Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community
Ö-zil to the Arsenal!

Playing Style, Structure & a modern 4-1-4-1 (Very Fluid)

Recommended Posts

Ah, you pass again for the very fluid style. I don't like your threads anymore!

Jokes aside, I always like how you make everything simple. Maybe it's time for you to take the seat of the old guy seating on Arsenal bench...

Another thread to bookmark and refer to when I need in the hope of improving :D

Good job :thup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is the the close down much more TI mitigated by the defensive shape and role/duty selection?Every time I attempt to use it I find my players closing down too much individually rather than supporting each other in groups and that inevitably leaves gaps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great work. I've been using this formation and approach for a while, since reading your Sacchi 4-4-2 thread. My roles and duties tend to be a tiny bit different but that's about it. I usually use one of the CMs as a DLP and the DM as a DM or AM. Suits the personnel I have a bit and ends up being a bit more defensive but I still usually get good movement in attack. That aspect - that you can simply switch around the roles and duties to alter how things play so easily - is a favorite of mine. Thanks again for these threads and the ideas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First thing first, this is a fantastic read.

How do you compare the 4-1-4-1 against a 4-1-2-2-1 shape? I feel like I'm getting better results with the later and as someone who played both, what advantages does one have over the other?

I also hope you'll expand on this part:

1 hour ago, Ö-zil to the Arsenal! said:
  • If you're playing a quick attacking system then you need numbers in advanced positions, in order to attack quickly.
  • If you prefer a controlled build-up then presence in midfield is essential and you'll need players making attacking runs.

What is the difference between "advanced positions" and "attacking runs"? is a CM/a a player in a advanced position whilst a BBM a player making attacking runs?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fantastic read so far. I am really enjoying the match analysis parts as always. I also love how you have approached I from the position of trying to adapt to different formations and even still having a place for your 3-4-3. Fascinating stuff to say the least. I made a thread about adapting tactics to different formations and approaches of the opposition and I believe this thread has definitely answered all my questions in my head.

One thing I wondered. All your past threads up until the Wales thread had PI's used.

I noticed in this thread you only mention one or two specific players having them to roam and get further forward. Do you not have the CF(s) Move into Channels anymore or the DLP Close down Much Less anymore?

Will read the rest before bed!

Edited by Anaconda Vice

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Top, top, top thread once again. Bravo! I enjoyed reading it just like all your other threads.

I just want to ask you a little bit more about your observations regarding Register vs Roaming Playmaker at the DMC position. I must confess, I've never used either role at that position, though I've used RPM at CM and like it. But you got me curious, so I would like if you could expand a little bit more on your analysis regarding both roles and their behavior on the field.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wonderful thread once again mate.

I do like the RPM in the DM strata. I've used it quite a bit so far in FM17 but usually as part of a 'double 6' combo.

So many 'shapes' can be created from the 4-1-4-1 or 4-5-1 base, depending on what roles and duties are used and as you've shown, depending on the personnel and situation/opposition, they can be interchangeable.

Just another fascinating read! As Yonko said, bravo! Again. :D

Edited by davehibb

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, jukilo said:

Ah, you pass again for the very fluid style. I don't like your threads anymore!

Jokes aside, I always like how you make everything simple. Maybe it's time for you to take the seat of the old guy seating on Arsenal bench...

Another thread to bookmark and refer to when I need in the hope of improving :D

Good job :thup:

Ay, c'mon. Less of the Very Fluid bashing! I did make an effort with the opposite end of the scale with Wales! :lol:
 

19 hours ago, KongeMeier said:

Nice work here, Özil!

Now buy that Bielsa book and make a tactic that includes as many of the concepts the book explains :)

 


I've watched nowhere near enough of Bielsa to have an informed opinion but I did see a lot of Chile at the 2010 World Cup and a little of Bilbao.

From what I've seen, I'd start with a common Playing Style of Very Fluid and Attack - which will be very difficult, hence why they call him El Loco - and shift the structure between a 3-man and 4-man defence depending on the opposition.


 

19 hours ago, Fosse said:

Is the the close down much more TI mitigated by the defensive shape and role/duty selection?Every time I attempt to use it I find my players closing down too much individually rather than supporting each other in groups and that inevitably leaves gaps.


Not at all. I'm finding a lot of success using a more conservative shape to balance out an aggressive playing style.

Also, what defensive role / duties are you referring to? I've got 4 attack duties, 3 support duties and 3 defence duties. I'd call that reasonably aggressive?

The combination of a slightly back heavy formation with a high block and pressing is a very compact, aggressive pressing unit. The only opposition players with any space - and it's still not much - are the opposition fullbacks but as soon as they advance they're hit and all of their passing options are blocked. The objective is to push them into a long ball.

Going even more back heavy, I think there is a lot of potential in the 3-4-2-1 ('4' = WBL - DMCL - DMCR - WBR) and 3-3-1-3 (midfield 3 = WBL - DMC - WBR) - particularly if more sides played 2 strikers.


 

19 hours ago, Bigpapa42 said:

Great work. I've been using this formation and approach for a while, since reading your Sacchi 4-4-2 thread. My roles and duties tend to be a tiny bit different but that's about it. I usually use one of the CMs as a DLP and the DM as a DM or AM. Suits the personnel I have a bit and ends up being a bit more defensive but I still usually get good movement in attack. That aspect - that you can simply switch around the roles and duties to alter how things play so easily - is a favorite of mine. Thanks again for these threads and the ideas.


Thank you very much. Having such a flexible midfield brings about a lot of interesting possibilities.


 

19 hours ago, TheJanitor said:

First thing first, this is a fantastic read.

