Overloads & playmaker

[Armistice]

Hi there, I see that more and more players are using the IWB role and it has intrigued me quite a lot in the past, but never tended to use it. I was thinking of a system that was intended to use two inverted wingbacks, an advanced playmaker and overload down a side, to exploit the other side, so this is what I came up with.

 

 

So I was thinking of my inverted wingbacks to act as something like deep lying playmakers, freeing the central midfielders to play a move advanced/roaming role in the middle but keep the depth. Basically I want my forward to push the opponents defensive line for my AP to create him space and to put opponents defenders under the pressure of what decision to take, press the AP and leave my striker unmarked or leave my AP unmarked and let him pick the right pass. You can notice that one of my IWB is slightly more advanced than the other so I was wondering if that's possible in something like this formation in FM.

 

 

I think the movement is quite rudimentary, but it should help us get past a few defensive teams? I still can't get the pattern for destroying those sides and punish their wish to come and defend deep. The problem at first side is the lack of defensive cover except the three central defenders, so possibly use a HB in the DM strata?

[ham_aka_stam]

I'd imagine you may struggle against teams that pack the midfield, with only one CMs

Bear in mind in defence any WB or FB will still look to form a line with the CBs, so you're going to have one player in front of them.

[Barbosa04]

41 minutes ago, ham_aka_stam said:

I'd imagine you may struggle against teams that pack the midfield, with only one CMs

Bear in mind in defence any WB or FB will still look to form a line with the CBs, so you're going to have one player in front of them.

Actually not. IWBs will move deep into center and act like CMs in most transitions. only reverting back to WB/FB when defending closer to your box. This behavior of IWBs only happen if there are wide players in front of them, which is the case with OPs line-up.

[jc577]

2 minutes ago, Barbosa04 said:

Actually not. IWBs will move deep into center and act like CMs in most transitions. only reverting back to WB/FB when defending closer to your box. This behavior of IWBs only happen if there are wide players in front of them, which is the case with OPs line-up.

His team will defend in a back 5 though regardless of the rest of his set up, and will only have one CM (DLP) ahead of them, which is what I think @ham_aka_stam was suggesting. 

[ham_aka_stam]

Yeah in transitions might be OK, but when in the defensive phase (I realise this is to be used against Parked Buses, but this may still occur) he may find himself stretched, and any opposition movement could see CBs running out to close down, leaving gaps.

[Barbosa04]

That’s an interesting formation. Right now I’m also playing with solitary DLP(s) player on CM strata with IWBs on sides. The ones from WB strata come close to DLP and play on one vertical line. I’m not sure how the one from FB strata will act.

As for overloading you can further increase the likelihood of ball ending up on left side by changing the LM player to AP. If you train a PPM to 2 APs to “switch ball to other flank” trait, that would release the right winger into rather tasty positions, as he will likely be  left unmarked in most of the times.

[Barbosa04]

4 minutes ago, ham_aka_stam said:

Yeah in transitions might be OK, but when in the defensive phase (I realise this is to be used against Parked Buses, but this may still occur) he may find himself stretched, and any opposition movement could see CBs running out to close down, leaving gaps.

Defensive phase doesn’t refer only to defending in your box. Wherever you lose the ball, you are already in defensive mode, and IWBs will challenge and close down opposition CMs when far from your box.

And when you are deep in your box AP will also come to help out so there is not only one CM screening your defense most of the times.

11 minutes ago, jc577 said:

His team will defend in a back 5 though regardless of the rest of his set up, and will only have one CM (DLP) ahead of them, which is what I think @ham_aka_stam was suggesting. 

Depending on team mentality his AP will also play central screening role when he is pinned in his box.

[ham_aka_stam]

I'd disagree and say that you're only in the defensive phase when you're re-organised after an attack, I haven't played with IWBs in the WB/DM line only in the FB line and they very much rush to get back into line with the defence.

I'd still be wary of relying on the AP(A) offering much in the way of protection to the box, but will have to give it a go to know for sure.

Keen to see how the OP gets on.

[Armistice]

4 hours ago, ham_aka_stam said:

I'd disagree and say that you're only in the defensive phase when you're re-organised after an attack, I haven't played with IWBs in the WB/DM line only in the FB line and they very much rush to get back into line with the defence.

I'd still be wary of relying on the AP(A) offering much in the way of protection to the box, but will have to give it a go to know for sure.

Keen to see how the OP gets on.

Yep that's what made me reflect once more before heading in game, my AP probably won't offer too much protection to my defence so I have to mix it up a bit to see what it could result. Was thinking of moving my AP in CM strata, but that means my striker will also have role changed most likely. Also, I thought of using a defensive midfielder instead of three CBs for extra protection in the defensive phase.

 

Something like this.

 

 

It should be a 4-1-4-1 in defensive phase and something like this in attack.

 

[Rashidi]

I've been recommending the use of IWBs since the first day they came out. These players are just good at going forward. The challenge is how you balance the flank on which they operate. Most people don't get IWBs working properly because they choose the wrong players for the role. To find out just go to their training programs, click on IWB, those are the attributes. To me they are like a playmaking fullback. SO think of a PM and a FB and combine them together. That's actually not so easy when you think about it. 

