Useful hints on roles and duties in 4-2-3-1

[burnum]

Against smaller teams like Mainz, Paderborn or Augsburg I usually have no problems to dominate the with my 4231 with Bayern. However, I keep getting destroyed on the counter against better teams like Leipzig, Dortmund or Schalke. I switch mentality based on opponents (Attacking at home against small teams, Positive away against small teams, Balanced against good teams).

 

Here are my two tactics I use (based on who plays in the AMC role). Whenever I play decent or good teams, I switch to Balanced mentality and drop my D-Line to 'Standard'.

@Johnny Ace @Experienced Defender Any suggestions what I should change to be less vulnerable against gegenpressing & counter attacking teams?

Edited November 24, 2019 by burnum

[Johnny Ace]

So long as they're winning you games @burnum I'd stick with them 

Two BPDs it something I'd change out, it just doesn't sit well with me as both will be playing risky passes when I think one is enough. A general FM rule I follow is a maximum of one playmaker (including the BPD) on either side of the tactic ie one BPD on the opposite side to the DLP

As for being countered, maybe press less out of possession? That'll push your players up & out of position or use a split press where a couple of your front 4 press heavy 

Gengenpressing you can up to the tempo, up the passing directness to try & play through the press 

[burnum]

I have real problems using a 4123 or 4231 against Leipzig. I have the slightly superior individual players but I can't create anything from open play. The play a 532 formation on Defensive mentality. I've tried multiple different mentalities/instructions/roles against this. Any ideas?

[Experienced Defender]

3 hours ago, burnum said:

Any suggestions what I should change to be less vulnerable against gegenpressing & counter attacking teams?

My primary suggestion against all teams - tone down your out-of-possession instructions, do not be so needlessly aggressive and hence logically vulnerable to counters. That's the first thing I would change in your tactic, although there are couple more that could be improved.

[burnum]

@Experienced Defender Thanks for your feedback. I've toned it down considerably. This is how it looks now when I play decent teams who are good on the counter. You mentioned there would be a couple more issues to resolve. What should I change from here on?

Note: Both WB have the PI to stay wider in possession to bring width to the formation when attacking. On paper, my theory was that Alaba, Müller, Coman (and even Thiago to an extend) could overload the left side to free up Lewa and Gnabry. Ignore Goretzka in the screenshot, he doesn't fit the role. Usually I have Tolisso or Martinez playing in that spot.

Edited November 24, 2019 by burnum

[Experienced Defender]

2 hours ago, burnum said:

You mentioned there would be a couple more issues to resolve. What should I change from here on?

In terms of instructions, I would remove the Overlap left. First, with an IW on support and WB on support, you already have a sort of natural overlap there. Secondly, bear in mind that an overlap/underlap instruction increases the mentality of the related fullback/wing-back, which potentially means more defensive risk on that flank. In a more balanced system with a DM (e.g. 4123) that would be less of an issue, but 4231 is already a vulnerable system by default, so you need to be more sensible. For basically that same reason, the Overlap right is also not necessary, although it does make a bit more sense than the left one due to having the wide forward on attack duty (so using the overlap/underlap TI makes his and his fullback's relative positioning somewhat closer to each other, plus you have a CM on defend duty on that side as defensive cover). 

Another instruction I would remove is the distribution to CBs. You already have the "Play out of defence" turned on, so there is no need to instruct the keeper whom he should specifically distribute the ball to. Let him pick the best/safest option in any given situation (especially as you play him in a SK role, as opposed to the standard GK). 

When it comes to the SS role, my personal experience is that it tends to work better when:

- the attack-duty wide forward is played in a standard winger role (as opposed to IF or IW);

- at least one of the CMs behind him is played in a more mobile - as opposed to holding midfield - role (more specifically, a BBM as the safer option, or MEZ on support duty as the riskier option).

However, take these suggestions with a pinch of salt, because I am still playing FM19, so it's possible that things have changed a bit in FM20 

Btw, while your previous tactic was overly aggressive defense-wise, this new one could well turn out to be overly passive (not only that you have toned down the defensive TIs, but you've also reduced the mentality by entire 2 degrees - from attacking to balanced - which is a huge change given that the mentality affects everything else in the game).

[BadAss88]

I've tinkered some more about my 4-2-3-1, since my last post got (bayern)-spammed, some feedback would be nice!

