Seeking experienced advice!

[OllyAI]

I am finding myself extremely frustrated with this years' game. So much so that I find myself constantly giving up a couple games into a season because I can't string together even what would resemble a half decent tactic but that doesn't stop me coming back the next day thinking I have the answer to no avail time and time again. I'll quite happily admit that in FM's gone by I was that guy who went straight to MR L's and plug and played the top tactic but now a little part of me feels unfulfilled riding on others successes so to speak and even some might argue exploiting the game, which I feel sometimes these tactical creators aim to do, which is fine, but I no longer want to go down the route of using plug and play tactics and possibly exploiting the M.E in doing so. 

 

In terms of a tactical idea, I find it difficult to label what I want to achieve, in my head it makes perfect sense to me but I feel as I continue writing it may begin to look like I don't actually have any idea of how I want my team to play fundamentally. I just want to play attractive possession-based football which leads to good quality chances. I tend to play a 4-2-3-1 and I keep the roles fairly generic I don't really understand fully how roles can link together. Trust me I've done all I can to try and broaden my thinking towards the game even investing as a Patreon with @Rashidi to gain access to his book but honestly, the words on the page may as well be foreign to me as I cannot get my head around any of it. After reading through the information provided in the book and a thread on here (Quitting the game part 2) I've come to the conclusion whether it is right or wrong that Support roles are good and Attack roles are bad.

I may seem like a complete idiot to whoever is reading this and you could definitely be right as my head is just a whirlwind of contradicting ideas and information. I and nobody else should be this frustrated by the game and I'm seeking advice to anyone who could provide me with any information or links to material that could help declutter my poor little brain and set me on a path to understanding and enjoying the game more.

Cheers in advance,

[FMunderachiever]

I sympathise, i created some threads a few days ago with much the same issue as you.

The issue being: I know what i want to do, but i have to translate it into abritrary football manager language, and this contradicts with the words i have in my head, the understanding of how football works in my head, and a lot of the time, the game seems to be a game of opposites where duties, roles and mentalities dont work as you think they will work

There are people a lot more qualified to give advice than me, but could you perhaps start by posting the team you are managing and your current tactic

[OllyAI]

3 minutes ago, FMunderachiever said:

I sympathise, i created some threads a few days ago with much the same issue as you.

The issue being: I know what i want to do, but i have to translate it into abritrary football manager language, and this contradicts with the words i have in my head, the understanding of how football works in my head, and a lot of the time, the game seems to be a game of opposites where duties, roles and mentalities dont work as you think they will work

There are people a lot more qualified to give advice than me, but could you perhaps start by posting the team you are managing and your current tactic

This is how I'm set out currently. No TI's no PI's, just looking to see how everything connects but I honestly wouldn't know what to change if I had to.

[FMunderachiever]

the reason that "attack" duties were bad, in the example that i gave in my thread, is that it meant players were pushed too far forward up against a packed defence and it therefore meant that players didnt have quality options to pass to, hence a lot of long shots, one dimensional play, etc.

It doesnt mean that attack duties are bad per se, but i had the wrong distribution of roles

I think one thing that stands out in your tactic is, there isnt a defined idea of the type of football you are trying to create, who is getting the goals and how.

Can you expand a little on this?

[OllyAI]

Obviously, this is early days in the season but like stated before i've tried over and over again trying to get something together mainly in FMT to take over into the full game. Anyway, to answer your question... I find that my goals mainly come from set pieces, nothing from open play to speak of but in terms of my intentions I want my front 4 to combine well and create good chances with the wingbacks providing extra width with an outball that's all. I don't know how to achieve this and I find very little in the realm of penetrating movement. which puts me in a vicious cycle where I could use attack roles but I'm contradicted by the post that you mention regarding attack roles up against the Opp D Line.

3 minutes ago, FMunderachiever said:

the reason that "attack" duties were bad, in the example that i gave in my thread, is that it meant players were pushed too far forward up against a packed defence and it therefore meant that players didnt have quality options to pass to, hence a lot of long shots, one dimensional play, etc.

It doesnt mean that attack duties are bad per se, but i had the wrong distribution of roles

I think one thing that stands out in your tactic is, there isnt a defined idea of the type of football you are trying to create, who is getting the goals and how.

Can you expand a little on this?

