The 4231 Explained

[dc_blade]

Thanks for this article, @Cleon. I'd been considering a 4-2-3-1 DM as part of my struggles to implement that formation without leaking loads of goals. I came upon this and decided to go with a Seg Vol instead of a DLP and I've been tearing up the English lower leagues ever since. The SV is almost overpowered in my tactic. The guy who I play there was "a good League 2 player" but is still killing it at the top of League One, averaging 7.5 and chipping in with lots of goals. 

I had to make some tweaks. My CDs were getting caught out with long balls so my defensive line isn't so high and I have them closing down less. I also play a BWM (D) next to the SV and I think the staggering of the midfield lines allows me to play out of defense more effectively with the passing triangles you so rightly highlight in the OP. At first I struggled to get my AMC contributing, but when I dropped the guy with the "come deep to get the ball" PPM this improved--for me, the role is best for a guy who runs at the defense with the ball at feet and plays risky passes. Still trying to tweak the PIs here, though.  Getting the IF(A) scoring as much as I'd like has been another challenge. 

In the future, I expect to struggle against teams who play really deep. Right now, I'm unexpectedly topping the league and I think the opposition underestimates me. We'll see how things look when the usual "found out 2/3 way through the season" blip happens. Cheers mate, and UTB!

[Cleon]

I'm still seeing people struggle with getting this tactic to work. Regardless of whether you use MC.'s or the DM version all of this thread still applies, especially the mentality section I did where I compared standard vs attacking mentality. That section should really hit home with a few people who I've seen posting on here recently and struggling.

[westy8chimp]

Phew... When i saw you bump this thread i thought... Oops i should have checked before posting. But our approaches and view of the 4231differ significantly enough ot to render my topic useless

Side note... How do you find the time and energy to make your posts so informative! Bravo

[Cleon]

7 minutes ago, westy8chimp said:

Phew... When i saw you bump this thread i thought... Oops i should have checked before posting. But our approaches and view of the 4231differ significantly enough ot to render my topic useless

Side note... How do you find the time and energy to make your posts so informative! Bravo

Ah it wasn't in relation to your post, I'm loving your threads atm. I hope someone is collecting them and putting them in a single thread when you've finished the project as it's probably one of the best I've ever seen on these forums or anywhere else for that matter

 

[westy8chimp]

Ha thanks... I've raised a bug about my inability to upload videos... If i can get that sorted itd really help me add the analysis needed

[herne79]

51 minutes ago, Cleon said:

Ah it wasn't in relation to your post, I'm loving your threads atm. I hope someone is collecting them and putting them in a single thread when you've finished the project as it's probably one of the best I've ever seen on these forums or anywhere else for that matter

 

 

49 minutes ago, westy8chimp said:

Ha thanks... I've raised a bug about my inability to upload videos... If i can get that sorted itd really help me add the analysis needed

I'll just ask SI to rename the forum "Westy's Forum" .

[lam]

As an old head returning to the game and a long time fan of your work Cleon I have to say this is by far your most effective thread for me.

My results have been amazing but the pleasing thing is that i can now 'generally' get the team to play the way I want them too.

However I am having a few issues.

1. I cannot seem to get  performance out of any player I have in the AMC position. Unless they score their ratings are sub 7 and, more importantly, they do not really seem to contribute much to the game. I'm trying to avoid playing an AP role so as to not pull play to them intentionally. I have three players that work this spot. Eriksen, Ali and Fekir. All offer something different but all rate low when there.

If for any reason I am playing with a counter mentality or sitting deeper and pressing less (against Liverpool) then the AMC(A) works well but that is the only time I manage to pull anything out of the role.

2. Almost all my assist are coming from crosses or wide passes (mini crosses). I've recently bought a pacey AMR into the role and have him as Reg rather than AMR W(A) and its joyous to watch but I am keen to understand how others are finding their assits.

Based on the two comments I'm likely to start trying the AP(S/A) role but as I said I don't want to force play through that position.

Does Eng/Treq pull the play in the same fashion?

[zlatanera]

3 hours ago, lam said:

1. I cannot seem to get  performance out of any player I have in the AMC position. Unless they score their ratings are sub 7 and, more importantly, they do not really seem to contribute much to the game. I'm trying to avoid playing an AP role so as to not pull play to them intentionally. I have three players that work this spot. Eriksen, Ali and Fekir. All offer something different but all rate low when there.

Based on the two comments I'm likely to start trying the AP(S/A) role but as I said I don't want to force play through that position.

Does Eng/Treq pull the play in the same fashion?

I had this with my 4231 - do you have many PIs on the AMC? I gave mine all the Treq instructions but without the actual role just so he didn't get stuck in a passing loop with my deeper playmaker so I always figured that was the reason. I'd perhaps look at his highlights more closely - if he's doing what you want, does it matter if it isn't being recognised? 

Yes, Enganche and Trequartista (in all four selectable positions) are playmakers and thus draw the ball. 

[Cleon]

9 hours ago, lam said:

As an old head returning to the game and a long time fan of your work Cleon I have to say this is by far your most effective thread for me.

My results have been amazing but the pleasing thing is that i can now 'generally' get the team to play the way I want them too.

However I am having a few issues.

1. I cannot seem to get  performance out of any player I have in the AMC position. Unless they score their ratings are sub 7 and, more importantly, they do not really seem to contribute much to the game. I'm trying to avoid playing an AP role so as to not pull play to them intentionally. I have three players that work this spot. Eriksen, Ali and Fekir. All offer something different but all rate low when there.

If for any reason I am playing with a counter mentality or sitting deeper and pressing less (against Liverpool) then the AMC(A) works well but that is the only time I manage to pull anything out of the role.

2. Almost all my assist are coming from crosses or wide passes (mini crosses). I've recently bought a pacey AMR into the role and have him as Reg rather than AMR W(A) and its joyous to watch but I am keen to understand how others are finding their assits.

Based on the two comments I'm likely to start trying the AP(S/A) role but as I said I don't want to force play through that position.

Does Eng/Treq pull the play in the same fashion?

How are you playing overall? The same as me in the OP's? If so remember everything is funnelled for the IF to be the main man in the side.

1 - When you say they aren't contributing much to games, how do you mean? What's the player actually doing and how is he involved in the side? I know you saw he's not contributing much but he must be doing something? Who does he pass to? is he being bypassed when the other players in the side have the ball and so on. Assists and goals skew the ratings for attacking players badly. That's why I'm trying to focus on what he's actually doing for you, as this will hold all the answers as to why he isn't involved.

2 - How are you set up though, do you use roles in the side that cross the ball fairly often or encourage crosses? So wingbacks/complete wingbacks/wingers etc?

It's hard to give exact advice without knowing any details about how you're set up.

[lam]

Eriksen really struggles in this role as he is bullied to much and losses possession way to much. The stats are from Ali.

I just had a quick check through the form and off all the players have have had a stint in that position only one game produced a 7.00+rating and that was Ali when he scored 4 goals in the Carabou Cup.

The next lowest rating in the team is 7.24 and Ali is in 6.92 which makes him the lowest in the squad. If I am going direct against a massively attacking team use direct passing and have him on AMC(A) or SS(A) then he'll do well.

Interestingly. He demonstrates none of his PPM's in this role but loves to shoot from distance and he is surprisingly inaccurate.

It may very well be linked to my no.2 concern about attacks from the flanks. Maybe the wingbacks are pulling the play from the SV(A) and DM(D/S).

I'm loathe to change the role to AP(S/A) as I do not want to force play through them.

 

My whole setup is very similar to yours. The only changes I make are to the FC role which depending on their involvement in the game I will move to a DLP(S) rather than (A). My AMR role is normally Rad(A) or AP(A) with running often on as I do no have a winger but have two pacey guys that excel in short crosses (passes) from the edge of the box.

 

Thoughts?

 

[Jean0987654321]

Germany may need to take a look at this thread

[Cleon]

Quote

Eriksen really struggles in this role as he is bullied to much and losses possession way to much. The stats are from Ali.

why didn't you post Eriksen's stats? There isn't really anything wrong with those stats from Ali or the ratings he's getting. You seem overly focused on the rating rather than what the player is actually doing in game. Ali is seeing lots of the ball, doing a lot of key passes. The only really issue is him shooting and not getting them on target. However this is probably a byproduct of the rest of the attacking players all being on attack duties and a lot more advanced than the AM will be.