				F9-s
IF-a						AM-a
		DLP-s						w-s
WB-a				A-d
		CD-d				CD-d		FB-a
				SK-d

[rockpie]

8 hours ago, BadAss88 said:

I've tinkered some more about my 4-2-3-1, since my last post got (bayern)-spammed, some feedback would be nice!

Without knowing TIs and PIs, the main thing that stands out here is how open your left flank is to being exposed with IF (a) + WB (a), then only a DLP (s) covering from the centre.

I'd recommend setting the left WB (d) and the TI to overlap right or maybe focus attacks down that flank. That should offer more balance in defense, as well as helping to recycle possession and also get the crosses coming in from the right for your IF (a) to attack from the far side.

[FulhamFc14]

Anyone having much luck with a 4231 on this version? Hoping to establish a Tiki Taka version with Sociedad 

[Johnny Ace]

@burnum Just be mindful of your CM pairings too, the player you have on the D duty really does need to be able to defend more along the lines of Kimmich or Martinez rather than Tolisso & Goretzka

[BadAss88]

2 hours ago, rockpie said:

Without knowing TIs and PIs, the main thing that stands out here is how open your left flank is to being exposed with IF (a) + WB (a), then only a DLP (s) covering from the centre.

I'd recommend setting the left WB (d) and the TI to overlap right or maybe focus attacks down that flank. That should offer more balance in defense, as well as helping to recycle possession and also get the crosses coming in from the right for your IF (a) to attack from the far side.

I have an anchorman covering him.. 🤨

[rockpie]

14 minutes ago, BadAss88 said:

I have an anchorman covering him.. 🤨

you have an anchorman yes, but he isn't really "covering" the left flank.

his job is to sit in front of the defenders, shield them and recycle possession in the central area. it's in the role description that he "doesn't venture far from his position, even to close players down" so you can't expect him to be tracking back in wide areas too much when the left flank gets overloaded.

[BadAss88]

Maybe a halfback with the central defenders staying wide is a better option?

[rockpie]

21 minutes ago, BadAss88 said:

Maybe a halfback with the central defenders staying wide is a better option?

That's an option when it comes to resolving the left flank issue, yes. But you also have to consider the other impacts of a change.

Going to a HB means the DM drops into a back 3 when your FB and WB push up, your AM (a) will be taking up an attacking position too, leaving only the DLP in the central midfield area and probably getting closed down by multiple opposition CMs.

It then becomes a risky game of him finding a killer ball in time, passing back to the CBs or HB to recycle backwards, or losing possession and giving up a counter opportunity.

Give it a go and see how it plays out, hopefully the F9 drops enough to give the DLP enough options to play through whatever press comes.

Maybe have 2 separate saves where you try the HB change and the WB (d) change to see which is best, then use the best one moving forward.

Edited November 25, 2019 by rockpie

[BadAss88]

3 minutes ago, rockpie said:

That's an option when it comes to resolving the left flank issue, yes. But you also have to consider the other impacts of a change.

Going to a HB means the DM drops into a back 3 when your FB and WB push up, your AM (a) will be taking up an attacking position too, leaving only the DLP in the central midfield area and probably getting closed down by multiple opposition CMs.

It then becomes a risky game of him finding a killer ball in time, passing back to the CBs or HB to recycle backwards, or losing possession and giving up a counter opportunity.

Give it a go and see how it plays out, hopefully the F9 drops enough to give the DLP enough options to play through whatever press comes.

The FB-a was a typo, I ment a IWB-a

[rockpie]

3 minutes ago, BadAss88 said:

The FB-a was a typo, I ment a IWB-a

OK well I'd make it IWB (s) and that should work alright.. the shape will have the right balance anyway, although you lose a nice overlap opportunity down the right flank without the FB (a)

also check the bit I added on the end of my last post about testing the different solutions 

Edited November 25, 2019 by rockpie

[Saranghapanida]

@Experienced Defender 

First of thanks for this nice informative post. Center midfielder (MC-MC-AMC) is important this tactics. My midfielders weakness out of stamina bad physical (Acceleration 10, Balance 12, Strength 10, Pace 11, Agility 13 and Stamina 19-18-13)

 

What do you think about my tactics ? is there any problem you see or suggestions ?

 

PI : Only Klaassen use move into channel.

 

  

[Experienced Defender]

59 minutes ago, Saranghapanida said:

 

59 minutes ago, Saranghapanida said:

What do you think about my tactics ? is there any problem you see or suggestions ?

