Improving 4-1-4-1 DM Wide

[Ein]

I'm using this tactic which has served me well in terms of results but it has one annoying issue - I just can't get the IF-A to function properly. I'm looking for the IF-A to be the team's main goalscorer but as you can see in the screenshots below their performances leave a lot to be desired. The majority of the goals instead came from the PF (from crosses) and the MEZ (from outside the box). How would you go about improving it?







 

[Experienced Defender]

7 minutes ago, Ein said:

The majority of the goals instead came from the PF (from crosses) and the MEZ (from outside the box). How would you go about improving it?

I would first change your striker's role (i.e. duty) to PF on support.  If you regularly play Lingard in AMR, I would rather use him as a winger on support. Then would change a number of team instructions. Definitely would avoid TIs such as "Run at defence", "Focus play through the middle" and "Narrow width". "Pass into space" could be used sometimes (when it makes sense based on what's happening on the pitch at the moment), but not all the time. You can also try with "Be more expressive", to utilize your more advanced players' attacking flair. Low crosses should benefit Martial, so you can use this TI.

Btw, if your tactic generally works well in terms of results. then don't make tactical changes only to make a certain player (or players) your (main) goalscorer(s). Because every tactical change affects some other aspect(s) of your tactic.

[Ein]

Yes, I initially had low crosses but the attacking IFs were consistently underperforming so I eventually changed it to mixed to make more use of Lukaku's height.

The PF on support and the AMR as winger are things I change from time to time (depending on the opposition/desired width) but I've still not witnessed any noticeable improvement from the IF-A.

I've never used 'be more expressive' but the midfield trio all have 'more risky passes' on to encourage them to spray passes into space once we win back the ball.

I tend to care more about the playing style than the results so 'run at defence' and 'pass into space' aren't negotiable. But why would you remove them given the advanced players' pace and dribbling skills?

I'm aware that the IF-A is probably bringing the best out of the MEZ by occupying and pinning defenders back (creating space for the MEZ). But I still would like him to perform better individually. Basically I would like my AML to mimic Salah's 17/18 performances.
 

[Keyzer Soze]

I would try, first of all, a simple swap in the midfield, so that the MEZ(s) would play on the right and the BBM(s) on the left. And because the MEZ(s) is now playing on the right, i would change the IF(s) to a W(s).

I think that your IF(a) is not scoring as much as you would like because the MEZ(s) is taking the game from him. 

I like all the ideas that @Experienced Defendersaid, and he already demonstrated that know a lot about the game, but as you said... the tactic is working, you just want your IF(a) to score more. So, don't rush into drastic changes.

[Ein]

That makes sense. Lingard is not really suited as a winger as he likes to cut inside so I brought in a proper winger, moved the MEZ to the right and changed the right WB to FB. Will see how this goes. The downside of changing the PF (A) to PF (S) is that it changes my tactic from flexible to fluid.

[permanentquandary]

1 hour ago, Ein said:

I tend to care more about the playing style than the results so 'run at defence' and 'pass into space' aren't negotiable. But why would you remove them given the advanced players' pace and dribbling skills?

Because those are instructions given to the whole team, whereas in reality you do not want certain positions, like centre backs or DLP(D), running with the ball or passing into space, because this sacrifices possession and will often put your team under pressure to defend.

If you remove this instruction, roles like inside forwards and wingers will still run with the ball. Increasing mentality also increases the chance of this happening in other positions too.

It is obviously better to not have team wide instructions for instructions that may negatively impact the performance of certain players and therefore your team. Instead, if you want players whose roles do not normally allow them to run with the ball much to run with the ball more, or pass into space, you give them personalised or general Player Instructions to get that done.

Solskjaer's instructions to his players aren't "i want everybody to run with the ball", they're more along the lines of "I want everybody to play with a positive mentality".

[SwedenYid]

7 minutes ago, Ein said:

That makes sense. Lingard is not really suited as a winger as he likes to cut inside so I brought in a proper winger, moved the MEZ to the right and changed the right WB to FB. Will see how this goes. The downside of changing the PF (A) to PF (S) is that it changes my tactic from flexible to fluid.