How do you compare the 4-1-4-1 against a 4-1-2-2-1 shape? I feel like I'm getting better results with the later and as someone who played both, what advantages does one have over the other?

I also hope you'll expand on this part:

What is the difference between "advanced positions" and "attacking runs"? is a CM/a a player in a advanced position whilst a BBM a player making attacking runs?


Your first question is answered in the Evaluating Structure - 4-3-3 section.

Both 4-3-3 and 4-1-4-1 are very flexible formation so a lot depends on your overall structure.

In a nutshell - 4-1-4-1 offers a greater midfield presence and more options in transition so suits a controlled build-up playing style very well. 4-3-3 has 3 attackers in advanced positions so may be better suited to quicker transitions in an attacking playing style, although the 4-3-3 I was using - with two inside forwards - does ask an awful lot of the wingbacks.

A player in the attacking midfield strata is an example of an advanced position whereas a player in the midfield strata with a high mentality or told to get forward more will make attacking runs.

Both will have a similar end result but the difference for me is transition time when you turnover possession.

Passing the ball is quicker than running so when you win the ball, a player in an advanced position can attack immediately whereas a player making runs needs to run there. Could be 5 metres, could be 35 metres but players in advanced position generally allow quicker transitions.

On the other hand, a deeper player making a run will be more effective defensively and available to receive passes earlier in the build up.

Swings and roundabouts. Another illustration of how formations are neutral, but your application is how you gain advantage or disadvantage.


 

19 hours ago, looping said:

Tremendous.


Thank you.


 

18 hours ago, dannysheard said:

Well, that's my night gone again :)

 


Enjoy! :lol:


 

18 hours ago, Anaconda Vice said:

Fantastic read so far. I am really enjoying the match analysis parts as always. I also love how you have approached I from the position of trying to adapt to different formations and even still having a place for your 3-4-3. Fascinating stuff to say the least. I made a thread about adapting tactics to different formations and approaches of the opposition and I believe this thread has definitely answered all my questions in my head.

One thing I wondered. All your past threads up until the Wales thread had PI's used.

I noticed in this thread you only mention one or two specific players having them to roam and get further forward. Do you not have the CF(s) Move into Channels anymore or the DLP Close down Much Less anymore?

Will read the rest before bed!


The usual ones are there but nothing major.

One change I forgot to mention is that normally my goalkeeper distributes to the playmaker - rolling the ball out as he drops deep - but against the 4-2-3-1 he distributes to the space on the flanks to bypass the 4 opposition attackers.

  • The MCs move into channels and get forward more (obviously not when an MC(D)) 
  • The striker moves into channels as well.
  • Wide Midfielder / Playmaker roams and comes narrow.

Enjoy! :thup:


 

9 hours ago, yonko said:

Top, top, top thread once again. Bravo! I enjoyed reading it just like all your other threads.

I just want to ask you a little bit more about your observations regarding Register vs Roaming Playmaker at the DMC position. I must confess, I've never used either role at that position, though I've used RPM at CM and like it. But you got me curious, so I would like if you could expand a little bit more on your analysis regarding both roles and their behavior on the field.


You've got 4 options for a deep playmaker in the DM strata.

  1. Deep Lying Playmaker (Defend)
    • Most conservative, combines holding midfield with a playmaker role.
    • Static role with minimal movement - holds position and can't get forward.
    • No option to dribble so always going to pass.
  2. Deep Lying Playmaker (Support)
    • Similar role but with a supporting mentality, rather than defensive.
    • Remains very static - holds position and can't get forward.
    • Has the option to run with the ball, so could bring the ball out of defence himself.
  3. Roaming Playmaker
    • Supporting mentality so more of a midfielder.
    • Lateral movement - roams from position but can't move forward and has the option to move into the channels.
      • My observation in the match engine is he starts deep, then joins midfield. Does move forward, but not aggressively.
      • Movement makes him a very good passing option when teammates are in possession.
    • Dribbles more so will bring the ball out of defence himself.
  4. Regista
    • Supporting mentality so - again - more of a midfielder.
    • Full movement - roams from position, option to move forward but no option for the channels.
      • Offers the most aggressive movement.
    • Slightly more direct passing.
      • Could suit a quick transition.
    • Option to dribble, shoot or play risky passes.


 

4 hours ago, davehibb said:

Wonderful thread once again mate.

I do like the RPM in the DM strata. I've used it quite a bit so far in FM17 but usually as part of a 'double 6' combo.

So many 'shapes' can be created from the 4-1-4-1 or 4-5-1 base, depending on what roles and duties are used and as you've shown, depending on the personnel and situation/opposition, they can be interchangeable.

Just another fascinating read! As Yonko said, bravo! Again. :D


Fantastic. Thank you very much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fantastic thread. Carefully thought through and simple explanations of complex issues. 

One of the next things to deal with in evolving this style of play for me is getting (at least one of) my CBs comfortable playing a direct ground pass into central midfield or even attacking midfield stratas and skipping the shorter pass to the DM or outside backs.

As described here... http://spielverlagerung.com/2016/05/12/tactical-theory-vertical-build-up-passing/

Especially when playing any of these systems against a Dortmund style 4-2-3-1. As you point out -- they have a ST, AMC, and potentially even a narrowing wide player coming to close down our two CBs and DM, so this is 3v2 for us or 3v3 if we take long enough that their wide player can come pressure us too. A confident ground pass from our CB straight through to our CMs will skip this pressure well and is something that coincidentally Hummels was so great at at Dortmund. 