The tactic itself looks okay (nothing strikingly wrong IMO). The tweaks I would consider are:

- changing the winger's duty (AMR) to attack;

- wouldn't necessarily insist on working ball into box (at least not all the time and/or in all situations)

But all in all, the tactic looks like a good starting point (provided you have the right players for such a system). 

1 hour ago, Saranghapanida said:

My midfielders weakness out of stamina bad physical (Acceleration 10, Balance 12, Strength 10, Pace 11, Agility 13 and Stamina 19-18-13)

What about their tackling, positioning, work rate, teamwork, anticipation, bravery, determination...? I am asking about central mids, not AMC.

[Saranghapanida]

34 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

 

The tactic itself looks okay (nothing strikingly wrong IMO). The tweaks I would consider are:

- changing the winger's duty (AMR) to attack;  i think so but i thought it would be very offensive

- wouldn't necessarily insist on working ball into box (at least not all the time and/or in all situations)  i turned it off and i'll decide according to the game

But all in all, the tactic looks like a good starting point (provided you have the right players for such a system). 

What about their tackling, positioning, work rate, teamwork, anticipation, bravery, determination...? I am asking about central mids, not AMC. 

Eggestein : tackling 12, positioning 12, work rate 18, teamwork 17, anticipation 15, bravery 9 , determination 11

Nuri :  tackling 12, positioning 14, work rate 10, teamwork 17, anticipation 16, bravery 10, determination 13

Should i do overlap right wing back (def) ? after making W(At)

   i'm undecided between AM(At) and SS which is better ?

 

 

Edited November 25, 2019 by Saranghapanida

[emil_sbn]

What roles is best for the striker and amc in this system play pressing forward/a and am/a right now.

[Experienced Defender]

1 hour ago, Saranghapanida said:

Should i do overlap right wing back (def) ? after making W(At)

Yes. you can experiment with the Overlap right TI after changing the winger's duty to attack (because the overlap will bring the 2 wide players closer to each other). Btw, you can even try with an IWB on defend, in which case the Overlap right would make even more sense (in terms of adding more variety to that side). 

 

2 hours ago, Saranghapanida said:

   i'm undecided between AM(At) and SS which is better ?

Considering both Klaassen's player profile and your overall tactical setup, I would definitely try him as a SS. My only real concern would be his dribbling, which should be a bit better for the SS role. But you can give it a try anyway and see if and how it works. You can always change him back into AMat if you are not satisfied with his performances as SS. I mean, both roles make sense within your current setup, so there definitely is room for maneuver 

[ultrAslan]

In my save in FM20 Im playing with Galatasaray and using a 4231 system with two middfielders and its working pretty well. Im using this system since FM19 and I know its strength and weaknesses. I have the right kind of players for the style I want my team to play. for example my two middfielders are two powerhouses when it comes to defending. defensive attributes are really important for them and they dont have the ppm like get further forward, because I want them to controll the middfield. my both players can shoot from long distance(min. 13+) so when they have the opportunity they blast it from distance. Galatasarays goal in the Champions League is to get the group stage, but I managed with this tactic till semi finals. I dont change my formation against stronger opponents, because my players are unfamiliar with another formations. I dont change roles and duties either because my players complete each other in every area of the pitch. I want to change team instructions only when it comes to certain scenarios. 

Home:

Away:

What kind of team instructions do you use or what roles/duties changes, when it comes to these kinds of scenarios:

• Defending a lead (time wasting last 15-20 minutes)
• All-out-attack (you need to score a goal)
• Stronger opponents(Away games against for example: Liverpool, Paris)

Edited March 9, 2020 by ultrAslan

[Experienced Defender]

1 hour ago, ultrAslan said:

what would you do @Experienced Defender if it comes to these scenarios?

Do you change your formation against stronger opponents? or how would you play possession based?

I do not change the formation. I may only make some small tweaks to the tactic within the formation I regularly use. 

[FM1993]

Hi Everyone, i'm new here to the forum and I just wanted some advice on my Leeds save I'm currently attempting. 

The results have been relatively poor and I'm asking for some advice now before the board decide enough is enough. 

As you can see the defence side of things is rather good however two wins from my league games is poor! 

I'm not the best at creating my own tactics so any advice from the experts on here would be much appreciated! 