 

[FMunderachiever]

7 minutes ago, OllyAI said:

Obviously, this is early days in the season but like stated before i've tried over and over again trying to get something together mainly in FMT to take over into the full game. Anyway, to answer your question... I find that my goals mainly come from set pieces, nothing from open play to speak of but in terms of my intentions I want my front 4 to combine well and create good chances with the wingbacks providing extra width with an outball that's all. I don't know how to achieve this and I find very little in the realm of penetrating movement. which puts me in a vicious cycle where I could use attack roles but I'm contradicted by the post that you mention regarding attack roles up against the Opp D Line.

 

i think id definitely have a role that has a player running in behind to vary your play and create different focuses to your attack. i think currently youll be playing in front of their back 4 a lot and not creating good chances.

id question whether you need a number 10 in the side if you want to use a deep lying forward, as that player will drop into a number 10 role and link with midfield, so it straight away gives you options to have players running beyond your central striker.

Remember, my thread was about Barcelona where 90% of the time, i faced deep, packed defences.

As sheffield wednesday i dont think this is the case. you may be able to exploit space in behind the back 4 with runs and through balls.

If you do intend on using a passing style, would it not be better to introduce a playmaking role into the team? this would be another option to you but then, you would have to compliment him with another role so perhaps a more defensive minded role next to him as an example.

 

hope more people come in on this thread

[OllyAI]

1 minute ago, FMunderachiever said:

i think id definitely have a role that has a player running in behind to vary your play and create different focuses to your attack. i think currently youll be playing in front of their back 4 a lot and not creating good chances.

id question whether you need a number 10 in the side if you want to use a deep lying forward, as that player will drop into a number 10 role and link with midfield, so it straight away gives you options to have players running beyond your central striker.

Remember, my thread was about Barcelona where 90% of the time, i faced deep, packed defences.

As sheffield wednesday i dont think this is the case. you may be able to exploit space in behind the back 4 with runs and through balls.

If you do intend on using a passing style, would it not be better to introduce a playmaking role into the team? this would be another option to you but then, you would have to compliment him with another role so perhaps a more defensive minded role next to him as an example.

 

hope more people come in on this thread

Thanks for your advice. I hope so too. 

[Experienced Defender]

3 hours ago, OllyAI said:

I've come to the conclusion whether it is right or wrong that Support roles are good and Attack roles are bad

There are no "good" or "bad" duties and roles. There is just a good or bad setup (balance) of roles and duties within a system. I saw in your tactics screenshot that you actually play a deep 4231 (with DMs), which can be a nice counter-attacking tactic, but you can also play a possession-oriented game as well. Unfortunately, I cannot tell you which exact roles and duties would best suit your players because I don't know what type of players they are, but I can give you an example of how a well-balanced setup of roles and duties in your deep 4231 system may look:

PFa

APMs        AMs        Wa

 

ACM    VOLs

FBa     CDc     CDd     WBd

GK/SWKd/s

As I said, this is just one example, but by no means the only. Because each setup requires certain types of players. For example, if you do not have a player who can perform a volante role in the right way, then you should not use the above setup. The same goes for any other role.

But while achieving a proper balance of roles and duties is very important, tactics are not just about them. Team instructions are no less important, because they help you create the style of play you want to achieve. You said in the OP that you "want to play attractive possession-based football which leads to good quality chances". So you need team instructions that would make it translated into the game. For example, shorter passing, play out of defense and work ball into box are the instructions that are logical for your desired style of play. Slightly lower tempo might help as well, but is not always necessary. Also, a lot depends on the mentality you are using because it affects all other settings. And this was just in relation to the in-possession section of tactics. But the other two sections (transition and out of possession) are as important and interrelated. And don't be reluctant to learn by trial and error. Because no matter how good pieces of advice you might get here, only when you get a true understanding of how tactics work you'll be able to create a logical tactic for whichever team you manage.

[Rashidi]

5 hours ago, OllyAI said:

I am finding myself extremely frustrated with this years' game. So much so that I find myself constantly giving up a couple games into a season because I can't string together even what would resemble a half decent tactic but that doesn't stop me coming back the next day thinking I have the answer to no avail time and time again. I'll quite happily admit that in FM's gone by I was that guy who went straight to MR L's and plug and played the top tactic but now a little part of me feels unfulfilled riding on others successes so to speak and even some might argue exploiting the game, which I feel sometimes these tactical creators aim to do, which is fine, but I no longer want to go down the route of using plug and play tactics and possibly exploiting the M.E in doing so. 