Quote

I just had a quick check through the form and off all the players have have had a stint in that position only one game produced a 7.00+rating and that was Ali when he scored 4 goals in the Carabou Cup.

The next lowest rating in the team is 7.24 and Ali is in 6.92 which makes him the lowest in the squad. If I am going direct against a massively attacking team use direct passing and have him on AMC(A) or SS(A) then he'll do well.

Again, focus on what the player is doing not what his rating is. 

Quote

Interestingly. He demonstrates none of his PPM's in this role but loves to shoot from distance and he is surprisingly inaccurate.

How can he get forward often or arrive late in the oppositions box when the 3 others players are so far away from him because they're all on attack duties and far too advanced? I spoke about this in detail in the series and how important it is having all the players play together. Currently 3 of your front 4 are isolated from the rest of the team. I don't understand why you'd have used 3 attacking duties.

Top Heavy Formations

One of the biggest obstacles people have with top heavy shapes is they don’t know how to firstly create space and movement and secondly don’t know how to use it when they have created it. Unlike deeper formations, it’s easy to have your front four isolated from the rest of the team when using this shape especially on higher mentality structures. When you use attacking duties and high mentalites you push the players even further forward, which isn’t always a good thing. If players are too high how can you create space let alone use it?

Not only that but it also requires the deeper players to supply them the ball constantly because they’ll be too high and attacking to be involved in most build up plays. When this happens it puts a lot of pressure on the full backs and the central midfielders and requires them to work even harder than normal while still carrying out their own duties. Basically you split your team into two different bands rather than a well oiled cohesive unit playing this way. This brings lots of issues, which I’ll be talking about in great depth a little further in the article.

Depending on how the opposition play, top heavy formations can naturally struggle to find space in behind the opposition. Especially if the opposition is sat deep and defending, then it gets harder to break these teams down. All the space that exists naturally is actually in front of the defensive line not behind. This means the role and duties you use here are vital in creating the space. Somehow you have to balance these roles out to offer the kind of movement you need.

Another important factor in this is the team shape you use. On the more fluid end of the scale players will be closer together and this again takes away space compared to the lower end team shapes. So if space is an issue then what kind of team shape you use will be vital. In fact all of the issues I’ve mentioned so far could mean you are restricted to long-shots without creating any real quality chances, at least not consistently.

Don’t worry though, I will be covering all of these issues a little later and discussing how we can stop it from happening and how to fix it, if you currently suffer with any of these issues.

Quote

It may very well be linked to my no.2 concern about attacks from the flanks. Maybe the wingbacks are pulling the play from the SV(A) and DM(D/S).

I'm loathe to change the role to AP(S/A) as I do not want to force play through them.

I'm pretty sure it's just because your front 4 roles just don't work together, its too top heavy. The IF, Raum and Striker are all way too advanced, where is the variety I spoke about throughout the thread? They're all stood up top waiting for something to happen and to get the ball to them, rather than helping the rest of the side out and playing as a unit.

Quote

My whole setup is very similar to yours.

You say this but it really isn't. Firstly you use a sweeper keeper. Which means you distribute the ball very different to what I do and at times will bypass the wingbacks/SV. A sweeper keeper isn't really about what he does without the ball but rather, the focus is all about what he does with it and how he distributes it. I wrote about this recently here;

Secondly, even though you have the rest of the defence set up exactly same as me, it yields different results because of the roles you used up top. What is the purpose of them in your system and what are they supposed to do? In my set-up, on the right hand side the wingback is to get forward and overlap/underlap the winger and force pressure on the oppositions fullback. Both players on your right hand side are attacking so overlaps won't really happen that frequently. Then when the overlap happens they put a cross in to the far side across the goal for the IF to tap into the net. That's why both roles on that side are crosses of the ball. Yours aren't though, only the wingback is. So you are using the ball different and the end goal is a lot different to mine. What are you expecting/wanting with the combo you use down this side?

While the left should do what my left side does, it probably doesn't due to how your right side is set up. Which will also have a knock-on effect of what the AMC does. In my set-up the AMC is a bit of everything but more importantly he is the link player. So either side of my tactic will look to use him as a passing option or look to play off him. The SV will also link up with him. But the one role change you've made with the Raum will have huge implications on this because he roams about and does a bit of everything himself. Which then detracts from the AM's play and stops him being involved even more than he currently is. Basically you are limiting/restricting the need for a AM.

Quote

My AMR role is normally Rad(A) or AP(A) with running often on as I do no have a winger but have two pacey guys that excel in short crosses (passes) from the edge of the box.

Using a AP won't help the AM either. All of these issues you are having with the AM all stem from the roles you use and how they all link together. It's all a bit disjointed and not really fluid, especially as 3 of them are on attacking duties. There is a reason why I spoke about limiting the attacking duties at the very start of the series when you use top heavy formations.

If you have wide players they can play the winger role they'll just interpret the role differently. 

You've basically took the tactic I created to achieve a specific thing which was to make the IF score lots and lots of goals. I highlighted in the thread the importance of the roles, how they link together with what my end goal was and also spoke about how the goals are scored and created. So when you've took the tactic and implemented it in your save, it's set up to play how I wanted and achieve this specific thing. But you then adapted it slightly to fit the players you had but I don't think you really considered how everything changes and now plays with the role and duty changes you made.

It's still ultimately focused on the IF scoring yet you don't use the roles that allow this. So when you made changes you needed to change what the focus of the tactic is and then tweak the rest of the roles to fit and allow for this. I genuinely don't believe you have any real focus on what the tactic should be doing for you and what the front 4 should be doing or how the goals should be scored. 

I also think you've missed some important points throughout the series like how roles link together, the relationship between mentality, role and duties and so on. As you suffer from a lot of this. This is also the reason why in an earlier post you said things linked better when you used a deeper mentality and the AM was more involved. I spoke about this extensively in the mentality vs mentality section of the thread and explained why this happens. 

[westy8chimp]

I used three attack duties up top in my 4231...i got around the issues by;

1) my am was a playmaker and had ppm 'looks to pass rather than shoot', and very high vision... Was constantly playing through the attacking wide men who supplied the striker

2) three support roles in midfield and both fullbacks on support, as Cleon says you need hard working players to do this as they are making up for the attacking trio

3) high dline, high tempo. Decreased the gap between my units... Helped restart attacks quickly so that i could use more space (before both teams transitioned to their default shape) 

[lam]

On 15/11/2017 at 07:57, oakesypvfc said:

 

*cant get rid of the quote bit as I am refering to Cleons reply.

Hey,

Thats a hell of a reply to sit down with my morning coffee to . I appreciate the detail in there.

Currently the tactic is an oustanding success. The goals are pretty much scored by Kane as DLP(A) or Song AML-IF(A) and primarily consist of headers and taps ins. Its amazing to watch however.... somewhat one dimensional.

Regular changes I make are to the DM roles where I will often switch from (S) to (D) or from (A) to (S) on the respective roles. However I imagine (as I will need to watch this) this is probably a by-product of the overloaded front line.

My keeper is (sweeper) because he is able to do so but also he is capable of stopping the odd long throughball that my defenders miss now and again. I'm sure it'll come as no real surprise but mostof my goals concended (which are not many) come from long/through balls from deep.

The fundamental change I have made, and I guess this shows just how impactful it can be on a team, is the AMR role. I do not have a winger (well I do but I do not like him and am trying to sell him). My thought process on the change was because I had enough crosses coming in already that I didn't want another playing doing it who simple was as good. The player I have in the role is oustanding at dribbling and have massive pace. Thus when he gets it he acts like a winger, he runs through players, to the byline and crosses however he does this in the channels and the result is impresssive. It's either a short cross to the back post of a pullback to the penalty spot. The conversion of when he does this is probably a goal a game. Though looking at his stats they do not seem quite as strong this season but you'll see his key passes.

I did have him in the Winger role and he played that role like he should however he cannot cross. I know his stats look like he can but those assists and key passes will all be passes from just inside or on the edge of the box. You'll see why, the winger role coupled with his PPM's, I changed his role. I used the RAD role as it has all the PPI's that suit the player - dont cross, run with ball, short passes.