@Experienced Defender

Cheers 

[Experienced Defender]

3 hours ago, FM1993 said:

In terms of roles and duties, it does not look too bad, except for a couple of role/duty combinations. Here is what I would change on that score:

AF/PFat

Wat         AMsu/at       IFsu

BBM     DLPde

FBsu   CDde   CDde    FBat

As you can see, I just swapped the duties of your winger (AML) and IF (AMR) in order to get a more sensible configuration of role combinations in relation to the role and duty of your lone striker. And then I consequently also swapped the sides of your CMs, so that the BBM plays behind the winger and DLP behind the IF, as well as the sides of the fullbacks (for the same reason again). Therefore, I did not change the overall number of different duties within your setup - because there are still 3 defend, 4 support and 3 attack duties, just like in your initial setup. Instead, I just re-arranged these duties so as to get a more sensible tactical configuration. 

When it comes to team instructions, most of them suggest you want to implement some sort of wing-play as your playing style (extreme width, focus down the flanks, early crosses and distribution to FBs). Is that your idea or maybe something else?

[FM1993]

8 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

In terms of roles and duties, it does not look too bad, except for a couple of role/duty combinations. Here is what I would change on that score:

AF/PFat

Wat         AMsu/at       IFsu

BBM     DLPde

FBsu   CDde   CDde    FBat

As you can see, I just swapped the duties of your winger (AML) and IF (AMR) in order to get a more sensible configuration of role combinations in relation to the role and duty of your lone striker. And then I consequently also swapped the sides of your CMs, so that the BBM plays behind the winger and DLP behind the IF, as well as the sides of the fullbacks (for the same reason again). Therefore, I did not change the overall number of different duties within your setup - because there are still 3 defend, 4 support and 3 attack duties, just like in your initial setup. Instead, I just re-arranged these duties so as to get a more sensible tactical configuration. 

When it comes to team instructions, most of them suggest you want to implement some sort of wing-play as your playing style (extreme width, focus down the flanks, early crosses and distribution to FBs). Is that your idea or maybe something else?

Thank you for your feedback it is much appreciated! 

I will swap the roles around like you have stated as it does appear to be more balanced that way. 

In terms of playing style I don't really have one, however my favourite tactic is the 4231 so my idea was to play wide and try to stretch the opposition defence & cut inside with the IF. I also like to build from the back rather than the keeper launching the ball up to the frontman and potentially giving away needless possession. 

I feel playing through the middle can be rather top heavy with the opposition press and difficult to achieve, i could be wrong though. 

I've also noticed when playing against 5 at the back I lose everytime, maybe this is because they have the width to cover my style of play. 

[Experienced Defender]

7 hours ago, FM1993 said:

I feel playing through the middle can be rather top heavy with the opposition press and difficult to achieve, i could be wrong though

Who said that you should play through the middle? I have not mentioned that instruction at all. 

7 hours ago, FM1993 said:

In terms of playing style I don't really have one, however my favourite tactic is the 4231 so my idea was to play wide and try to stretch the opposition defence & cut inside with the IF. I also like to build from the back rather than the keeper launching the ball up to the frontman and potentially giving away needless possession

Anyway, whatever style of football you are trying to achieve, remove the tight marking instruction, because it only increases defensive risk in a formation and tactic like the one you posted here. 

When it comes to defensive risk, also bear in mind that an instruction Focus play down a flank increases the mentality of your fullback on that particular flank. And given that you use this instruction for both flanks, it means both FBs have a slightly higher mentalities than their default ones would have been. And since one of your FBs is already on attack duty, I am not sure that you need to increase his mentality further.

[amirko]

I think it is difficult to talk about roles in any tactic if we do not know what mentality is used. I do not think that we have one rule for roles and duties.

I'll try to explain how I see that. If I play defensive mentality or caunter I would have more players on attack dutie. Even CM's maybe I would use role like BBM or CM but if I play control or attacking I would use CM's on defend dutie. Also front four would be all on support dutie if I use attacking mentality.

So I do not think it is propriate to talk about roles and duties in any formation if we do not have whole picture of mentality and how we want our team to play.