The second step is thinking of how you want to leverage the movement. If anyone has been following my series I usually have a few systems that use the IWB, in fact, sometimes I don't like using them because it makes overloads too easy.  The thing about the IWB is that its only effective if it helps to release someone in front of him. Otherwise, it just becomes traffic wasting time. So you want to think about how you want to use them with someone else nearly to unlock areas of the pitch. Its the same kind of issues Pep had with Bayern. There he was blessed with really good and technical players, fast forward to Manchester City, and it didn't do so good. Furthermore, the use of IWBs has a distinct weakness,  and it lies in isolating the strikers from midfield. If that ever happens you will lose. Leicester vs Manchester City - the two strikers choked the IWBs from playing any part in the game. 

In the game now there are times when the AI seems fairly astute at handling this, sometimes it isn't.  A common myth is that IWBs work best in assymetric systems. I have used an IWB in a 4231 and it works just fine. You don't need assy tactics to make IWBs work, you just need to ask one fundamental question - what do you do with the player whose space he is entering. You answer that and come up with a plan and you will find that IWBs are going to be a role that needs to be tweaked in FM18. I have said since the day I introduced that role here in a video, that its an exploit waiting to happen. SI have tweaked it to prevent the exploits I was expecting, I just wished there was an option to have a less adventurous version, but I reckon SI did the right thing by not introducing that yet.  Its a good role, that can be used in a variety of systems, in fact one of my favourite ways of using them is in a 3 man backline

 

[Armistice]

10 minutes ago, Rashidi said:

I've been recommending the use of IWBs since the first day they came out. These players are just good at going forward. The challenge is how you balance the flank on which they operate. Most people don't get IWBs working properly because they choose the wrong players for the role. To find out just go to their training programs, click on IWB, those are the attributes. To me they are like a playmaking fullback. SO think of a PM and a FB and combine them together. That's actually not so easy when you think about it. 

The second step is thinking of how you want to leverage the movement. If anyone has been following my series I usually have a few systems that use the IWB, in fact, sometimes I don't like using them because it makes overloads too easy.  The thing about the IWB is that its only effective if it helps to release someone in front of him. Otherwise, it just becomes traffic wasting time. So you want to think about how you want to use them with someone else nearly to unlock areas of the pitch. Its the same kind of issues Pep had with Bayern. There he was blessed with really good and technical players, fast forward to Manchester City, and it didn't do so good. Furthermore, the use of IWBs has a distinct weakness,  and it lies in isolating the strikers from midfield. If that ever happens you will lose. Leicester vs Manchester City - the two strikers choked the IWBs from playing any part in the game. 

In the game now there are times when the AI seems fairly astute at handling this, sometimes it isn't.  A common myth is that IWBs work best in assymetric systems. I have used an IWB in a 4231 and it works just fine. You don't need assy tactics to make IWBs work, you just need to ask one fundamental question - what do you do with the player whose space he is entering. You answer that and come up with a plan and you will find that IWBs are going to be a role that needs to be tweaked in FM18. I have said since the day I introduced that role here in a video, that its an exploit waiting to happen. SI have tweaked it to prevent the exploits I was expecting, I just wished there was an option to have a less adventurous version, but I reckon SI did the right thing by not introducing that yet.  Its a good role, that can be used in a variety of systems, in fact one of my favourite ways of using them is in a 3 man backline

 

Experimenting as we speak and losing to Sunderland at home. I will either delete this game or just use someone else's tactics. Either I am too stupid or this game is pathetic and working only for a few people who have/had the time to look into tactics and stuff like that. I am sad because I have spent so much time to read guides and watch videos instead of doing some productive stuff.

[craiigman]

10 minutes ago, nightwalker22 said:

Experimenting as we speak and losing to Sunderland at home. I will either delete this game or just use someone else's tactics. Either I am too stupid or this game is pathetic and working only for a few people who have/had the time to look into tactics and stuff like that. I am sad because I have spent so much time to read guides and watch videos instead of doing some productive stuff.

Don't give up! I said the same thing at one point and was honestly so done with FM. But this Celtic save I'm playing has turned me around. At times it's easy yes, at times you need to pay more attention and not just expect a win. But that's good. It also means you have a bit more freedom to try out new systems and such. Will probably keep this Celtic save going, but will look now at starting up a different one and use what I learn from my Celtic save and adapt it to other saves/ teams.

With any FM it only takes 1 save to get you hooked, sometimes it just takes a while to get there.

[Rashidi]

I will just add one that thing. The only reason why things come so easy to me in FM terms is cos I tried relentlessly.  A large part of this game that people take for granted is attributes. It's so common a problem. You need to step back and take things a step at a time.

