Not scoring enough of my chances...

[saware]

Had similar issues before whilst trying to play as a team expected to win (Man City), especially when it came to anything other than a counter-attacking tactic.

I started a new game, as Chelsea, and tried to think a bit more about how I wanted my team to play, who I wanted to score the goals etc. I lined up like this (R>L)...

GK - SK-S

RB - WB-S

RCB - CD-D

LCB - BPD-D

LB - FB-A

DM - DLP-S

RCM - BBM-S

LCM - MEZ-S

RAM - W-S

LAM - IF-S

SC - CF-A

Positive

Shorter passing, play out of defence, and lower tempo.

Couter-Press and counter.

High defensive line, high LOE, and prevent short GK distribution.

SC, LAM, RAM, & LCM set to press more urgently.

How did it end up? Finished 2nd, got to FA Cup Semi-Final, CL Semi-Final, and won League Cup. Abraham scored 30 goals, with the Hudson Odoi, Pulisic, and Mount all getting over 10 from their positions too.

The play was good to watch, and I was quite happy with everything from what was still a side with plenty of room for improvement.

It got me wondering about whether a similar tactic would work with Man City, or had i just got lucky?

I mirrored the formation as I felt this suited the team better, and I tweaked the midfield roles slightly. At Chelsea I used a BBM as I had to find room for Kante and his bursts through the middle, however with Man City I felt that I'd play better to my teams strengths by using an AP-A in the LCM slot alongside a MEZ-S on the right-hand side. I learnt the hard way in my 1st Man City stint that 2 playmakers weren't a good idea, it was too safe, so I changed the DLP-S to a DM-S. The only other change was changing my Winger (S) to Winger (A), this is really because it's usually the position I play Sterling and I wanted him to be more of a goal threat but keep some of the unpredictability that might come with changing to an IF-A, sometimes he'll go down the line and sometimes he'll cut inside. Also, because he tends to hold the width more it gives the CF and the attacking midfield more space to move into, or that's how I see it anyway!

Haven't been able to get too far into the season but I won the Community Shield, and have won my 1st 5 or 6 games in the PL, scoring quite a few goals along the way. I anticipate I might need to tighten up a bit when playing some of the better teams, maybe changing the DM-S to a DM-D, or changing the Winger back to a support role, but so far so good. Hopefully this might give a few people some ideas.

EDIT: This does seem to result in quite a few shots, although thankfully the feedback on the tactics screen doesn't suggest they're all hopeless ones from long-range. I'd say about a 3rd are on target, which I think is quite acceptable.

 

Edited October 24, 2019 by saware
Added extra info.

[Experienced Defender]

On 19/10/2019 at 15:46, LCFCEaves31 said:

Looking at some of the players from your preferred (starting) 11 in this screenshot, I fear that your issues have more to do with player selection than the tactic itself. Unless Gravenberch, Kotarski and Bakker incredibly developed in one year only (from 2018 to 2019). 

[summatsupeer]

On 24/10/2019 at 09:08, LCFCEaves31 said:

I just feel as though I’m going round in circles. I could take all of the other advice above and that doesn’t work And there would be another comment again asking why I’m doing this/don’t like that

I always recommend a step by step process of developing tactics for a team.  Otherwise your kind of relying on luck to hit on a tactic that works better than the last one rather than improving what you have.

Sometimes you'll see the tactical changes your making don't have much of an effect due to the player. Don't under estimate the difference a few points make or the effect traits have.

That's when I think people start to see how the pieces fit together and combine rather than judging the tactic on the final score.

In the tactic you used last I think it was too passive. A lot of cautious/static deep players leaving a lot of work for the advanced players. That DLP probably had at best 4 options assuming they were actually available considering the slow build up allowing defences to get back and organized and a lack of deeper players getting forward to create space.

I also dislike the sole playmaker being on the "attack" flank. Typically the play should be built through the "support" flank before play is switched to the other flank where there should be space.  But with a DLP on the attack flank play will be draw to the right earlier or he will move to collect so no one to switch play without a long ball but does your instructions allow for that?

I also think MEZ are over used, how did we manage for all the years before that role existed? Anything but AP in AML/R is a wide forward as far as I'm concerned and I don't see the need for MEZ in 3 forward systems.  By the time they're making there runs in the final third the forwards already usually are doing that to.  Earlier runs are typically couter attack runs that other roles would of done.

[Armistice]

On 24/10/2019 at 15:41, pheelf said:

I understand where you're coming from with regards to the frustration. That's unfortunately the issue you get when asking such a broad and potentially open-ended question to people with a range of different points of view. It's very difficult in such a situation to coalesce around a solution which satisfies all the advice you are given. I did however highlight this at the beginning of my first post in this thread and the fact that I'm repeating myself is symptomatic of the circular situation which you are describing. In order to break that cycle I'll refrain from asking any further questions and muddying the waters further.

The problem with copying a tactic (however good it may be) is that you don't really understand the tactic and hence when things go wrong you have no way of knowing what to change to react to what is happening in a game. Therefore, that was the reason why when coming up against FC Emmen and you couldn't score you became stuck.