I completely get what you are saying about the front being overloaded. Generally I'll check stats at around the 20 minute mark and if my DLP(A) has not seen enough of the ball at this point I'll switch to either (S) or CF(S) to bring him into the game however I can see now how this will impact on the AM(S) role.

I appreciate that the issues are of my own making but the tactic is excelling (though with minor issues) but he is the single role that struggles. You can see Kane and Son here:

Kane

Son:

Interestingly Son doesn't have the impact that your IF has but this may be down to Kane being just so dominant. Even in the (S) roles Kane will score and dominate most.

I guess it may all really be aiming towards a little bit of a tactical re think. I do not have a winger that I want to use. Do you think the AP(S) role with the PPI 'stay wider' will counter all of this a little. It will sit him deeper, keep him wider but still allow him to cut in later and may even provide more over lapping space?

I just got excited here as I have been looking at one of my players a little one dimensionally. Fekir:

If I mirror the tactic to the Right instead Fekir could easily do the Winger role and offer much more and also my Left wing back is outstanding and is amazing as a CWB:

 

I'll try that and see how it does. I can see why the Winger(S) role is important now as it is about space. As always with me, and clearly with you (Cleon) and others, the results are great but its how we get them that are important.

Though, once again, this is likely to meant that I'm selling some players. Luckily I just hit January!!!

However lets assume that I do have the AML/R roles on (A) with a DLP(S). How can I use an AMC in that? Or should I pull himback to an attacking MCA role?

 

Demonstrating the success:

 

Lee

 

Edited June 30, 2018 by lam

[Cleon]

Quote

Hey,

Thats a hell of a reply to sit down with my morning coffee to . I appreciate the detail in there.

Currently the tactic is an oustanding success. The goals are pretty much scored by Kane as DLP(A) or Song AML-IF(A) and primarily consist of headers and taps ins. Its amazing to watch however.... somewhat one dimensional.

No worries. The overall tactic is probably one dimensional because it was to create a specific thing for my save. That's why if you want more variety you have to set it up for your own style rather than what I created it for. So one slight change on the right for example has a knock on effect elsewhere and so on. It's basically the domino effect. 

Quote

Regular changes I make are to the DM roles where I will often switch from (S) to (D) or from (A) to (S) on the respective roles. However I imagine (as I will need to watch this) this is probably a by-product of the overloaded front line.

What makes you decide to make this change? Also remember that the DM's don't really want to be too far away from the attacking players or it isolates them even further. Could possibly be another reason why you don't think the AM is doing enough. It's likely he is having to work harder and move into areas he shouldn't really be in due to less support from the DM's. DM's on D will just be even further away from the front 4 and basically splits your tactics into 2 different bands, which can make life hard.

Quote

My keeper is (sweeper) because he is able to do so but also he is capable of stopping the odd long throughball that my defenders miss now and again. I'm sure it'll come as no real surprise but mostof my goals concended (which are not many) come from long/through balls from deep.

If you read the thread I linked above you'll see that a sweeper keeper is more about what they do with the ball compared to what they do when you don't have possession. Technically a SWK and a general keeper will still pick the loose balls up in the same manner, the role doesn't really make them collect the ball like you presume they would. I show examples of this in the thread.

Quote

The fundamental change I have made, and I guess this shows just how impactful it can be on a team, is the AMR role. I do not have a winger (well I do but I do not like him and am trying to sell him). My thought process on the change was because I had enough crosses coming in already that I didn't want another playing doing it who simple was as good. 

This is sound logic but how does this impact the rest of the set up? If you have enough crosses coming into the players already then what does the AMR now do and offer you that is different? And how does this impact the players around him i.e the AM?

Quote

The player I have in the role is oustanding at dribbling and have massive pace. Thus when he gets it he acts like a winger, he runs through players, to the byline and crosses however he does this in the channels and the result is impresssive.

Are you 100% sure about this? Because if you use a AP or Raum then they won't play like a winger at all regardless of what their attributes are. If you have a Raum or AP who is going to the byline frequently then to me that suggest you have issues, as neither of those roles encourage going to the byline to cross. So this suggest a lack of movement/options which we already know because you have 3 players on attack. While the results of this might seem impressive, it's not happening because of tactical settings, it seems to be a byproduct of something going wrong somewhere. All though on this occasion you seem to suggest it works good. But it's not setting/role related why its happening and the fact it works and looks impressive for you is down to pure luck.

Quote

It's either a short cross to the back post of a pullback to the penalty spot. The conversion of when he does this is probably a goal a game. Though looking at his stats they do not seem quite as strong this season but you'll see his key passes.

I did have him in the Winger role and he played that role like he should however he cannot cross. I know his stats look like he can but those assists and key passes will all be passes from just inside or on the edge of the box. You'll see why, the winger role coupled with his PPM's, I changed his role. I used the RAD role as it has all the PPI's that suit the player - dont cross, run with ball, short passes.

When I'm looking at the screenshots of the player and his form, I find it strange that you seem to persist with the raumdeuter role when he seems none existent in terms of passes apart from 1 game. He's hardly involved at all. At the very start you mentioned the AM and how he wasn't involved yet he's more involved than the raum. I think you have a serious issue here with him not being involved or linking up with the rest of his team. Look how poor he is. 173 passes 6 games yet has 169 in 3 games as a AP. So we can see from stats alone that the raum doesn't fit how you play and isn't really integrated into your system. In some of those games you subbed him off early but even so, he wasn't really showing anything and I assume that's why he was subbed in majority of them. The key passes seem to be extremely low too when he plays as a raum.

Quote

I completely get what you are saying about the front being overloaded. Generally I'll check stats at around the 20 minute mark and if my DLP(A) has not seen enough of the ball at this point I'll switch to either (S) or CF(S) to bring him into the game however I can see now how this will impact on the AM(S) role.

I see this often even in real life football but why? I mean, if the striker isn't involved much why do people automatically think that changing the player or role will help? If he's not seeing much of the ball and isn't really involved then this is down to the team not giving him the service he needs. Changing the role might address this ever so slightly but it will still be the same unless you sort out the supply issues.

Quote

I appreciate that the issues are of my own making but the tactic is excelling (though with minor issues) but he is the single role that struggles. You can see Kane and Son here:

Kane

It's excelling as you've stumbled upon something randomly and getting behaviours from players that you shouldn't be. However at some point in the same, it'll catch up with you and all the fundamental issues will come back to bite you if you don't find out why something is working like it is. Even if its unintentional. As you'll not know what to change and why.

It's interesting though because even though you say you are excelling with a few minor issues, from the player stats you've shows I immediately noticed that the Raum wasn't involved and it seems that when you use a complete striker, he also is involved very little in most games compared to the other roles. Kanes ability is pulling him through you can see this in some of the games. So while he does look good and his individual ability will always allow him to score goals even in a poor set up, he could be so much better.  20 goals in 13 games is impressive until you take away the 5 he scored in 1 game. Then he's just over a goal a game which is still good but doesn't sound as impressive without that 5 goals in 1 game.

On top of this he only has 5 assists and 3 of those came in one game too. Which is uprising and suggest he isn't involved in playing people in or doing that much for the team. In this kind of set up (going off my saves) he should be getting just as many assists as he almost does goals. We have a vast difference here as my striker based on stats is more involved, scores more goals and is doing more for the players around him as apposed to Kane. I'll dig some screenshots out when I'm home in a short while to show you.

Quote

Interestingly Son doesn't have the impact that your IF has but this may be down to Kane being just so dominant. Even in the (S) roles Kane will score and dominate most.

Granted he scores goals (Kane) but he looks far from dominant based on stats. As for Son he won't score as many as my IF and it isn't down to Kane, it's down to him not getting the constant supply he does in my system. Which is fine as that isn't your aim I don't think. But how regular someone scores is down to the constant supply the player has. In the original set up he has a constant supply from both sides of the bitch and centrally. That's why my IF and the striker score bucket loads.

Quote

I guess it may all really be aiming towards a little bit of a tactical re think. I do not have a winger that I want to use. Do you think the AP(S) role with the PPI 'stay wider' will counter all of this a little. It will sit him deeper, keep him wider but still allow him to cut in later and may even provide more over lapping space?

I love wide AP's but if he's staying wide all the time, who is he really creating for considering he will be deeper and wider? This means he has to do more long/direct balls and rely on throughballs. Or means you have to bring players to him. I don't really see the benefit of having him staying wider in the current system you use without other changes to make it worthwhile. Also what you going to do with an overlap if the AP cuts inside? Considering he is a ball magnet, how do you see him playing and the relationship he will have with the wingback overlapping?

