Rebooting the 451 for FM 2016

[Jambo98]

Right.

The prologue (aka the ramble)

So, so I put a lot of effort into learning how to play the tactical elements of Football Manager last year, having been one of the many "originals" who owns every single version of the game, i had always had what i would call a "decent" understanding of the ME, the tactical parts of the game, and how to set up a semi decent tactic, but i never truley zeroed in on it. Over the years, my interest in real life football tactics, ways of playing the game, has grown considerably. I watch a lot of football across Europe, i read a lot of books and articles around the tactical element of the game (it is by far the most interesting element, not the celeb nonsense...).

So last year i set out to spend time reading the games, having a clear approach to the game of football an being able to implement it. I did it reasonably well, got a great deal of satisfaction from it, and shared things in this forum when i could. I had a number of great saves, most of which focused on tactics. I bored those of you around here with 3 or 4 different threads, and many of you had the good grace to read and help me (fools..).

So fast forward to FM16 being released. I got a bit disenchanted by the Beta ME, some stuff which i wont go on about here around how the release and development of the game is handled really put me off. But its Football Manager. There is no way in the world i was not going to get sucked into playing many many hours (My steam counter says 679hrs so far).

What i found, was immense frustration and annoyance. Initially, there is no doubt i was lazy. I created some good stuff last year, so i just imported it (well, the import didnt directly work, so i manually recreated in reality) and off i went. I expected it would need tweaking - its a new game, a new ME, just like with new patches there is often a need to slightly adapt. What i found was the opposite. The things i had learned last year and developed just quite simply did not work at all. Not even close. My players no longer seemed to move in the way i envisioned, the play turned out miles away from how i wanted it to. Hrmmm. I tweaked a little. Nope, its not happening. The things i instinctively saw last year and reacted to, well now when i react things work different?

So i got a bit annoyed. Decided that "ok, last years learnings dont work". So i set out to create a system. Then another. Then another. Many times i had moderate success in getting things working as i wanted in the short term, but it was never lasting or consistent. I started to get infuriated. I created something, watched 2 matches in lots of details, then started to wind back the detail but still keeping a close. Suddenly 5 or 6 or even 12 matches in, the things that worked for me stopped working. The runs i wanted, and set my players up to make, stopped or altered. This happened with at least 3 tactics and had me swearing at the game (for at least the 15th year in a row). I had one good system, a counter attacking one, which for half a season did exactly what i wanted. Then it didnt.

Now, the last 2 paragraphs would come across to most as "ME bashing" or "blaming the game" - and you would be right. That is how i read it to. However it cant be what i really believe. Sure, i have some issues with some aspects of the ME, even the best players and posters on here do im sure. But its far from crap, and in many ways might be the best ME ever (personally i still prefer FM15.3, but its marginal). So then having ruled out the "system", that leaves only the "user"......

So somewhere i lost my way. What to do? Well, i fired up FM15 last night for a quick couple of games. I loved it. I was back to being watching my tactic play out perfectly. The master plan, executed. So i decided that I must still be capable of doing that in what is essentially just an updated version of the same old game (no offence meant to our SI bods!).

The Vision

I have a few visions of the game, but the above made me realise that my starting point is that i want to take the exact vision i had last year, which worked last year, and find out how i can now execute it. It seems clear i need to approach things in a different way than last year in the execution, but i still believe the plan is sound. I absolutely love the flat 451 shape, but i waxed lyrical enough last year, and im sure your all bored of that. So i will just recap with an image and some key bullets, what my plan is:

That is in essence, the exact type of movement i expect from each player in my system. I have noted down the role and duty i used last year, and last year i could achieve almost the exact movement patterns and shape both on and off the ball. But what are the elements and why - because lets face it, it is entirely possibly my vision is not a good one, and i benefited from luck and ME quirks last year.

How i want to play the game

• Fast transitions from back to front, but not via overly direct passing. When we win the ball, i dont want tika-taka for the sake of it. I dont particularly want to slow the pace of the game down. Win it, move quickly into attacking positions in dangerous areas, and have a means of getting the ball to said areas.
  
• Movement - Lots of it. I believe it is at the heart of all successful football teams. Players charged with being part of the attacking side of my game should have considerably different positions with, and without the ball, and be able to constantly be on the move to unsettle the opposition.
  
• Movement - Hardly any of it. The converse of the above, is that the players i want to focus on goal prevention should rarely if ever leave their posts. I want a solid core who will rarely if ever be caught out of position when we are in possession, and can be relied up to keep the back door bolted
  
• Energy - Lots of it. I want all my players to be "active". When we do not have the ball, no one has "no responsibility". We defend as a team. Clearly when we attack, the situation is different and 4 players will not "attack as a team", but i am very strong on wanting, for example, wide men who work for the team, forward and backwards
  
• Mavericks - I like a flair player who can run with the ball, and i want at least one place in my team where that is actively encouraged and accommodated in the system.
  
• Freedom - Yes or no? This is where a lot of us trip up. I might say "i want to give my players the freedom to express and play free, hand break off". But hold on, i just listed 5 relatively strong principles on how i want the game played, so can i really give them lots of freedom when i am so certain on how i want them to play? A conundrum indeed....
  
• Combinations - I love them. Players who have a telepathic understanding of each other. I would have my LB and LM life in the same house if i could. They should work as a pair. I suppose what i want here, really, is teamwork
  

.

Actually, i read all that then went back to my DNA thread last year, and it could probably have been better summarised into the 4 bullets i used back then:

• 
  
• We will play attacking football which focuses on high energy, pressing, quick movement, possession and above all teamwork.
  
• When we have the ball, we will use technically proficient players to create varied attacks and mixed focal points without risking possession unnecessarily.
  
• When we do not have the ball, we will operate as a team to press and win the ball back
  
• We will impose ourselves on our opponents first and foremost and be reactive only when strictly necessary. Let our opponents be the ones to react to us.
  

Football Manager 2015 - Executing it Well

Before i look at translating this into an FM16 tactic, i am going to lay out how i set it up in FM15. This might end up being a mistake - It is entirely possible i need to start from scratch, rather than live off past glories, but none the less, below is my system from FM15

In terms of PI, other than the usual keeper ones:

1) Both CWB set to "run wide with the ball"

2) Both WM set to "cut inside" and "cross less often"

3) DLP(s) set to "more risky passes"

4) CM(a) set to "shoot less often", "Dribble More", "Roam from position", "run wide with the ball"

This brought me top flight titles with Liverpool, Hearts, QPR, Napoli, Schalke, Barca, A polish team i cant recall the name of, a chinese team i cant recall the name of and Sassuolo. However, i am less interested in the accolades i collected in game and more interested in making a vision become reality.

Thats the aim with this thread - Chronicle, and certainly ask from help around, my quest to take my vision of football and properly understand how i can realise it within the confines of Football Manager 2016 and its ME. There is no way this will be a "plug and play" - What it is, is a base tactic which then can take small adaptations to suit circumstances. However i first need the solid base tactic. I can envision that a large number of the roles and instructions might need to change from how i built it last year, and i will need a lot of observation to understand that.

I will do a post on putting it into 2016 shortly. I might start by importing the exact tactic shown above and playing out a few matches to observe exactly why that doesnt produce my vision, and then work from there.

Hopefully some people can add some ideas, guidance, thoughts as we go along

[vasilli07]

Don't think CM position roles comes with run wide with ball anymore.

[heisenburglar]

I'm no expert, and you certainly seem more tactically clued up than me, but in my experience the 2 CWBs and 2 WMs on Attack Duty will be exposed in this years engine.

What I've had some success with is, particularly on a high pressure tactic, is to lower the defender's Closing down and set them to tight marking. The match engine seems to favour early crosses to the far post, and full backs often lose their man in the 6 yard box without these PIs. It also stops the DCs drifting out early in an opponents attacking move, and means they're more likely to be in position to head away

[Deego619]

Glad to see by far my favourite thread of FM 15 return .

I'm upgrading to FM 16 this weekend and I'm intrigued to know what the fuss is about with the ME. In a sense, I'll be on this journey with you because the 4-5-1 (well, 4-1-4-1 but it's 95% the same) just capped off my FM15 season in style with a Champions League title for Brighton and I'm not ready to give up the shape just yet.

