did though spend part of my lunchtime reading through the 'Lines & Diamonds' thread, and have just altered it a little;

Changes;

Mentality to Standard from Control

Box To Box Midfielder changed to CM/D

Regista changed to DLP/S

CM/A changed to AP/A

Work Ball Into Box removed as a starting TI

The reason for these changes are as follows;

According to the aforementioned thread, Control as a mentality increases the directness of passing in the attacking phase. With a DLF/S and an AF/A up front, and only one true playmaker (Regista), I think this is making us very predictable. The Regista also isn't a true holding midfield player, hence the change to a CM/D, which has also led to changing the DM position to a DLP/S.

CM/A has changed to an AP/A to add another Playmaker and try to make us less one-dimensional, whilst Work Ball Into Box has been removed as I felt it was at times making us too ponderous up top. We'll see how it goes. I think I am getting somewhere with it though.

[displaced_seagull]

Made the changes above as we went into a home game against league leaders Wrexham. After taking the lead through a goal on the counter following a Wrexham corner, they pegged us back before the break after a rebound. After then laying siege to our goal, I went to Counter for the last 40 minutes, and we closed the game out quite well.

I wonder if the change in midfield is perhaps too drastic - from previously having a Regista-B2B-CM/A 'DM Triangle' I now have a DLP/S-CM/D-AP/A 'DM Triangle'. One thing I noticed straight away is that the CM/D and the DLP/S occupied a similar position - in effect, from having no true Holding midfield player, I've now got two. Perhaps the CM/D is one too far alongside the DLP?

My main concern though is creating chances - throughout the season (as I'd have hoped!) our wingbacks have been immense in this area, with Hirst (WB/A) creating 7 in 15 and Butler (WB/S) 6 in 14. I wonder if they should both be set to Attack? - with three at the back, plus a holding midfielder, can they both be pushed forward to add to our attack without risking too much at the back?

[Overmars]

I wonder if they should both be set to Attack? - with three at the back, plus a holding midfielder, can they both be pushed forward to add to our attack without risking too much at the back?

I think so. Even with just two CDs and a defensive DMC, attacking wingbacks were perfectly fine to use (at least in FM15) from a defensive stability standpoint.

How does the DM play with three CDs behind him? I've always felt like the middle CD and the DM don't quite fit together properly.

If you keep three at the back with two wingbacks and a DMC then I don't think you need a CM(d) in midfield.

[displaced_seagull]

What I'm trying is to use those holding midfielders to my advantage - with a flat midfield 3.

GK, DC/D x 3, WBR/A, WBL/A, DLP/D, AP/A, CM/D, DLF/S, AF/A

Standard/Flexible. TI of Pass Into Space added.

First result since changes (and updated Beta patch), a 2-1 win against Lincoln. Looked comfortable, and I was pleased with the midfield play especially.

[displaced_seagull]

So now we look a lot like this;

Having the two holding midfielders allows us to be more adventurous with the wingbacks (so both now on Attack), with an AP/A as well to get into that gap between midfield and forwards which is where I feel we have been lacking with some of the other variants.

[Hunter T]

I am someone who values a clean sheet. I'd certainly rather win 1-0 than 4-3, for example.

I also have the same mentality.

I too experimentign with a three-men defence and i am starting to really enjoy a

3DC

2WBL (sup)

2CM (not clear on their exact roles and duties yet)

2Rauds (att.)

and DLF (sup)

Played about 14-15 games, mamaged a clean sheet to like 6-7 of them, but i was, as i said, experimenting a lot.

Seems quite solid defensive-wise though.

[PhroX]

I haven't played such a formation in '16 yet (though I certainly intend to in the future as I'm a big fan of it), but overall, I do like the flat midfield you're going with now over the other options. It offers a lot of flexibility, and you can pretty well recreate either of the "triangle" midfields (2-1 and 1-2) using player roles (as you have done here for the former), while the outer two positions are generally better at covering the flanks if needed.