 

In terms of a tactical idea, I find it difficult to label what I want to achieve, in my head it makes perfect sense to me but I feel as I continue writing it may begin to look like I don't actually have any idea of how I want my team to play fundamentally. I just want to play attractive possession-based football which leads to good quality chances. I tend to play a 4-2-3-1 and I keep the roles fairly generic I don't really understand fully how roles can link together. Trust me I've done all I can to try and broaden my thinking towards the game even investing as a Patreon with @Rashidi to gain access to his book but honestly, the words on the page may as well be foreign to me as I cannot get my head around any of it. After reading through the information provided in the book and a thread on here (Quitting the game part 2) I've come to the conclusion whether it is right or wrong that Support roles are good and Attack roles are bad.

I may seem like a complete idiot to whoever is reading this and you could definitely be right as my head is just a whirlwind of contradicting ideas and information. I and nobody else should be this frustrated by the game and I'm seeking advice to anyone who could provide me with any information or links to material that could help declutter my poor little brain and set me on a path to understanding and enjoying the game more.

Cheers in advance,

Thanks for supporting me, but I don't think that support roles are good and attack roles are bad.

What we need to do is simple, know who is expected to attack and who is expected to defend. Now figure out who should do both. This is where everyone gets it wrong. The support duties are important in as far as your overall mentality is concerned. So if you have a system with a lot of support duties and you are playing defensively (mentality) then most of your support duties will have a lower mentality. This makes them risk averse. So when creating any kind of tactic start simple. Just go and make a simple 442, then go from there. Sometimes people try too much and then fail spectacularly. 

I see you have gone and created your tactic. Why did you go clean slate if you don't understand what everything means. Pick a style and work from there. At least that gives you a starting point. Second you chose balanced, that means all yoru players on the pitch have a 50-50 outset, with no tactical instrructions per se, you will be depending a lot on decision making and good attributes. Yes you went into this with no tactical instructions, lets think things out slowly.
 

You have a system with 2 DMs sitting deep, both are on support, you are playing balanced,  with two wingbacks on support who will do both attack and defend. There is a gap so someone needs to bring the ball up. When you do get the ball up in midfield you have a DLF(S) dropping deep to play through balls, but no one is attacksing the space. So the only way that will work is if you camp. So possession goes up, but really who is creating any of the chances otherwise. 

You have 2 DMs who are going to play a simple game, overall your tactic does lack a clear plan.  If you are frustrated just take a step back and come up with your own plan. Tell us what you want to do and slowly people can guide you.

What you have mentioned is the obvious, the wingbacks to give you width while the forwards combine well. Now the forwards are only wingers who will be on support. Here wingers will either go down the flanks or attack the box. What kind of attacking movements are you looking for? Do you at any point want those wingbacks to defend and protect the flanks. Or are you prepared to defend the crosses? Do you have defenders who can win the ball in the air? Do you plan on trying to launch balls from deep at any point to catch teams on the counter? Do you expect a playmaker or sorts to string passes together? Do you want the midfielders to control possession and move a side around? 

When you can clearly spell out what you want then you will be able to craft your own systems. The issue with some people is that this articulation is a challenge, which is why the tactical presets are there as a starting point.

[OllyAI]

3 hours ago, Rashidi said:

Thanks for supporting me, but I don't think that support roles are good and attack roles are bad.

What we need to do is simple, know who is expected to attack and who is expected to defend. Now figure out who should do both. This is where everyone gets it wrong. The support duties are important in as far as your overall mentality is concerned. So if you have a system with a lot of support duties and you are playing defensively (mentality) then most of your support duties will have a lower mentality. This makes them risk averse. So when creating any kind of tactic start simple. Just go and make a simple 442, then go from there. Sometimes people try too much and then fail spectacularly. 

I see you have gone and created your tactic. Why did you go clean slate if you don't understand what everything means. Pick a style and work from there. At least that gives you a starting point. Second you chose balanced, that means all yoru players on the pitch have a 50-50 outset, with no tactical instrructions per se, you will be depending a lot on decision making and good attributes. Yes you went into this with no tactical instructions, lets think things out slowly.
 