Quote

I'll try that and see how it does. I can see why the Winger(S) role is important now as it is about space. As always with me, and clearly with you (Cleon) and others, the results are great but its how we get them that are important.

I also think it's important that regardless of whatever success someone is having currently, that they actually know why its happening. You can have success and be lucky with no clue how or why its happening and think you've got a good tactic. But come point in the save when the wheels fall off, the same user becomes a bit clueless and lost then. This is why we see so many posts like 'I won everything last season and this season I am looking at midtable/relegation' etc. 

[lam]

Clearly the issue started much earlier than the tactics screen. I wanted a pacey player and bought one...... then changed the tactics around him!

I had a really long reply bouncing around in my head but they say a picture paints a thousand words:

Interestingly we are defensively so much stronger too as we were not losing possession high up the pitch.

The overlapping on the Left wing (i mirrored your setup) was outstanding to watch. Both of the players i had in the AML role like to step inside (just a little) so they dragged the defence over too,

I do need to find a winger that likes staying wide though..... and sadly I do not really have anyone coming through the ranks.

Because I had not crammed the middle of the pitch the DM's and AMC all had space. They did cross over a little but not as much and because of that I could leave the DM's on (S) and (A).

I'ts quite incredible how two decisions can wreck havoc.

1. I bought the wrong player

2. I changed the tactics to suit him..... just one role.

[lam]

On 30/06/2018 at 09:21, Cleon said:

I see this often even in real life football but why? I mean, if the striker isn't involved much why do people automatically think that changing the player or role will help? If he's not seeing much of the ball and isn't really involved then this is down to the team not giving him the service he needs. Changing the role might address this ever so slightly but it will still be the same unless you sort out the supply issues.

This quote was in response to me changing the DLP(A) to (S) if the striker is not involved in play.

Given your response can you advise how you would handle this as it is proving more and more common as I entered the 2nd half of season two and teams are becoming more and more defensive. The two soloutions I use which work(ish) is to go DLP(S) or CF(S) which gives him roaming. Or I switch Kane to the IF(A) role and bring my other striker into the FC position.

You mention that its about supply but if there is no supply then something has to change. I can change the roles around him ie the IF(A) to IF(S) but in your tactic this would pull the focus away from the IF who is setup to score. Riskier passes will involve someone going TQ/AP which will then pull play to them.

The DM's are already at max attack in (A) and (S) respectively. The other option would be to go 'control' to push play up and effectively bring the game to him rather than him into the game or start using some PPM's 'riskier passes'.

The 'control' element appeals to me but early in the thread you mentioned that its one hell of a change to make as it changes the entire team rather than a player or two.

Thoughts?

 

*EDIT*

Would a change in Shape help? Move to fluid to compress play? Would it work both ways (kinda) that it will pull him back into the game a little but also push the game to him?

Edited July 1, 2018 by lam

[Cleon]

Quote

Given your response can you advise how you would handle this as it is proving more and more common as I entered the 2nd half of season two and teams are becoming more and more defensive. The two soloutions I use which work(ish) is to go DLP(S) or CF(S) which gives him roaming. Or I switch Kane to the IF(A) role and bring my other striker into the FC position.

How do these changes help with a defensive team? How does the DLP being on support help break them down? Or did you mean DLF? Either way, if the striker is isolated and has no supply then changing his duty doesn't actually address the issue or cause of it. It just makes him drop slightly deeper. But if supply is the issue or him being isolated, then the issues are elsewhere on the pitch and not really the strikers fault.

Remember earlier in the replies when I said people can be playing well and picking results up because certain roles aren't behaving how the should due to how it's all linking together on the pitch and that it would come back to bite people? I feel this is you now 

Quote

You mention that its about supply but if there is no supply then something has to change. I can change the roles around him ie the IF(A) to IF(S) but in your tactic this would pull the focus away from the IF who is setup to score. Riskier passes will involve someone going TQ/AP which will then pull play to them.

I'm kind of confused here and I hate to sound like an arse because genuinely I am trying to help you. But you seem to have taken something I created to play a specific way and to utilise players for specific behaviours and have all the roles compliment each other. Your using my ideas for your save and that just isn't going to work. You're trying to keep the core of the tactic (the reasons why I created this and what its supposed to do) yet at the same time want something different from the tactic and to use different roles etc. Is it really any wonder why you've got issues even though you did well the first season? It comes down to using my ideas yet implementing them different in your game. Which is fine and what I encourage people do to. However you seem stuck and aren't doing either that well. So you need to decide if you are replicating what I did or trying to create your own tactic for the style you are wanting to create for the set of players that you have, not what I have.

If its to replicate me, then everything is already there in the thread. The full template. I couldn't expand on it more if I wanted too, all the info needed is there.

However if its your own ideas you want to try, then forget how I've set up and instead focus on the principles I spoke about throughout the thread and explained. They're more helpful to you in this sense and no matter how you're wanting to play, the principles still apply.

Quote

Riskier passes will involve someone going TQ/AP which will then pull play to them.

You don't need to be a playmaker to do risky passes. This can be achieved on a few different roles or via player PPM's and his attributes. 

Quote

The DM's are already at max attack in (A) and (S) respectively. The other option would be to go 'control' to push play up and effectively bring the game to him rather than him into the game or start using some PPM's 'riskier passes'.

You've spoke about not being able to break sides down, but how would playing higher and pushing players closer to the opposition help break down tight spaces? You just going to hope that at some point you force a mistake through sheer pressure? I guess what I'm asking is, when you are watching the game what is the exact issue? I know the opposition are defensive but that's not an issue. How are you using the ball exactly? What are the players positional play like? Which players are marked out of the game? Which players are more free? Who is linking the midfield to the attackers and vice versa? There are different types of answers as to how you can break sides down and this is down to the shape you use and the settings. So it's important to know what you players aren't doing currently that you'd expect them to do. This will then shed some light on what needs fixing and deal in exact specifics.

Quote

Would a change in Shape help? Move to fluid to compress play? Would it work both ways (kinda) that it will pull him back into the game a little but also push the game to him?

If space is an issue then I don't really see how compressing play would help either.  I think once you determine how you want to play then we can work with the rest and it will all fall in place. Currently you are implementing 2 different styles to achieve different things and failing at both.

Sorry if I sound short or arsey but I'm trying to get you to see the bigger picture and maybe think a little bit differently to how you do atm. So you'll see things from a different angle.

[summatsupeer]

@iam

As @Cleon points out above, your not really following his principles, your bastardizing his example.  In his analysis he shows how the W-S and WB-A stretch play to that side and help transition the ball, pulling opponent to that side.  They can then either cross it early or from touchline for the DLF-A + IF-A to attack, if they don't cross it then a quick switch of play through the midfield allows the IF-A to attack the space before the opponents can move over with the central midfield setup to assist with this.

In the last tactic you posted it had a IF-A, RMD-A and DLF-A, you removed a player helping transition the ball, who creates space and potentially directly assists.  If you remove that player how are you going to move the ball instead?  Is another player going to bring it forward?  Are you going to play more direct?  Is another advanced player going to drop to collect it instead?  How is that transition going to use space or create it? 

Consider what Cleon put about top heavy formations (quoted below).  A support duty forward won't really make a different transitioning the ball, other changes would need to be made to transition the ball to him.  Same with how Team Shape wouldn't really change things, pushing players slightly apart or together won't change how you transition the ball, your moving the potential targets slightly. Changing instructions/role/duties that affect how the ball is moved will change how you transition.

Quote

Top Heavy Formations

One of the biggest obstacles people have with top heavy shapes is they don’t know how to firstly create space and movement and secondly don’t know how to use it when they have created it. Unlike deeper formations, it’s easy to have your front four isolated from the rest of the team when using this shape especially on higher mentality structures. When you use attacking duties and high mentalites you push the players even further forward, which isn’t always a good thing. If players are too high how can you create space let alone use it?

 Not only that but it also requires the deeper players to supply them the ball constantly because they’ll be too high and attacking to be involved in most build up plays. When this happens it puts a lot of pressure on the full backs and the central midfielders and requires them to work even harder than normal while still carrying out their own duties. Basically you split your team into two different bands rather than a well oiled cohesive unit playing this way. This brings lots of issues, which I’ll be talking about in great depth a little further in the article.