Training my CB to do this is one of the sort of next step tactical pieces that I find really brings an added dimension to tactics like yours. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, acmilano112000 said:

Fantastic thread. Carefully thought through and simple explanations of complex issues. 

One of the next things to deal with in evolving this style of play for me is getting (at least one of) my CBs comfortable playing a direct ground pass into central midfield or even attacking midfield stratas and skipping the shorter pass to the DM or outside backs.

As described here... http://spielverlagerung.com/2016/05/12/tactical-theory-vertical-build-up-passing/

Especially when playing any of these systems against a Dortmund style 4-2-3-1. As you point out -- they have a ST, AMC, and potentially even a narrowing wide player coming to close down our two CBs and DM, so this is 3v2 for us or 3v3 if we take long enough that their wide player can come pressure us too. A confident ground pass from our CB straight through to our CMs will skip this pressure well and is something that coincidentally Hummels was so great at at Dortmund. 

Training my CB to do this is one of the sort of next step tactical pieces that I find really brings an added dimension to tactics like yours. 


It's funny you should say that..


rh2aE46.png


Great insight. Look at the Player Traits, bottom right. I've got Zivkovic and Cerny returning from loan and Nunnely coming through so I'm going to have a lot of pace to play with next season.

Killer Balls may be a step too far, but I'm watching it closely and so far - over a season - am yet to see a marked difference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Ö-zil to the Arsenal! said:

Killer Balls may be a step too far, but I'm watching it closely and so far - over a season - am yet to see a marked difference.

Nice, this is exactly what I've experimented with too. I don't think that killer balls is a step too far at all for a CB with the right skill set.

You have the perrrrfect CB in Bazoer in my mind for what we are discussing... but in your examples above you've been playing him in midfield? So are you suggesting that you may switch him back to CB or already do so now and then? 

I'm playing FM16 with Torino and had Bazoer himself playing CB for me for a season trying to implement these passes into the system but Tottenham swooped for him and I was forced to sell. Rugani and my future captain 19 y/o regen don't quite have the passing vision yet. 

I have an excellently developed Kimmich who I normally play in midfield but with surplus players there I've been experimenting with him as an elite ball playing CB. Only problem is that he's wasted there if the whole point is to open up a range of (not over the top, but line-skipping) passes from CB but he doesn't play them frequently enough. 

Still tweaking, but this is a goal for sure. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, acmilano112000 said:

You have the perrrrfect CB in Bazoer in my mind for what we are discussing... but in your examples above you've been playing him in midfield? So are you suggesting that you may switch him back to CB or already do so now and then? 


Funny you should say that as well! :lol:


SWtgcuF.png


I'm going to have the same issue with Bazoer. He's one of the most complete players in Europe right now and all the big clubs are circling. He's committed to another year to see the youth develop but I think that after that I'll do well to keep him.

Check out Rivaldo Coetzee from Ajax CT - if he's on your game. He's been wonderful for me and cost under a million.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is very funny @Ö-zil to the Arsenal! On your post about Riedewald I just assumed it was a screenshot of Bazoer. Forgot about Jairo. I stand corrected, you have TWO perrrrrfect players for a true ball playing CB. Personally, I don't find that the tactics creator "BPD" is ball playing enough. It needs further player adjustment with training and PI's to coax the right moves.

(Not to mention that the BPD even on stopper doesn't move out with the ball enough). For the life of me I cannot get a CB to step over the midfield line when we are in calm controlled advanced possession. Which is why I've given up trying to build a Conte 3-4-3 and basically all 3CB systems. In possession it just winds up with 3 wasted underutilized players sitting on the halfway line. Maybe works for a pure counterattacking tactic. And I've tried experimenting with sweepers and liberos but I don't want the central one to push up, I usually want the outside two to push up the way Azpilicueta and Cahill have been doing recently for Chelsea. 

Anyhow, sorry, mini-rant. To get back on topic, the point of that is why the 3CB frustration has led me back to 4-1-4-1 based tactics like this thread is about...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, acmilano112000 said:

That is very funny @Ö-zil to the Arsenal! On your post about Riedewald I just assumed it was a screenshot of Bazoer. Forgot about Jairo. I stand corrected, you have TWO perrrrrfect players for a true ball playing CB. Personally, I don't find that the tactics creator "BPD" is ball playing enough. It needs further player adjustment with training and PI's to coax the right moves.

(Not to mention that the BPD even on stopper doesn't move out with the ball enough). For the life of me I cannot get a CB to step over the midfield line when we are in calm controlled advanced possession. Which is why I've given up trying to build a Conte 3-4-3 and basically all 3CB systems. In possession it just winds up with 3 wasted underutilized players sitting on the halfway line. Maybe works for a pure counterattacking tactic. And I've tried experimenting with sweepers and liberos but I don't want the central one to push up, I usually want the outside two to push up the way Azpilicueta and Cahill have been doing recently for Chelsea. 

Anyhow, sorry, mini-rant. To get back on topic, the point of that is why the 3CB frustration has led me back to 4-1-4-1 based tactics like this thread is about...


3 centre backs is very useful for controlled build up play through the middle. I love 3-man defences but I just find the back four offers more efficient cover against opposition formations with 3 or 4 attackers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fair.

So, back on topic, question then for you @Ö-zil to the Arsenal!: What's with the full-backs? Can you talk about your choice to make them FBs instead of WBs? I'd wager its more common to see WBs in the 4-1-4-1 shape. Is it purely your concern for counter-attacks? 

You've explained your central roles so beautifully (RPM, Regista, etc). What's your take on the wide backs?