Whereas, if you understand a tactic and have an idea of how it's supposed to play out you are far more equipped to deal with problems as they arise.

As it stands, the ONLY way to increase understanding of a tactic is to watch the matches in full and analyze what is happening. This is of course not ideal but it's the way the game has been designed so we have to deal with it. You need to watch matches until you have enough knowledge of your system to be confident. If you are unwilling to do that then I think you'll find it very difficult to make any improvement when it comes to the tactical side of the game (which incidentally isn't the only aspect to consider when it comes to team performance).

I think you would benefit from spending some time in FM Touch in a throw away save to just experiment with. That way things like tactical familiarity aren't an issue and there is no pressure to get results. Use that to teach yourself the fundamentals about tactics that you've read about and that should enable you to build confidence and be more able to construct balanced tactics.

All the best

Good post but I think you and other people offering advice need to expand more on what’s “understanding a tactic” in your opinion? Is it knowing exactly what each of your players is supposed to do?

 

This + some vaguely described TIs + player roles make things more complicated for the regular FM player imo.

Edited October 25, 2019 by Armistice

[lferreira]

If you think about triangles, the IF-At shouldn't be on the same flank as a DLP-Su. It usually means his passing option on that flank will be heavily marked or tucked in between centre backs and he will have to pass it to the right back, unless you have a player who can hit deep diagonals at a consistent basis.

The Mezzala is a dynamic role and I don't see a problem with that, but I would switch the duties on the flanks, for starters. Perhaps a Mez-Su with a IF-At and a WB-Su or IWB-Su on one side with a DLP-Su and a Winger on support (in case you've got a guy with the cut inside trait) being backed by a WB-Su. 

You would be able to have some good passing combinations on both flanks, being assisted by a striker on a more roaming role. I'd prefer to have a Winger due to positioning - the DLP works better when he can open up play and pick players in open space, he's not going to get you a lot of through balls with that setup, you're Ajax and teams are sitting deep.

In that case, you gotta stretch defenses, not push them further back. The Winger would start deeper and wider and then cut inside, exploiting the half space between their defensive line and midfield when you retain the ball. 

Edited October 25, 2019 by lferreira

[LCFCEaves31]

On ‎24‎/‎10‎/‎2019 at 23:30, Experienced Defender said:

Looking at some of the players from your preferred (starting) 11 in this screenshot, I fear that your issues have more to do with player selection than the tactic itself. Unless Gravenberch, Kotarski and Bakker incredibly developed in one year only (from 2018 to 2019). 

Kotarski, had no choice, Onana was injured. BUt conceding goals isn't an issue.

Gravenberch has improved a lot, introduced him last season as I knew De Jong was leaving.

Bakker went to PSG but I got him back on loan after Tagliafico wanted to leave so it left me short.

In most games in this league, these players should be plenty good enough to win nearly every week

[LCFCEaves31]

On ‎25‎/‎10‎/‎2019 at 14:36, summatsupeer said:

I always recommend a step by step process of developing tactics for a team.  Otherwise your kind of relying on luck to hit on a tactic that works better than the last one rather than improving what you have.

Sometimes you'll see the tactical changes your making don't have much of an effect due to the player. Don't under estimate the difference a few points make or the effect traits have.

That's when I think people start to see how the pieces fit together and combine rather than judging the tactic on the final score.

In the tactic you used last I think it was too passive. A lot of cautious/static deep players leaving a lot of work for the advanced players. That DLP probably had at best 4 options assuming they were actually available considering the slow build up allowing defences to get back and organized and a lack of deeper players getting forward to create space.

I also dislike the sole playmaker being on the "attack" flank. Typically the play should be built through the "support" flank before play is switched to the other flank where there should be space.  But with a DLP on the attack flank play will be draw to the right earlier or he will move to collect so no one to switch play without a long ball but does your instructions allow for that?

I also think MEZ are over used, how did we manage for all the years before that role existed? Anything but AP in AML/R is a wide forward as far as I'm concerned and I don't see the need for MEZ in 3 forward systems.  By the time they're making there runs in the final third the forwards already usually are doing that to.  Earlier runs are typically couter attack runs that other roles would of done.

Appreciate that regarding MEZ, I don't even like it but have no idea what to use instead  

I have been put off using DLP and AP in the same set-up, BBM I can never get it work/see it working how I would expect it to work...

I am watching the games in full at the moment and going to change things as I go... hopefully I understand this enough to make the right calls...

[summatsupeer]

On 25/10/2019 at 16:36, Armistice said:

Good post but I think you and other people offering advice need to expand more on what’s “understanding a tactic” in your opinion? Is it knowing exactly what each of your players is supposed to do?

 

This + some vaguely described TIs + player roles make things more complicated for the regular FM player imo.

Well it's how each piece fits together plus how a players plays that role compared to another.

Some will look at big picture but be too general and say "this player creates" but how does he create? Who for, when and how?  This doesn't just come down to the role+duty of that player but those around him and the overall team instructions.

Same thing for "runners", who, what where and is anyone else attacking same area? Is anyone creating space for the run by dropping, providing width or a deep option to draw defenders out?