 Depending on how the opposition play, top heavy formations can naturally struggle to find space in behind the opposition. Especially if the opposition is sat deep and defending, then it gets harder to break these teams down. All the space that exists naturally is actually in front of the defensive line not behind. This means the role and duties you use here are vital in creating the space. Somehow you have to balance these roles out to offer the kind of movement you need.

Another important factor in this is the team shape you use. On the more fluid end of the scale players will be closer together and this again takes away space compared to the lower end team shapes. So if space is an issue then what kind of team shape you use will be vital. In fact all of the issues I’ve mentioned so far could mean you are restricted to long-shots without creating any real quality chances, at least not consistently.

 

Edited July 1, 2018 by summatsupeer
put W-A instead of WB-A

[lam]

As a general rule of thumb I always copy your tactics to start with as it gives me a base understanding of how it should work. Being Spurs I am blessed with a wide range of players so playing any kind of formation/tactic is possible.

What I'm trying to do now is understand why (and yes, I did mean DLF and not DLP ) my DLF(A) does not work but the DLF(S) does. Clearly sitting deep means he will see more of the ball and whether individually or otherwise Kane (or whomever plays in that role) will do better and bring others into the game. However his goals tend to be hero shots rather than based on a tactical brief.

In terms of not getting results I'm not there, in fact it's the complete opposite. My team is very dominant just not playing the way I want. I'm not posting this to prove a points as winning games is not the issue. It's my understanding of how certain dynamics are working in the game.

I'm frustrated with what I see and am struggling to change it. Last season DLF(A) worked. This season it doesn't but DLF(S) does. However that has a knock on effect.

On thing I am noticing as I look at things more closely is that many of my players like running with the ball and despite decent stats to do so generally do not fare well when doing it.

I'm going to push on with the DLF(S) but will try and work out how to set others up around him. I think I need to play around in the PPI's a little. For instance Ali is great in the Seg Vol role but loves shooting from distance all the time. On many occasions it is down to not having options but not always. I think his PPM comes into play around arriving late. I think by the time he gets there everyone else (who doesn't have that role) is already there.

I also think I need to sit back and really think about what I want to see from the team. All well and good saing it's frustrating......... but what isn't? what looks good?

ps. No, I don't think you'rebeing arsey.

 

 

 

[Jean0987654321]

Looking at your success, I wouldn't change a thing. Keep going with what works...

[lam]

1 hour ago, Jean0987654321 said:

Looking at your success, I wouldn't change a thing. Keep going with what works...

Ha... thanks. As I said. This isn't about making it work. It's about understanding it.

@summatsupeer

Thanks for the feedback. Though, isn't that what these threads are for. Take the tactic, tweak it, break it and then learn it. I'm just obviously at the break it stage......

Reality is that I need to do two things now. Rethink what I want from this tactic as I really keen to get my young IF scoring but Kane is my talisman and really he should be the focus. Secondly, I made an observation a few days back that I thought my team were running it way to much and I've just look through their PPM's and 'run with ball' in some shape or variet is loaded across the board. This is one of the reasons I am not seeing as much passing and I also think it's pushing players into odd positions.

I'm going to create another save off the current game and remove a few PPM's and see how it plays out. If it works I'll restore and try to 'unlearn' them. My two wingers both like to cut in too....... that aint gonna help.

 

 

[summatsupeer]

1 hour ago, lam said:

I also think I need to sit back and really think about what I want to see from the team. All well and good saing it's frustrating......... but what isn't? what looks good?

I think you should consider not just what the role+duty does but when.  The IF-A + RMD-A whilst aren't near each other are doing a very similar job on both flanks at a similar time, so someone has to create space for both of them at the same time, or they have to do something exceptional to create space for themselves.  Neither really helps transition the ball, both are more focused on pushing high and running in behind and using the middle of the pitch.  In the middle both attackers are again doing a similar job as well so for me there's a lack of variety. If the ball transitions through the middle then opponents will be narrow so hard to play through the IF-A + RMD-A.  For the ball to transition on the flanks, it has to be a quick direct ball or your wingbacks have to bring it forward on there own with the wide forwards not really looking to combine due to there focus so the wingbacks will need good skill to beat there opponent on there own.

Looking at your reply whilst I was typing I see you've changed it a bit.  I'd just add, don't think you need to have Kane on attack duty to be the "focus" or for him to score lots.  Support duties still make runs, but they vary there play more and the runs can be from deeper areas rather than sitting on the shoulder.  I think this is easiest to see if you compare a IF-S and IF-A.  Of course if he has lots of players making runs past him then likely they'll get the chance instead of him, but thats why it depends on the full setup.

Oh and REG-S + VOL-A with WB-A + WB-S looks really open to counter attacks.

3 minutes ago, lam said:

Thanks for the feedback. Though, isn't that what these threads are for. Take the tactic, tweak it, break it and then learn it. I'm just obviously at the break it stage......

Not really.  I used to do the same thing but rarely does it work that way.  Really you need to take the principles, look at your squad and start from scratch, analyse, tweak, repeat.

[Cleon]

Quote

As a general rule of thumb I always copy your tactics to start with as it gives me a base understanding of how it should work. Being Spurs I am blessed with a wide range of players so playing any kind of formation/tactic is possible.

The point is not to copy though. It's to show how and why things work and then the user can take the ideas and adapt them in their own saves. When you copy you just get all the issues you are currently having and are struggling to get the style you want. Even though results are really good. It doesn't really matter what players/formation you have/use. It's how you utilise them than is key and get them all playing together and complimenting each other.

Quote

What I'm trying to do now is understand why (and yes, I did mean DLF and not DLP ) my DLF(A) does not work but the DLF(S) does. Clearly sitting deep means he will see more of the ball and whether individually or otherwise Kane (or whomever plays in that role) will do better and bring others into the game. However his goals tend to be hero shots rather than based on a tactical brief.

This is easy to answer and I already did earlier in the thread. This is because you have 2 wide players who are on an attack duty so sit very high up the pitch. You then have a striker on attack too doing the same, this means that it is up to the others in the side to get the ball to them and a lot of onus is on the AM here when the ball is central. So he's isolated and its a struggle for deeper players to involve people in the initial build up if they're too advanced up the pitch. When you switch him to a support he becomes slightly deeper and thus will link up better with the midfield, namely the AM and the SV. This makes sense.

Him taking hero shots also makes sense because the two wide players are both attacking. I mentioned this in the very first reply. You have everyone far too advanced and top heavy, so they all rely on the ball being gave to them. It also means that in most cases they have less time and space because they'll be closer to the oppositions defenders. This is why I spoke about top heavy formations and how having them all on attack duties is generally bad and how you have to create space differently. 

If you want them all involved and not spectating then stop thinking that attack duty = more attacking threat because it doesn't. A support player can just the same/more. It's all about the support and how everything links together to give the end product. I wrote about how everything should work together in an earlier piece. It's a different shape but the exact same principles apply globally.

https://teaandbusquets.com/piecing-it-all-together

Quote

In terms of not getting results I'm not there, in fact it's the complete opposite. My team is very dominant just not playing the way I want. I'm not posting this to prove a points as winning games is not the issue. It's my understanding of how certain dynamics are working in the game.

That's what I'm trying to help you to see.

Quote

I'm frustrated with what I see and am struggling to change it. Last season DLF(A) worked. This season it doesn't but DLF(S) does. However that has a knock on effect.

You're obsessing over 1 role and even then its not the striker that is the issue. Your thinking in isolation and thinking the striker is the main problem but its not. The issue is the rest of the side aren't involved/supply the kind of support he needs. You're trying to fix a problem at the very end of the issue rather than doing it from the more logical point of view - the beginning. 

I mentioned this in one of the earlier replies. I even told you to look at specifics like players positions during phases of play etc.

Quote

On thing I am noticing as I look at things more closely is that many of my players like running with the ball and despite decent stats to do so generally do not fare well when doing it.