 

Sorting out the wide backs is my other new challenge. Previously I had a DM halfback and two raiding WBs on attack and support but I had them geting into fantastic positions on the edges of the opposing box and refuse to cross only to wait for a defender to close them down and try to dribble the defender to the byline. 9 times out of 10 what should have been my wide-open-square-ball-tap-in-goal turns into a corner kick instead. :seagull:

(From what I hear this happens still on FM17.)

So I'm accepting it as an issue of the ME and moving on to looking into alternative goals for my wide backs. The goal used to be exactly as above, minus the end result, but now I'm looking more towards how Bayern use theirs IRL (especially under Pep) and seeing what else I can do with the backs. 

Edited by acmilano112000

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, acmilano112000 said:

Fair.

So, back on topic, question then for you: What's with the full-backs? Can you talk about your choice to make them FBs instead of WBs? I'd wager its more common to see WBs in the 4-1-4-1 shape. Is it purely your concern for counter-attacks? 

You've explained your central roles so beautifully (RPM, Regista, etc). What's your take on the wide backs?

 

Sorting out the wide backs is my other new challenge. Previously I had a DM halfback and two raiding WBs on attack and support but I had them geting into fantastic positions on the edges of the opposing box and refuse to cross only to wait for a defender to close them down and try to dribble the defender to the byline. 9 times out of 10 what should have been my wide-open-square-ball-tap-in-goal turns into a corner kick instead. :seagull:

(From what I hear this happens still on FM17.)

So I'm accepting it as an issue of the ME and moving on to looking into alternative goals for my wide backs. The goal used to be exactly as above, minus the end result, but now I'm looking more towards how Bayern use theirs IRL (especially under Pep) and seeing what else I can do with the backs. 


Ah unfortunately don't talk to me about the half-back. I've made 3 threads - one here last year, one here this year and one in the bugs form this year - highlighting that it only works if you use wingbacks in the DM strata but SI have ignored it.

Wingbacks v Full Backs is simply a label - wingbacks just have a few extra pre-set instruction whilst the fullbacks are completely flexible, and could be identical to wingbacks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Ö-zil to the Arsenal! said:


Ah unfortunately don't talk to me about the half-back. I've made 3 threads - one here last year, one here this year and one in the bugs form this year - highlighting that it only works if you use wingbacks in the DM strata but SI have ignored it.

Wingbacks v Full Backs is simply a label - wingbacks just have a few extra pre-set instruction whilst the fullbacks are completely flexible, and could be identical to wingbacks.

But....but....they said the would look at it. :D

So literally just those PI's you mentioned were used? Is that so you can have different types of players performing the same role differently?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Anaconda Vice said:

But....but....they said the would look at it. :D

So literally just those PI's you mentioned were used? Is that so you can have different types of players performing the same role differently?


Yes, for example my right-backs - Jonas Svensson and Tete - are similar so they play the same way where as my left-backs - Diks and Augustinsson - play differently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Ö-zil to the Arsenal! said:


Yes, for example my right-backs - Jonas Svensson and Tete - are similar so they play the same way where as my left-backs - Diks and Augustinsson - play differently.

That's great. Basically allowing the intelligence of players to use their various individual strengths effectively in different situations and to play the role in their own way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ö-zil to the Arsenal! said:

You've got 4 options for a deep playmaker in the DM strata.

  1. Deep Lying Playmaker (Defend)
    • Most conservative, combines holding midfield with a playmaker role.
    • Static role with minimal movement - holds position and can't get forward.
    • No option to dribble so always going to pass.
  2. Deep Lying Playmaker (Support)
    • Similar role but with a supporting mentality, rather than defensive.
    • Remains very static - holds position and can't get forward.
    • Has the option to run with the ball, so could bring the ball out of defence himself.
  3. Roaming Playmaker
    • Supporting mentality so more of a midfielder.
    • Lateral movement - roams from position but can't move forward and has the option to move into the channels.
      • My observation in the match engine is he starts deep, then joins midfield. Does move forward, but not aggressively.
      • Movement makes him a very good passing option when teammates are in possession.
    • Dribbles more so will bring the ball out of defence himself.
  4. Regista
    • Supporting mentality so - again - more of a midfielder.
    • Full movement - roams from position, option to move forward but no option for the channels.
      • Offers the most aggressive movement.
    • Slightly more direct passing.
      • Could suit a quick transition.
    • Option to dribble, shoot or play risky passes.

 

That's excellent. For some reason I most often tend to go for DLP-D or DLP-S as my chosen playmaker role. But since reading your post, I played a game in my Liverpool save against Crystal Palace who used a flat 5-4-1 formation. I use 4-1-2-3 DM Wide as the modern 4-3-3 is called. I play Henderson at the DMC, usually as DLP-D with a few times in Support duty. In this game however, I switched him to Regista, not RPM because he lacks the Dribbling ability with only 12 for that attribute. He was so much more involved and aggressive with his play. I liked it a lot. Now I plan to use it more often when the opposition doesn't use an AMC. Btw, my other roles in midfield were BBM and CM-A.

1 hour ago, Ö-zil to the Arsenal! said:

Forgot to mention, but I did notice this nice little shape come up a few times during the analysis.


AyNZQUf.png


:lol:

Is this diamond with the following roles?

DM-D

WP-A

CM-S

CM-A

1 hour ago, Ö-zil to the Arsenal! said:


It's funny you should say that..


rh2aE46.png


Great insight. Look at the Player Traits, bottom right. I've got Zivkovic and Cerny returning from loan and Nunnely coming through so I'm going to have a lot of pace to play with next season.

