4-3-3 Positional Play - Arteta And Guardiola Inspired

[poobington]

Hi guys I am trying to get my positional play based 4-3-3 to work, inspired by Guardiola, and more recently what Arteta is trying to achieve at Arsenal.

I have been trying to perfect the system with Leeds, and whilst at sometimes we dominate matches and create a lot of clear chances, we suffer from not converting these into goals, and also not being consistent enough. This may be a limitation imposed by the players I have, but given Leeds superiority in the championship this shouldn't be too much of an issue.

Expectations from players

GK - comfortable playing either long or short but not just hoofing it up the pitch. Should be looking for open players to bypass opposition press.

DCs - comfortable on the ball but ultimately keepin it simple

LB - Inverted wb tucks in to provide extra numbers

LW - Stays wider but with licence to cut in in the final third.

RB - Stays wide and overlaps

RW - sits narrower and acts as a striker

DM - I want him to screen the defense ultimately alongside the inverted wing back

MCL - I want him to be a playmaker who runs at defence looking to feed the the the front 3

MCR - I want this guy to be a bit of a water carrier they will have to cover the wide space vacated by the wing back.

ST - Can drop deep but also lead the line

TIs and Roles selected are shown in the screenshot. Only PIs are for the ST, LW, RW, MCR and MCL to Close Down More.

Any thoughts?

 

[bere23]

You are playing a very aggresive mentality with a fairly attacking formation too..your right flank is extremely exposed with Raum who stay forward and not helping defensively,also u have a BBM whos is arriving late in opposition third and a WB-sup who is aggresive too.if u want to keep the width in right flank u could use a wb-def to reduce his attacking mentality and also provide width and sometimes overlap the raum.Remember u are using a very aggressive mentality which means all base mentality of ur team is attacking which also means tha get higher at the pitch and using a verry aggresive def shape with higher lines.in ATT mentality u can have it already.its a bit overkill to me..remember also when using att mentality defender tend to play shorter passing and attackers direct so i dont think u need Play out of defence because it makes ur build up more slower and pattiently..this is my advice for now..if i can help a bit more feel free to ask  

[mdougal]

Hi

If you are looking for something that sort of looks like Guardiola/Arteta then you could try the base of Crusedtsar team he is doing with his young devils save

From last seasons FM where I tried to emulate a Pep style the base formation of 4-1-4-1 can really work as it’s very easy for it to morph into a 4-3-3 or even 2-5-3 in attack and his tactics in his save really go along way to look like this

I myself have gone with the 4-1-4-1 but changed a few player positions and added a few extra team instructions to be more like the style of play I’m going for but I’m currently in 4th place with Southampton and being praised in the media for the passing and attacking style the team plays. Plus I’m really enjoying watching the football it produces compared to the more plug and play styles that can obviously work

[Experienced Defender]

4 hours ago, poobington said:

If you want to play on the Attacking mentality, you may need to loosen your defensive TIs (DL and LOE) up a bit. I would drop both by 1 notch, so as to create more space in attack while also reducing the risk of being hit by balls over the top. The overall level of compactness remains unchanged.

If you want to use the RMD role, not only that you need to pay more attention to his flank defense-wise (because RMD is pretty much irresponsible defensively) but I fear he'll also need better support in attack in order to be utilized to full effect.

This is an example of what I would look to change in your setup on that score:

F9/DLFsu

IWsu                                    RMD

CAR/BWMsu RPM/MEZsu

HB

FBat   CDde  CDde   FBsu/IWBde*

SKsu

* If you have a player in DR position that is good/reliable enough, you might be able to proceed with a WB on support (as in your original tactic)

Now, let me explain the other tweaks I made above:

- by putting a highly creative and mobile role (RPM or MEZ on support) behind the RMD, he should get more direct and qualitatively better support

- by playing the striker in a role that looks to drop deep in the attacking build-up phase (F9 or DLF on support), you create more space for the RMD that he can take advantage of more effectively while still retaining the creative type of support than with a CF (who is inherently more attack-minded and higher-positioned than F9/DLF)

- with a FB on attack on the left flank, you now have a player that will naturally overlap the IW (AML) and deliver crosses for both the RMD and those supporting him

- the carrilero (or BWM on support) in MCL is meant to provide defensive cover for the attacking FB as well as help with recycling possession when needed

Hope this helps.

[ashlfcowen]

1 hour ago, Experienced Defender said:

If you want to play on the Attacking mentality, you may need to loosen your defensive TIs (DL and LOE) up a bit. I would drop both by 1 notch, so as to create more space in attack while also reducing the risk of being hit by balls over the top. The overall level of compactness remains unchanged.

If you want to use the RMD role, not only that you need to pay more attention to his flank defense-wise (because RMD is pretty much irresponsible defensively) but I fear he'll also need better support in attack in order to be utilized to full effect.