Speaking of which, would it be blasphemy to your shape to perhaps drag a man back to the DM area of the pitch? You are very gung ho on the flanks and an anchor would go a long way to helping out your defence.

[herne79]

About bloody time .

A little disappointed you didn't follow through on the 3412 Roma - I reckon that had a lot of mileage. However, that being said, 100% agree about staying true to your core values and restarting the 4-5-1 Swiss Army Knife for FM16.

Looking forward to it .

(PS, you were asking about the AF/TQ combo in my 442. I've added some analysis on that now).

[Jambo98]

Don't think CM position roles comes with run wide with ball anymore.

Correct. SI seems to not allow the development of a true "central winger" in this TC, at least not via the fundamental approach of asking a player who picks the ball up centrally to then run wide with it, as Di Maria used to do when he was one of the recent "original" central wingers (at real). One of the things i will need to work to find other ways. In fairness, my own idea of a "central winger" is probably slightly different anyway, as i will come on to when i do a role by role analysis

I'm no expert, and you certainly seem more tactically clued up than me, but in my experience the 2 CWBs and 2 WMs on Attack Duty will be exposed in this years engine.

What I've had some success with is, particularly on a high pressure tactic, is to lower the defender's Closing down and set them to tight marking. The match engine seems to favour early crosses to the far post, and full backs often lose their man in the 6 yard box without these PIs. It also stops the DCs drifting out early in an opponents attacking move, and means they're more likely to be in position to head away

It is a fair point to make. If i am honest, i think the fullbacks are the one area where the ME FM15 was probably to "easy". I consistently used this exact setup to record the best defensive record in the league, and its perhaps right or fair that 2 such attacking wingbacks should be penalised to some extent. WM on attack duty should still do his defensive work, because his duty will impact how he acts when we have the ball. The formation (along with his attributes and various other factors) will impact him chasing back and working defensively.

I cant quite see why "close down less" would help with your fullbacks better picking up a player in the box, but if it works for you then fair play! As everyone has found this year, Crossing is far improved so i will need to spend time looking at how we defend the cross ball.

Glad to see by far my favourite thread of FM 15 return .

I'm upgrading to FM 16 this weekend and I'm intrigued to know what the fuss is about with the ME. In a sense, I'll be on this journey with you because the 4-5-1 (well, 4-1-4-1 but it's 95% the same) just capped off my FM15 season in style with a Champions League title for Brighton and I'm not ready to give up the shape just yet.

Speaking of which, would it be blasphemy to your shape to perhaps drag a man back to the DM area of the pitch? You are very gung ho on the flanks and an anchor would go a long way to helping out your defence.

Enjoy the upgrade. Dont let my views on the ME taint you opinion though - Get in there and experience it. I moan a lot about it, and i just have different expectations

I am not totally stuck on the fact that i need to stick with this formation, but initially i want to until i find i cannot make it work. We are gung ho on the flanks absolutely, but the 2 "defending" midfield players, along with some things i have not yet gone into around shape are my way of dealing with that. It is, however, one of the areas i am struggling with, so the solution might well end up being a formation change.

That said, from what i have observed in other systems i have used, an Anchor does not necessarily make up for attacking fullbacks. He does not often get all the way cross to actually cover the position, from his starting point bang in the middle of the pitch, and likewise if/when he drops deep enough to be in DC, the outer DC going out to the cover the fullback position does not seem to have been that effective for me thus far. However, my mind remains open

About bloody time .

A little disappointed you didn't follow through on the 3412 Roma - I reckon that had a lot of mileage. However, that being said, 100% agree about staying true to your core values and restarting the 4-5-1 Swiss Army Knife for FM16.

Looking forward to it .

(PS, you were asking about the AF/TQ combo in my 442. I've added some analysis on that now).

I would love to go back to the Roma tactic, but it was a bit of a disaster. The attacking play was rubbish, but i feel i could probably improve that once i use this thread / tactic to improve myself again and get a better understanding of things. The defensive play, however, i think is beyond the current ME. It requires lateral movement between WIB / WOB - So the shuttling across to form a back 4 rather than a back 3 when one WB has flown forward. Even using asymetric formations, i couldn't get my players to do that kind of movement without the ball, in the defensive area. It might just be me, but that felt a bit obstacle.

I might revisit it somewhat at a later date

I shall try to do another proper post this afternoon with some details of FM16 approach and initial views!

[johnnyyakuza78]

Great, really interested in this thread already.

I find it interesting how every year most people end up taking bits and pieces from each other in terms of constructing tactics, and each year there are new learnings and things are changed. I always assumed that the game is basically essentially the same, football is football. If you want to play one way then it should of course translate exactly the same from version to version. I don't think thats true now and maybe you are proving it.

Last year every man and his dog was using Complete Wingbacks on attack, 2 of them. I found that a bit odd at the time as on paper it seems a little ludicrous, in my head if you ever wanted to play a CWB then your whole team would need to be set up to compensate for his freedom and attacking intent.. yet mostly everyone seemed to cope just fine with 2 of them and little in the way of cover.

I've seen it mentioned a few times in other threads that CWBs are much more exposed now, leaving your flanks unprotected can be a lot more dangerous than before. Partly this might be due to some crossing bug (seems to be more people than ever complaining about it, and I tend to see a lot of crosses leading to goals, but who's to really say) or maybe its just that the fullback issue has been fixed.

Either way I'm interested to see how your tactic changes for this years release.

[Jambo98]

Ok so i laid out how i want to play the game and showed my formation, but worth adding what i expect from each player in my system, so i can check back "actual" against "expected" behaviour.

GK - I expect a keeper who comes off his line a bit to support a dline which is moderately high at best, but rarely deep. I also very much want possession based distribution from my keeper (a huge bugbear!)

DL / DR - I expect fullbacks who are very capable of joining in my attacking game. My overall mindset is attacking, and i am willing to accept an element of risk of condeding in order to have a potent attack, which shapes my choices here. They should not totally abandon defending, since we are a back 4 and they are fullbacks not wingbacks in a positional sense. I expect them to provide width for my team in the second / final third of the pitch

DC x 2 - Your general DCs. Ideally a mixture of a pace and strength in the duo, but i do not use BPD or expect anything other than basic passing - out to the fullbacks or into the midfield. I also, for the moment, favour a "flat 2" - i like the idea of a cover defender, but at the moment i dont have the confidence in it. It is an area i might explore

WM x 2 - These guys are a big part of my system. I want basically an inside forward, but who defends. That is why they are at ML and MR rather than AML and AMR. What i really want are thrusting diagonal runs from deep into the box, providing an unexpected threat. Coming from deeper, the runs take a different angle and can be harder to track. I also want them to be able to play football- they will have a lot of possession and i want players who are capable of passing as well as running

LCM / RCM - The solid base on which my team is built. These guys are the polar opposite to the rest of midfield. I do not want lots of movement at all. I want them sat side by side, picking up the peices when attacks break down, providing the passing options for my backline, and shifting the ball from back to front. I have a bit of a spilt vision, with one of the 2 being a little more free to move into AM strata when the situation is suited, and the same guy havnig more passing freedom to potentially pick out a killer pass. They also should be well positioned to pick up second balls from clearances.

CM - The maverick. My version of a "central winger". This is bloody hard to achieve, but i want someone who runs from deep, dribbles through the middle, and ideally even go beyond the striker from time to time. Other times he will be just in behind. He will also provide a hassling role when defending, giving us strength in numbers in the middle of the pitch

ST - The man up top, sort of. In order to link the play i like this guy to operating initially infront of the opposing defence. Dropping off and given the opposition a headache. because we already have 5 in midfield, and attacking fullbacks, their midfield should have their hands full without the DC's "passing on" a striker when he drops deep. He can create spaces which hopefully the WM and/or CM can exploit. One thing i also absolutely love with a deep striker, is to use this false 9 role in the way probably only Messi has ever been able to. Rather than just dropping off to link and create space, i want him to drop off so he has time and space to recieve the ball. Then i want him to turn and run at them. Nothing scares a DC like a dribbling striker who has built up speed. Drop deep, recieve, turn, run, finish. Not much to ask.........

The OP stated a lot of my team level philosophies and approach to the game, this is how i see each player fitting into that and linking with each other. I have very purposely left off roles and duties from this post. You can see in the OP the way i made all those things come to life last year, but for this year i need to understand which combination of roles, duty, TI, PI, team shape etc will align to my thinking.