You have a system with 2 DMs sitting deep, both are on support, you are playing balanced,  with two wingbacks on support who will do both attack and defend. There is a gap so someone needs to bring the ball up. When you do get the ball up in midfield you have a DLF(S) dropping deep to play through balls, but no one is attacksing the space. So the only way that will work is if you camp. So possession goes up, but really who is creating any of the chances otherwise. 

You have 2 DMs who are going to play a simple game, overall your tactic does lack a clear plan.  If you are frustrated just take a step back and come up with your own plan. Tell us what you want to do and slowly people can guide you.

What you have mentioned is the obvious, the wingbacks to give you width while the forwards combine well. Now the forwards are only wingers who will be on support. Here wingers will either go down the flanks or attack the box. What kind of attacking movements are you looking for? Do you at any point want those wingbacks to defend and protect the flanks. Or are you prepared to defend the crosses? Do you have defenders who can win the ball in the air? Do you plan on trying to launch balls from deep at any point to catch teams on the counter? Do you expect a playmaker or sorts to string passes together? Do you want the midfielders to control possession and move a side around? 

When you can clearly spell out what you want then you will be able to craft your own systems. The issue with some people is that this articulation is a challenge, which is why the tactical presets are there as a starting point.

Just tried this, it was a total failure. I think I'm done trying with this game.. I'm clearly not able to articulate what I want or have the knowledge required to play this game. I just don't get it. 

 

 

[VinceLombardi]

9 hours ago, OllyAI said:

In terms of a tactical idea, I find it difficult to label what I want to achieve, in my head it makes perfect sense to me but I feel as I continue writing it may begin to look like I don't actually have any idea of how I want my team to play fundamentally. I just want to play attractive possession-based football which leads to good quality chances. I tend to play a 4-2-3-1 and I keep the roles fairly generic I don't really understand fully how roles can link together.

Nothing wrong with any of this. But I think it would do you well to define few terms. 

What is "attractive possession based football"? Is that slow paced? Fast? Where are the passes occuring? How would you describe them? Probing? Safe?

What are good quality chances? Are they crosses to a big man? Through balls to a runner? Do you want to feed your scorers at their feet or in the air?

What do you want your defense to look like?

These questions will really help design the tactic before you even start looking at roles or duties.

[kpsia518]

https://www.guidetofm.com/

i'm waiting this guys to complete the guide

[sporadicsmiles]

1 hour ago, OllyAI said:

Just tried this, it was a total failure. I think I'm done trying with this game.. I'm clearly not able to articulate what I want or have the knowledge required to play this game. I just don't get it. 

 

 

What are you trying to achieve with this, though? What type of football are you trying to play there?

I will tell you how I think this tactic will go. You have two wingers, so almost all your play is down the flanks. You will create nice triangles in midfield to retain the ball, but most attacks will end up being funneled down one of the flanks. This means you rely almost exclusively on crosses to create goals. Sure, you may occassionally get a good through ball from the center. So you end up seeing a load of crosses either be cleared or go out for corners. You also probably end up with a lot of long shots. Defensively, I guess you are quite decent.

I will try to explain that now. You have only two ways you are regularly going to create chances. The most important of those is the wingers. You have two of them, and they are often going to find space (space is always easier to come by on the flanks). The second will be sometimes getting through balls to your striker from the midfielder. You are immensely reliant on your striker in this tactic, and your wingers. If your striker has a bad day, you will not score. And he will  have a lot of bad days. You have nobody getting forward centrally to support him, so he is alone in the penalty area trying to get on the end of crosses himself, for the most part. Take your striker out, and the AI is 90% to getting at least a point from you. If your crossing also isn't working, you will not even give your striker chance to be bad. He will have no service. There is no variation in your tactic. There is no plan B, or plan C. There are not different ways you can build up.

In addition to this, you have so many players who I do not know what they are for. What is your CM(S) doing in this tactic? What is he for? What do you want from him. What is the point of the supporting fullbacks? What job are they doing when you attack? These three roles do not seem to contribute enough.

So what can you do? I'd suggest to ask yourself a few basic questions when you are setting up a tactic.