Whats the right attribute for the IWB, now what's the right attributes for those around him. Just think in terms of movement. I know this sounds generalised, but it's at the very heart of the game. And, it took me years to figure it out. Now I've formulated a methodology, and central to it is attributes. I will try and put more basic videos out on this very soon. Funny thing is this even when it comes to my book, people still skip the first two sections about attributes and go straight to the tactic building portions and the ask me on Discord about how to combine roles.

i guarantee you this much, work on attributes and understanding what affects what and this game will become **** easy

[Armistice]

39 minutes ago, Rashidi said:

I will just add one that thing. The only reason why things come so easy to me in FM terms is cos I tried relentlessly.  A large part of this game that people take for granted is attributes. It's so common a problem. You need to step back and take things a step at a time.

Whats the right attribute for the IWB, now what's the right attributes for those around him. Just think in terms of movement. I know this sounds generalised, but it's at the very heart of the game. And, it took me years to figure it out. Now I've formulated a methodology, and central to it is attributes. I will try and put more basic videos out on this very soon. Funny thing is this even when it comes to my book, people still skip the first two sections about attributes and go straight to the tactic building portions and the ask me on Discord about how to combine roles.

i guarantee you this much, work on attributes and understanding what affects what and this game will become **** easy

I have created a custom club with the best players to play those roles, like Alaba, Iniesta, Modric and lost to Sunderland and drew with Charlton. Irl if you actually need to be tactical masterclass to beat a **** clubs like Charlton when having world class players in your squad, then I am a donkey.

[Rashidi]

How do you know those are the best players for the roles you want? Like I said before it's about combining them. If you want shortcuts you will tear your hair off and go bald.

[Armistice]

2 hours ago, Rashidi said:

How do you know those are the best players for the roles you want? Like I said before it's about combining them. If you want shortcuts you will tear your hair off and go bald.

Because the atributes say so. You telling me Iniesta is not fit for an AP (A) or Lewandowski could not play the DLF role...?

[Rashidi]

Again you are not looking at the whole picture. I talk about combining them to get the best you talk about individuals.

[Armistice]

15 minutes ago, Rashidi said:

Again you are not looking at the whole picture. I talk about combining them to get the best you talk about individuals.

Yeah ok, but I have the tactical setup a few posts above and I have taken the players I thought they could fill the roles.

[Rashidi]

When I look at your tactic, it doesn't even seem to me like you have thought about how all your players are going to move when you want to create overloads, which is why I suggest you think about how they combine together. The permutations are endless, but when I see your layout I don't see any chance of an overload, you are simply placing a player extra in midfield, but who is going to take advantage of it? How will the move move AROUND THE LEFT to create the overload you want on the right? What roles have you used. Why in the world are you even playing with a double IWB.  Why don't you just overload one side of the flank. Its so much easier.  When I create overloads I have a clear picture in my head, as to exactly what kind of movement I want, but you absolutely need to know your roles. 

 

Whenever I create overloads I am only thinking of one thing, movement. In this type of an overload which is from the same system, but I changed the role of my striker from DLF(A) to a F9 and my FB to a CWB(A) to unlock this movement.

[jc577]

@Rashidi Would something like this work?

?

[Armistice]

46 minutes ago, Rashidi said:

When I look at your tactic, it doesn't even seem to me like you have thought about how all your players are going to move when you want to create overloads, which is why I suggest you think about how they combine together. The permutations are endless, but when I see your layout I don't see any chance of an overload, you are simply placing a player extra in midfield, but who is going to take advantage of it? How will the move move AROUND THE LEFT to create the overload you want on the right? What roles have you used. Why in the world are you even playing with a double IWB.  Why don't you just overload one side of the flank. Its so much easier.  When I create overloads I have a clear picture in my head, as to exactly what kind of movement I want, but you absolutely need to know your roles. 

 

Whenever I create overloads I am only thinking of one thing, movement. In this type of an overload which is from the same system, but I changed the role of my striker from DLF(A) to a F9 and my FB to a CWB(A) to unlock this movement.

Ok but aren't Overloads supposed to be easy, I mean logically? You just put more players down a side of the pitch to drag more opponents down that flank and then immediately find a long pass to switch the play on the other flank and release player(s). The point is I don't know what I am doing wrong, in my thoughts I think this is well thought, even the tactic above I thought it was well thought, but it turns out it isn't so then maybe my logic is screwed and I can't help to play the game.

[Rashidi]

If they were easy everyone would be doing it. Just think things through, how do you get everyone on the left side to pass the ball to each other so effectively that they do not lose the ball?

[Armistice]

1 minute ago, Rashidi said:

If they were easy everyone would be doing it. Just think things through, how do you get everyone on the left side to pass the ball to each other so effectively that they do not lose the ball?

They're close to each other (have support in other words), I might say.

[Rashidi]

11 hours ago, jc577 said:

@Rashidi Would something like this work?

?

Yes

[Cap'nRad]

why not just use 3 atb with 2 dm's? the back 5 is hindering the defensive phase, forcing you into needless tweaks. 

Don't wanna tweak your idea too much but how about something like this:

D(s)    D(d)    D(d)

  DLP(s)   DM(s)

W(a) AP(s) W(s)

       AM(a)

        CF(s)

Gives similar shape in attack, and not porous in defence.