Then you have to look at the players being used, even if they have ideal attributes, their traits could go against what you want.  Players taking risks in ways you don't want in a possession system or moving deep in a fast direct system etc.

Some will go to specific and look at the players too specifically and not the big picture.

@LCFCEaves31 I was being quite general and not directing it at you specifically as I skim read the topic.  Can really advise what to use instead of MEZ as don't know what you want/have at this point.  If he's expected to be a runner and get past forwards I'd first look at the players movement ahead and outside of him.  CM-At can be customised a lot.  If want him to support more and leave the front 3 as the main box players then I typically start with a CM-Su or BBM unless I want him to do something else specifically.

[Svenc]

In Terms of Chance Analysis, posted this somewhere in GD already. But the OP may be interested in this. Actually, whilst half a season of FM EPL football is a small/er sample size than what goes into xG models; the guy has come to the conclusion that it would be slightly easier to score in FM 19 than in football; and much moreso from range.

https://dictatethegame.com/2019/09/27/getting-expected-goals-or-xg-into-fm19/

Needs to be stressed though probably that he left out headed attempts. In particular against AI "parking that damn bus", headed attempts from the set piece can quite pile up -- and should be comparably difficult to put away on average. Additionally, he expected it to be easier to score, as he was under the Impression that FM wouldn't simulate the 90 minutes in full (it does). I'm Posting this also to further encourage some seasonal Chance Analysis , still haven't seen any. I think anybody may struggle to score at some Point or at least a couple matches (Wenger argued it would have even be cyclical for Arsenal ); and this certainly applies to AI Managers. Given how negative AI manages Matches, arguably anybody SHOULD struggle to score at some Point -- or I'd be HUGELY concerned about the ME's Integrity / defensive robustness.  

Edited October 27, 2019 by Svenc

[LCFCEaves31]

Well a little update... I decided to take most peoples advice and watch the full match. Not just 15 mins, but the whole match... twice 

Have not conceeded a goal in 3 matches, but again, this was never a problem in the first place it was scoring. 

First 90, yet again, was 0-0, loads of chances, tried changing stuff during the game, but only tactically, no roles specifically.

So the next game I vowed to change roles and think about where I want players to move into, and ignore my normal stuboness to experiment with roles I do not understand. I also used the base shape of 4123 that I love using, but left team instructions at pretty much default. Midway through the next game I changed to shorter passing as we kept giving it away.

To cut a long story short I ended up with this (below)... I am sure you will all pick holes (not in a nasty way) as I am sure there are some flaws, but from what I am watching is more like what I wanted and is creating more attacking opportunities than just passing sideways around the oppositions box. The next 3 games we won 1-0, 3-0 and 3-0.

                  SK (s)

WB (a) CB (d) BPD (d) FB (s)

                   A (d)

          DLP (s)  CM (a)

IF (s)                             W (a)

                  CF (s)

Edit: I must add, the winger on the left works well, offers variety other than just running down the line, because he has a trait of cutting in from both wings (Neres) and has popped up in the pentaly area scoring with his head 

Edited October 28, 2019 by LCFCEaves31

[GreenTriangle]

1 hour ago, LCFCEaves31 said:

The next 3 games we won 1-0, 3-0 and 3-0.

Very important question : who passed and who scored ? Where (what area of the pitch) are these players when they pass / score ?

[Johnny Ace]

Great stuff @LCFCEaves31!!

Your lineup up to the front 3 looks fine to me, though with the CF(S) & IF(S) you have two number 10's & no number 9. The easiest tweak would be IF to (A) & W to (S)

 

[Experienced Defender]

You seem to have finally discovered a tactic  that suits your players in an optimal way, which is great 

Do not make any changes (as long as you are getting results), lest you spoil a good tactic. Just be pragmatic 

[Svenc]

Now the only Question is whether the scorelines went up as the Quality of chances increased, or whether it's a bit of a Honeymoon period after changing to yet another tactic, and immediately seeing higher scorelines (Maybe even helped by the fixture list…). Inevitably though, there is no perfect tactic. There will come Opposition who will defend this better, and some worse. So what Experienced Defender said.  

There may also again be a spell where Things swing in the opposite direction, even though not overly much in Terms of chances may have changed. As written on the first page, if SI are correct, even the very best chances would be roughly 50/50 Affairs most of the time. And they would require the Forward to be in genuine space. Going by my more recent, er, Experiment, which saw a Team pretty clear on goal all match (and converting slightly above half of those Situations into Goals), that sounds About Right. 

Edited October 28, 2019 by Svenc

[LCFCEaves31]

22 hours ago, Johnny Ace said:

Great stuff @LCFCEaves31!!

Your lineup up to the front 3 looks fine to me, though with the CF(S) & IF(S) you have two number 10's & no number 9. The easiest tweak would be IF to (A) & W to (S)

Ok thanks, makes sense. I am really struggling with getting any goals out of my strikers again, all my goals have come from midfield... Dolberg scored a penalty I think, thats about it. 

I initially put the CF on Attack because i thought if he played higher it might stretch the opposition, but it just wasn't working, he was having zero influence, nor getting any service. At least on Support he joins in some of the link up play, but not getting any goals from them at all. 