Killer Balls may be a step too far, but I'm watching it closely and so far - over a season - am yet to see a marked difference.

 

46 minutes ago, Ö-zil to the Arsenal! said:


Funny you should say that as well! :lol:


SWtgcuF.png


I'm going to have the same issue with Bazoer. He's one of the most complete players in Europe right now and all the big clubs are circling. He's committed to another year to see the youth develop but I think that after that I'll do well to keep him.

Check out Rivaldo Coetzee from Ajax CT - if he's on your game. He's been wonderful for me and cost under a million.

Not many defenders with such good attributes for playing out of the back as these two. The other ones that come to mind are Pique and possibly Bartra.

Riedewald:

passing 14

technique 13

decisions 15

vision 16

Bazoer:

passing 15

technique 16

decisions 13

vision 17

Though one is let down by his technique a little, while the other by his decision, but both are young and can improve. The added bonus is that both are versatile and can play in multiple positions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Ö-zil to the Arsenal! said:


Ah unfortunately don't talk to me about the half-back. I've made 3 threads - one here last year, one here this year and one in the bugs form this year - highlighting that it only works if you use wingbacks in the DM strata but SI have ignored it.

Wingbacks v Full Backs is simply a label - wingbacks just have a few extra pre-set instruction whilst the fullbacks are completely flexible, and could be identical to wingbacks.

The Wingback role is slightly more aggressive in all equal duties compared to the Fullback role, from my observations. You can adjust the drilling and crossing, but not the aggressive nature which is coded on purpose, otherwise there will be no need for both roles. The Complete Wingback is even more aggressive (the most aggressive), however it gives you the risky roaming as well. You gotta have a special player to play that role to the best effect (think Dani Alves at Barca for all those years, especially under Pep) and the right structure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, yonko said:

That's excellent. For some reason I most often tend to go for DLP-D or DLP-S as my chosen playmaker role. But since reading your post, I played a game in my Liverpool save against Crystal Palace who used a flat 5-4-1 formation. I use 4-1-2-3 DM Wide as the modern 4-3-3 is called. I play Henderson at the DMC, usually as DLP-D with a few times in Support duty. In this game however, I switched him to Regista, not RPM because he lacks the Dribbling ability with only 12 for that attribute. He was so much more involved and aggressive with his play. I liked it a lot. Now I plan to use it more often when the opposition doesn't use an AMC. Btw, my other roles in midfield were BBM and CM-A.


Yea, I would say the ideal role for Henderson would be one of the Support roles but the challenge is then who holds the midfield given Liverpool's midfield set up. Does anyone? Is that why they've been conceding a lot?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, yonko said:

The Wingback role is slightly more aggressive in all equal duties compared to the Fullback role, from my observations. You can adjust the drilling and crossing, but not the aggressive nature which is coded on purpose, otherwise there will be no need for both roles. The Complete Wingback is even more aggressive (the most aggressive), however it gives you the risky roaming as well. You gotta have a special player to play that role to the best effect (think Dani Alves at Barca for all those years, especially under Pep) and the right structure.


According to the mentality bar on the Player Instructions screen, they're all the same.

However, I have no idea if anything is there's anything hard-coded into the match engine. If there is, I've not noticed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Ö-zil to the Arsenal! said:


Yea, I would say the ideal role for Henderson would be one of the Support roles but the challenge is then who holds the midfield given Liverpool's midfield set up. Does anyone? Is that why they've been conceding a lot?

I'm starting to think that Henderson is Regista, Emre Can/Wijnaldum is BBM and Lallana is CM-A. The reason they concede a lot of goals is because either they get caught on the counter or someone makes a stupid mistake at the back. The only one I haven't seen make a mistake is Matip so far, or at least a mistake that cost them a goal. And if they get exposed on the counter is more because Klopp has both fullbacks so high (and wide) up the field as wingers, that they are leaving Matip and Lovren stranded. The problem is not so much Hendo's aggressiveness in the middle. 

But against Man United and recently Southampton, it seems like they've learned their lesson from previous mistakes (Burnley earlier in the season). Anyway that is a little off topic and IRL.;)

6 minutes ago, Ö-zil to the Arsenal! said:


According to the mentality bar on the Player Instructions screen, they're all the same.

However, I have no idea if anything is there's anything hard-coded into the match engine. If there is, I've not noticed.

Yeah I know about the mentality bar. I saw your post btw in the skinning section and I adjusted the code that was suggested there, so now I have a numerical representation of the mentality bar. But I think it is hard coded in the ME that the Wingbacks are more aggressive than Fullbacks. As I said, otherwise what's the point of having both roles as options, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Yeah I know about the mentality bar. I saw your post btw in the skinning section and I adjusted the code that was suggested there, so now I have a numerical representation of the mentality bar. But I think it is hard coded in the ME that the Wingbacks are more aggressive than Fullbacks. As I said, otherwise what's the point of having both roles as options, right?

They're not hardcoded and I agree its pointless having all the roles we have for the fullback positions because they can all be created from PI's. Myself and others over many years asked for them to be cut down be we was ignored.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, yonko said:

Yeah I know about the mentality bar. I saw your post btw in the skinning section and I adjusted the code that was suggested there, so now I have a numerical representation of the mentality bar. But I think it is hard coded in the ME that the Wingbacks are more aggressive than Fullbacks. As I said, otherwise what's the point of having both roles as options, right?