[Jambo98]

So a bit more about actually doing this on FM16.

The club / game setup

For now, i am just doing a save to learn. I dont intend this to be my long term save. To this end, i both cheated somewhat, and stole an idea from one of the current great posters here ( ). I created my own club.

I chose to go into the German league, just for a bit of variety. I replaced Schalke, as a top 4 but possibly not top 2 side they had a good budget. I duly renamed the club as "Herz" with a maroon color scheme (although it doesnt seem to change the color of my main screens, only the strips!).

I specifically selected players who fit very well into the system i want to play - players with PPMs in particular, and attributes, who match exactly what i believe i would need to make a system like this work successfully.

Below i have started a basic tracker showing the positions in my system, the roles and duties used last year, those i will use this year (which will be defined as we go), and the "template player" i have selected. I have also listed the PPMs i want for each role (those with an asterix are ones that the current template player does not yet have).

First up, i am going to play my first game with the exact tactic from last year. I know this doesnt work, but i want to spend some time looking at exactly which aspects cause the problem, rather than a generic "Oh well, that didnt work". Will do some screenshot analysis soon.

[herne79]

I have very purposely left off roles and duties from this post.

That is brilliant. No preconceptions of rules and duties, just "this is what I see each player doing". Love it.

And +1 internet for using spreadsheets .

[Jambo98]

That is brilliant. No preconceptions of rules and duties, just "this is what I see each player doing". Love it.

And +1 internet for using spreadsheets .

It is interesting, when i see lots of people (almost certainly myself included in the past) who say things like "I will use an IF(a) because he will cut inside, and a DLF(s) because he will not take up the same space" - Nothing at all wrong with the logic, but i suppose my brain is trained to work as "Problem" then "solution". Its so easy to solutionise when you are just trying to work out what the actual problem (in a loose sense of the word) that you want to solve is.

I have 7/8 (depending on how you view LCM and RCM) problem statements in post 8. I now need to identify the most suitable solutions. I could start writing acceptance criteria, but that really is taking the comparisons a bit far

Ps, just for you, my latest game......

[herne79]

Haha good one .

I guess Mützel had an off day in front of goal.

[Jambo98]

The straight replica

I suppose there are 2 approaches to this - 1) Start with last years full tactic, and tweak until it executes in the way i want or 2) Start from scratch and build up everything from vanilla.

The later approach is likely somewhat more sensible at first glance, but because i did spend a lot of time in FM15 thinking out the settings, i decided initially to take option 1)

So for my first friendly of the season, i created the exact replica of my FM15 tactic (with the exception of not being able to add "run wide with the ball" to the CM(a) ). I then watched the first 15mins on full highlights. I knew from experience this wasnt going to pan out how i wanted, but this time round i want to document some of the "why".

So a few screenshots from friendly 1, against Admiral Wacker. Now of course, i must consider the lack of tactial familiarity and the lack of squad gelling (not entirely sure how this is treated on create a club).

Image 1 - Attacking Phase

We are attacking, and Rafinha has just dinked a cross, after my LB (number 5) has reached the byline and cutback. A couple of things to highlight.

Good - The right side WM (Number 6) is in a dangerous position in the box. He has given me exactly the threat i want when the ball is coming in from the other side

Bad - Also highlighted is Goretzka (number 8) who should be one of my "holding" players. He is right up on the edge of the area. The shaded area shows a big chunk of space where the opposing number 10 could break into from a clearance. I would prefer that number 8 be towards the top end of the shaded space. I already have 4 players in the box, little need for a 5th. I would prefer he was in position to pick up a second ball.

Image 2 - Defending Phase

We are defending, they are attacking from the right hand side, harmless looking build up, and the ball has just gone into number 7 from number 6. Again 2 related things of note

Bad - The man closing down is my RCM. He is my DLP(s) and the right side of my 3 central mids. This concerns me. I have highlighted the position of the other 2 CMs and we look a bit all at sea here. Number 7 (my CM(a)) should be closing down whilst my RCM should be standing off more. I chose the DLP role as i dont particularly want high closing down from either of those players

Bad - Linked to the above, the closing down of my RCM has left a big space for the opposing number 11 to run into. My RB and RM are pretty much where i would expect, but that gap worries me

Image 3 - Defensive possession

http://i.imgur.com/kDpRosd.jpg

Interesting - The RB (number 2) has made an interesting move here. We have the ball at the back, and a big space is available infield of his starting position, and he has moved infield to fill it. Not the type of move i often expect to see from a fullback, but i think its good football intelligence to use the space. Not overly concerned by it.

Bad - The DLP(d) (number 9) has dropped to a really wierd position. I know he has the PPM "comes deep to get the ball, but as the ball went from one CB (number 4) to the other (number 5), he suddenly dropped way back beyond the Dline, and nowhere near the ball. Hmmm. I cant see a huge tactical reason behind this one.

Image 4 - Defensive positioning

Good - Nice compact back 4 and middle 3, close together. Happy with this type of compressed shape at an opposing goal kick.

Puzzling - The position of the LM and RM confuses me. This is just as a goalkick has been taken. I chose this formation very much because i want to defend as 451, and attack as 4231. This might just be a point in time issue, the goalkick might just have been taken too quickly for them to get all the way back, but I will need to keep an eye out.

Image 5 - Defending under pressure

Good - Nice pressure on the ball in the middle of the pitch. Happy with the double pressing, without completely losing shape. Rafinha is also tracking back on the left.

Good - Nice coverage down the right hand side. Right back (number 2) has tucked in a bit to cover number 10, and my RM (number 6) has tracked back as well. At this point we look ok.

Image 6 - Conceding a goal

Bad - A couple of seconds after me saying we are looking good, it goes wrong. Our RB makes zero attempt to track the run of the opposing number 10, who has the freedom to run onto a loose ball in the box. The RM has tracked a bit, but what is alarming is the complete lack of activity by the RB. One nil down.......

I will do a seperate post around what i think these early observations might mean in terms of what i might want to change.

[shirajzl]

Regarding the WMa being high on the pitch. I noticed on FM16 that players with attacking duty even in that midfield stratum position themselves really high without the ball, and when you're in possession, they run up high really quickly and if they don't get the ball immediately, they cut themselves off.

I'm far from a knowledgeably guy when it comes to tactics, but those have been my observations. I got much better positioning from wingers and/or wide midfielders on support, rather than on attack.

[johnnyyakuza78]

Don't WM's with attack duty automatically have 'get further forward' switched on?

[Jambo98]

Don't WM's with attack duty automatically have 'get further forward' switched on?

yes, but that is a "with the ball" instruction. The screenshot was "without the ball". Its not a big thing, was just a positioning at goal kick. Overall the WM track back plenty in general play. Its probably one of the aspects of the tactic which i dont think needs tweak, thus far D

[herne79]

Re. Goretzka in image 1 - interesting that a DLP(S) comes with the PI Hold Position set as standard, which you can't change, and yet he is all the way up on the edge of the box.

I'm assuming that pic isn't from a set piece or recycled ball after a set piece (which could explain the position).

On pic 4, I'm actually ok with the LM/RM positioning. They look like they are picking up the two fullbacks, safe in the knowledge their other 7 team mates in the box highlighted are happily covering the opposition. Your 2 fullbacks have picked up their wide men, and you are nicely compact in midfield.

[Jambo98]

So what conclusions did i draw from the (very) early observations. Well, i have not properly assessed all aspects just by watching 15 - 20mins of one match, but so far:

1) WM(a) look to work pretty good still, plenty of thrusting runs into the box. Happy with that element based on early view

2) The centre of midfield is a problem. It is not functioning at all as i want. Firstly, the 3 are a bit all over the place, and to often 2 of them end up on top of each other. The DLP(s) in particular is no where close to how it was for me last year, and is going to give me a problem

3) Thus far, tentatively, the CWB have not looked like leaving me too exposed, but i have seen some slightly strange behaviour from them. There are a few built in PI which might cause this, so i need to keep a close eye on things

4) The compact nature of the team is good, happy with that. It seems to aid our passing nicely.

5) I didnt screenshot this, but i saw a few slightly worrying instances of the good old DC rushing out to close down in midfield and leave a gap. I need to keep an eye out for this, not having a DM in the formation can impact this i think.