20 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

You seem to have finally discovered a tactic  that suits your players in an optimal way, which is great 

Do not make any changes (as long as you are getting results), lest you spoil a good tactic. Just be pragmatic 

It is working... I am still getting similar scenarios with lots of shots but not scoring and have had another 0-0, but more often than not we are changing small things during games to come out on top. 

I don't know whether I am right or not, but one example that springs to mind was 0-0 against Sparta at half-time, I dropped the back line to normal, dropped line of engagement to standard to try and draw them out a little... we scored by countering from the space, so I think it worked? That is what I was hoping would happen anyway. 

Playing wider or narrower against a deep defence just doesn't seem to change anything at all... 

On another note, something you mentioned before, I don't think Gravenbach is good enough, compared him to the rest of the top teams in Holland and he isn't good enough.. just hoping he comes good over time, Man City and Liverpool are interested in him so the potential is there. 

My wingbacks crossing also doesn't look great, 12 at best... might explain some issues. 

[Johnny Ace]

46 minutes ago, LCFCEaves31 said:

Ok thanks, makes sense. I am really struggling with getting any goals out of my strikers again, all my goals have come from midfield... Dolberg scored a penalty I think, thats about it. 

I initially put the CF on Attack because i thought if he played higher it might stretch the opposition, but it just wasn't working, he was having zero influence, nor getting any service. At least on Support he joins in some of the link up play, but not getting any goals from them at all. 

To be honest, I'm having the same problem in my save. Last season my striker got 43 in 40, season before 19 in 20, this season he's 6 in 12. I think he's a marked man (rightfully so) so I've switched my attention to the IF(A) & he's on 5 in 2 so far.

Just remember, a Complete Forward will move around a lot, he'll hold the ball up, look to play in others, roam & move into channels which means he won't always be a focal point for the team, I tried it for a few games with my striker, trying to get him back on track & came to the conclusion a CF isn't always the ideal role as a lone striker, though it sounds ideal, he's more of a creator & supporter than a goalscorer. He either needs a strike partner to create for & free him up or a central runner from deep (which is what you're probably finding with your midfielders getting the goals) to hopefully occupy defenders & let your CF find a pocket of space in the box. All from own observations, of course, because no doubt someone will chip in with a 50 in 50 lone CF(S)  

The CF could fall into any category of supporting, creating or goal scoring, it's a phenomenal role which requires a phenomenal player. The more "goal getting" roles are the Advanced Forward, Poacher & Pressing Forward (Attack). A bit unfair on the PF(A) as it's a grafting role but they're the roles more focused on staying central, looking for support from others & putting the ball in net  

Edited October 29, 2019 by Johnny Ace

[LCFCEaves31]

4 hours ago, Johnny Ace said:

To be honest, I'm having the same problem in my save. Last season my striker got 43 in 40, season before 19 in 20, this season he's 6 in 12. I think he's a marked man (rightfully so) so I've switched my attention to the IF(A) & he's on 5 in 2 so far.

Just remember, a Complete Forward will move around a lot, he'll hold the ball up, look to play in others, roam & move into channels which means he won't always be a focal point for the team, I tried it for a few games with my striker, trying to get him back on track & came to the conclusion a CF isn't always the ideal role as a lone striker, though it sounds ideal, he's more of a creator & supporter than a goalscorer. He either needs a strike partner to create for & free him up or a central runner from deep (which is what you're probably finding with your midfielders getting the goals) to hopefully occupy defenders & let your CF find a pocket of space in the box. All from own observations, of course, because no doubt someone will chip in with a 50 in 50 lone CF(S)  

The CF could fall into any category of supporting, creating or goal scoring, it's a phenomenal role which requires a phenomenal player. The more "goal getting" roles are the Advanced Forward, Poacher & Pressing Forward (Attack). A bit unfair on the PF(A) as it's a grafting role but they're the roles more focused on staying central, looking for support from others & putting the ball in net  

Yes, it has been a problem for me on FM19. 

I have played with a lone striker since probably FM15 days, and on FM17 I got them scoring easily double figures, but this year I feel the AI defends a hell of a lot better and block/beat my striker to 99 out 100 crosses or through balls. Tempted to switch back to DLP (s) again, but I had the same issue of scoring goals even though the link up was perhaps a bit better than my CF (s) set-up at the moment. 

I wanted my striker to be a little less involved in the build up to hopefully free him up to be more readily available for a pass/cross where he is in the penatly area rather than being busy outside the box all the time and not being to get into the box quick enough to receive the final pass... the first part worked (haha), but the latter hasn't, so pretty pointless... not involved much in the build up or being effective in the opposition penalty area. 

How people get goals from a lone striker as Advanced forward or Poacher I have no idea... 

[Johnny Ace]

10 minutes ago, LCFCEaves31 said:

How people get goals from a lone striker as Advanced forward or Poacher I have no idea... 