Also if I use attacking or control mentality I would give defensive players more creative roles, because I believe that they will have ball more often in their feets than in defensive mentality. So for example I fa I go for control mentality I would use BP Defenders

Edited March 13, 2020 by amirko

[vkastanas]

Hello,

As I am still on FM19 thought I would ask in this thread if this is OK. I recently started a new save in Vanerama North and i decided to create this 4-3-2-1:

First friendly and I lost probably to a local pub 2-0. So I tried to analyze (not so good at it, that's why I say tried). I only looked at the AM. Both players used there, 60 and 30 minutes respectively, moved very close to CM's and AM's to offer a passing option and stayed far away from the ST and the opposition area. Pressing Forward and Winger are on Attack duty, Inside Forward and Advanced Playmaker on Support duty. No player instructions given, no player traits exist. The players used are these:

  

Although it was an FM result (2 shots on target, 2 goals and I had 6 ot, no goals) as we dominated them I didn't like how the role played.

So, is this how the AP moves although the description says he moves in the holes between defence and midfield?

A "hold position" player instruction will solve my "problem" or should I try a more static role which is hardcoded to "hold position" like an Enganche?

Thanks! 

[vkastanas]

Follow up post:

It seems that changing the duty of the AP to Attack and adding the "Hold Position" Player Instruction works for my player and tatic! Best player in 4 league matches now my AM (Advanvced Playmaker). 

[edhdurham]

@Experienced Defender can you advise on the below, I want to create a tika-tika style for Newcastle:

 

SK-D

FB-S  CD-D  CD-S  FB-S

DLP-S  CM-D (would you suggest a RPM-S rather than DLP-S I was trying to create a more solid holding midfield)

W-S  AM-A  W-S

F9-S (Also tried PF-S and would prefer that but it doesnt seem to work as well as the F9).

Wall Ball into Box, Play Out Of Defence, Shorter Passing, Higher Temp

Counter Press, Hold Postion, Distribute Quickly, GK to wings

High LOE, High Def Line

 

Any advice, its seems similar to some of the posts on the forum.

[Experienced Defender]

1 hour ago, edhdurham said:

@Experienced Defender can you advise on the below, I want to create a tika-tika style for Newcastle:

 

SK-D

FB-S  CD-D  CD-S  FB-S

DLP-S  CM-D (would you suggest a RPM-S rather than DLP-S I was trying to create a more solid holding midfield)

W-S  AM-A  W-S

F9-S (Also tried PF-S and would prefer that but it doesnt seem to work as well as the F9).

Wall Ball into Box, Play Out Of Defence, Shorter Passing, Higher Temp

Counter Press, Hold Postion, Distribute Quickly, GK to wings

High LOE, High Def Line

 

Any advice, its seems similar to some of the posts on the forum.

This tactic does not really look even close to a tiki-taka. A couple of the instructions are possession-friendly though, but the tactic as a whole not really. And the setup of roles and duties is neither suited to a tiki-taka (or any similar possession-heavy style) nor is well-balanced overall (regardless of the playing style). 

Btw, you forgot to mention the team mentality. 

If you want detailed advice, please start a separate thread in which we can discuss your tactic specifically.

[isignedupfornorealreason]

I may have missed it, but for your principle guidelines does the Treq count as an attack or support duty if you put them in the AMC slot?

 

I was considering using the Treq + poacher, because I got to read the poacher thread by Herne and was thinking of how to use a poacher. My reasoning was the Treq (descriptively) is akin to an AP in a way. I would have put an IF/S and W/A on the flanks, the idea being the winger has the poacher to aim for crosses-wise. The IF on Support to cut in deeper and he would have the Treq (in theory) and the rest of the midfield to link up with. 

 

Just pondering.

[Johnny Ace]

I'd class the Treq as an in-between Support & Attack role, goalscorer & creator role  

[isignedupfornorealreason]

I'm about 2/3rd of the way through a season with Swansea using a 4-2-3-1.

I went with the following;

 

GK/D 

WB/S - CD/D - CD/D - FB/S

CM/D - DLP/S

IF/S - Treq - Winger/A

Poacher

 

Instructions were cut down a bit, but I settled on;

Pass into Space - Not that there will always be space to rely on given we're top heavy, but I want players to take the risk of sending the ball into space when it is available, especially for the poacher. I might drop this one though and just save it for games where I'm on the defensive.

Distribute to CB/FB - To encourage playing out from the back.

Counter-press - A tactical style choice. I used to love sitting back into a shape, but I think a 4-2-3-1 is so top heavy I don't think sitting back is a good idea, maybe I'm wrong? But, I want the players to counter-press quickly initially.