[Jambo98]

Re. Goretzka in image 1 - interesting that a DLP(S) comes with the PI Hold Position set as standard, which you can't change, and yet he is all the way up on the edge of the box.

I'm assuming that pic isn't from a set piece or recycled ball after a set piece (which could explain the position).

On pic 4, I'm actually ok with the LM/RM positioning. They look like they are picking up the two fullbacks, safe in the knowledge their other 7 team mates in the box highlighted are happily covering the opposition. Your 2 fullbacks have picked up their wide men, and you are nicely compact in midfield.

Yeah i am very much finding that the DLP(s) just quite simply does not hold position at all, not in the very fluid, standard mentality with the TI "press more" active. The behaviour is just wierd. I might watch a half of a game and just focuss purely on that position, because i cannot make sense of it at the moment.

Im fine with the positioning in pic 4 in reality, i just dont necessarily think that is how i envisaged it working. Your formation is your shape when defending. My formation is 451. Not 4321. But its certainly not causing a big issue at the moment!

[shirajzl]

I'm very curious to see how this thread evolves. Last year you were confident you had a full grasp of the game, with results to support it, but now your struggles and eventual solution to the problem should inspire many.

[summatsupeer]

I think the changes to mentality being affected by duty like flexible team shape used to do is throwing a lot of people off.

[isignedupfornorealreason]

Yeah i am very much finding that the DLP(s) just quite simply does not hold position at all, not in the very fluid, standard mentality with the TI "press more" active. The behaviour is just wierd. I might watch a half of a game and just focuss purely on that position, because i cannot make sense of it at the moment.

Im fine with the positioning in pic 4 in reality, i just dont necessarily think that is how i envisaged it working. Your formation is your shape when defending. My formation is 451. Not 4321. But its certainly not causing a big issue at the moment!

DLP/S did hang around in those positions in 15 though, I'm pretty sure of it. I just think it is more pronounced now because of the dangers of stuff happening, especially on the counter-attack.

If you remember, I came into your 4-5-1 topic and basically stole your brain, in a jar (like Futurama) and used it for my own evil trophy winning means. Just to refresh your memory though, I actually went 'backwards' in terms of progression with you. Because I had a look at your end result and initially played a few games with it, I think it was as it is here, the two cutting inside and so on.

And basically, I worked backwards to your original 4-5-1 with the more wider winger players, almost back to the CM/D/S/A set up you had. It was weird, imitation is flattery and all that, like everyone rushed to copy Chapman with his innovations and so on.

I digress, hope you're still with my ramblings. Anyway, my set up ended up with the midfield being jiggled around a bit, I went DLP/S, DLP/D, CM/A, rather than how you had it as CM/A in the middle. I've tried both set ups, the CM/A in the middle is exceptionally fun, if you get a target man there, say, like Fellaini, then you can really exploit the crosses and make him a lethal player if he bothers training his finishing, because of the late runs in between the middle of the defence for the crosses. On the other hand, I found, personally, that the defending was wonky, because the CM/A would shift illogically in FM15 for me, travelling into the space vacated by the DLP midfielders, leading to all sorts of trouble. That was why I moved the DLP/D into the middle and told the CMA to close down less. However, I played on counter and not control, so my set up was built for holding shape and not closing down so much, so it worked better that way for me.

So back to the DLP/S, I found he creeps up to the edge of the box, as he should do given his description, but a way to get him to hold back a bit in 15 was by making him stay on the left side of midfield, where the WM/A was, and by shifting the CM/A out to the right hand side. What would then happen, bearing in mind I'm no good at analysing this, was in the attacking phase we would end up with a sort of front three being like so;

WM/A - DLF - CM/A

And on the right hand side, stretching the defence even more was a W/A (or S I forget) and that caused the opposition no end of problems because of the stretching they had to do to cover what was turning into a belated 4 man attack. What I found was because the DLF (or Treq even) stayed central and had players to either side, the DLP didn't really have an incentive to get further forward unless there was a rebound/poor clearance chance for him to go hunting, so he stayed back a bit more, usually just a bit ahead of the DLP/D or even in line together if we were really turning the screws - which, we were in the end when we were winning everything with ease.

There may have been tweaks to make them a bit more offensive though.

Oh, and I agree with you on the experience of finding differences between the 4-5-1 in 15 and 16. I did the same as you and even had a look back at 15 to see if I wasn't kidding myself with how the formation worked in 15. =x Even though our designs ended up somewhat different, I too, wasn't happy with the 4-5-1 in FM16, but I think part of my dislike of the 4-5-1 was because of the success I had with it in 15 (thanks again to you for pushing me in that direction), and because I'd like to try out a new formation.

Anyway, best of luck with your experimentation and such, I can't play the game properly for a while at the moment, but I hope you solve the issues you're finding.

[Jambo98]

DLP/S did hang around in those positions in 15 though, I'm pretty sure of it. I just think it is more pronounced now because of the dangers of stuff happening, especially on the counter-attack.

If you remember, I came into your 4-5-1 topic and basically stole your brain, in a jar (like Futurama) and used it for my own evil trophy winning means. Just to refresh your memory though, I actually went 'backwards' in terms of progression with you. Because I had a look at your end result and initially played a few games with it, I think it was as it is here, the two cutting inside and so on.

And basically, I worked backwards to your original 4-5-1 with the more wider winger players, almost back to the CM/D/S/A set up you had. It was weird, imitation is flattery and all that, like everyone rushed to copy Chapman with his innovations and so on.

I digress, hope you're still with my ramblings. Anyway, my set up ended up with the midfield being jiggled around a bit, I went DLP/S, DLP/D, CM/A, rather than how you had it as CM/A in the middle. I've tried both set ups, the CM/A in the middle is exceptionally fun, if you get a target man there, say, like Fellaini, then you can really exploit the crosses and make him a lethal player if he bothers training his finishing, because of the late runs in between the middle of the defence for the crosses. On the other hand, I found, personally, that the defending was wonky, because the CM/A would shift illogically in FM15 for me, travelling into the space vacated by the DLP midfielders, leading to all sorts of trouble. That was why I moved the DLP/D into the middle and told the CMA to close down less. However, I played on counter and not control, so my set up was built for holding shape and not closing down so much, so it worked better that way for me.

So back to the DLP/S, I found he creeps up to the edge of the box, as he should do given his description, but a way to get him to hold back a bit in 15 was by making him stay on the left side of midfield, where the WM/A was, and by shifting the CM/A out to the right hand side. What would then happen, bearing in mind I'm no good at analysing this, was in the attacking phase we would end up with a sort of front three being like so;

WM/A - DLF - CM/A

And on the right hand side, stretching the defence even more was a W/A (or S I forget) and that caused the opposition no end of problems because of the stretching they had to do to cover what was turning into a belated 4 man attack. What I found was because the DLF (or Treq even) stayed central and had players to either side, the DLP didn't really have an incentive to get further forward unless there was a rebound/poor clearance chance for him to go hunting, so he stayed back a bit more, usually just a bit ahead of the DLP/D or even in line together if we were really turning the screws - which, we were in the end when we were winning everything with ease.

There may have been tweaks to make them a bit more offensive though.

Oh, and I agree with you on the experience of finding differences between the 4-5-1 in 15 and 16. I did the same as you and even had a look back at 15 to see if I wasn't kidding myself with how the formation worked in 15. =x Even though our designs ended up somewhat different, I too, wasn't happy with the 4-5-1 in FM16, but I think part of my dislike of the 4-5-1 was because of the success I had with it in 15 (thanks again to you for pushing me in that direction), and because I'd like to try out a new formation.

Anyway, best of luck with your experimentation and such, I can't play the game properly for a while at the moment, but I hope you solve the issues you're finding.

Yeah i think thats a fair observation, it was somewhat prevalent in FM15 as well. There is certainly an argument to be made that i have the wrong role selected. If you go back to post #8 where i laid out what i expected from each player in the team, it could be said that selecting DLP(s) to delivery the type of behaviour i wanted, was the wrong move. Time will tell, to some extent!

I do indeed remember your work last year. You didnt still my brain at all, you took a few of the principles i had managed to figure out and you ran with them. Thats all most of us here do. Many of the things i created last year were similar - Take something i read in a thread by another poster and use that learning to create my own. Your final tactic was a bit different to mine, and it brought you success

Good luck this year once you get playing. I shall do a post shortly on my first (failed) attempt to tweak.