I am not convinced. Sadly, my opinion of SI has fallen quite considerably since they ignored the Half-Back issue. Many of the player roles seem to be nothing more than labels and completely pointless differences. For example:

  • The Box-to-Box Midfielder is a Midfielder (Support) plus roaming. And yes, Roaming is an option for the Midfield (Support).
  • The Complete Forward (Support) is the Deep-Lying Forward (Support) plus roaming and dribbling. Again, both options.
  • Complete Forward (Attack) is just the Advanced Forward with roaming and risky passes.

Personally, I find it quite misleading.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Cleon said:

They're not hardcoded and I agree its pointless having all the roles we have for the fullback positions because they can all be created from PI's. Myself and others over many years asked for them to be cut down be we was ignored.


There we go, direct from the man himself! :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Ö-zil to the Arsenal! said:


I am not convinced. Sadly, my opinion of SI has fallen quite considerably since they ignored the Half-Back issue. Many of the player roles seem to be nothing more than labels and completely pointless differences. For example:

  • The Box-to-Box Midfielder is a Midfielder (Support) plus roaming. And yes, Roaming is an option for the Midfield (Support).
  • The Complete Forward (Support) is the Deep-Lying Forward (Support) plus roaming and dribbling. Again, both options.
  • Complete Forward (Attack) is just the Advanced Forward with roaming and risky passes.

Personally, I find it quite misleading.

This annoys me too. Roles should only be added if they add value and have behaviours that are different from the other roles for that position. Like HB (when working), Playmakers and targetmen, they all have behaviours hardcoded that you can' t directly influence or repeat via other roles and PI's. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I agree with you both. SI need to re-think the roles a little bit. Too many of them are similar. But I guess that is the effect of different people expressing opinions they want more roles, more customization of the roles, etc. Personally I think SI need to ask people like Cleon and others who have an excellent in-depth knowledge through the years of the ME and the tactical side of the game, how to better improve this aspect of the game. That's how the Tactics Creator was implemented in the first place many years ago. Btw, same thing needs to happen with Training side of the game, but that is a whole another topic.....pandora's box.....

I could be wrong and I can accept it, but I swear I have observed that wingbacks are more aggressive than fullbacks. There is something different......but it could be that my eyes mislead me too....anyway, don't want to derail this excellent thread with this....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ozil Excellent read again mate? 

I like your tactical set up a lot especially the 4141. I would just like to know how you would fit player like Mesut Ozil in formation like a 4141. This formation seems right for Arsenal but it comes back to to do with Mesut Ozil

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Excellent read! You really have the ability to explain in simple terms while at the same time inspire your readers to have a go by themselves. 

I have a question for you: don't you get many throughballs over your defensive line when you play with such a high line? You have good defenders but they are not exceptionally fast defenders? Often when I try a system like yours I have problem with balls over the top because my pressing is not good enough, even playing as Chelsea with pretty fast defenders and good midfielders who press.

How do you make sure that doesn't happen too often?

Thanks!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, James9 said:

Ozil Excellent read again mate? 

I like your tactical set up a lot especially the 4141. I would just like to know how you would fit player like Mesut Ozil in formation like a 4141. This formation seems right for Arsenal but it comes back to to do with Mesut Ozil

There isn't a thread where you don't pop up and ask how you can use this with Arsenal and fit Ozil into it.:D;) How many set ups have you gone through by now? Just kidding....

I would try Ozil as Wide Playmaker on the right. You have other options for the center but IMO Arsenal lack top quality on the right side of attack. Walcott and the Ox are not good enough for me. 

But personally I wouldn't play him anywhere else but at AMC. Therefore this structure is not for Arsenal. I would use 4-4-1-1 instead and you can use the same playing style as in this thread. If the opposition doesn't use a DMC, then make Ozil your (sole) playmaker with everyone else in generic roles. If facing a formation that uses DMC (s), then change him to the generic AMC role - duty depends on the rest of the set up. And choose the another position as the playmaker. Arsenal are loaded with players suitable to playmaking roles, I'm sure you know they are by now - just figure out what is the best playmaking role to use for what you want the team and the player to do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hate that I don't have much to add after you put so much effort into this other than thanks. I have all of your threads bookmarked and refer to them weekly when trying to contextualize the ME.  You have a real gift for this, pleasure to read another wonderful thread. :thup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

first of all top stuff it really is. the amount of stuff some people put on this site is so helpful.

 

I have one question. Central Midfielders now attack the space opened up - one has Attacking duty and the other instructed to get forward more. what is the difference? will using it that way attack the same way as a CM-A but help more in defence?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, danfmnoob said:

first of all top stuff it really is. the amount of stuff some people put on this site is so helpful.

 

I have one question. Central Midfielders now attack the space opened up - one has Attacking duty and the other instructed to get forward more. what is the difference? will using it that way attack the same way as a CM-A but help more in defence?

I don't know about his reasoning, but as far as I know, mentality affects more than attacking runs. The Attacking duty MC will be inclined to make riskier choices on and off the ball in general, including those related to passing, pressing etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Excellent thread, was a big fan of your Sacchi 4411 pressing tactic.

Was playing as Tottenham recently and using  your FM16 tactics found the following formation worked really well in FM17;

                                                        SK-d

WB-A                                  DC-d             DC-d                                 WB-a

                                                       AM-d

W-A                                    B2B-s            AP-s                                  W-a

                                                        CF-s

Using your England Tactics in the Sacchi thread; V. Fluid and Standard with 4 instructions; higher tempo, close much more, press keeper, push higher up.

Played great football and sound defensively, Kane banging in the goals. The 2 central midfielders linked up really well and so did wingers and full backs.

Thanks for the tips :)

NB found Spurs had the players for this formation and a really good starting squad so will see if I can make it work at Milan which needs a lot of work!