1. What do I want every player in my team to do? What is their job. For example, in the tactic you post. You want a central midfield player to hold position and act as a pivot/holding player to cover the defense. So you selected a CM(D). This makes absolutely perfect sense to me. Now ask yourself what each of the players is supposed to do. With this, you can more easily pick the roles and duties. I'd even suggest making it into a post here, so you can describe what you want even if you do not know exactly what role this means. Then we can help to guide a choice.

2. How am I going to create chances? This is critical to designing a good, robust tactic. You want to have a number of ways to create chances. In your current tactic, the main way you will create chances is by crosses. However, it is the only way. How could you make this better? Using a role for one winger that cuts inside and see's him getting into the box. This gives the AP another player to pass to centrally, and gives support to your striker by occupying another defender. Suddenly, you open more options, and you are not reliant on crosses. Another example would be to use a SS in AM, and have him get ahead of the striker, who can feed him the ball. There are so many things you can do here. You will also note in both examples I gave you, I have created another player who can score, so taking the burden from the striker. The more ways you can think of making your side score, the better.

3. What is my global idea for how I want to play? Do you want to play like Pep? Like Mourinho? Like Klopp? Like Ranieri? (I play like Mourinho!). This guides how you chose mentality and team instructions. For example, to emulate Klopp or Guardiola, you will use lots of closing down high up the pitch. For Mourinho, you will drop deeper and defend in your own half. There is no right or wrong way to play. It will also, of course, be closely tied to point number 1 - roles and duties will feed into how you want to play. The most important thing to do is ensure you pick a TI because it fits how you want to play.

These, for me, are the most basic steps you can take. I understand the game can be remarkably frustrating at times. Even for people who understand the game. Hell, last night I got absolutely pasted 4-0 by Valencia, and I have no idea what went wrong (even after watching the match back). It is an incremental and frustrating learning process, but it is also very rewarding.

[Rashidi]

I may do a How to Make a Tactic show and use this club as an example. But that will essentially be someone else doing it for you.

What you need to do is step back and like some of the others have said  : Define your identity

Step 1  - Analyse your squad

It's one thing wanting to play in a certain way its another thing when you are faced with a squad that can't do it. So take a look at your squad first and understand what they can and can't do.

Step 2- Craft a Plan

Here depending on your side you will come up with a broad plan.
- Can my side defend against crosses. That will give you more options. You can play narrow, deep draw sides in, win headers in the box and launch counters
- Can I launch counters. Do I have crafty players who can make the pass? Do I have players who can get on the end of them?
- Do I have players who can control midfield? 
- What kind of physical attributes do my players have? Can they last the match? Do they have the drive to come back from a goal down?
- Do I have any strengths? Targetmen, pacey strikers, dribbly wingers?

This will give you a broad understanding of your own team. And based on this you will draw up a plan. You may want to play attractive possession football, but can your side actually do so? The others are all giving you advice on the macro side of things, which is what you need to address before going into a tactic. So start from there. 

Forget the tactic tell us about your own team. You are showing basic issues with not even understanding what your side is capable of. Let me explain:

 

Season preview lists you as a midtable side

Your defenders are the worst in the air, or nearly the worst in the air in the whole league, they are also one of the slowest in the league.

With an average jumping reach of 12.27, they won't be able to handle most of the strikers in the league. Millwall for example, 14.20 in jumping reach. This has big implications on set pieces and even how you defend from corners., but from that screenshot you are starting with two players who can't even deal with crosses.

You have Pelupssey playing on support so you clearly need him to control the ball and do something with it in midfield, however he has poor composure, so when under pressure against systems that are applying a middle press which is the most common press, you will have issues.

You are using Bannan as a CM(D) when he is clearly the better lockpicker between the two, but you are handicapping his ability by against him only to focus on defensive tasks as a central midfielder on defend.

You want to play Penny as an W, but he can't even get away from anyone. Stick a U18 player next to him and he will still get caught. He is never gonna get you a decent cross on attack duty cos he will ALWAYS be marked.

Reach is slightly better, but he clearly has a better left than right foot, and he loves to get forward, so most times he is going to be isolated, perhaps once in a while he may be able to do soemthing, but cos he is on his wrong foot, he will tend to cut inside or turn his body to make a cross, and that will cost your side.