I did with Haaland back a few in game years ago, he got something like 243 in 265, I'm going from memory from my best XI screen as it surprised me, I didn't realise how much he banged for me but he was mostly an AF(A) in a 4-3-3 like your formation  

Last season my main man was a Pressing Forward (Attack) mostly & like I said above, he was bettering a goal a game but I find every season or two, I'm having to switch it up tactically as my set ups get nullified by the opposition & I end up watching terrible matches with my centre backs & centre midfield getting the majority of the goals from set-pieces. 

This season has frustrated me the most, I went into the new season using pretty much the same set ups & my striker couldn't hit a barn door with a CB outscoring him. I figure, he either gets the attention from the CB's, the World Cup has worn him out or he's gotten too big for his boots  I'm resigning after this season anyway ready for FM20

So I freshened it up, had him as a PF(S) the last few games, doing the graft for the IF(A) & he's now bagging, he got a 15 minute hattrick in the first game I switched, it was like watching a different team even though it was the same players with a few role tweaks  

Try changing him back to DLF(S) or (A) have him holding the ball up for the IF(A). You could have another CM on the opposite side to the IF bombing into the box, something like how you'd set up above. I like how the DLP(S) sits deep, covers & recycles, with the wingback going forward & wide the W(S) on the other flank, the CM(A) will get into the box running vertically, the IF(A) will run in diagonally & if the DLF is good enough he'll cause the backline problems. All in theory of course!    

                    SK (s)

WB (s) CB (d) BPD (d) FB (s)

                   A (d)

          DLP (s)  CM (a)

IF (a)                             W (s)

                  DLF (s/a)

[Experienced Defender]

6 hours ago, LCFCEaves31 said:

I don't know whether I am right or not, but one example that springs to mind was 0-0 against Sparta at half-time, I dropped the back line to normal, dropped line of engagement to standard to try and draw them out a little... we scored by countering from the space, so I think it worked?

It obviously worked, so you made the right tweak  However, that particular tweak (LOE) will probably not work against every opposition, as some teams will be so extremely defensive that they will not attack you even if you allow them plenty of space. Btw, LOE is one of the instructions with the greatest effect in the game atm - moving it just a notch up or down can sometimes have a decisive impact. 

 

6 hours ago, LCFCEaves31 said:

Playing wider or narrower against a deep defence just doesn't seem to change anything at all

Like any other tweak, it will sometimes work, but sometimes not. Because not all defensive teams defend in the same way - and even if they do, there are differences in their players' abilities. But the most important thing when you tweak the tactic is - do not make too many tweaks at once; actually, always make them one by one. And when you make a tweak, let the team play for some reasonable time (between 5-10 minutes) before making the next tweak (if the first one didn't produce a result). The good thing is that when you watch your matches, you can hit the "Pause" button at any point and see where each of your players is (and what he is doing) in different situations (attacking transitions, defensive transitions, build-up phase...). This can help you determine what kind of tweak would make more sense in that particular case. 

 

7 hours ago, LCFCEaves31 said:

On another note, something you mentioned before, I don't think Gravenbach is good enough, compared him to the rest of the top teams in Holland and he isn't good enough.. just hoping he comes good over time, Man City and Liverpool are interested in him so the potential is there

No doubt he has great potential. I just wasn't sure if he is good enough atm to be the first-choice mezzala in the strongest team in the league. Anyway, you can post his profile (if you want) so we can see how much he has improved in the meantime  

[LCFCEaves31]

18 hours ago, Johnny Ace said:

I did with Haaland back a few in game years ago, he got something like 243 in 265, I'm going from memory from my best XI screen as it surprised me, I didn't realise how much he banged for me but he was mostly an AF(A) in a 4-3-3 like your formation  

Last season my main man was a Pressing Forward (Attack) mostly & like I said above, he was bettering a goal a game but I find every season or two, I'm having to switch it up tactically as my set ups get nullified by the opposition & I end up watching terrible matches with my centre backs & centre midfield getting the majority of the goals from set-pieces. 

This season has frustrated me the most, I went into the new season using pretty much the same set ups & my striker couldn't hit a barn door with a CB outscoring him. I figure, he either gets the attention from the CB's, the World Cup has worn him out or he's gotten too big for his boots  I'm resigning after this season anyway ready for FM20

So I freshened it up, had him as a PF(S) the last few games, doing the graft for the IF(A) & he's now bagging, he got a 15 minute hattrick in the first game I switched, it was like watching a different team even though it was the same players with a few role tweaks  

Try changing him back to DLF(S) or (A) have him holding the ball up for the IF(A). You could have another CM on the opposite side to the IF bombing into the box, something like how you'd set up above. I like how the DLP(S) sits deep, covers & recycles, with the wingback going forward & wide the W(S) on the other flank, the CM(A) will get into the box running vertically, the IF(A) will run in diagonally & if the DLF is good enough he'll cause the backline problems. All in theory of course!    

                    SK (s)

WB (s) CB (d) BPD (d) FB (s)

                   A (d)

          DLP (s)  CM (a)

IF (a)                             W (s)

                  DLF (s/a)

Ok, I think I will try DLF (s) again and see what happens. I do have my CM (a) on that same side that you have shown above, so it should work wel... although as mentioned, I am not sure i have the best player in Gravenberch (yet)... i don't have anything better though. 