I'm not too experienced with the Mezzala role, but will not Pogba and Chiesa try to operate in the same wide space given that Chiesa is a Winger on support duty?

With that said I'm having some troubles with the same formation especially the midfield combinations so I'm here for my own learning as well  

Good luck!

[Keyzer Soze]

3 minutes ago, SwedenYid said:

I'm not too experienced with the Mezzala role, but will not Pogba and Chiesa try to operate in the same wide space given that Chiesa is a Winger on support duty?

With that said I'm having some troubles with the same formation especially the midfield combinations so I'm here for my own learning as well  

Good luck!

Actually that would happen more if Chiesa was playing as a attacking winger, because with that mentality the winger will tend to stay a bit more narrow in the final third.

With a support duty, the winger will attack the space between the opponent fullback and the line, while the MEZ will attack the channel between the FB and the centerback. It's a good combination because it will make a overload in that area creating problems for the opponent fullback.

[permanentquandary]

In terms of creating more chances your main problem is with your midfield roles and the way they attract the ball to different locations.

Look at it from the perspective of building an attack from the back after the GK distributes to your defence.

In your current setup, you're telling your central two to do a lot of running and not so much of the creating. Your "creator" is also your holding midfielder in DMC. So he will attract the ball from the centre backs then lay it off with simple passes due to his defend duty. It's a low mentality duty - so he takes few risks. The central two are then the most likely recipients of the ball. They then want to make runs and let someone else create. So they probably are going to play the ball wide with more relatively simple passes. Some chances are going to come from that, no doubt, but it will be inconsistent from cutting in and taking a bunch of long shots or crossing occasionally from the wing.

With this setup the players in midfield aren't attracting the opposition enough, so it causes the front 3 to be easier to mark. They're pinning back the opposition defence with their attack duties but they are isolated and that explains why you might be scoring a bunch from long shots.

[Ein]

8 minutes ago, permanentquandary said:

Because those are instructions given to the whole team, whereas in reality you do not want certain positions, like centre backs or DLP(D), running with the ball or passing into space, because this sacrifices possession and will often put your team under pressure to defend.

If you remove this instruction, roles like inside forwards and wingers will still run with the ball. Increasing mentality also increases the chance of this happening in other positions too.

It is obviously better to not have team wide instructions for instructions that may negatively impact the performance of certain players and therefore your team. Instead, if you want players whose roles do not normally allow them to run with the ball much to run with the ball more, or pass into space, you give them personalised or general Player Instructions to get that done.

Solskjaer's instructions to his players aren't "i want everybody to run with the ball", they're more along the lines of "I want everybody to play with a positive mentality".

I see - but in this case when would you use such team instructions?

I understand team instructions more along the lines of playing to particular strengths.

For instance I want my team to play to the strengths of my quick forwards so I use TIs like 'pass into space' and 'run at defence'. Then I might instruct slow players like Herrera to dribble less. I see it as 'erring' on the side of particular strengths.

[permanentquandary]

4 minutes ago, Ein said:

I see - but in this case when would you use such team instructions?

I understand team instructions more along the lines of playing to particular strengths.

For instance I want my team to play to the strengths of my quick forwards so I use TIs like 'pass into space' and 'run at defence'. Then I might instruct slow players like Herrera to dribble less. I see it as 'erring' on the side of particular strengths.

Just because some of your players are good at certain actions, it does not necessarily mean it is tactically advantageous that they do more of those actions.

Wingers and forwards are always going to run with the ball more often, and telling them to do it even more might not be beneficial, because you're telling them to do it more often in times when it would be inappropriate or likely to lose the ball.

I guess what I'm trying to say is, how much they do every action is a function of mentality and the under-the-hood defaults for each mentality are generally entirely appropriate for each mentality, so you don't need to mess with that.

Where you might add some of these team instructions is to exploit opposition weaknesses. Other team instructions don't necessarily affect every player's instructions, like play out of defence or hit early crosses.