[Jambo98]

The first attempt to tweak

Ok so a few posts back, i summarised some of my findings from the initial couple of pre-season matches. I must have set the game start date to mid pre-season in England i think, in error, so by the time my club was created we were far into pre-season with only a few friendlies left.

So after reflecting on my main problem, around the midfield 3 behaviour, i reflected on some problems i had early in my FM15 451 development, whilst doing my first Liverpool save. I remember i had added "roam from positions" and when that was combined with "Very Fluid" it just created far too much movement, and meant my midfield lost its shape very easily. On that occasion, i resolved it by taking away the TI "Roam from position". This time i dont have that active.

My initial thought process led me to 3 potential options as a first step to sorting out the midfield.

1) Add the TI "Stick to Positions" - almost a step along from how i described solving the problem last year. However, my concern with this is that it could limit the ability of both the WM's and the CM to move out of their positions and into the areas i showed on the picture in the OP. So i discount this for now

2) Add the TI " Be more disciplined" - Very Fluid brings with it high creative freedom, and there might be a view that this high creative freedom might be behind some of my positional issues in the middle of the park. I ponder this option but for now I think creative freedom alone is not the issue, and i do like my players to have a bit of freedom, in the final 3rd especially, so i opt not to go with it

3) Change the team shape away from "Very Fluid" - This one has been in my mind all along. It seems clear enough from reading a few threads that the effect of "team shape" is slightly different this year to last, and indeed it is notable that not many of the good tactical threads in this forum seem to support "Very Fluid". I loved how it made the team operate last year, but with the changes to what it does, i feel that perhaps i might need to come away from it. I decide that coming one step down the "ladder" will not be enough, so i opt to move 2 stages and go to "flexible"

Ok, so that was the only tweak. I am certain i will need more, but one thing at a time. I change the team shape, and go into my next friendly, which is a stern test against Galatasaray.

Analysing the tweak

Few screenshots early in the game, again i watch the first 22mins this time in full details

Screenshot 1 - DLP(s) when attacking

Geis this time is my DLP(s) and same as before, he has gone too far advanced for my liking. The tweak has not really change this, and i suppose i didnt totally expect it to solve it, but seems to have had no effect thus far

Screenshot 2 - Midfield alignment

This time it is our own Goalkick and again we have Klaasen (the CM) pretty much stood on top of my DLP(s). This had already happened a few times, and whilst i didn't screenshot them all, this happened a few times early in the game. The main problem seems to still be very much prevalent

Screenshots 3 - Less compact shape

If you compare this to "image 4" in the ealrier post, you get a really great visual of the core change that happens when you alter team shape. The team is notably less compact, which for me is not a positive. I expected this, but this just confirmed it.

The bits i didnt screenshot

As well as not resolving my midfield positioning issues, the change in team shape immediately had another negative effect. As our players became more spaced out, our passing suffered massively. We already struggle a bit with pass completion, which i have put down to team cohesion and tactical familiarity (i have noted in the past that the "way" in which the ME applies the penalty for lack of gelling often comes through misplaced passes). The change in team shape magnified this issue and led to more long passes which failed to reach the target.

In summary, i did not like the effect of the change of team shape at all. It was probably an idea sound enough in its thinking, but having analysed it (with the risk that it was a short period in one game), i feel it is not right for me.

So back to the drawing board. We go back to "very fluid" and think about our next move.

[herne79]

Leaving the choice of Team Shape to one side for a moment, what is it you want to achieve?

A compact team with creativity mainly defined by player roles with perhaps generally the majority of possession (not a "possession tactic" though)? A half way house? Lots of player creativity and a compact team?

I think if you can define this and crack that particular nut, the rest could start to fall into place.

For example - you seem to like the creativity and compactness that "Very Fluid" brings, but not the positional "issues" as you put it above? By the same token, you don't like the space created by a less Fluid shape nor the impact that has on possession?

[Jambo98]

Leaving the choice of Team Shape to one side for a moment, what is it you want to achieve?

A compact team with creativity mainly defined by player roles with perhaps generally the majority of possession (not a "possession tactic" though)? A half way house? Lots of player creativity and a compact team?

I think if you can define this and crack that particular nut, the rest could start to fall into place.

For example - you seem to like the creativity and compactness that "Very Fluid" brings, but not the positional "issues" as you put it above? By the same token, you don't like the space created by a less Fluid shape nor the impact that has on possession?

Well, I suppose i see it slightly different - I dont want to "achieve" anything in relation to player roles. What i want to "achieve" is my vision set out in the earlier posts - my way of playing. The player roles, and team shape, are a means to doing that. Would i prefer to achieve the outcome via method "a" or method "b"? It doesnt overly matter.

I also think, re your last statement, that might assume that the positional issues are a consiquence of the team shape? I would submit that actually, i have shown that initially at least, it appears they are not. I did not like anything about the less fluid shape, so there is no trade off decision. It was a tweak i tried, and it was the wrong one. It likely shows that i misunderstood the cause of the initial problem.

For the moment, i seem to have found a different solution to the midfield positional issues, and it is not necessarily one i expected, but i will watch some more, post some screenshots and outline my thinking

[Jambo98]

Tweaking - Take Two

Ok, so attempt one was not a success. I tried something, it did not work. These things happen. I am by no means a tactical guru, and i will make more than my share of mistakes and misteps

So i went back to "Very Fluid", and also went back to my visions in the early posts. i watched back some clips of the early games again, got a note pad out and scribbled a few things down. Here are the conclusions i reached:

1) My vision is for a solid "2" in midfield who sit. Well then why not make them the same, at least initially. So my first tweak is to move my DLP(s) to a DLP(d). Longer term i might want a bit of variation between the style of play of each, but i can achieve that by perhaps adding in some PI's, or even just relying on differing player types and PPMs

2) Linked to this, my 2 "holders" need to be a bit more static. I recall last year that DLP seemed to close down less, but this year the PI is not active. So i added "closed down less" to both DLP's

3) I also decided to reduce my TI a bit. I removed "pass into space" since i was concerned that this was not being effective. It was on there to help get the WM's onto through balls, but that can happen naturally by the runs they make. I also removed "play out of defence" for the moment as i already have shorter passing. Finally i removed "higher tempo", as on watching it back, we seemed a bit rushed at times.

Will do a few screenshots of the effect of these changes next.

[3@theback]

I have also been experimenting with your 4-5-1 from last years version and have actually made some of the same changes you have. 2 x DLP-D (haven't added 'close down less') seem to be working well (with different PI's for each). I have also changed the CM-A to a BBM-S (no PI's) and in the 2 games since the change he has got 2 goals in each game, arriving late into the box very much like Lampard used to do for Chelsea. I actually removed all TI's to start with, but have added back 'Push Higher Up', 'Close Down More' and 'Shorter Passing' along with 'Play Wider' which is giving the midfield 3 more space to play in.

Great thread by the way, am looking forward to seeing how you develop this years version.

[Jambo98]

Reviewing Tweaks - Take Two

Image 1 - Attacking Shape

Now thats more like what i wanted originally. 3 Players being a threat in the box (F9 and both WM) and the CM on the edge of the area. They key difference is that my 2 DLP are now holding position nicely, and exactly as i expect. I might like one to be a yard or two further up, but at this stage that is getting a little picky. I might add a PI to one, but not yet.

Image 2 - Attacking movement

Just a clip of us with deep possession, and i am quite happy with the movement here. The WM's are headed into the box to be a threat, the LB has space to move into as a result, and the CM is available for a pass. The DLP are both close enough together to exchange passes, but not standing on top of each other

Image 3 - Defensive transition

Here we have just lost the ball, and it is interesting to note how we are in quite a nice 4231 shape (despite the formation being 451). Sissoko is the first to retreat, since we have a potential 3 v 2 behind him against my 2 DLP, but i quite like the look of this shape in transition, as long as the WM's also retreat fairly quickly so we defend as a 5.