[LCFCEaves31]

Well I am done with FM19 I am afraid. I just cannot get it to work for me, hoping FM20 will bring about better crossing and chance conversion/creation.

Just played Gronigen twice and had 40+ shots combined... drew 0-0, lost 1-0. The most annoying thing that doesn't appear to change whatever you guys have helped with is crossing... every time it is blocked... cannot handle that anymore

Thanks for everyone's help, I do think I have learnt a lot but there is something that's just not clicking into place even with all the expert advice.

Edited October 30, 2019 by LCFCEaves31

[pheelf]

On 25/10/2019 at 16:36, Armistice said:

Good post but I think you and other people offering advice need to expand more on what’s “understanding a tactic” in your opinion? Is it knowing exactly what each of your players is supposed to do?

This + some vaguely described TIs + player roles make things more complicated for the regular FM player imo.

I think it's been covered pretty well by others in the thread. It's very important that you understand how you are asking your team to play.

I would agree with the sentiment that the game can be rather obscure with the descriptions used and the tactic creator interface is rather clunky and often misleading. That is why I advocate for it moving away from descriptions and more towards a pictorial representation which is much more difficult to misinterpret but unfortunately that appears to be some way off from happening.

I don't present myself as an expert and a lot of what I've learnt about the ME has been done by trial and error. The problem some 'regular' players have at times is that they make things overly complicated for themselves for no reason. You don't need any extensive footballing knowledge to know the basics of creating a tactic and in FM that is enough to be successful. You have to ask yourself the question, if you don't understand how a TI works or how to use a particular player role optimally then why are you selecting it in the first place? 

It's better to keep things simple (using generic roles with minimal TIs & PIs) then you have less variables to consider when diagnosing issues with a tactic.

12 hours ago, LCFCEaves31 said:

Well I am done with FM19 I am afraid. I just cannot get it to work for me, hoping FM20 will bring about better crossing and chance conversion/creation.

Just played Gronigen twice and had 40+ shots combined... drew 0-0, lost 1-0. The most annoying thing that doesn't appear to change whatever you guys have helped with is crossing... every time it is blocked... cannot handle that anymore

Thanks for everyone's help, I do think I have learnt a lot but there is something that's just not clicking into place even with all the expert advice.

Just so you know, racking up the shot count on its own isn't indicative of a team dominating another team. If anything, it can be a sign that your players don't have other options so are just blindly shooting and hoping for luck. Looking at your latest tactic,

                    SK (s)

WB (a) CB (d) BPD (d) FB (s)

                    A (d)

            DLP (s)  CM (a)

IF (s)                              W (a)

                   CF (s)

It still suffers with some of the same problems which I highlighted earlier in the thread. I don't see why you would need your most advanced player to be so creative which is something you have also mentioned.

In my view, he needs to be on the attack duty and become a #9 if you want to use an IF (S) as your #10. He should be in a role which isn't about creating for others as he has the whole team behind him looking to create for him. Roles such as Poacher, Advanced Forward, Pressing Forward or even Target Man are more suited for what you need from him in the tactic you created with a preference being on roles which don't have move into channels. The threat he poses of running in behind is what is going to create space for the players behind him by pushing back the opposition defensive line. I'd also consider putting the winger on the support duty so that he can take advantage of that space.

I'd also get rid of the Anchor Man and replace him with a DM (D) then make the DLP (S) an AP (S), if I wanted to have my playmaker in the central midfield. Alternatively, you could replace the Anchor Man with a DLP (D) and replace the DLP (S) in midfield with a CM (S), BBM (S) or BWM (S).

The reason why your wide players may be having their crosses blocked is because they have to dither on the ball. Aside from your CM (A) who will arrive late you have hardly any targets in the box to get onto the end of a cross. This is a problem as both the wingback and winger roles are solely about getting crosses into the box.

After those alterations you could end up with something looking like the following,

                  GK (d)

WB (a) CD (d) CD (d) FB (s)

                DLP (d)

         BWM (s)  CM (a)

IF (s)                             W (s)

         AF / P / PF / TM (a)

I think this would be more balanced, working from back to front.

GK (d) - I assume you still want to play from the back so his job will be to get the ball to your defenders and failing that pump the ball long for your midfielders to compete for. Taking him off the sweeper keeper role will stop him from regularly attempting Hollywood passes which turnover possession cheaply. He will be more likely to try to pick out a defender when distributing the ball.

WB (a) - His job is to get up the pitch as soon as the ball is won and create width on your right flank. He needs to regularly overlap the IF (s) in front of him and on receiving the ball in the final third needs to run at opposition fullbacks and draw them wide to create space in the channels for the IF (S) to cut inside into. You need to pick a player for this role that is capable of getting up and down that flank so he needs great stamina, he also needs to be quick so that he can recover defensively should you lose the ball with him up the pitch and shouldn't have any conflicting PPMs such as stays back at all times.

CD (d) - In a system with a DLP in front of them looking to pick up the ball from deep and orchestrate play you don't need a BPD attempting to perform the same role. When on the ball their job is to pass the ball into midfield or out wide to the fullback on their flank. You want players that are comfortable on the ball that don't panic and punt the ball long when pressed and have the composure to work the ball around well.