Edited by Markmilan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another amazing thread with loads to take away and think about! Thanks for taking the time to share!

Only question that comes to mind is one asked earlier in the thread but I'm not sure got a direct answer. Do you still use Close Down Much Less PI on your DM(d), DLP(d) and RPM(s)?

Sidenote - just noticed the DM(d) naturally Closes Down More, but you can still apply Close Down Much Less to the role. Huh.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, James9 said:

Ozil Excellent read again mate? 

I like your tactical set up a lot especially the 4141. I would just like to know how you would fit player like Mesut Ozil in formation like a 4141. This formation seems right for Arsenal but it comes back to to do with Mesut Ozil


If I'm honest with you, I don't know how I would play with Arsenal.

There's no out-and-out left-sided player in attack which makes life difficult. As with Ozil, I'd prefer play him in an Attacking Midfield role as he's just about the best on the game but I'm not sure how I would structure the rest of the team.

My bias for Arsenal makes it difficult to manage them.


 

5 hours ago, danfmnoob said:

first of all top stuff it really is. the amount of stuff some people put on this site is so helpful.

 

I have one question. Central Midfielders now attack the space opened up - one has Attacking duty and the other instructed to get forward more. what is the difference? will using it that way attack the same way as a CM-A but help more in defence?


What I'm trying to create is a kind of 'double 8'. Seen as my wide players were no longer cutting in, I wanted my central midfielders creating a real attacking threat. Enjoyed the way Pep had the Man City midfield set up with De Bruyne and Silva.

As for the difference - think of the real-life example of Lampard and Gerrard (they could never play together, right? :lol:)

The MC (A) behaves similarly to Lampard. Very aggressive midfielder, only observable difference between this role and an AMC is his defensive position is in midfield but Klaassen also regularly leads the press.

The MC(S) behaves more like Gerrard. All-action midfielder, involved with everything but also gets forward and gets goals. Aggressive but not quite as much as the MC(A) but involved in more in the rest of the match.


 

4 hours ago, Markmilan said:

Excellent thread, was a big fan of your Sacchi 4411 pressing tactic.

Was playing as Tottenham recently and using  your FM16 tactics found the following formation worked really well in FM17;

                                                        SK-d

WB-A                                  DC-d             DC-d                                 WB-a

                                                       AM-d

W-A                                    B2B-s            AP-s                                  W-a

                                                        CF-s

Using your England Tactics in the Sacchi thread; V. Fluid and Standard with 4 instructions; higher tempo, close much more, press keeper, push higher up.

Played great football and sound defensively, Kane banging in the goals. The 2 central midfielders linked up really well and so did wingers and full backs.

Thanks for the tips :)

NB found Spurs had the players for this formation and a really good starting squad so will see if I can make it work at Milan which needs a lot of work!


That looks good - glad to hear it's working for you.

How does the B2B and AP(S) work? I imagine a lot of roaming? You've got great width. Harry Kane must be loving life and the opposition fullbacks suicidal! :lol:


 

3 hours ago, fmjames said:

Another amazing thread with loads to take away and think about! Thanks for taking the time to share!

Only question that comes to mind is one asked earlier in the thread but I'm not sure got a direct answer. Do you still use Close Down Much Less PI on your DM(d), DLP(d) and RPM(s)?

Sidenote - just noticed the DM(d) naturally Closes Down More, but you can still apply Close Down Much Less to the role. Huh.

 

 


Theoretically - yes, I would prefer to have the holding midfielder hold position whilst the others press. In reality - I think I actually forgot to click it and didn't notice a difference.

And yes, it's common for the MC(D) - or similar roles - to close down much more and much less. Logical, right? :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, yonko said:

There isn't a thread where you don't pop up and ask how you can use this with Arsenal and fit Ozil into it.:D;) How many set ups have you gone through by now? Just kidding....

I would try Ozil as Wide Playmaker on the right. You have other options for the center but IMO Arsenal lack top quality on the right side of attack. Walcott and the Ox are not good enough for me. 

But personally I wouldn't play him anywhere else but at AMC. Therefore this structure is not for Arsenal. I would use 4-4-1-1 instead and you can use the same playing style as in this thread. If the opposition doesn't use a DMC, then make Ozil your (sole) playmaker with everyone else in generic roles. If facing a formation that uses DMC (s), then change him to the generic AMC role - duty depends on the rest of the set up. And choose the another position as the playmaker. Arsenal are loaded with players suitable to playmaking roles, I'm sure you know they are by now - just figure out what is the best playmaking role to use for what you want the team and the player to do.

I know I have been through many set ups now with Arsenal. I think this is because the current team still is not balanced. I think Ozil is the best number 10 on FM but if for example I wanted to play a 4141 system then what do you do with Ozil. I see your point about playing him as a Wide Playmaker Attack. 

I am not a fan of the having a player in the AMC position because I think they can be ineffective if marked by a really good DMC. But because I have Ozil I have to find a way to play him. 

Ozil is a number 10 there is no doubt about that but I am not a fan of the AMC and I have the best player in that position on FM.

Anyway I do not want to take away from this excellent thread so I will leave it there for now. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Ö-zil to the Arsenal! said:


If I'm honest with you, I don't know how I would play with Arsenal.

There's no out-and-out left-sided player in attack which makes life difficult. As with Ozil, I'd prefer play him in an Attacking Midfield role as he's just about the best on the game but I'm not sure how I would structure the rest of the team.

My bias for Arsenal makes it difficult to manage them.


 


What I'm trying to create is a kind of 'double 8'. Seen as my wide players were no longer cutting in, I wanted my central midfielders creating a real attacking threat. Enjoyed the way Pep had the Man City midfield set up with De Bruyne and Silva.