Image 4 - Defensive Shape

Now this is much better. Rather than 2 players on top of each other, or the DLP(s) being the wrong side of the CM, we now have a nice solid shape as we defend. Sissoko (CM) has stepped out to press the ball, which is exactly what i want, whilst the others are retaining a nice bank of 4

Image 5 - F9 and WM combining

Here we have a bit of my vision coming together. The F9 drops deeper to collect the ball, and the WM makes a great "out to in" run. The F9 is left with a relatively easy through ball to put us in on goal. This is a big part of how i want my F9 and WM's to combine. It is not happening often enough yes, but this shows we can do it

Image 6 - The CM(a)

Another example of my vision. Here Iturraspe has just played the pass. In the seconds before, Ayoze has come short to offer, meanwhile Sissoko is on his horse and making a run from deep to get ahead of the striker and in behind. In my first couple of itterations of this tactic, the CM(a) was a problem, in that he was not giving me enough attacking thrust. If i am being totally honest, i am not sure i understand which changes that i made have helped this (none of the changes were to specifically address this topic)

Image 7 - More of the CM(a)

Slightly different flavour this time. Ayoze has gone out wide with the ball, leaving a space in the middle. This time round Sissoko has taken the invitation and is getting himself into the box to take the place of Ayoze. Another little glimpse of the good things from this tactic that i envisioned.

Summary

So clearly as i watched these 2 games (one cup game against lower league, which we won 3 nil. All 3 goals assists from LB, scored by RM......., one league game drawn 2 v 2) I saw a lot more good things. The tactic is now playing out much more like my vision that it previously was. But we are no where near the finished article. A couple of thing still in my mind:

1) The DC combo - I will do analysis of my goals conceded in the first 3 or 4 league games, but i have a feeling that we are getting a bit exposed by how my DC's are playing. It could be Dline related, and part of me is thinking that a cover player might be the answer, but that is jumping ahead. I will need to look at the problem in some detail first

2) The Fullbacks - Again i will need to look at this, but one of the pleasant surprises so far, is that i do not appear to be exposed down the flanks at all, despite the use of 2 x CWB(a). It is early days to make a call on this, but thus far i am not seeing the expected frailty here

3) The striker - I am reasonably happy with the ST, but i think there is merit in looking at whether other roles might give me a closer delivery on my expectation. In the early days, i did consider whether i might need to move him to the AMC slot and go strikerless in formation terms, but thus far i dont think this is needed. I will do a match or so just purely looking at my ST and his movement and play patterns. Not helped by my main man being out for 3 months :/ His back up (Alberto Bueno or Benik Afobe) are not quite the same standard!

Hopefully some of this is interesting or useful to others. Always keen to see or hear the experiences of others, and indeed how others might interpret some of what i am seeing differently Football is all about opinions afterall......

[inosensu]

Awesome thread, loving the in-depth analysis of your tactics. Good to see the tweaks having a desired effect. Personally I'd be a little skeptical about using two DLP's with a defend duty in midfield, but it seems to have its merits. I don't know if you watched Zidane's Real play Deportivo yesterday, but it was interesting to watch Kroos and Modric, who you could say were both playing the DLP-d role. It bothered me a little that 75% of the time, during build-up play, they were practically standing next to each other and just exchanging passes until one of them passed it vertically, which made it seem as though two (similar type) players were doing a one man job. However, it did open up space for Isco and the BBC to move into and consequently resulted in some nice football. The roles in your tactic seem to have a similar effect on the way your team plays.

[Jambo98]

Awesome thread, loving the in-depth analysis of your tactics. Good to see the tweaks having a desired effect. Personally I'd be a little skeptical about using two DLP's with a defend duty in midfield, but it seems to have its merits. I don't know if you watched Zidane's Real play Deportivo yesterday, but it was interesting to watch Kroos and Modric, who you could say were both playing the DLP-d role. It bothered me a little that 75% of the time, during build-up play, they were practically standing next to each other and just exchanging passes until one of them passed it vertically, which made it seem as though two (similar type) players were doing a one man job. However, it did open up space for Isco and the BBC to move into and consequently resulted in some nice football. The roles in your tactic seem to have a similar effect on the way your team plays.

Ah if only i had the BBC in front of my 2 x DLP......... I actually did watch a bit of that game, it was quite interesting not only how Kross and Modric played, but also Isco at time was quite conservative.

I havent done any analysis for a few days. I decide to play through a good number of games to let things settle. The outcome was the same as in every other thing i have tried in FM16. Complete frustration. I spent time setting it up, analysing, tweaking. It looks as i intend for a few games, then suddenly it stops looking like that. I end up just thinking "how".

I will go back now analyse some of my recent games to understand what exactly is going on. I can see already one issue is a huge volume of crosses, many of which are not succesfull. I have a few ideas why this might be worse than last year, but need to look at it.

[Jean0987654321]

Chinese LLM is so adventurous. I play this similar shape but I used different roles. I'll pull up my game to post it in a bit. Close to promotion so far

[Jambo98]

So here is a picture of my season so far (and a microcosm of my entire FM16 experience)

The 3 opening draws were as i made my initial tweaks, and the team was coming together. The loss to Bayern was to be expected, and actually one nil away to them was no embarrassment. The draw with Hanover was one of those things - battered them and couldn't get through - these things happen. Dortmund away another very hard fixture, and we were down to 10 within 35mins so i give my team a mulligan on that one.

And then.........Well. T*ts up would be putting it mildly.

Talk about frustrating. I know there is stuff to analyse, and i will, but part of me says there must be something other than tactics at play. I played 3 more games, changing nothing. 2 good wins and a fair draw. So maybe it was form, maybe it was luck. No, next game is a meek 2 nil defeat at home.

Its getting harder and harder to be motivated to keep trying to analyse and understand, but i will do some analysis tomorrow :/

[felley]

Hey Jambo.

Forgive me if this sounds harsh but the last post sounds very much like you're blaming some sort of invisible metric for derailing results, when i'm sure if you're honest you know that something mustn't be quite right with your tactic. Maybe you're very close to having something stable but your in-game management is off?

Looking at the results and going by reputation, would it be also fair to say that your tactic is perhaps a bit anaemic going forward? The 0-0 against Hannover and the poor results against Copenhagen, Bremen and Frankfurt suggests that you are maybe struggling to break teams down that see you as a bigger club (I'm guessing you inherited Schalke's reputation?).

The good results have come against teams that tend to be more attack minded (at least IRL) so maybe they are leaving space which your tactic is good at exploiting in it's current guise? I'm thinking in particular of Leverkusen and Herta - Hoffenheim are also a pretty positive team, in spite of their disastrous season so far IRL.

Anyway, keep positive and keep analysing. I think herne provided some good questions earlier in the thread where he asked you what you wanted to achieve... Maybe if you sit down and think how exactly each position contributes, then you'll at least have a roadmap you can refer back to.

[Guest]

I agree Jambo, you're getting too despondent too quickly. Take time it will come and trust me this thread will be invaluable because you are experiencing issues we all struggle with at some point in this game.

Jam tarts don't give up either ;-0

[Jambo98]

Hey Jambo.

Forgive me if this sounds harsh but the last post sounds very much like you're blaming some sort of invisible metric for derailing results, when i'm sure if you're honest you know that something mustn't be quite right with your tactic. Maybe you're very close to having something stable but your in-game management is off?

Looking at the results and going by reputation, would it be also fair to say that your tactic is perhaps a bit anaemic going forward? The 0-0 against Hannover and the poor results against Copenhagen, Bremen and Frankfurt suggests that you are maybe struggling to break teams down that see you as a bigger club (I'm guessing you inherited Schalke's reputation?).

The good results have come against teams that tend to be more attack minded (at least IRL) so maybe they are leaving space which your tactic is good at exploiting in it's current guise? I'm thinking in particular of Leverkusen and Herta - Hoffenheim are also a pretty positive team, in spite of their disastrous season so far IRL.

Anyway, keep positive and keep analysing. I think herne provided some good questions earlier in the thread where he asked you what you wanted to achieve... Maybe if you sit down and think how exactly each position contributes, then you'll at least have a roadmap you can refer back to.

Erm, i think you are mis-reading that quite a bit felley. For all my complaints about some aspects of the ME, i am not one of those who claims mysterious dark forces are at play. I was suggesting that there are other aspects which influence results other than just the tactics you pick? Form, morale, match fitness, team gelling, tactical familiarity, manager reputation.......and so on and on. The game is about more than just tactics, and i am pondering if my yo-yo form and performances could be related to that. Otherwise its quite hard to work out why things play out quite so differently from match to match

In-game management however, is a good observation. I have been making very few tweaks, because i wanted to get the base tactic right. that is probably not quite the right approach, not this far into the season. Something to look at for sure.

