Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, summatsupeer said:

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

Unsure. There was one game where I used Close Down More, but it also produced a red card for the right full back. If I had to pinpoint an issue, it might be the CM-D. The player should be doing better than he is. Can I make changes that would allow him to play as a BWM-D?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour 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.

You're not playing with a high def line.

Some things to consider:

Cover/stopper duties with the offside trap?

Soler/Parejo in the right positions?

Why two playmakers?

A very attacking wingback down the left coupled with a support duty role on the left of midfield?

Who's actually attacking the box?  And who is the AP trying to thread through balls to?

What sort of pressing are you getting your players to do?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, herne79 said:

You're not playing with a high def line.

Some things to consider:

Cover/stopper duties with the offside trap?

Soler/Parejo in the right positions?

Why two playmakers?

A very attacking wingback down the left coupled with a support duty role on the left of midfield?

Who's actually attacking the box?  And who is the AP trying to thread through balls to?

What sort of pressing are you getting your players to do?

I was trying it in pre-season. I do admit I'm unsure of this.

Cleon says in a thread it's not an issue if the players have good mentals. To him, C/S pairing isn't an issue.

I want Parejo closer to goal. He has great Long Shots and even Composure.

I should reverse the MF pairing, then?

Well- the players to the right and left of him, and the DF. This role is still a striker, right?

Well, Zaza is suited for a frontal press. Other options like Vietto- not sure. I tried closing down more in one game, and it seemed like it was an issue for my defense. They had to do lots of last ditch tackles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Bunkerossian said:

Cleon says in a thread it's not an issue if the players have good mentals. To him, C/S pairing isn't an issue.

Cleon doesn't "say" things for you to then follow.  He offers guidance, discusses principles and gives us information to help us make our own informed decisions.  A C/S pairing is not necessarily an issue for sure, especially with players who have good mentals.  But in this particular instance, what is it adding to your defence?  How is it improving things for you?  How is a stopper stepping up out of his defensive position into the hole between defence and midfield helping you?  Further, you are adding in the offside trap.  What does that do to the pairing here?

53 minutes ago, Bunkerossian said:

I want Parejo closer to goal. He has great Long Shots and even Composure.

Indeed he does, so why are you playing him as a playmaker?  How does he stack up as someone to play at AMC compared to Soler?  Do either particularly stand out as a DLP?

56 minutes ago, Bunkerossian said:

I should reverse the MF pairing, then?

There is never "should".  However a defend duty central midfielder on the same side as a very attacking wingback may help provide better cover than a support duty player when your wingback inevitably gets caught high up the pitch.

57 minutes ago, Bunkerossian said:

Well- the players to the right and left of him, and the DF. This role is still a striker, right?

They are all support duty players.  Yes they will attack the box, but they'll start deeper.  And when combined with your other tactical settings, there's no real oomph.  Plus your AP is looking to thread passes to players attacking the space, which nobody is doing with any real sense of urgency.

1 hour ago, Bunkerossian said:

Well, Zaza is suited for a frontal press. Other options like Vietto- not sure. I tried closing down more in one game, and it seemed like it was an issue for my defense. They had to do lots of last ditch tackles.

Then stop using TIs and focus on certain players instead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, herne79 said:

Cleon doesn't "say" things for you to then follow.  He offers guidance, discusses principles and gives us information to help us make our own informed decisions.  A C/S pairing is not necessarily an issue for sure, especially with players who have good mentals.  But in this particular instance, what is it adding to your defence?  How is it improving things for you?  How is a stopper stepping up out of his defensive position into the hole between defence and midfield helping you?  Further, you are adding in the offside trap.  What does that do to the pairing here?

Indeed he does, so why are you playing him as a playmaker?  How does he stack up as someone to play at AMC compared to Soler?  Do either particularly stand out as a DLP?

There is never "should".  However a defend duty central midfielder on the same side as a very attacking wingback may help provide better cover than a support duty player when your wingback inevitably gets caught high up the pitch.

They are all support duty players.  Yes they will attack the box, but they'll start deeper.  And when combined with your other tactical settings, there's no real oomph.  Plus your AP is looking to thread passes to players attacking the space, which nobody is doing with any real sense of urgency.

Then stop using TIs and focus on certain players instead.

The C/S pairing would accentuate the qualities of each player.

Better than Soler at AMC. He is better than him in a DLP role too, but I need to give Soler playing time to develop.

Does a Cover CB help with an attacking WB? I thought that would work.