As for the difference - think of the real-life example of Lampard and Gerrard (they could never play together, right? :lol:)

The MC (A) behaves similarly to Lampard. Very aggressive midfielder, only observable difference between this role and an AMC is his defensive position is in midfield but Klaassen also regularly leads the press.

The MC(S) behaves more like Gerrard. All-action midfielder, involved with everything but also gets forward and gets goals. Aggressive but not quite as much as the MC(A) but involved in more in the rest of the match.


 


That looks good - glad to hear it's working for you.

How does the B2B and AP(S) work? I imagine a lot of roaming? You've got great width. Harry Kane must be loving life and the opposition fullbacks suicidal! :lol:


 

 


Theoretically - yes, I would prefer to have the holding midfielder hold position whilst the others press. In reality - I think I actually forgot to click it and didn't notice a difference.

And yes, it's common for the MC(D) - or similar roles - to close down much more and much less. Logical, right? :lol:

I am the same because I am an Arsenal fan I find it difficult to manage them because I so attached to the players. I find it hard selling the players that I watch and cheer for every week. I know I am not a fan of players in the AMC but Ozil makes life difficult because I do not want to sell him. He is a great player and my favourite Arsenal player behind Henry and Bergkamp. 

I which I could find a system that works for Arsenal. I was hoping you would make a system in the current Arsenal squad the only thing I have is the Arsenal Invincible Thread which still has its limitations with the current Arsenal Squad. The Sacchi thread which does not fit the Arsenal squad I have now. 

And you newest instalment which I like but again does not really fit Arsenal.

Anyway I will have to keep trying and hopefully I can pick up some advice from you and others 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Im interested to know who you would class as the holding midfielder in the first formation? Im guessing the MC (d) as the whilst the roaming playermaker is playing the DM position, hes much more vital to the attacking moves than the defensive ones, plus he will roam too much?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Kamakazeee said:

Im interested to know who you would class as the holding midfielder in the first formation? Im guessing the MC (d) as the whilst the roaming playermaker is playing the DM position, hes much more vital to the attacking moves than the defensive ones, plus he will roam too much?

that seems correct. He even mentions about limiting the roaming from the Cm(d) as he has roaming and chasing down the ball as default - so you can "turn them off" to better suit a holding midfielder.

 

Looking at his images - the cm(d) drops then the rpm moves about. but still keeps near enough to the ball at all times in attack to I guess either recycle possession or offer a smart , simple outlet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm very much inspired by your topics and started using the very flued shape already in FM16, which brought me great success! 

Now I'm trying the same in FM17, but I'm curious what PI's do you give to your players! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Ö-zil to the Arsenal! stunning read, thanks for sharing. As a fellow fan of Ajax saves I wanted to know how you plan to use the following players:

Cerny

Nouri

(could these 2 be effective both centrally and wide)

Van Der Beek

Edited by Mikeraff
Wrong link and found an answer on another thread

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Kamakazeee said:

Im interested to know who you would class as the holding midfielder in the first formation? Im guessing the MC (d) as the whilst the roaming playermaker is playing the DM position, hes much more vital to the attacking moves than the defensive ones, plus he will roam too much?


Yes, the MC(D) - the Roaming Playmaker is given more freedom to control the match and as a result ventures out of position more.
 

18 hours ago, BadAss88 said:

I'm very much inspired by your topics and started using the very flued shape already in FM16, which brought me great success! 

Now I'm trying the same in FM17, but I'm curious what PI's do you give to your players! 


There's nothing too essential, but one change I forgot to mention is that normally my goalkeeper distributes to the playmaker - rolling the ball out as he drops deep - but against the 4-2-3-1 he distributes to the space on the flanks to bypass the 4 opposition attackers.

  • The MCs move into channels and get forward more (obviously not when an MC(D)) 
  • The striker moves into channels as well.
  • Wide Midfielder / Playmaker roams and comes narrow.


 

4 hours ago, Mikeraff said:

@Ö-zil to the Arsenal! stunning read, thanks for sharing. As a fellow fan of Ajax saves I wanted to know how you plan to use the following players:

Cerny

Nouri

(could these 2 be effective both centrally and wide)

Van Der Beek


All 3 seem to have random potentials. In my first game, Nouri and van de Beek were excellent whilst Cerny was hit-and-miss but in this save Cerny looks the best of the bunch whilst Nouri and van de Beek are rated as potential first-teamers.

All 3 out on loan at the moment - Cerny is at Valencia, Nouri at West Ham and van de Beek is at Lazio. All getting lots of game time so we'll see what they look like when they get back.

Cerny has been troublesome. He's twice asked for a transfer, failed to be tutored and failed to learn new Player Traits meanwhile big clubs have been sniffing. I've got him out on loan at the moment so I'm tempted to cash in.

Other alternative is that I could let him fight for a spot in the team, but I have the impression he'd give me grief again.

Nouri and VDB on the other hand, less potential but model students. Rated potentially slightly lower than Klaassen, which is fine. Both tutored - I think they're both Resolute - and picked up interesting traits whilst committing to new contracts and no-fuss over transfers.

I assume I will lose Sensi at some point as he doesn't have the ties to Ajax and I think he could attract a good fee. So, van de Beek has got potential to take over as the deep playmaker.

Nouri looks like he can compete for a place at the attacking end of midfield. Good cover, rotation and comfortably good enough for the Eredivise but maybe not first choice in Europe. Similar squad status to van Ginkel. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   1 member

×
×
  • Create New...