In terms of the other things, thanks for the feedback, some good stuff in there which is close to the mark:

1) Yes attacking is my main issue, more specifically, my striker is where i have identified that i have a real problem. He is not contributing goals or assists. I can afford him to not contribute one or the other (depending on my vision for the player), but a striker who delivers neither......well might as well name him Balotelli..... This is an area i need to look at in some detail - study in game movement and work out why he is either not getting into positions, or is not getting service. Goals from midfield are at a reasonable level, but if i added in another 7 or 8 goals from the ST position (over the half season), i would be in a very different place.

2) I dont necessarily think it is bigger reputation sides. Since that screenshot i also beat Darmstadt who are lower rep. What is interesting is that a load of German teams when AI managed seem to set up as 4312 narrow, which might be an interest sub plot. IN FM15, that was a formation the AI rarely used in my experience. It might be that this is a factor, i will review Part of the idea behind my tactic is attacking threats in different ways, but that is not fully coming to fruition at the moment.

3) I must admit i am not sure i follow the bit about what i want to achieve, but i have to be fair and say you are the second person to give that feedback. In my head, i mapped it out very clearly between the OP (where i set out my vision - both in text and graphics) and post #8 where i laid out my exact vision for each position, including what they contribute to the system. I am certainly open to the fact that my vision is just wrong, but it also seems maybe i have not articulated my vision very well here. And if i have not articulated it well, its possible i have also not translated it well in game. Food for thought.

I did some analysis of goals conceded this morning, not had time to upload the screenies etc due to playing FMO tonight, but i will load them up and keep seeing what i can do to develop this

Thanks for the feedback

[Cam8]

Jambo, you've mentioned that your having issues with your striker and even though you haven't posted up much analysis, I already suspect that its something to do with the F9 role. I don't think the role is functioning as its supposed to in FM16. For example I'm finding that 1. he's simply not dropping deep enough and 2. he's not dropping when he's supposed to. If this is happening in your save, then its no wonder your ST is not contributing. If the F9 is not dropping deep he's going to be isolated (especially as you play a 451) and he won't be creating space for your other players to come onto. I think this is definitely something to keep an eye on.

[isignedupfornorealreason]

Its getting harder and harder to be motivated to keep trying to analyse and understand, but i will do some analysis tomorrow :/

Keep going, once it 'clicks' it'll be worth it, I think.

Looking at your run of results, the only two results I'd be annoyed with -outside of the ones you've already explained- are the 0-0 to Copenhagen and the 0-1 to Werder, both at home because I'm a sucker for making the home ground a fortress. The run of away fixtures can be sapping, I often hated triple-away fixtures, even against perceived easy teams because they had a habit of making it rough.

Reading your roles back, here are two questions I'd throw your way, maybe they'll help?

1) Even though you have a double-pivot, are you secure on the flanks? You have two (unless I've missed it) aggressive roles, actually four if the WM's are included, which would make me wonder if attacks are getting into the space there? The Pivot may not be able to shift out wide, if they faced with an overload in the middle anyway?

2) On the attack, how narrow do you end up? You get three/four players pushing on, but does that not leave your team short of options to 'shift' the ball wide and around in order to pull the defence out of position? Often, I found I struggled greatly against any team that stacked the middle, the 4-2DM in particular started to be adopted by a certain Jose Mourinho to counter-act my variant 4-5-1 in later seasons, but fortunately for me it never became mainstream!

Actually I'll ask a third; How attacking was your set up in general? For me, I found the 4-5-1 was superb defensively, often conceding less than 30 goals in the EPL, but it was never quite as gluttonous in terms of goals compared to other formations - often I was hovering around 70-80 goals, which some might argue is a low total. When I looked over my old FM15 saves (I still have them!) I realised that it performed better once I had that 'maverick' player that you like, up front. I dare not suggest that this position was the most important, but I would say the striker was very potent in both goalscoring and assisting terms because he kind of ended up as the focal point that everything moves around. Not sure if that makes sense?

If it is the same case for you, maybe it'll give you more food for thought?

[3@theback]

After having played a full season with RB Leipzig (won the German 2nd division) I have switched back to a CM-A in the middle of the 5 midfielders, but to be honest both he and the F9-S didn't really set the world alight during the season. What I have found is working really well though is having both my WM-A given the PI sit narrower and adding the 'Look For Overlap' TI.

A lot of goals seem to come from a cross by one of the CWB-A to the opposite WM-A arriving at the back post for a tap in. (WM's scored a combined 28 league goals last season)

I think a bit of experimentation with both the CM-A and the F9-S is in order during pre-season.

[shirajzl]

A lot of goals seem to come from a cross by one of the CWB-A to the opposite WM-A arriving at the back post for a tap in. (WM's scored a combined 28 league goals last season)

That's 16.2 ME in a nutshell, I'm afraid. :/

[Jambo98]

Jambo, you've mentioned that your having issues with your striker and even though you haven't posted up much analysis, I already suspect that its something to do with the F9 role. I don't think the role is functioning as its supposed to in FM16. For example I'm finding that 1. he's simply not dropping deep enough and 2. he's not dropping when he's supposed to. If this is happening in your save, then its no wonder your ST is not contributing. If the F9 is not dropping deep he's going to be isolated (especially as you play a 451) and he won't be creating space for your other players to come onto. I think this is definitely something to keep an eye on.

Yup, i am reasonably sure the F9 role is not working as i hoped in this system, however i would not go as far as to say it is not functioning as it is supposed to in FM16. I have seen others use it to reasonably good effect, but what i will say is that i do not think it functions in quite the same way as it did in FM15. I noticed herne79, who's work and analysis i respect hugely, had some issues getting a striker in the ST slot to drop deep at all, including when he tried the F9 role. A cursory glance at some ave position maps from this year and last year does indeed seem to suggest the F9 does not drop as deep as often, or in the same phases of play as i envisaged.

I will need to look at alternate roles.

Keep going, once it 'clicks' it'll be worth it, I think.

Looking at your run of results, the only two results I'd be annoyed with -outside of the ones you've already explained- are the 0-0 to Copenhagen and the 0-1 to Werder, both at home because I'm a sucker for making the home ground a fortress. The run of away fixtures can be sapping, I often hated triple-away fixtures, even against perceived easy teams because they had a habit of making it rough.

Reading your roles back, here are two questions I'd throw your way, maybe they'll help?

1) Even though you have a double-pivot, are you secure on the flanks? You have two (unless I've missed it) aggressive roles, actually four if the WM's are included, which would make me wonder if attacks are getting into the space there? The Pivot may not be able to shift out wide, if they faced with an overload in the middle anyway?

2) On the attack, how narrow do you end up? You get three/four players pushing on, but does that not leave your team short of options to 'shift' the ball wide and around in order to pull the defence out of position? Often, I found I struggled greatly against any team that stacked the middle, the 4-2DM in particular started to be adopted by a certain Jose Mourinho to counter-act my variant 4-5-1 in later seasons, but fortunately for me it never became mainstream!

Actually I'll ask a third; How attacking was your set up in general? For me, I found the 4-5-1 was superb defensively, often conceding less than 30 goals in the EPL, but it was never quite as gluttonous in terms of goals compared to other formations - often I was hovering around 70-80 goals, which some might argue is a low total. When I looked over my old FM15 saves (I still have them!) I realised that it performed better once I had that 'maverick' player that you like, up front. I dare not suggest that this position was the most important, but I would say the striker was very potent in both goalscoring and assisting terms because he kind of ended up as the focal point that everything moves around. Not sure if that makes sense?

If it is the same case for you, maybe it'll give you more food for thought?

Thanks for the input / feedback - Really good questions there and thought provoking.

1) Interestingly, i dont find the flanks get exposed too often. As you say, i have 4 attacking roles that, but it is very rare that i have been caught out by the CWB being upfield. I think the double pivot helps stop the service out wide. What i have been caught out by, is my fullbacks being beaten quiet a few times in 1 v 1 situations, which then leads to a cross, which (as i think we all acknowledge to some extent in 16.2) all to often leads to a goal. The 1 v 1 issue can only really be down to the players. The role and duty should not impact that, as they are in the right position to start with. It is interesting, when i first created the system last year on paper the flanks looked by far the weakest, and yet my issues were nearly always down the middle. This year is similar. Long through balls still seem to catch us out too often

2) That is a great question. And i think the answers is possibly quite interesting. The core of the answer is we dont generally suffer from a lack of width, because the CWB's get up so far and so fast that they are always a wide passing option. What is interesting, however, is that the WM's seem to end up in the box much earlier, and from a different angle, than i would ideally like. They seem to cut inside early (which, to be fair, probably relates to a PI they have). which means the runs they make into the box are less dangerous. They are more easily snuffed out.