FB (s) - It's important that he offers close support to the winger ahead of him and helps to transition the ball from defence into midfield by offering a wide option for your DLP (d). You have correctly identified that he needs to be more conservative so that he can cover for the runs of the CM (a) on his side. He needs to have stronger defensive attributes than the wingback on the opposite flank and physical attributes aren't as important.

DLP (d) - The Pirlo of the team who will set the tone for your attacking play. When your team doesn't have possession his job will be to sit in front of your defenders and attempt to delay the opposition and force them to attack out wide. When your team has the ball, if the ball is behind him (say with the GK or a defender) then his job will be to drop deep into space and offer himself for a pass. If the team has the ball in front of him, then his job is to create depth to your attacks by offering a deep option to recycle possession. On receiving the ball he should be looking to spray creative passes around which is why I like my playmakers slap bang in the middle. That way all passing angles are available to him. You don't want him to roam too much as he is the defensive pivot which links your defence to your midfield. Therefore, you want a player in this role which is disciplined with his positioning (doesn't have the Get Further Forward PPM for e.g.) that is also intelligent and gifted technically to match.

BWM (s) - I like this role on the side of the more attack minded fullback. The reason why is that should you lose the ball high up the pitch he is going to be more proactive in pressing the opposition which I find very helpful in buying time for your fullback to recover defensively. When the opposition has the ball his job is to pester the opposition midfielders to try and force a turnover of possession. Failing that his job is to delay opposition attacks and force them out wide. When your team has the ball his job is to make forward runs into the golden zone and when your team is in full control of possession in the final third to make late runs into the box. When he has the ball his job is to get the ball to the more creative players such as the IF (s) which shouldn't be too difficult given his proximity to him. You don't want him trying to be overly creative or individualistic by trying to dribble past players. His job is to be the link man between your IF (s) which is your attacking pivot and the DLP (d) which is your defensive pivot. The kind of player you are looking to play in the role is a workhorse, strong and defensively sound. He is a player who you expect to do the dirty work which gives the freedom for your other players to express themselves.

CM (a) - If I'm looking for a player which defines this role best I'd probably say Lampard. Defensively, his job is to block off passing lanes and make it difficult for the opposition to play through the middle. His job much like the BWM (s) is to delay but not to the same extent as there is adequate cover in the FB (s). When you have the ball his job is to get forward and run into the box and offer close support to the striker. The purpose of his runs being to draw defenders towards him thus creating a push - pull effect on the defensive line in conjunction with the striker. When he has the ball then his job is to either pass it into the striker, out wide or to take a shot if in a good position. To get the best of the player in the role you need someone who knows how to take a good shot that can finish. It's also a bonus if he is good in the air as that will increase his ability to get on the end of crosses.

IF (s) - This is where you put your most creative striker. When the opposition has the ball his role is to get back and help the fullback behind him. He should do this by pressing the opposition fullback on his side forcing them to play the ball inside. As a personal preference, I like to have my AML and AMR roam in a 4-3-3 and give them that PI. That way when we have possession they look for pockets of space in between the opposition central midfield and defence. I find that movement heavily disrupts the opponents defensive rhythm as they have no way of being able to predict where to position themselves. To add further unpredictability, I also like to have the AML and AMR swap positions during the game. From my perspective, that is the key to breaking down defensive teams alongside having good width and depth, make it impossible for them to read what you are going to do next. When the IF (s) is on the ball he should be taking on players and looking to feed the ball into the striker. I'd also want to see him regularly passing it to the overlapping fullback if there is a lack of space in the channel for him to attack.

W (s) - This is where you put your quickest striker. When off the ball he should behave much like the IF (s) on the opposite flank. His job on receiving the ball is to create the width on the left flank even if it requires him to run wide with the ball after roaming inside when off the ball. That movement is important to create space for the CM (a) beside him. Also by playing him on the support duty will mean he will position himself slightly deeper which should work well and give him the opportunity to utilize his speed. On the attack duty, he will get forward too quickly and by the time he receives the ball he is practically in front of the defensive line and narrow with no space to run into.

ST (a) - His job is to occupy the central defenders. You want him staying central and constantly testing the oppositions back line. You want your best finisher in the role and if he has other strengths such as being strong, a good dribbler, composed and quick that will all help him to perform better. Even if he doesn't score and looks at times to be slightly isolated as long as his movement is threatening the opposition defenders he will be creating space for the players in behind him.

I hope what I've written helps

Best Regards

[Armistice]

 

3 hours ago, pheelf said:

I think it's been covered pretty well by others in the thread. It's very important that you understand how you are asking your team to play.

I would agree with the sentiment that the game can be rather obscure with the descriptions used and the tactic creator interface is rather clunky and often misleading. That is why I advocate for it moving away from descriptions and more towards a pictorial representation which is much more difficult to misinterpret but unfortunately that appears to be some way off from happening.

I don't present myself as an expert and a lot of what I've learnt about the ME has been done by trial and error. The problem some 'regular' players have at times is that they make things overly complicated for themselves for no reason. You don't need any extensive footballing knowledge to know the basics of creating a tactic and in FM that is enough to be successful. You have to ask yourself the question, if you don't understand how a TI works or how to use a particular player role optimally then why are you selecting it in the first place? 