[Experienced Defender]

1 hour ago, Ein said:

Lingard is not really suited as a winger as he likes to cut inside

That's even better and makes even more sense to play him as a winger. Because if he has the trait "cut inside", he will cut inside anyway, while a winger role would make him provide more width and serve as a wide passing option. But once he receives the ball, he will look to cut inside and either cross or play a cut-back pass for an onrushing teammate (eg. mezzala). And he is technically capable enough of doing this stuff.

3 hours ago, Ein said:

I initially had low crosses but the attacking IFs were consistently underperforming so I eventually changed it to mixed to make more use of Lukaku's height.

Okay, I understand that, but at the same time you complained in the OP that most goals are scored by Lukaku, whereas you wanted your AML/IF to be your main goalscorer. That's why I suggested low crosses and changing Lukaku's role to support. Btw, if I managed Utd, I would look to utilize Lukaku's aerial domination as much as possible (based on my analysis of the Utd squad, I would go with 5212WB as the primary formation and 442 narrow diamond as the secondary one).

3 hours ago, Ein said:

I tend to care more about the playing style than the results so 'run at defence' and 'pass into space' aren't negotiable. But why would you remove them given the advanced players' pace and dribbling skills?

In order to avoid an overkill. As for "pass into space", I did not say I would have removed it altogether and never used it, but rather occasionally, i.e. when it makes sense (when I see the opposition is leaving some more space to play passes into). But when I play against a defensive side that sits deep and looks to maximally deny space to me, I won't tell my whole team to look to pass into space, but will rather pick a couple of my best passers and tell them to play more risky passes (or give them roles with the risky passes already hard-coded). 

Regarding "run at defence", there are two reasons I tend to avoid this TI. First, it tends to disrupt my team's defensive shape (which can backfire once we lose the ball). And secondly, you already have enough players who will run with the ball by the very nature of their roles.

3 hours ago, Ein said:

Basically I would like my AML to mimic Salah's 17/18 performances.

Then I fear you would have to buy Salah. Because he is a very different type of player than either Martial or Rashford. In fact, Alexis Sanchez would be a more suitable choice if you want to mimic the Salah of 17/18 (though I'm not sure if the IF would be the right role; maybe trequartista on the left flank would be a better choice given his attributes and traits).

[Experienced Defender]

2 hours ago, Ein said:

The downside of changing the PF (A) to PF (S) is that it changes my tactic from flexible to fluid.

That's just a label, and should not be confused with the "Team shape" that existed in previous versions of FM. So don't pay attention to it.

[Ein]

Thanks for the replies. I took note of them (including the ones I may not have replied to).

3 hours ago, permanentquandary said:

Just because some of your players are good at certain actions, it does not necessarily mean it is tactically advantageous that they do more of those actions.

Wingers and forwards are always going to run with the ball more often, and telling them to do it even more might not be beneficial, because you're telling them to do it more often in times when it would be inappropriate or likely to lose the ball.

I guess what I'm trying to say is, how much they do every action is a function of mentality and the under-the-hood defaults for each mentality are generally entirely appropriate for each mentality, so you don't need to mess with that.

Where you might add some of these team instructions is to exploit opposition weaknesses. Other team instructions don't necessarily affect every player's instructions, like play out of defence or hit early crosses.

Fair enough, that makes sense.
 

1 hour ago, Experienced Defender said:

That's even better and makes even more sense to play him as a winger. Because if he has the trait "cut inside", he will cut inside anyway, while a winger role would make him provide more width and serve as a wide passing option. But once he receives the ball, he will look to cut inside and either cross or play a cut-back pass for an onrushing teammate (eg. mezzala). And he is technically capable enough of doing this stuff.

Interesting, never thought about it that way. I always tended to avoid contrasting traits but what you say makes sense.
 

1 hour ago, Experienced Defender said:

Btw, if I managed Utd, I would look to utilize Lukaku's aerial domination as much as possible (based on my analysis of the Utd squad, I would go with 5212WB as the primary formation and 442 narrow diamond as the secondary one).