I'm 100% sure without even looking at your games that players running with the ball and doing well with it is down to a lack of options. Yes you're winning but in an unflattering way and you've spoke about how Kane is basically doing it all on his own and scoring through his skill rather than his tactical instructions. If a player has a lack of options they generally have 3 options;

1. Shoot
2. Pass
3. Dribble

One of those or even all three, will be over compensating for the lack of real options. The options comes back to something I've mentioned several times to you in the replies so far and spoke about in the original articles. And that is players on attack duties are generally less involved with build up. They expect the ball to be played to them but if they're marked tightly then its a really hard task for those supplying the balls to be successful. So they over dribble, passes get cut out or they take wild shots from silly angles and that's without even mentioning being disposed of the ball.

You need players to be able to run into space to create movement and this is what pulls the opposition apart. I genuinely don't believe you have this. I know this set up pretty well and know almost every single scenario and how the roles interact with each other. 2 minutes looking at a PKM and you should be able to see that proper intelligent movement will be scarce. 

Quote

I'm going to push on with the DLF(S) but will try and work out how to set others up around him. I think I need to play around in the PPI's a little. For instance Ali is great in the Seg Vol role but loves shooting from distance all the time. On many occasions it is down to not having options but not always. I think his PPM comes into play around arriving late. I think by the time he gets there everyone else (who doesn't have that role) is already there.

This is the point above. Your attacking players already start in those positions, that's why its bad. I think during the SV article I mentioned about players needing to keep up with each other. It's no good having people make runs or create movement if the players who are to take advantage of this can't get there fast enough. It's why I bang on all the time about people needing to see how roles/duties work together and interact with the others selected in the side.

 

Quote

I also think I need to sit back and really think about what I want to see from the team. All well and good saing it's frustrating......... but what isn't? what looks good?

You need some kind of reference point, if not how do you know what you're working towards or if something is/isn't working like intended? If you sort out how you want to play in your head then you have something to work towards and compare.

Quote

Thanks for the feedback. Though, isn't that what these threads are for. Take the tactic, tweak it, break it and then learn it. I'm just obviously at the break it stage......

No it's not as then users have all the issues you currently face yourself on your save. You're supposed to take the ideas/principles and see how you can work them into your own save to fit your own ideas. These threads are to get you thinking and show you an example of how I do things. If it was just about taking the tactic and copying it, I'd put it in the download section with a download link. But that's not what any of my threads are about. They show how stuff works, my thinking behind the ideas and so on.

Quote

Reality is that I need to do two things now. Rethink what I want from this tactic as I really keen to get my young IF scoring but Kane is my talisman and really he should be the focus

This seems even more bizarre now that you'd copy what I created if you want Kane to be the talisman. My IF was the talisman but the striker still scored as many goals almost. I think my IF scores roughly 50 goals a season in about the same amount of games. The striker scores around 40 but has around 20+ assists too every single season. I achieve both.

Quote

 I made an observation a few days back that I thought my team were running it way to much and I've just look through their PPM's and 'run with ball' in some shape or variet is loaded across the board. This is one of the reasons I am not seeing as much passing and I also think it's pushing players into odd positions.

Possibly. Still think it's highlighted more currently due to a lack of options though.

Quote

I'm going to create another save off the current game and remove a few PPM's and see how it plays out. If it works I'll restore and try to 'unlearn' them. My two wingers both like to cut in too....... that aint gonna help.

If you don't have players to play a specific way, then why persist with trying to shoehorn them? You get good results so it works but you aren't happy with the style. This is one of the reasons why, the players don't have the skillsets for what you are wanting them to do. So you either have to bring more suitable players in, develop more suitable players, remove PPM's etc. It's this that will determine how the players react to the style you're trying to create.

As for the last shape you posted with Kane as the AF. Why didn't you have the wings reversed? The IF as the attacking player and the winger as support? If the wingers crosses the ball atm then he's only got 1 target in the box to aim for. So no matter how good Kane is, he is going to be alone a lot of the time. Doing it the other way, you have the IF acting as the wide striker and providing support in the box too. This allows Kane to have someone to knock the ball down for rather than him doing it all alone.

[Cleon]

11 hours ago, summatsupeer said:

I think you should consider not just what the role+duty does but when.  The IF-A + RMD-A whilst aren't near each other are doing a very similar job on both flanks at a similar time, so someone has to create space for both of them at the same time, or they have to do something exceptional to create space for themselves.  Neither really helps transition the ball, both are more focused on pushing high and running in behind and using the middle of the pitch.  In the middle both attackers are again doing a similar job as well so for me there's a lack of variety. If the ball transitions through the middle then opponents will be narrow so hard to play through the IF-A + RMD-A.  For the ball to transition on the flanks, it has to be a quick direct ball or your wingbacks have to bring it forward on there own with the wide forwards not really looking to combine due to there focus so the wingbacks will need good skill to beat there opponent on there own.

Looking at your reply whilst I was typing I see you've changed it a bit.  I'd just add, don't think you need to have Kane on attack duty to be the "focus" or for him to score lots.  Support duties still make runs, but they vary there play more and the runs can be from deeper areas rather than sitting on the shoulder.  I think this is easiest to see if you compare a IF-S and IF-A.  Of course if he has lots of players making runs past him then likely they'll get the chance instead of him, but thats why it depends on the full setup.

Oh and REG-S + VOL-A with WB-A + WB-S looks really open to counter attacks.

Not really.  I used to do the same thing but rarely does it work that way.  Really you need to take the principles, look at your squad and start from scratch, analyse, tweak, repeat.

This is really good advice.

[summatsupeer]

Just going to share my basic 4231 Wide.  I think its pretty much the stereotypical setup, 2 strong defensive midfielders (but in CM) that allow both fullbacks to get forward and support the front 4.  My front 4 are almost identical to Cleons example, not because I copied it but because like Cleon I want my wide forward and center forward to be the main threats then the other parts around them are about creating space, supplying the ball to them, linking defence to attack and providing cover.

GK: GK-D

PI: Take Short Kicks but Could be Distribute to CB/DB or Roll Ball Out in other systems with other keepers.  Mine is pretty good but not really a SK, with a quick attack and decent size in the front 6 I don't mind him taking a few risks getting the ball forward quicker.

DR: FB-A

Here I want him to get forward to support attacks, but not take lots of risks with the ball or take lots of risks to get forward really early like a WB-A or CWB would.  Whilst there is a W-S in front of him so my normal thought would be to just keep the FB behind him and leave the space for the W-S, even as a FB-A he is often behind the W-S in his AMR starting position.  Together with the DL and CM pair they often form a flat 4 to collect loose balls or start there runs.

DCR+DCL: CB-D

Simple pair not doing anything fancy. They need to be quite mobile and able to tackle since there is a bit of space around them. I prefer reliable (concentrate etc) centre backs who do the basics well and aren't terrible on the ball but don't have to be BPD.  Defend the goal and just get the ball to the linking players, simple.

DL: FB-A

Same as DR although I am analyzing how a WB-S performs differently.  I like the overlapping of the IF-A but sometimes I think he would be better still getting forward but keeping it simple and letting the IF-A use the space more often.

MCR: BWM-S

Probably the lowest risk taker of the Support duty central midfield roles, he is often next to the CM-D to form the base for the front 4 and the FBs outside of them. A CM-S or BBM-S would leave this area more often when we have the ball, so whilst the BWM-S doesn't Hold Position he is lower risk and less freedom so in the right area for when we do lose the ball.  He's not a headless chicken or a 6 year old mindlessly chasing the ball around the pitch, but if the ball does come near him he will try to win it and stop attacks before they develop.  Whilst his main role is to win the ball back, a bit of skill with the ball helps, he doesn't have to be a creator but able to consistently to get the ball to the front 4  to help link play and switch the ball between flanks.  If its safe he'll also get in and around the box inside of the W-S and central players.

MCL: CM-D

The main defensive player but again, able to link play without doing anything flashy.  Stays deeper more often than his partner and let the AMC + AML use the space in front of him.

Typically you'll see a DLP in one of these MC positions so both have Hold Position but the addition of the playmaker role will affect passing patterns so needs to be considered and not just an automatic selection/change, it is a good option though.  Still should be a strong defensive player with good mobility and able to win the ball to keep balance, more of a Diawara or Matic (if his acceleration was better) than a Neves or Veretti.