Another way to look at it, is that when i play them at ML / MR, i want them to function like an ML / MR in defence but almost recreate inside forwards from the AML / AMR position when in attack. Last year i made that work, this year they cut inside to early and maybe in attack end up more like an AMRC and AMLC in a narrow 4321. That really is food for thought

3) Another quite thought provoking question actually. I looked back on FM15, in particular the 3 team "simplicity" thread (since memory alone can be "rose tinted"!). With "good" sides, in consecutive 38 game league campaigns i scored 95, 96, 126 (to be fair, that last figure was with Barca!). With "lesser" teams, eg 2 seasons at QPR i still managed 74, 61.

In this save, at the exact half way point, i am on course for 46 goals. Now granted, its a 34 game season not 38, but this is a squad who should be custom built for the system. Attacking is certainly where i have suffered a severe drop off.

I agree the strker was a really important part of the goals last year - and that is my vision. At teams i achieved huge totals, with true world class players (Messi and Barbosa scored 44 and 45 in a season). Even with "non world class" players, i could rely on a good return. In this save, injuries and form have complicated it. But across 3 strikers so far, we have 24 starts and 14 sub appearances, for a total of 7 goals between them. That is not a good total. They also have only 5 assists.

I think it is clear that attacking is something i need to look at. Majorly on the ST role, but also a little about how the shape develops in the attacking phase with my WM's

After having played a full season with RB Leipzig (won the German 2nd division) I have switched back to a CM-A in the middle of the 5 midfielders, but to be honest both he and the F9-S didn't really set the world alight during the season. What I have found is working really well though is having both my WM-A given the PI sit narrower and adding the 'Look For Overlap' TI.

A lot of goals seem to come from a cross by one of the CWB-A to the opposite WM-A arriving at the back post for a tap in. (WM's scored a combined 28 league goals last season)

I think a bit of experimentation with both the CM-A and the F9-S is in order during pre-season.

Interesting that you are finding some similar issues. I do score quite a few goals from crosses to the back post, but that is a big part of how this system is intented to work. The late arriving WM causing havoc in the box was the key to it all. Sounds like you have it working pretty well

[Harpoon76]

Re. the comments on the F9 not seeming to work, there is a thread in ME bugs with a couple of examples of the F9 not dropping deep - more examples would be great:

http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php/448055-False-9-role-not-working

[Jambo98]

Bah, i give up on this.........

I looked at the issues discussed in the last couple of posts, and identified a couple of tweaks:

1) I moved the F9 into the AMC spot and made him TQ. This i hoped would force him to drop deep. It makes us strikerless, which is unusual but could work. I looked at SS but when i tried it for 45mins earlier in the season it didnt work, Treq give me a bit more lateral movement

2) Adjusted the PI on the WM to remove "cut inside" - Was not 100% on this one, but there was something just not quite right about how my WM were behaving.

I made these ahead of a winter break friendly against a team from the league below us. I watched the game in comprehensive detail, and although we only won 2 v 1, the movement was much better. The Treq dropped deep, linked with the CM(a) who could go past him more. The WM were not perfect, but looked much better in the angles they took. Now, its a lower league side, so no getting excited by the overall dominance, but just looking at my own team and the movement / positions, i was pleased.

So then on to some competative games, and i watch the first game in full for 15mins, then comprehensive. What the.......suddenly the movement from the last game is missing. The CM no longer links with the Treq. The Treq drifts out of the game for long....hmmm. Give it time, i think.

So we manage to win 3 games on the bounce, all by the odd goal, and all against teams in the bottom 6. I am still watching in detail, and whilst we are not as fluent as i saw in the friendly, we are starting to look like things are coming together a bit.

Then we play bayern, lose 1 v 6 and look like a pub team. Then scrape a draw with 41% possession at home to CSKA in europe. Then draw nil nil with augsberg with movement as bad as it has ever been in this tactical development. Rage quit time.

I just cannot fathom why my tweaks dont give a consistent output. Even if it was consistently bad, at least then i would be able to learn that certain things dont work this year! Its so up and down its just stupid.

I am minded to start again with the 451, reconsider all the roles and duties, in a new save.

[richeh88]

hello jambo been looking at 4 5 1 since my 4 4 2 is leaking goals left right and center. and with reading this thread ive made a few adjustments and its really great defensive tactic.

Changed fullbacks to FB attack. and the DLP's to Defend. Put the CM-A PI 'move into channels' and gone with an Advanced forward.

What ive noticed is the opposition doesnt have much space on the wings and Using this in Vanarama north. last 7 games only conceded 1 goal

[mc40]

Really appreciate this thread. Completely can identify with your frustrations with trying to set up a tactic in FM16 even after giving it a good go.

[max787]

This is a great thread, hope you pick it up again when 16.3 is released!

[Guest]

Why would 16.3 suddenly make everything fall in to place? The 451 can work now without a patch so I am interested to know why this would suddenly solve the issues here?

[RTHerringbone]

Why would 16.3 suddenly make everything fall in to place? The 451 can work now without a patch so I am interested to know why this would suddenly solve the issues here?

It won't. Some people have seemingly high hopes and are making assumptions that the final update will change the world. It won't.

[felley]

It's a shame that some are more bothered about idiosyncrasies in the ME and how to negate/exploit them.

@Jambo, if you're still reading.

Still really think it'd help a lot if you sat down and got a good idea of how your 4-5-1 should work - i.e. who is responsible for what in the system. Had a good read of the thread again and you seem to be overly sure on the role selection from last year as if they alone give your tactic its identity. Would it be fair for me to say that it looks pretty wild on paper? "Very Fluid" may give you compactness and connections between the lines but all those attack duties must be combining into a spectacularly high risk style. For example, those DLP's may be "watered down" in terms of attracting the ball but they're given license to try all sorts of extravagant passes even with the "be more disciplined" TI.

For what it's worth I'd try a few support duties and build from there - particularly at full back. And also the F9 is maybe too much of maverick with all that creative freedom, have you thought of trying a DLF instead?

[Jambo98]

It's a shame that some are more bothered about idiosyncrasies in the ME and how to negate/exploit them.

@Jambo, if you're still reading.

Still really think it'd help a lot if you sat down and got a good idea of how your 4-5-1 should work - i.e. who is responsible for what in the system. Had a good read of the thread again and you seem to be overly sure on the role selection from last year as if they alone give your tactic its identity. Would it be fair for me to say that it looks pretty wild on paper? "Very Fluid" may give you compactness and connections between the lines but all those attack duties must be combining into a spectacularly high risk style. For example, those DLP's may be "watered down" in terms of attracting the ball but they're given license to try all sorts of extravagant passes even with the "be more disciplined" TI.

For what it's worth I'd try a few support duties and build from there - particularly at full back. And also the F9 is maybe too much of maverick with all that creative freedom, have you thought of trying a DLF instead?

You have said that first bit twice in this thread, and even though i gave up on this concept a while back, i still am curious as to what you mean by it? Specifically, take the first image in post #1 and then the descriptions in post #8, and maybe try to say what you think they dont show? Not trying to come across as argumentative, but it just baffles me a bit as to what makes you think i have not looked at exactly how it should work.

My issue is not that i dont have a vision - I do. My issue is either that

a) my vision is unrealistic or flawed.

b) I am unable to translate my vision into reality using FM16 ME and TC.

I am reasonably certain that it is 20% the former, and 80% the later. I gave up because i really really struggle to get any enjoyment out of the current ME. I actually went back to FM15 and had a great time, because i could tweak and it did what i expected. This time round......less so. That and i dislike the balance towards crosses this year (personally i dont think it is about the crosses as such, but more penalty box defending).

I have no doubt that as Ivan said "the 451 can work" (Although interestingly, i have not seen many examples at all across the forums), however this particular 451 did not work for me.

Might give it a try with the final patch. I dont expect that to change the world, but i do expect the ME to improve.