Which role would be safest to convert into an Attack duty? (AMC or the wing forwards) when Zaza plays. If Vietto or Mina play, then they are AF.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Bunkerossian said:

The C/S pairing would accentuate the qualities of each player.

Better than Soler at AMC. He is better than him in a DLP role too, but I need to give Soler playing time to develop.

Does a Cover CB help with an attacking WB? I thought that would work.

Which role would be safest to convert into an Attack duty? (AMC or the wing forwards) when Zaza plays. If Vietto or Mina play, then they are AF.

C/S combo can work, but for me when playing a 4231, I wouldn’t be comfortable with my CD’s aggressively trying to win the ball higher up the pitch, as top heavy formations are susceptible to counter attacks, and this will likely make it worse. Also, why try and play offside when you’ve got a cover duty CB dropping behind the D-line looking to sweep up through balls? 

Why does Zaza have to be a DF-S? You’re making massive changes to how the tactic performs on the pitch just by changing one role. I’m sure all three of your strikers can play as a DLF-A, so that they are creating space/making runs for your AP-S. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Bunkerossian said:

The C/S pairing would accentuate the qualities of each player.

And how's that working out for you.  You also keep swerving my point on the offside trap.

I haven't asked any question here to get a response.  I'm asking them to help you to stop and think.  You've already said the system isn't going too well and yet most answers you've given above would indicate the opposite: "C/S pairing isn't an issue" (it is); "the C/S pairing would accentuate the qualities" (seemingly not); "I want Parejo closer to goal" (so that he can take long shots?!?); "the ST + AML/R will all be attacking the box" (but without any urgency) and so on.

51 minutes ago, Bunkerossian said:

Which role would be safest to convert into an Attack duty? (AMC or the wing forwards) when Zaza plays. If Vietto or Mina play, then they are AF.

As jc577 says above.  It doesn't have to be a DLF-A, but if you're going to play with an AP at AMC, consider what the role does and which roles around it may benefit from and compliment it.  The AP needs space to operate, does your striker and two wide players help with that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, herne79 said:

And how's that working out for you.  You also keep swerving my point on the offside trap.

I haven't asked any question here to get a response.  I'm asking them to help you to stop and think.  You've already said the system isn't going too well and yet most answers you've given above would indicate the opposite: "C/S pairing isn't an issue" (it is); "the C/S pairing would accentuate the qualities" (seemingly not); "I want Parejo closer to goal" (so that he can take long shots?!?); "the ST + AML/R will all be attacking the box" (but without any urgency) and so on.

As jc577 says above.  It doesn't have to be a DLF-A, but if you're going to play with an AP at AMC, consider what the role does and which roles around it may benefit from and compliment it.  The AP needs space to operate, does your striker and two wide players help with that?

I thought this when looking at the player attributes. I did want one CB to close the gap between defense and midfield, and push away any tall strikers from goal.

I must admit I was unsure of what formation to play. I was thinking 4-3-3 at the start, but I had no idea how to distribute midfield roles well. I guess I don't know that in another system, either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Bunkerossian said:

I thought this when looking at the player attributes. I did want one CB to close the gap between defense and midfield, and push away any tall strikers from goal.

I must admit I was unsure of what formation to play. I was thinking 4-3-3 at the start, but I had no idea how to distribute midfield roles well. I guess I don't know that in another system, either.

I'd recommend reading some more stickies then. Especially this one...

 

https://community.sigames.com/showthread.php/403153-Building-A-Tactic-From-The-Beginning-And-Maintaining-It-Long-Term

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎19‎/‎09‎/‎2018 at 13:21, Bunkerossian said:

 

Valencia Club de Fútbol_  Overview.png

Good afternoon.  May I ask a question which I think has been overlooked?  Why is the DCL a ball playing defender (BPD)?

I sometimes think of this role as playmaker in the back line.  I know its not a playmaker role by definition but it plays longer passes and riskier passes.  Just as a playmaker would.  Such a role can be really useful in a counter attack setup or perhaps if you lack a midfield playmaker.  However you actually have two playmaker roles in midfield already so this is where it becomes muddled and confusing for me.

To use Soler properly I'd think you want him to take a nice easy pass to feet from the defence.  This I would reason is why you chose the TI 'play out of defence'.  But then you've counteracted this by telling Munilo to be a BPD & play through balls.  You may disagree with my logic, but hey, its just how I see the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Robson 07 said:

Good afternoon.  May I ask a question which I think has been overlooked?  Why is the DCL a ball playing defender (BPD)?