[OllyAI]

2 minutes ago, Rashidi said:

I may do a How to Make a Tactic show and use this club as an example. But that will essentially be someone else doing it for you.

What you need to do is step back and like some of the others have said  : Define your identity

Step 1  - Analyse your squad

It's one thing wanting to play in a certain way its another thing when you are faced with a squad that can't do it. So take a look at your squad first and understand what they can and can't do.

Step 2- Craft a Plan

Here depending on your side you will come up with a broad plan.
- Can my side defend against crosses. That will give you more options. You can play narrow, deep draw sides in, win headers in the box and launch counters
- Can I launch counters. Do I have crafty players who can make the pass? Do I have players who can get on the end of them?
- Do I have players who can control midfield? 
- What kind of physical attributes do my players have? Can they last the match? Do they have the drive to come back from a goal down?
- Do I have any strengths? Targetmen, pacey strikers, dribbly wingers?

This will give you a broad understanding of your own team. And based on this you will draw up a plan. You may want to play attractive possession football, but can your side actually do so? The others are all giving you advice on the macro side of things, which is what you need to address before going into a tactic. So start from there. 

Forget the tactic tell us about your own team. 

That's a fair point and I'll endeavor to try harder. My main issue is I do genuinely feel like I balance the roles well but perhaps it is far too generic and one dimensional as mentioned by previous posts. I do however not understand a certain part of the previous post by @sporadicsmiles where he questions my fullbacks choice in roles. I've gone with FBs with a Wa ahead of him.. to my knowledge and my thinking behind it is that the Winger is far more advanced up the pitch earlier in transition so why would I also push my FB high and risk leaving acres of space in behind on the flanks? I thought the rule of thumb in terms of dual wide players is to have opposite roles to provide balance? Sorry if I'm causing frustration for you, I am extremely grateful for your replies. 

[Rashidi]

I just did a cursory look at your team, and you are getting the basics all wrong. You need to look at your players and understand what they can and can't do first.

[Rashidi]

3 minutes ago, OllyAI said:

Winger is far more advanced up the pitch earlier in transition so why would I also push my FB high and risk leaving acres of space in behind on the flanks?

Fair point, if the winger can do it on his own, then yes. Sometimes I do that. Or if I want to play a sit back and hit one over the top counter system, I will do the same as you.

However there are also times when the lack of ability in midfield forces us to get more players up in support, this can be done in various ways.
 

1. Choose a more attacking role, eg wingback over fullback - not always ideal cos this means you need to use a solid defender to cover. It can be done, but there are risks. However you are guaranteed to get better support for midfield
2. Choose an attacking duty, this positions the player further up the pitch, but it still gets him to prioritise the attacking phases which means during transitions you may be caught out
3. Use overlap and use a fullback and tell him to play on support or even defend. Now we are using a conservative role but using the overlap shout to force a higher mentality in the back
4. Ask the back to sit narrower, here he lends more support to midfield during transitions
5. Use a role that supports midfield more than attacks the flanks - Inverted Wingback

There are many ways to get support up.

 

[OllyAI]

3 minutes ago, Rashidi said:

3. Use overlap and use a fullback and tell him to play on support or even defend. Now we are using a conservative role but using the overlap shout to force a higher mentality in the back

 

I like this point. I wasn't aware the shout would still take effect with a more defensive minded player.

[Rashidi]

yeah and please loan two fullbacks and rethink how you want to play cos that system with what you put out on the pitch will never work

[OllyAI]

3 minutes ago, Rashidi said:

yeah and please loan two fullbacks and rethink how you want to play cos that system with what you put out on the pitch will never work

I will do, thanks. Are the fullback really that bad?  I thought Palmer was half decent on the right haha. I do hope you decide to do a video on the team, you have me intrigued. Thanks again!

[Rashidi]

you don't have options at RB and LB really only has one decent player. If either one gets injured, you will struggle. You can't even rotate them cos the rest are so bad

[OllyAI]

1 minute ago, Rashidi said:

you don't have options at RB and LB really only has one decent player. If either one gets injured, you will struggle. You can't even rotate them cos the rest are so bad

That's something I was aware of moving forward. I previously stated that I'm currently using FMT just to get a feel for the game and some sort of system I was happy with before taking it to full game and that was definitely an area I was aware needed strengthening. I was worried for a second that I was completely oblivious to how poor my first choice FB's were.