Higher defensive line - This one I'm in two minds about. I don't know whether I should drop this back to standard and just increase the line of engagement instead.

Prevent short distribution - Hoping to get them to kick it long.

+1 for pressing urgency - I think.

 

I'm top of the league, just about, which is a massive overachievement. My possession stats are reasonable, often 55-65%, my results aren't that amazing though, lots of scrappy 1-0's, but often I wonder if that is because the opposition rely heavily on defensive 4-2DM formations and lock up shop a lot.

Some amateur observations:

 

1. The two key playmakers in this set up is the Winger and the Deep Lying Playmaker. The winger is an assist machine, regular assists when he's afforded any time and space. The DLP is a pre-assist machine, but easily leads the way in terms of average ratings (7.55-8.10), which I think is one of the highest I've ever seen a DLP get. He has a mix of goals and assists, is just very good all round.

 

2. The main scorer is the Poacher.  Obviously, that's what I want. I play Ayew in that position, mainly because I'm inflexible and won't change the wings around to allow him to play IF/S. He's the league's top scorer, has scored more than he's ever managed IRL and basically shouldn't be this good. Now, I did think he wasn't scoring enough (15), but... that is perhaps my over-expectations? I think in reality terms, 15 goals by February is a decent return.

 

3. It is defensively sound. In theory. We have the lowest conceded and the most clean sheets. I expected more difficulty in this respect because I've never been able to get a 4-2-3-1 to remain defensively solid. It is vulnerable when playing top teams though - Liverpool for example, put four past me in one half.

 

Negatives?

1. The Treq isn't the star of the show. Usually I play a Treq in a 4-4-1-1 and he's the Eric Cantona, just stealing the limelight and being all around amazing. In the 4-2-3-1, he basically goes missing for long stretches of times. Sometimes, he come alive, but it's not uncommon to see him getting a 6.1 rating. Perhaps the prevalence of the 4-2DM opposition is hurting here? Perhaps, I just need Eric Cantona for this role? Mind you, the tactics creator is telling me a Treq-Poacher is a bad combination, but there we are...

 

2. The Inside Forward is a weak link. I'm not very good at observing matches etc, but the IF is bad. Horrifically so. Often rated 6.1-6.3 unless he gets in with a rare goal. I had Brewster there, and he chipped in with 2 goals so far. Atrocious. I had better luck with Routledge, but even he was very uneven in his performances, a 7 here, a 6 there, the IF/S suffers from woeful consistency and I'm not sure what to do with him. (In fairness... The front four often seems to fluctuate between 6.1-6.6's unless they get a goal. Shots tend to be taken fairly centrally and in the box, which is a decent sign at least. 

 

Anyway, thought I'd share. I'll see how the rest of the season goes. If I get promotion, maybe I can buy some reasonable stars, but I don't know. We seem to have no money and no one wants to join us (yikes!)

 

(Edit, fixing the positions.)

Edited October 20, 2020 by isignedupfornorealreason

[Johnny Ace]

I like it @isignedupfornorealreason, role wise, it's pretty similar to what I'm using in a long-term save 

What mentality are you using? Positive or Attacking at a guess

The number 10 is tricky, I've complained about it plenty  but you will pretty much need a Cantona there if you want him to shine. You really need high level mentals (Anticipation, Decisions, Vision, Composure, Off-the-ball, Flair, Technique) as well as everything else you want for role. Having two DMs on him most games won't help his performance but at least he's be occupying them & allowing your other players space. Having a DLP right near him won't help him either as the DLP will receive passes he could be getting     

IF(S) too, Brewster would be more of an IF(A) I would've thought not sure if he's well known for his creativity. You'd want good attributes there for the IF(S), Passing, Vision, Teamwork, Anticipation, Decisions, Composure, Technique, First touch  etc 

[isignedupfornorealreason]

1 hour ago, Johnny Ace said:

What mentality are you using? Positive or Attacking at a guess

Balanced, as I didn't want to compress the play further by going too aggressive.

[Experienced Defender]

5 hours ago, isignedupfornorealreason said:

The Inside Forward is a weak link

Most probably due to insufficient support from his fullback (FBsu in your setup). I would put WBsu behind him and FBsu behind the winger. That would make more sense in terms of space creation and utilization IMHO. 