I sometimes think of this role as playmaker in the back line.  I know its not a playmaker role by definition but it plays longer passes and riskier passes.  Just as a playmaker would.  Such a role can be really useful in a counter attack setup or perhaps if you lack a midfield playmaker.  However you actually have two playmaker roles in midfield already so this is where it becomes muddled and confusing for me.

To use Soler properly I'd think you want him to take a nice easy pass to feet from the defence.  This I would reason is why you chose the TI 'play out of defence'.  But then you've counteracted this by telling Munilo to be a BPD & play through balls.  You may disagree with my logic, but hey, its just how I see the game.

I'm not sure myself, if a BPD would go long with the TI Play Out of defense. Maybe he would? I don't know the exact threshholds for actions of players.

Share this post


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

I'm not sure myself, if a BPD would go long with the TI Play Out of defense. Maybe he would? I don't know the exact threshholds for actions of players.

I believe 'play out of defence' will shorten the BPD's passing range, however, it would not remove play more risky passes aka through balls.  A through ball is a pass into space, typically if you are moving up the pitch and attacking this would be a pass that a player runs on to.

In your setup Munilo, your BPD, has a static central defensive partner next to him.  He is unlikely to want a through ball.  Same goes for your central mid (defend) and Soler the playmaker.  These players won't be making lots of forward runs off the ball either.  The only player it may combine well with is the attacking left wingback. 

Anyway to utilise Soler properly, if that's what you want to do, with him as a genuine playmaker in the side I'd have the DCL as a normal central defender.

Edited by Robson 07

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I set up my attacking four as IFa F9s SSa and Ws which seems very effective as all players score goals and get assists as well. They move around (back & forth) which makes it very hard for the opponent defenders. My DM is a more conservative setup with SVs and Ad (sometimes a DLPd) which makes it very hard to counter against my team. The defensive line is WBs BPDc CDs + FBa, their main task is a clean sheet and both full backs offer wide support if it's needed.

Edited by YasoKuul

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is really amazing tactics, it open my eyes by reading all Cleon post. It help me to understand how to build the attack and defend in FM18.

It's help me to win a lot of match against the big team easily. The SV works amazingly good, he attack/defense/assist/score goals, making space ...

After using this tactics for around 35 match, I tweaked a little bit the team shape, and it look like this (see picture below)

- I dont use the AMC due to what I see in the game, AMC get stuck in the defense line of opponent and I want he stay deep when team dont have the ball for defense and moving forward not to much when team have the ball to create chance.

- When facing small team who stay back with 10 men, just need to modify defend line a little higher and slow down the tempo, it will make a lot of problem for them, just be patience and the goal will come.

- When facing a strong team, let the defend line natural or a little deeper.

- When facing the team who has strong winger like Arsenal or Manchester City, just need to ask LB/RB to defense

- When facing the team who like to use long pass for their striker, adjust the defend line deeper (and reverse, if the play short ball, adjust it higher)

I dont touch the mentality at all, but still the result is very positive compare to what i've done earlier.

What I understand is how important to break the opponent attacking system. If i break their way to attack, they will definitely make mistake and my team (with this team shape) will always find the way to score.

:lock:

image.thumb.png.138da338231cd13af5db7894eacd2084.png

image.thumb.png.10adb3b7d0fa71f69bc3eb90e2539190.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This tactic is absolutely a monster.

It produces a LOT of long shots, but is absolutely dominating in every game. You will have scoring from the front 4 and BBM. 

I've tried to tone down the number of long shots and to produce more CCC by using work ball to box on lower mentality but it doesn't seem to help a lot. There can be games where you will concede from just a couple of shots due to the high line and fail to score enough and lose or draw but it's like very very rare. Usually it is problematic against ******,park the bus opposition where you won't suceed in breaking them. But after you score first goal it's a walk in the park. Against tougher and stronger teams who will attack you this is just insanely good.

I have tried this with HSV, Real Madrid and Racing and it worked in all 3 saves like a charm.

To be honest, I don't know why exactly. I would never build this kind of tactic with so few attack duties and such aggressive full back roles with basically no real DM but it works. 

I only switch DLF/A to PF/A. But both work fine, it's just my preference. Also I change the mentality sometimes , switching between balanced and positive usually. When failing to break down the opposition or chasing the game, you can go to attacking/very attacking and put attack duties for fullbacks and/or IF's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, luka_ said:

This tactic is absolutely a monster.

It produces a LOT of long shots, but is absolutely dominating in every game. You will have scoring from the front 4 and BBM. 