It's better to keep things simple (using generic roles with minimal TIs & PIs) then you have less variables to consider when diagnosing issues with a tactic.

The basics of creating a tactic is not enough if you want to perform well (and that, in my opinion, is overachieving) in FM. Especially with FM19, it has become increasingly frustrating for people to score goals against sides that oversaturate the defence (sometimes unexplicably) with numbers and leave one striker on his own upfront. So when this happens I feel you need more than just a basic setup to score goals.

Anyway, the system you've posted above is sound and fair but you're giving OP exactly what he said he's frustrated of. Crosses. WB-A and W-S are rather archaic crossing roles and as much as you'd like them not to cross, they still will.

Edited October 31, 2019 by Armistice

[herne79]

15 minutes ago, Armistice said:

So when this happens I feel you need more than just a basic setup to score goals

What's a "basic setup"?

[GreenTriangle]

Too much theory. In FM there are a lot of goals scored from set pieces. Why does his team score so few goals ? He has many players who should have no trouble scoring from corners and free kicks. In FM there are a lot of goals scored from long shots and his team is full of players who can score form outside the box. IRL Ajax does not have the striker as main scorer, and there is a reason for that. This striker is tightly marked and he can not find enough space to shoot frequently. But a lot of goals are scored by the AMR-AMC-AML line.  AMC is very important because he create links between wide midfielders and he is the guy who help the striker to not lose posession. There are a lot of movement there and frequently attacking midfielders switch positions between them. Maybe FM is not a perfect simulation, and the best evidence is that the LCFCEaves31 team was in first place in November with a tactical configuration that would create real problems for Ajax IRL

[Armistice]

1 hour ago, herne79 said:

What's a "basic setup"?

The FM presets for example. Or big man little man partnership. Or creative - finisher partnership.

Edited October 31, 2019 by Armistice

[herne79]

19 minutes ago, Armistice said:

The FM presets for example. Or big man little man partnership. Or creative - finisher partnership.

The presets aren't designed to be the finished article.  They're a starting point for us to adapt if we feel the need.

Big man / little man or creative / finisher aren't setups.  They're just two players.

I'm not meaning to be pedantic, I just don't understand what you're driving at?

[Armistice]

11 minutes ago, herne79 said:

The presets aren't designed to be the finished article.  They're a starting point for us to adapt if we feel the need.

Big man / little man or creative / finisher aren't setups.  They're just two players.

I'm not meaning to be pedantic, I just don't understand what you're driving at?

Well maybe you can explain what you understand when you hear basic setup then we can go from there. Not convinced if I explain properly though.

Edited October 31, 2019 by Armistice

[pheelf]

51 minutes ago, Armistice said:

I see.

The basics of creating a tactic is not enough if you want to perform well (and that, in my opinion, is overachieving) in FM. Especially with FM19, it has become increasingly frustrating for people to score goals against sides that oversaturate the defence (sometimes unexplicably) with numbers and leave one striker on his own upfront. So when this happens I feel you need more than just a basic setup to score goals.

Anyway, the system you've posted above is sound and fair but you're giving OP exactly what he said he's frustrated of. Crosses. WB-A and W-S are rather archaic crossing roles and as much as you'd like them not to cross, they still will.

My experience with FM19 contradicts the assertion that you need to be some sort of tactical genius in order to overachieve. I've run as basic a 4-4-2 as you can imagine throughout the whole FM19 cycle and I've repeatedly overachieved and as I stated earlier I'm no expert so if I can do it anyone should be capable of doing it. In my save I come up against parked buses all the time domestically and I rarely struggle to break them down and on the rare occasions that I do, I tend to find it has very little to do with tactics and is usually a problem with the players (player not suited to the role/duty, has problematic PPMs, has poor morale, unfit etc.).

I agree that strikers tend to be a lot less effective in FM19 than they were in FM18 which can lead to frustration. I once had a player in FM18 score over 70 goals in a season with a similar 4-4-2 but then again that's hardly realistic is it. I'm hoping that FM20 makes the balance with strikers a bit better but not to the extremes like in FM18 where it was one goal fest after another once you assembled a decent enough squad.

If I'm reading it correctly I thought that the frustration stemmed from the crosses being blocked which as I mentioned earlier is likely to happen when the wide players dither on the ball and have no targets in the box to cross to. I don't doubt that it exists but I've yet to experience this excessive blocked crosses phenomenon in FM19 which is surprising given that my system is built on mainly attacking through the wide areas. I think having 2 targets in central areas helps as my wide players don't tend to wait to get closed down before firing off a cross. I've seen defenders under no pressure heading straight to opposition strikers, throw ins being thrown straight to the opposition, long shots flying in from all angles (in a previous ME build), the ball rebound off a GKs glove and accelerate and other often quoted ME peculiarities but not that one...strange.

[herne79]

16 minutes ago, Armistice said:

Well maybe you can explain what you understand when you hear basic setup then we can go from there. Not convinced if I explain properly though.

I've no idea, that's why I asked.