If you are willing to be even a bit more adventurous, you can go with a WB on support on both flanks, given that you play both CMs in holding roles. In that case, I would also consider swapping the sides of your CM roles (DLP su behind the IF and CMde behind the winger). 

 

5 hours ago, isignedupfornorealreason said:

The Treq isn't the star of the show

A potential reason - in case it's not the player himself - is the presence of another playmaker behind him (i.e. the DLP). However, I cannot claim for sure that's the cause, just an assumption. 

[isignedupfornorealreason]

1 minute ago, Experienced Defender said:

Most probably due to insufficient support from his fullback (FBsu in your setup). I would put WBsu behind him and FBsu behind the winger. That would make more sense in terms of space creation and utilization IMHO. 

My mistake. The WB is behind the IF and the FB is behind the Winger.

 

2 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

A potential reason - in case it's not the player himself - is the presence of another playmaker behind him (i.e. the DLP). However, I cannot claim for sure that's the cause, just an assumption. 

Hmm. Perhaps. I don't want to lose the DLP, since he is phenomenal. I guess I need to think about a different role there, a non-playmaker role, so... AM/S perhaps. I'll have a tinker in the run in to the end of the season.

[Johnny Ace]

35 minutes ago, isignedupfornorealreason said:

Balanced, as I didn't want to compress the play further by going too aggressive.

Ah, fair play

I'd missed the flank combos, like ED just said, I prefer a WB on the flank of the IF & a FB on the flank of the Winger. The Fullback will sit behind the winger, he'll support & cover. The wingback will look to support on the flank when the IF has cut inside, then I have the CM(D) on that side to cover for the WB going forward

I might do a write up on here of my favorite FM20 4-2-3-1, to keep the 4-2-3-1 ball rolling, it's incredibly simple & effective  

Edited October 20, 2020 by Johnny Ace

[Johnny Ace]

8 minutes ago, isignedupfornorealreason said:

Hmm. Perhaps. I don't want to lose the DLP, since he is phenomenal. I guess I need to think about a different role there, a non-playmaker role, so... AM/S perhaps. I'll have a tinker in the run in to the end of the season.

The flanks are sorted then 

Who do you have playing the treq? Can you post up a pic of his profile if possible?

The AM(S) is a great role with it's options, the only thing it's missing is the playmaker in-game "note" to focus play toward that player IMO

 

[isignedupfornorealreason]

1 hour ago, Johnny Ace said:

Who do you have playing the treq? Can you post up a pic of his profile if possible?

Yan Dhanda is the primary Treq, with Byers as his back up.

 

I thought they were relatively similar initially, so went with the younger player as the lead. 

[Johnny Ace]

28 minutes ago, isignedupfornorealreason said:

Yan Dhanda is the primary Treq, with Byers as his back up.

 

I thought they were relatively similar initially, so went with the younger player as the lead. 

You've two decent numbers 10's there, you could use either as an Attacking Midfielder (S)

With Yann, you could ask him to run on the ball more often with his acceleration, dribbling, balance & agility & play risky passes with his passing , vision & anticipation

With George you could ask to play risky passes & shoot more often, his long shots & technique are great 

Both have PPIs that will cover some of those but with your Poacher being fairly stationery you could ask both to roam from position or move into channels. Both have good finishing & composure so you could ask them to get further forward to get on the end of chances as well as creating them 

Only thing that would worry me with both is the 11 Decisions, 14 is a good figure for the Championship but with them both being young it could improve over time 

 

 

Edited October 20, 2020 by Johnny Ace

[Experienced Defender]

2 hours ago, isignedupfornorealreason said:

I guess I need to think about a different role there, a non-playmaker role, so... AM/S perhaps

AM on support makes sense given the 2 holding CMs behind him. However, that could have a negative effect of leaving the poacher with insufficient central support, considering the role's rather static nature. So maybe a better option would be the attack duty for the AM while switching the winger's duty to support. 

Anyway, you can try both combinations and see what works better for your team  

[isignedupfornorealreason]

3 hours ago, Johnny Ace said:

Only thing that would worry me with both is the 11 Decisions

Yeah, both started with 10 in decisions and have gone up to 11 this season. I think they have room to get it to maybe 12-13 if I keep using them in the Premier League. 

I don't have much of a transfer budget, so I doubt I'll be replacing them unless I get a lucky find.