[Johnny Ace]

I'd have a read of the Pairs & Combinations guide, it's something I've gone back to time & time again when something isn't working. It's from FM15 but still holds up today, it's not a set in stone guide but it's a good starting point   

[sporadicsmiles]

5 hours ago, OllyAI said:

That's a fair point and I'll endeavor to try harder. My main issue is I do genuinely feel like I balance the roles well but perhaps it is far too generic and one dimensional as mentioned by previous posts. I do however not understand a certain part of the previous post by @sporadicsmiles where he questions my fullbacks choice in roles. I've gone with FBs with a Wa ahead of him.. to my knowledge and my thinking behind it is that the Winger is far more advanced up the pitch earlier in transition so why would I also push my FB high and risk leaving acres of space in behind on the flanks? I thought the rule of thumb in terms of dual wide players is to have opposite roles to provide balance? Sorry if I'm causing frustration for you, I am extremely grateful for your replies. 

No frustration, happy to try to help.

I did not explain very well, and Rashidi has dealt with this in more detail. However, my point was I do not see what you want them to be doing. They are almost just there because you need them. There is no clear direction, I do not know what you expect them to be doing. Ideally, I would want them to at least support the midfield in a meaningful way. Act as an additional passing option, force the AI to have a man to deal with them. Alternatively, have them close enough to the W(A) that they provide support, a passing outlet other than a byline cross from the winger, and perhaps even helping the winger find space. Rashidi has pointed out the many things you can actually do with fullbacks so I will not go into it again (he understands the game far better than I in any case).

Also, you do not necessarily have to have S/A or A/S on the flanks. I will often use A/A on the same flank, if I really want to try to overload that area of the pitch, for example. Or if I have an IF and I want to still have a wide threat. Naturally, you have to balance that with roles and duties elsewhere. On the flipside, I will also often have D/S for the full back and wide player if I want to really protect a flank. Guidelines are not rules.

[warlock]

On 09/12/2018 at 21:09, OllyAI said:

I am finding myself extremely frustrated with this years' game. So much so that I find myself constantly giving up a couple games into a season

Just caught up with this thread and wanted to offer some support, but the above is your first problem - if you constantly quit after a couple of bad games you'll never get better. You need to stick with it.

Having said that, I'm managing the Owls and after three seasons I won the Championship, survived the first season in the PL, and am just starting to build from there. I know you don't want a download tactic, so I won't give you one (although I'm happy to share if you want!) but I have some thoughts that might help.

I hold Rashidi in the highest regard and would not lightly disagree with him when it comes to FM, but I do think he's a bit harsh on Wednesday. On paper, 442 looks like a natural choice but because of the injuries at the beginning of the save you can't really play that. Instead, I went for a cautious 4141dm and, because you need options out wide, brought in Oliver Burke from West Brom on loan. When everyone recovered from injury I went for the 442 but discovered that the players simply don't have the quality - Winnall, Fletcher, Hooper and Matias simply never performed for me. But up front, Niuhu, Joao and Forestieri did the business (with the latter mostly playing IF-L but filling in at striker when necessary) and the latter two are still with me in season 3. In midfield, Bannan was the outstanding player in the squad, and was able backed up by Onomah and Lee. Hutchinson and Peluplessy rotated in DM. I brought in McTominay from Man Utd as additional midfield support.

At the back, Lees and Hector were great, playing simple CM-D roles, and van Aken was OK in rotation. So let's talk about FBs. Yeah, they're not the best but Thorniley and Palmer did well for me all season in a four-at-the-back setup. I used Baker as backup at RB and he wasn't great but did enough; Fox at LB was better. The trick at LB is to use Pudil - he's not perfect but he is better than the alternatives. I didn't go with it, but if you can bring in some extra rotation at CB you could play a 3/5 defensive system, which would let you get the best out of Reach and Penney, who aren't really good enough at LB or RM but are pretty good at WB-R.

For me, the trick with Wednesday was to keep things simple, play your best players in their best positions, and accept that you don't have the talent (Bannan excepted) to do anything remarkable. In my case, we hit the top spot in September and never surrendered it. If I can help with anything, just ask!