AMR: W-S

Keeps some width high up the pitch.  I don't want another forward focusing on making runs past the opponents d-line, he will start a bit deeper more often and the runs should come later.  I also don't want him coming inside and having all 4 attackers narrow.  I want the BWM-S feeding him simple balls for him to stretch defences and help transition the ball forward to then cross or after drawing the defence to that flank play a simple pass inside for the ball to be switched to the other flank.

AMC: AM-S

The main creator of the team but in a more patient role.  I don't want him dropping to collect the ball from the CM pair, I want him sitting between them and the ST offering an advanced passing option to penetrate lines with a simple pass to his feet.  I don't want him making forward runs often as I have the AML+ST already doing that or trying risky passes often and trying to force it before we've created space.  Initially I had him as a AP-S but he was too deep too often and also trying speculative passes too often, he needs to be in the hole and creating space for them.  If I wanted more urgency in the passing i'd likely have a deeper distributor such as SK/BPD/DLP with some TI/PI's to get the ball forward to the front 4 sooner and not have the AMC drop to do it.

AML: IF-A

The main goal threat, getting on to through balls then running away/past defenders with the ST occupying the CBs to go on and score or pull it back or cross.  Good back post presence for crosses from the right.

ST: CF-A

Main job is to be a central goal threat, but I wanted a more mobile role.  With multiple fast players near him he has support earlier to not have to hold up play as often like a DLF-A and has multiple options to play through with the IF-A making early runs and the W-S making later runs plus the AM-S occasionally getting past him to.

Mentality: Standard

If you've read Cleon's analysis I shouldn't need to explain anything here.

Shape: Structured

Using Structured as I wanted to keep the team shape a bit more and have players stick to there assigned job.  Started on Flexible so this was more a personal preference and a minor tweak.

TI: Close Down More, Prevent Short GK, Play Out of Defence

Again keeping it pretty simple, as we are top heavy I want to make use of them by pressuring higher than standard to force rushed passes for the back 4+CM pair to clean up.  As we're top heavy + pressuring high we aren't really setup to counter attack so using Play Out Of Defence to try be more patient and feed the linking players rather than going directly to the front 4 as often.

[difran8]

On 29/06/2018 at 00:10, lam said:

1. I cannot seem to get  performance out of any player I have in the AMC position.

 

On 29/06/2018 at 00:10, lam said:

2. Almost all my assist are coming from crosses or wide passes (mini crosses).

Exact same issues here. I initially hoped this formation would make my AMCs shine but they act more like deep creators. They are the ones usually making the pre-assist wide pass. Then the standard cross from the wingback -> goal. Pretty boring and repetitive.

I watched the screenshots on OP and notice the same concerning pattern as i have. Ultra wide set-up, disjointed play, no real co-operation. Also i'm surprised he/she doesn't face problems with that attack duty striker being far away from the rest, especially on flexible shape.  An option that kind of works for this is to go very fluid. Then of course you get even more crossing as your guys can't find any vertical space. All in all, I find this deep 4231(DM) one of the hardest formations to play in the game. Imagine how many poor newcomers must have been frustrated trying to set up their favorite real life shape

[summatsupeer]

1 hour ago, difran8 said:

 

Exact same issues here. I initially hoped this formation would make my AMCs shine but they act more like deep creators. They are the ones usually making the pre-assist wide pass. Then the standard cross from the wingback -> goal. Pretty boring and repetitive.

I watched the screenshots on OP and notice the same concerning pattern as i have. Ultra wide set-up, disjointed play, no real co-operation. Also i'm surprised he/she doesn't face problems with that attack duty striker being far away from the rest, especially on flexible shape.  An option that kind of works for this is to go very fluid. Then of course you get even more crossing as your guys can't find any vertical space. All in all, I find this deep 4231(DM) one of the hardest formations to play in the game. Imagine how many poor newcomers must have been frustrated trying to set up their favorite real life shape

This is likely to do with the players your using.

For example if the winger has low mentals, especially teamwork then he is less likely too see other options and will be greedier with the ball, going for the headlines himself.

Another example is the AM, I see a big difference between my starter and the backup because the backup has drop deep to collect ball trait and more through balls trait which changes how he plays the role to more like a AP-S but a AP-S doesn't fit my tactic.

There's a reason AP type players have become rarer and made to play deeper or wider.  Tactical trends over the years, especially in last 20 years have seen more tactics using 1 or more DMs, forcing creative players to find space elsewhere.

Whilst this is a simulator and not as simple as Fifa, people tend to look past the obvious and blame the game for their idea or favorite RL players not working.

[Cleon]

1 hour ago, difran8 said:

 

Exact same issues here. I initially hoped this formation would make my AMCs shine but they act more like deep creators. They are the ones usually making the pre-assist wide pass. Then the standard cross from the wingback -> goal. Pretty boring and repetitive.

I watched the screenshots on OP and notice the same concerning pattern as i have. Ultra wide set-up, disjointed play, no real co-operation. Also i'm surprised he/she doesn't face problems with that attack duty striker being far away from the rest, especially on flexible shape.  An option that kind of works for this is to go very fluid. Then of course you get even more crossing as your guys can't find any vertical space. All in all, I find this deep 4231(DM) one of the hardest formations to play in the game. Imagine how many poor newcomers must have been frustrated trying to set up their favorite real life shape

I don't have disjointed play, I'm not ultra wide and I have plenty of co-operation, so not sure what you're on about.

And the AM being a deep creator is the intention, I even spoke about it in the series. Surprised you didn't pick up on that if you'd read the articles? I also don't cross that often from wingbacks either. Sure they do cross but its not the wingbacks getting the assists, it's the striker/am and IF for me. If your wingback is getting all the assists then you have a player issue, you lack co-operation and so on, not me as I'm not playing the way you describe.

[Armistice]

I have a different dilemma, how would you go if you wanted your AMC to be one of the goalscorers instead of being a deep creator? An attack duty would probably be a more viable option but unless the player has the PPM "Comes Deep to get the ball", I believe the AMC would sit higher up the pitch which could put a bigger burden on the DMs/CMs to transition the ball. Then an attacking midfielder would also need someone to create space for him, right? And another potential issue might be that the IF could run in the same space as the AM.

Edited July 6, 2018 by Armistice

[difran8]

12 hours ago, Cleon said:

I don't have disjointed play, I'm not ultra wide and I have plenty of co-operation, so not sure what you're on about.

In your screenshots i see the very same shape most deep 4231 suffer from. For you this play may appear fluid and well worked. For me the way the players usually set and and move in this formation seems ineffective.

 

1 hour ago, Armistice said:

And another potential issue might be that the IF could run in the same space as the AM.

This does happen and is one of the problems of the formation. I think the trouble lies in the position of the forward players. It is not optimal for using (central) space effectively.  If you try to bypass this with the old trick of flexible shape + low mentality + deep movement then forwards become isolated and better teams shut them off easily. Try a 4411 and everything falls magically into place without much tinkering

[Cleon]

Quote

In your screenshots i see the very same shape most deep 4231 suffer from. For you this play may appear fluid and well worked. For me the way the players usually set and and move in this formation seems ineffective.

It seems like I'm wide because I'm playing on the narrowest width pitch possible, so I'm closer to the touchline naturally. Plus the winger role, wingbacks and IF (to some extent) are all roles that start out very close to the touchline. They are wide staying/starting roles. Although there is only 1 screenshot that is wide, when the ball is the centre. All the other examples you mentioned are wide because play is out wide or players are taking up wider positions to come inside or have causes support out wide. Again this is because of what the role does, it's expected. If I used a different role, the behaviour would be different. So still not really sure what you're on about. It's like you are forgetting/ignoring what the role is supposed to do when on about width.

If your players don't move properly and it doesn't seem fluid, it's down to the roles you are using, the TI's and PI's and how it all works together. If you want players narrower you can its not an issue. If you want better movement then concentrate on how it all works together and how the roles along with the duties you've selected all fit together to give you the style/end product you are creating.

[oi_oi_ginger_roy]

Hiya - am switching to a 4-2-3-1 formation for my new season now I am established in the prem

my issue is the wide players I have are both left footed - so would I swap the roles so IF is on the right and the winger is on the left?

what bout the midfield 2 - swap them too?

[Jean0987654321]

3 hours ago, oi_oi_ginger_roy said:

Hiya - am switching to a 4-2-3-1 formation for my new season now I am established in the prem

my issue is the wide players I have are both left footed - so would I swap the roles so IF is on the right and the winger is on the left?

what bout the midfield 2 - swap them too?