Yes, Man Utd can probably achieve great success with different formations. Their squad is superb and their defence is deceptively excellent and very well suited to a high line. The 4141 formation has otherwise been excellent; surprisingly very strong defensively (15 goals conceded in 38 PL matches and 21 consecutive games without conceding). The only issue was the IF-A. And struggling to score in some away matches when you'd logically think there'd be more space to run into.




Some off-topic comments on the PL from my playthroughs with different teams:
- Liverpool always produce strong runs.
- Guardiola was sacked yet again (happens too often in my saves) after dropping out of the title race in the midst of an injury crisis. IMO this manager should be immune from sacking, especially in the 1st season. Is there a way I can reduce this from happening? Maybe increasing the owner/board's patience in the editor?
- Espírito Santo's 541WB does not seem to do well in the game. He always gets sacked and Wolves pretty much always get relegated.

[SwedenYid]

On 20/02/2019 at 17:21, Keyzer Soze said:

Actually that would happen more if Chiesa was playing as a attacking winger, because with that mentality the winger will tend to stay a bit more narrow in the final third.

With a support duty, the winger will attack the space between the opponent fullback and the line, while the MEZ will attack the channel between the FB and the centerback. It's a good combination because it will make a overload in that area creating problems for the opponent fullback.

Thank you very much for that clarification! 

[BigV]

I too have been having this problem however, I think i've found a solution that is beneficial to ME rather than what most would consider an overall change. Bare in mind i've opted with the public beta where changes have been made and may/may not help my situation. 

I've similarly set up like yours however I do question your mentality of style-balanced. I'd personally be more positive if not more attacking with the squad you have. 

The advice you've been given is very good by several people but personally i'd drop your Striker whom I use as a complete forward as support and IF-a so likes of your wide player getting past. Lukaku can fit target man, CF, DLF- support. Either one of those should work best for him as he's been a beast prior and after the opting of Public beta (PB). 

I'd listen with taking off "running with ball" your players aren't as great as you think they are, dribbling and pace with agility is highly desired and from the scrn shot and my knowledge of United as a supporter and personal use of them myself is quite poor so you'll be doing no favours unless you heavily invest in highly rated dribblers all over the pitch which is hard but also diminishing as there'll be a lack of threaded passes and possession loss.

The tempo seems to be very important IMHO as i've tried it fast and slow and I have to say the slow option works best when positive/attacking (I have no idea why but it does, dunno if it's a bug or something i;m missing or maybe it contradicts/overlaps the mentality instructions). Slowing it down causes me to have more possession and the likes of martial/lingard/sanchez whome play LW/RW in my save cause more danger with passing and running directly. Now you have rashford as LW, I've used him quite a bit and noticed the last 3 FM's he sucks as a LW IF because his mental attributes are poor. So I use him in rotation to lukaku as a striker as an AF-A who acts like what he does now for solskjaer in a watered down sense in FM19. 

Look at the pic i've sent, the MEZ role go in the vertical/half space and as they're more attacking/higher up your IF occupies the same space so when they join your IF will be statitc or move elsewhere that may hinder your shape and your threat to the opposition, now to a winger this is perfect as the winger would occupy the far left/right side and your MEZ would support or run onwards like an underlap overloading one side creating width. 

I suggest having a playmaker in CML/CMR as your DM is there to cover but also help passing. You can either get a better CDM thats great in defence but has great passing ability or you switch your DM role to Ball winner/Defensive mid and maybe change roles/ have another player incase it doesn't work in particular games. A playmaker would constantly distribute and help your wingers alot more than a BBM (does a general job of going up and down so no particular speciality unless highly rated- milinkovic savic springs to mind) or even your MEZ who will just move around and try and score than assist. I always have a Playmaker deep or adv in CM just to build around and make attacks more deadly hence I use pogba as Advanced playmaker-A. 

I dunno about playing through the middle either, think it hinders your wing play and maybe leave it neutral or even test it a few matches on focusing sides see if it helps. 

[Ein]

13 hours ago, BigV said:

I've similarly set up like yours however I do question your mentality of style-balanced. I'd personally be more positive if not more attacking with the squad you have. 

I tend to alternate between positive (home/easy matches) and balanced (away/tough matches) and change the mentality throughout the match depending on how things are going. Do you use the same mentality in home/away matches?