I've tried to tone down the number of long shots and to produce more CCC by using work ball to box on lower mentality but it doesn't seem to help a lot. There can be games where you will concede from just a couple of shots due to the high line and fail to score enough and lose or draw but it's like very very rare. Usually it is problematic against ******,park the bus opposition where you won't suceed in breaking them. But after you score first goal it's a walk in the park. Against tougher and stronger teams who will attack you this is just insanely good.

I have tried this with HSV, Real Madrid and Racing and it worked in all 3 saves like a charm.

To be honest, I don't know why exactly. I would never build this kind of tactic with so few attack duties and such aggressive full back roles with basically no real DM but it works. 

I only switch DLF/A to PF/A. But both work fine, it's just my preference. Also I change the mentality sometimes , switching between balanced and positive usually. When failing to break down the opposition or chasing the game, you can go to attacking/very attacking and put attack duties for fullbacks and/or IF's.

I have a similar setup with a few differences.

GK - sweeper keeper support

DL - Full back Attack

DCL - Central Defender

DCR - Ball Playing Defender

DR - Full back - support

MCL - DLP Defend

MCR - Mezzala Attack

AMC - Attacking Midfielder Support

AML - Inside forward Support

AMR - Winger Support

ST - Complete Forward Attack

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 horas atrás, luka_ disse:

This tactic is absolutely a monster.

It produces a LOT of long shots, but is absolutely dominating in every game. You will have scoring from the front 4 and BBM. 

I've tried to tone down the number of long shots and to produce more CCC by using work ball to box on lower mentality but it doesn't seem to help a lot. There can be games where you will concede from just a couple of shots due to the high line and fail to score enough and lose or draw but it's like very very rare. Usually it is problematic against ******,park the bus opposition where you won't suceed in breaking them. But after you score first goal it's a walk in the park. Against tougher and stronger teams who will attack you this is just insanely good.

I have tried this with HSV, Real Madrid and Racing and it worked in all 3 saves like a charm.

To be honest, I don't know why exactly. I would never build this kind of tactic with so few attack duties and such aggressive full back roles with basically no real DM but it works. 

I only switch DLF/A to PF/A. But both work fine, it's just my preference. Also I change the mentality sometimes , switching between balanced and positive usually. When failing to break down the opposition or chasing the game, you can go to attacking/very attacking and put attack duties for fullbacks and/or IF's.

Good one, but in all fairness, I've found to have great success no matter the size of the club with the default 4-2-3-1 Gegenpress that comes with FM19. Usually I only do 3 small tweaks: change the Sweeper Keeper from attack to support or even defend (less risks), and on the TI's apply shorter passing and wide setup (these two things are personal preferences in the way I like to see football, not a necessity). That's it, and works really well, beautifully even.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Hi. I am a big fan of 4-2-3-1, along 4-3-3 it’s probably my favorite formation. I will give this article a re-read to freshen things up.

As for my 4-2-3-1 I am trying to create one that uses an AP in the AMC. It’s an idea that stems from the fact that the playmaker “attracts” the opposition players when he has the ball so that could free up the space somewhere else. Of course I have to be aware of the opposition formation aswell, I think a playmaker in AMC would struggle v 4-1-4-1 or any formation that uses two DMs. So starting from that idea and using a very good playmaker in Eriksen, I want to build the tactic up. So the info I got, a playmaker needs space to create chances and team mates who can finish those chances. So I was thinking of choosing a Poacher up top. He’s a fairly static role though so maybe I should reconsider this choice? Also, to make sure the space centrally does not become congested, I would choose a winger down AML/R. Given that I have an attacking striker up top, a winger could supply him with crosses. On the other side of the pitch I am not sure what to use. I am not sure what I want either. Do I want/need another player who looks to make early runs, like an IF-A? Do I need a player who will attack the box from deeper? Most certainly I am not going to use another winger, to have some variation. That unless the player I use has PPMs like Move into Channels or Cuts inside with the ball. Also the two CMs should be more conservative as you said in the article but do I need a more dynamic role like box to box (using the standard 4-2-3-1)? My concern is that he will get in the same space as the AP.

Also was thinking to use a player who recycles possession, maybe a DLP? But is that a good idea to use two playmakers in a 4-2-3-1?

For the back four I will look to use an overlapping fullback and a more conservative one. Mentality is Standard/Control. Keep in mind that my team is expected to win most of the games so my roles & duties choice will probably have to include all sorts of movement, width, depth, creativity etc to break sides down.

Edited by Armistice

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

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

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

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

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

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


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...