It's all up to you. I would put one on the right as a IW and the on the left as a W and swap positions.

[summatsupeer]

14 hours ago, oi_oi_ginger_roy said:

Hiya - am switching to a 4-2-3-1 formation for my new season now I am established in the prem

my issue is the wide players I have are both left footed - so would I swap the roles so IF is on the right and the winger is on the left?

what bout the midfield 2 - swap them too?

You can take Cleons tactic and flip it all if you want, doesn't mean your players will play it like Cleons players did.

You should make a tactic the fits your players following the principles shown.

[oi_oi_ginger_roy]

Any idea how to get my Volante from taking so many long range shots?

I think on average i'm having 30+ shots a game (as a team) and only 5 or 6 are going on target....i notice that its my Volante that is taking most of these long shots.

[Jean0987654321]

6 hours ago, oi_oi_ginger_roy said:

Any idea how to get my Volante from taking so many long range shots?

I think on average i'm having 30+ shots a game (as a team) and only 5 or 6 are going on target....i notice that its my Volante that is taking most of these long shots.

Shoot Less Often PI?

[oi_oi_ginger_roy]

34 minutes ago, Jean0987654321 said:

Shoot Less Often PI?

His role already has shoot more often ticked though and I can’t untick it. Thing is everything else he’s doing is fine just when it comes to him whacking one 30 yards wide 10 times a game...

[zlatanera]

1 hour ago, oi_oi_ginger_roy said:

His role already has shoot more often ticked though and I can’t untick it. Thing is everything else he’s doing is fine just when it comes to him whacking one 30 yards wide 10 times a game...

Try to modify his traits, to use "looks for pass instead of trying to score" perhaps? I imagine he'd still shoot when its on but be less likely to blast it just because of tunnel vision.

[warlock]

42 minutes ago, zlatanera said:

I imagine he'd still shoot when its on but be less likely to blast it just because of tunnel vision.

I do think there are certain roles in Fm18 that are prone to long shots (even more than usual) - IF-A, B2B and SV-A are among them. PPMs can help, as can the 'work ball' TI, but the single most important thing is that there are players available for the pass, especially someone sitting somewhat deeper and/or wider than the SV.

As much as anything, though, this year I've come to love the 'retain possession' TI - seems to work wonders in encouraging players to look for alternatives, including a relatively long pass backwards to reset and start again. I think, this late in the year, it's become my favourite TI... I used to think it would prioritise possession over everything, making us toothless in attack, but in my latest save, just as an example, I've just put together three games where we scored a total of 14 goals using it.

[Cleon]

13 hours ago, oi_oi_ginger_roy said:

Any idea how to get my Volante from taking so many long range shots?

I think on average i'm having 30+ shots a game (as a team) and only 5 or 6 are going on target....i notice that its my Volante that is taking most of these long shots.

Have a look at why he is shooting so often in your games. Pause the game just before he takes a shot and look at the positioning of the players around him. Does he lack support? Are players too advanced, so he can't pass to them? Are the players marked and so on.

[oi_oi_ginger_roy]

1 hour ago, Cleon said:

Have a look at why he is shooting so often in your games. Pause the game just before he takes a shot and look at the positioning of the players around him. Does he lack support? Are players too advanced, so he can't pass to them? Are the players marked and so on.

Will do, thanks mate 👍🏻

I’ll admit though that although I’d know what to do in real life how would I, say, make sure someone is open for a pass when he does gets the ball? - what instruction(s) would I use (and on who) to make sure a wide player offers him support and are not marked/too far forward? 

I’m keen to learn more about how FM works so apologies for the noob questions 😁

[Cleon]

37 minutes ago, oi_oi_ginger_roy said:

Will do, thanks mate 👍🏻

I’ll admit though that although I’d know what to do in real life how would I, say, make sure someone is open for a pass when he does gets the ball? - what instruction(s) would I use (and on who) to make sure a wide player offers him support and are not marked/too far forward? 

I’m keen to learn more about how FM works so apologies for the noob questions 😁

The mentality vs mentality article on the first page of this thread should be an eye opener in this regard. Another example would be the player roles, if you used a winger then he's focused on attacking down the wing and putting crosses into the box. However if you have a striker who drops deep and no-one else getting in the box then who is he crossing the ball to?

The same with the AMC, what is he supposed to offer? Does he drop deep? If so what does the striker do, if he drops deep as well, then who gets into the box?

Stuff like that will impact how often people shoot from distance because a lack of forward options. You need balance. Think about how the roles link up and how they play together. Not only this but also focus on what the role does, this includes the very brief description of the role and looking at the settings it comes with. That way you can see exactly what a role does. This is one of the areas I find FM'ers neglect the most. They pick roles but don't really look at what the roles.

[forlegaizen]

Hey, insightful thread as always.

One problem I found in my tactic its the AMC being very deep in build up phase.

https://imgur.com/Ni50Tng

https://imgur.com/i088Dkq

https://imgur.com/uaHnShi

https://imgur.com/I5RTl5w

 

This is the tactic I'm using

https://imgur.com/kzvaNbT

 

I already tried the Engache role but the same happened and neither of the players have the PPM " come deep to get the ball ".

Maybe if would use a more structured shape it would be less noticeable but I'm happy on how the rest of the tactic is playing so didnt really want to change that.

Thoughts?

[jc577]

I don't think it's necessarily to do with team shape, but more the type of role you're using. Both the AP and ENG are playmakers, so naturally will come deeper to receive the ball (AP especially). Having said that, is the AM coming deep actually a problem? How involved is he in attacks? Does play bypass him? If these things are true, then it may be a problem, but if not, and your tactic is working, then stick with it. 

[forlegaizen]

11 hours ago, jc577 said:

I don't think it's necessarily to do with team shape, but more the type of role you're using. Both the AP and ENG are playmakers, so naturally will come deeper to receive the ball (AP especially). Having said that, is the AM coming deep actually a problem? How involved is he in attacks? Does play bypass him? If these things are true, then it may be a problem, but if not, and your tactic is working, then stick with it. 

Interesting...

I didnt know that playmakers were prone to come deep to get the ball, I thought the only "mechanism" they had was attracting the ball more.

The problem of him being so deep is how I want the team to play, I would like for the AMC to be main creator for the Poacher and the IF and he can't do it being so deep.

The plan was for the wingbacks and DMCs  to bring the ball foward and in the final third let the AMC run the show

Edited August 17, 2018 by forlegaizen

[Bunkerossian]

How to do well with a 4-2-3-1 when one side of the pitch lacks offensive width?

The right back is not as good in attack as the left one. Would putting Rodrigo on IF-A be a bad idea?

Edited September 19, 2018 by Bunkerossian

[herne79]

3 hours ago, Bunkerossian said:

How to do well with a 4-2-3-1 when one side of the pitch lacks offensive width?

The right back is not as good in attack as the left one. Would putting Rodrigo on IF-A be a bad idea?

Probably not bad, although with 2 x IFs you may lack variety in attack.  I'm more concerned about a couple of other aspects, but before I comment on those how's the tactic going?  If it's ok then no need for me to say anything .

[Bunkerossian]

3 hours ago, herne79 said:

Probably not bad, although with 2 x IFs you may lack variety in attack.  I'm more concerned about a couple of other aspects, but before I comment on those how's the tactic going?  If it's ok then no need for me to say anything .

Not good. Despite me thinking my D-Line is clever and fast enough, it is getting breached by through balls, or even counterattacks. I have exceptional quickness on most of my CB-s, bar the one I brought in to provide a boost in Leadership, Determination and overall class. I really thought I could get away with a high D-Line. A low D-Line is suicidal anyway, as the CB-s aren't great in the air, except for the new guy, and a CB that starts injured.

Edited September 19, 2018 by Bunkerossian

[summatsupeer]

16 minutes ago, Bunkerossian said:

Not good. Despite me thinking my D-Line is clever and fast enough, it is getting breached by through balls, or even counterattacks. I have exceptional quickness on most of my CB-s, bar the one I brought in to provide a boost in Leadership, Determination and overall class. I really thought I could get away with a high D-Line. A low D-Line is suicidal anyway, as the CB-s aren't great in the air, except for the new guy, and a CB that starts injured.

Is it the high line that an issue or lack of pressure from the players up the field?