Width

[el_locoman]

I recently started a new save with Olympique Marseille. The tactic I want to make is based on inviting pressure from the opposition and try to exploit the space they have left behind when we're winning the ball. I want my team to be quite narrow when defending and deny the opposition trough the middle of my defence. As far as I have understood the TI "width" is about how wide my team is when attacking, but how can I influence the width when defending to be as narrow as I want it?

[enigmatic]

The game automatically sets back fours to be narrow (which is a good thing as it saves a lot of headaches and arguments over the best setting to use)

Unfortunately, the game also automatically fails to encourage wingers to defend properly at all, so either use them solely for counter attacking or don't use them at all,

Vertical compactness in defence (gap between defenders and midfielders) is achieved, somewhat illogically, by the "very fluid" slider.

[herne79]

3 hours ago, enigmatic said:

The game automatically sets back fours to be narrow (which is a good thing as it saves a lot of headaches and arguments over the best setting to use)

Unfortunately, the game also automatically fails to encourage wingers to defend properly at all, so either use them solely for counter attacking or don't use them at all,

Vertical compactness in defence (gap between defenders and midfielders) is achieved, somewhat illogically, by the "very fluid" slider.

Your first line is the only correct sentence there.

@el_locoman Welcome to the forum .

You are correct, the Width TI is indeed used when you are in possession.  When defending, your team retreats into a tight defensive shape all by itself.  The knock-on effect of the Width TI is during the defensive transition phase - your players will have slightly further to run to get back into their defensive shape when using wide settings.  It's not much but worth mentioning.

There is however an issue with formations that use "wingers" (generic term) such as the 4-4-2 whereby the wingers tend to stay quite wide (some would say too wide) when defending to mark opposition fullbacks.  This "look" on pitch can be somewhat exaggerated by the central midfielders coming a little too narrow at the same time, thus quite large gaps can sometimes appear between central midfield and wide midfield.

It's still perfectly possible to set up tactical systems that use such formations, it's just worth noting seeing as I've been talking about a tight defensive shape and you notice these gaps .

[Thyra13]

Regarding width and narrow formations, 

Would a 442 diamond set to "play wider" push the two central mids wider, closer to "half spaces" thus increasing distance and having players less clustered together? 

Ie an attacking, narrow formation you'd want more width vs one with natural wide player? 

[enigmatic]

On 6/28/2017 at 21:58, Analog said:

Wingers do defend though, especially with player instructions.  If you need more defensive positioning from them then drop them into the midfield strata, rather than the attacking midfield.  

They defend far too wide especially from the perspective of the OP's desire to defend narrow, and tend to largely ignore actual threats of opposition wingers in favour of potential threats of opposition fullbacks (I'd actually recommend the opposite: if you want to use wingers you might as well play them in the AMR/AML slot where they're most effective going forward since neither sort of winger tracks back effectively)

 

Baffled why @herne79 thinks only my first sentence is correct when he goes on to restate the point I made in my second sentence, and the "very fluid = vertical compactness" is so uncontroversial it's even in the forum FAQ (I mean, you can achieve it in other ways like giving midfielders defend duties but that's obvious)

[herne79]

46 minutes ago, enigmatic said:

Baffled why @herne79 thinks only my first sentence is correct when he goes on to restate the point I made in my second sentence, and the "very fluid = vertical compactness" is so uncontroversial it's even in the forum FAQ (I mean, you can achieve it in other ways like giving midfielders defend duties but that's obvious)

If baffled, re-read your own sentences and my replies.

1)  You state "the game also automatically fails to encourage wingers to defend properly at all".  This is simply untrue.  Wingers are perfectly capable of defending, tracking back perfectly well in the defensive phase.  And I certainly didn't "restate the point" by mentioning apparent wide midfield positioning - read my final sentence again where I say it's perfectly possible to set up systems that use such formations.  It wouldn't be possible if wingers couldn't defend properly at all.

2)  "Vertical compactness in defence (gap between defenders and midfielders) is achieved, somewhat illogically, by the "very fluid" slider."  Change the word "is" in your sentence to "can be" or "may be" and I'd agree. 

We need to be clear about information given out and the audience who reads it - especially the inexperienced players.  You may think it nit picking, but making statements such as this can give the perception to others that it's the only way of achieving something.  You correctly say above "you can achieve it in other ways", but it's not obvious to inexperienced users especially when they've read how it apparently "is" achieved.

It would probably have been better if I'd elaborated more in my initial response, I was just keen to ensure the inexperienced OP didn't get hold of the wrong end of the stick .

[ceefax the cat]

With any luck there have been enough complaints about this for it not to be such an issue next time out