My one concern is that you might be asking a lot of your AF when it comes to scoring goals. With his strike partner dropping deep, the wing backs staying wide, and the most advanced of the midfield three in a more creative role, he could lack backup. If he's on form, he'll likely do very well, but if he has an off day, or the opposition manage to keep him out of the game, who else is going to be in a position to score? I would personally prefer an MC(a) to the AP(a), as I find the former is much better at making runs into the box and getting into goalscoring positions, and with the DLP and DLF you still have a fair bit of creativity. Of course, if things are going well with the AP, I wouldn't change purely for the sake of making changes, but if this problem does arise, then that would be my first suggestion.

[displaced_seagull]

Thanks for the input

I made the changes yesterday, and results have been encouraging - 4 wins and a draw. I will be watching the AP closely next game to see how he does with regard to making bursting runs. I'm certainly enjoying the play from the Wingbacks though, that has been a joy to watch at times.

[displaced_seagull]

OK, so first defeat, 2-1 at third placed Forest Green Rovers.

We went 2-0 down within the first 30 minutes. Pulled it back to 2-1 before the break, which is when I thought would be ideal to try the CM/A for the AP/A. What I saw was, much as PhroX suggested, more runs from the central midfielder - Summerfield, who came off the bench, was frequently popping up in the AMC position which was encouraging to see. What I did note though was the lack of a creator higher up, which in turn meant the DLP seemed to be playing longer passes. Whilst the CM/A was ahead of him, he seemed to always be looking to hit the forwards straight away.

Perhaps as a 'Plan B' it could be an idea - I could see myself using the CM/A role in a more adventurous variant (perhaps with a Roaming Playmaker rather than DLP ? ) if the situation demanded something a little different.

[PhroX]

Yeah, there's always the tradeoff between creativity and runs when it comes to APa vs CMa. Depends on what the team needs more really

[displaced_seagull]

Yeah, there's always the tradeoff between creativity and runs when it comes to APa vs CMa. Depends on what the team needs more really

Just noticed you can ask the APa to Get Further Forward. Wonder if that could be the answer?

[Overmars]

The DLF(s) should score plenty of goals for you, but he will contribute greatly in the playmaking department. His assist count should be really high, setting up the CM(a) and AF(a). I don't think an AP(a) is necessary, since your DLF(s) is specifically designed to link midfield to attack while offering creativity of his own.

If you use a DLP, AP, and a DLF then you become a bit more probing in attack than incisive. I prefer watching the incisive type of attacks. A CM(a) sprinting toward the goal to receive a pass from the DLF is beautiful to watch. Also, I get some strange satisfaction out of having a midfielder score plenty.

[Rupal]

I have found this thread to be full of useful ideas and very helpful in trying to set up a similar tactic with Truro. I've ended up with something very like the last version in displaced_seagull's post, except that I am using a CM (attack) rather than an AP and use a sweeper and two DCs instead of 3 DCs ( I just happen to LIKE sweeper formations). So far seems to be very promising, so thanks for all the great tips!!

[iamneallyons]

Ever since conte arrived at Juventus iv been trying to get a 3 man defence with the playmaker to work, i had it firing in fm14 it was superb - struggled in 15 and now 16 to get it going though... im currently looking like this...

[Orikoru]

Ever since conte arrived at Juventus iv been trying to get a 3 man defence with the playmaker to work, i had it firing in fm14 it was superb - struggled in 15 and now 16 to get it going though... im currently looking like this...

That looks like an airplane, haha. Looks pretty mad to be honest, does it work?

Surely you have the players wrong and you don't actually play Fuchs AMC though..?

[roggiotis]

So in the buildup to FM16 I have been trying to work out where I want to start.

i used to play with exact the same roles in FM14 except 2

the B2B was DLP(S)

AP(S) was AM(A)

I don't remember to play that in FM15 ,but i think you must pay attention in the crosses the AI make