2 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

AM on support makes sense given the 2 holding CMs behind him. However, that could have a negative effect of leaving the poacher with insufficient central support, considering the role's rather static nature. So maybe a better option would be the attack duty for the AM while switching the winger's duty to support. 

Hmm... Yeah, why not, AM/A with a W/S might work.

It's interesting though, I've jigged the roles around a bit, but this is the first time I've seen in-game, the tactics creator is telling me that a Treq and Poacher absolutely don't work together. I've never seen that pop up before, it makes me wonder why that's come up as I thought the two would be a creator/scorer combination. Maybe the reasoning is in the static(ness) of the poacher? Perhaps the striker needs to move to make space for the Treq? 

Regardless, I think I'll try the AM/A experiment for the last four games, as I don't want to mess with the elements that are currently working.

[Experienced Defender]

13 minutes ago, isignedupfornorealreason said:

the tactics creator is telling me that a Treq and Poacher absolutely don't work together. I've never seen that pop up before, it makes me wonder why that's come up as I thought the two would be a creator/scorer combination

I would not pay much attention (if any) to what the game tells you. Just as you should not pay much attention to the ass man's advice. Instead, just use common sense  

[isignedupfornorealreason]

In the end nothing seemed to work to fix the issues, so I ended up back with the IF/S T combination.

 

In the following season, Premier League survival was a trip. I could only sign four mediocre players, and they were mostly for defensive positions.

My Treq and IF were both 6.71 average across the season, but we were terribly outplayed tbh.

 

I'm now having other issues, or they may have been there and I hadn't really paid attention to them. I survive in the PL (12th), which was only because 10th-20th were like a few points off each other!

Second season, people were interested in joining, so I got myself a brand spanking new centre-back pairing. A new Deep Lying Playmaker and a new forward.

That's allowed me to move Ayew into the IF slot, where he's doing okay. 7.07 Average rating. Treq is also 7.08, so it's gone up, but both are very inconsistent and reliant on a goal or assist to kick things off.

I've been playing around too much with the defensive line. Sometimes, I find my team is overwhelmed defensively, lots of 'rearguard action', it is players running through us as if we weren't there. Or... We sit far too deep, even with the higher line instruction on. I'm too scared to go further up in terms of defensive line though!

We also score a lot from set pieces, and our open play goals tend to be long balls over the top - superb from the playmaker/winger, but not always what I want to see. 

I'm still tweaking the instructions tbh, because there's a bit of a 5-2-2-1 formation trending in the Premier League at the moment, and it's forced me to adjust to defend narrow/exploit the wings, *and* remove the DLP because it's frankly asking for trouble to use him with so many players occupying his space. I guess I should stop whinging though, we are overachieving by a mile. 

[Gee_Simpson]

In my 4231 the IF (S) didn't work well for Rashford, yet IW (S) did, he started banging the goals in despite the latter being a more creative role which is weird because Rashford isn't a creative player, he's more of a dribbler/goal scorer. I've seen other people on the Man Utd thread who have had great success using Rashford in the same role, strange one and makes me think maybe passing and vision isn't as important for the IW (S) as we think it is? He was barely scoring for me as an IF, maybe the reduced mentality of the IW actually made him less likely to force the play and let him take his time to make a better decision?

Edited October 28, 2020 by Gee_Simpson

[Experienced Defender]

1 hour ago, Gee_Simpson said:

In my 4231 the IF (S) didn't work well for Rashford, yet IW (S) did, he started banging the goals in despite the latter being a more creative role which is weird because Rashford isn't a creative player, he's more of a dribbler/goal scorer. I've seen other people on the Man Utd thread who have had great success using Rashford in the same role, strange one and makes me think maybe passing and vision isn't as important for the IW (S) as we think it is? He was barely scoring for me as an IF, maybe the reduced mentality of the IW actually made him less likely to force the play and let him take his time to make a better decision?

The problem here is - as in most cases - that you look at a player and his role in isolation from the rest of the tactical setup. What is "best" role for a player is entirely relative and varies from tactic to tactic. 

[Gee_Simpson]

2 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

The problem here is - as in most cases - that you look at a player and his role in isolation from the rest of the tactical setup. What is "best" role for a player is entirely relative and varies from tactic to tactic. 

Yeah that's true. I just found it surprising that he would perform so well in that role when in certain guides I have read it's usually more suited to a player with good crossing, passing, vision etc which isn't any of Rashford's strengths.

Edited October 28, 2020 by Gee_Simpson