13 hours ago, BigV said:

The tempo seems to be very important IMHO as i've tried it fast and slow and I have to say the slow option works best when positive/attacking (I have no idea why but it does, dunno if it's a bug or something i;m missing or maybe it contradicts/overlaps the mentality instructions). Slowing it down causes me to have more possession and the likes of martial/lingard/sanchez whome play LW/RW in my save cause more danger with passing and running directly.

Yes, attacking (higher risk) mentalities further increase things like tempo and passing directness. That's also why I don't like going more attacking than positive.
 

13 hours ago, BigV said:

A playmaker would constantly distribute and help your wingers alot more than a BBM (does a general job of going up and down so no particular speciality unless highly rated- milinkovic savic springs to mind) or even your MEZ who will just move around and try and score than assist. I always have a Playmaker deep or adv in CM just to build around and make attacks more deadly hence I use pogba as Advanced playmaker-A.  

I don't like using playmakers because they act as a ball magnet and make things predictable and/or they can get marked out of the game. I would prefer the whole team to be involved in attacking if possible. To that effect, I probably shouldn't be using a DLP-D but at the same time I'd want this player to try more direct/risky passes from time to time so I'm not sure which role would be best for this position (maybe DM with more risky passes?).

[BigV]

35 minutes ago, Ein said:

I tend to alternate between positive (home/easy matches) and balanced (away/tough matches) and change the mentality throughout the match depending on how things are going. Do you use the same mentality in home/away matches?

Yes, attacking (higher risk) mentalities further increase things like tempo and passing directness. That's also why I don't like going more attacking than positive.
 

I don't like using playmakers because they act as a ball magnet and make things predictable and/or they can get marked out of the game. I would prefer the whole team to be involved in attacking if possible. To that effect, I probably shouldn't be using a DLP-D but at the same time I'd want this player to try more direct/risky passes from time to time so I'm not sure which role would be best for this position (maybe DM with more risky passes?).

Understandable and well worked IMO, I always use positive but since positive hinders attacking threats against smaller teams I usually change it up time to time and during games. Had a final recently with liverpool on positive and more or less dominated the game but nothing came about till ET which i then went attacking and ending up winning 3-1. The mentality is important more than ever I think as it dictates the way you see irl where as before you could tweak options and maybe work around it like attacking and being good on counter. 

I'd suggest tamper around with the whole tempo gauge and see what works best, realistically I thought a higher tempo would work great as we usually see martial, rashford, pogba play quick these days under sleek passing but slowing the tempo seems to be heavily direct with possession more than movement speed of the ball. Under a high tempo game and positive mentality my wide players were making 20-30 passes which is poor and as soon as I slowed the tempo it grew to 28-43 (min/max) and it seemed their passes were deadlier and their dribbling improved which was a huge down side for the likes of martial/sanchez and lingard in a higher tempo game. 

I very much agree and one of the reasons I dont often use deeplying CM's anymore. However, I think if you had a DM-D with risky passes and a deep lying support who drops deep to collect the ball as well as move off the ball to accommodate attacks then it should work in theory. I've always used a deep lying DM on defend as they usually dictate the game but im thinking of switching it up to a DM or even BWM-D to give that extra protection when needed. Matic can serve as a DM and a deep lying as i've tested it quite often and works quite well. If you want attacking as much then a regista is what you want, ive not tested that role myself but im sure others in here have and probably help you however its an awful alot of attacking threat that could leave that back line under threat. The problem is that no one in those CM positions offer to come and get the ball but wait for someone else to give them the ball and with the DLP-D sitting far back and hardly going forward he drags your 2 CM's back or 1 that it hinders your attack. A playmaker certainly a deep one will get the ball and either drive or pass it to the other CM or wide player.  @permanentquandary summed it up perfectly "The central two are then the most likely recipients of the ball. They then want to make runs and let someone else create. So they probably are going to play the ball wide with more relatively simple passes. Some chances are going to come from that, no doubt, but it will be inconsistent from cutting in and taking a bunch of long shots or crossing occasionally from the wing."