This is an example of what I would look to change in your setup on that score:

F9/DLFsu

IWsu                                    RMD

CAR/BWMsu RPM/MEZsu

HB

FBat   CDde  CDde   FBsu/IWBde*

SKsu

* If you have a player in DR position that is good/reliable enough, you might be able to proceed with a WB on support (as in your original tactic)

Now, let me explain the other tweaks I made above:

- by putting a highly creative and mobile role (RPM or MEZ on support) behind the RMD, he should get more direct and qualitatively better support

- by playing the striker in a role that looks to drop deep in the attacking build-up phase (F9 or DLF on support), you create more space for the RMD that he can take advantage of more effectively while still retaining the creative type of support than with a CF (who is inherently more attack-minded and higher-positioned than F9/DLF)

- with a FB on attack on the left flank, you now have a player that will naturally overlap the IW (AML) and deliver crosses for both the RMD and those supporting him

- the carrilero (or BWM on support) in MCL is meant to provide defensive cover for the attacking FB as well as help with recycling possession when needed

Hope this helps.

I appreciate my question is unrelated to OPs thread in particular, but I notice, across a number of threads you never recommend a Mezz on Attack. 

Can I ask why?

[Experienced Defender]

1 hour ago, ashlfcowen said:

I appreciate my question is unrelated to OPs thread in particular, but I notice, across a number of threads you never recommend a Mezz on Attack. 

Can I ask why?

It's absolutely not true. I do recommend a mezzala on attack when it makes sense and fits well into a tactic as a whole. After all, one of my best tactics in my Man Utd save does employ the attack-duty mezzala. This is one variant of that tactic (and the other one also uses the MEZat):

PFat

IFsu                           APsu

MEZat   BMWsu

HB

IWBsu   CDde  BPDde  FBat

 

[ashlfcowen]

5 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

It's absolutely not true. I do recommend a mezzala on attack when it makes sense and fits well into a tactic as a whole. After all, one of my best tactics in my Man Utd save does employ the attack-duty mezzala. This is one variant of that tactic (and the other one also uses the MEZat):

PFat

IFsu                           APsu

MEZat   BMWsu

HB

IWBsu   CDde  BPDde  FBat

 

Apologies, I should have said "across a number of threads I have seen". 

I don't wish to take over the thread of OP, but neither do I particularly want to start another as I'm not doing TOO badly, but I wonder what your thoughts are with the below and my use of the MEZat

I currently use: Mentality: Balance | In Possession: POD, Narrow | In Transition: Take Short Kicks, Counter, Regroup | Out of Possession: HDL

        CFSu         

Wsu MEZat   DLPsu IWat

DMsu

FBat  CDde  CDde  WBs

SKsu


 

[Experienced Defender]

30 minutes ago, ashlfcowen said:

I currently use: Mentality: Balance | In Possession: POD, Narrow | In Transition: Take Short Kicks, Counter, Regroup | Out of Possession: HDL

        CFSu         

Wsu MEZat   DLPsu IWat

DMsu

FBat  CDde  CDde  WBs

SKsu

 

31 minutes ago, ashlfcowen said:

I wonder what your thoughts are with the below and my use of the MEZat

I would only change the LB into IWB on support to make the left flank less exposed defensively and also add another body in central midfield area in the attacking build-up phase. Other than that, I don't see anything strikingly wrong in your tactic in and of itself. Don't know why you opted for the narrow width though?

Btw, in case you want to have a FB on attack duty, I'd rather have the right one as FB on attack, because you have a holding MF role in the form of DLP on that side (which means 2 attack duties on the same flank are less of an issue defense-wise).

[ashlfcowen]

12 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

 

I would only change the LB into IWB on support to make the left flank less exposed defensively and also add another body in central midfield area in the attacking build-up phase. Other than that, I don't see anything strikingly wrong in your tactic in and of itself. Don't know why you opted for the narrow width though?

Btw, in case you want to have a FB on attack duty, I'd rather have the right one as FB on attack, because you have a holding MF role in the form of DLP on that side (which means 2 attack duties on the same flank are less of an issue defense-wise).

Fabulous, I'll give the LB > IWB a shot. Thank you! 

Over to you again poobington, sorry for hijacking!

[abdi1721]

1 hour ago, Experienced Defender said:

It's absolutely not true. I do recommend a mezzala on attack when it makes sense and fits well into a tactic as a whole. After all, one of my best tactics in my Man Utd save does employ the attack-duty mezzala. This is one variant of that tactic (and the other one also uses the MEZat):

PFat

IFsu                           APsu

MEZat   BMWsu

HB

IWBsu   CDde  BPDde  FBat

 

Could I ask what do TIs and PIs look for this, doing a United save myself and looking to get a 433 working, got Sancho, Bruno Fernandes, and Ajer in for the first team

[Experienced Defender]

10 minutes ago, abdi1721 said:

Could I ask what do TIs and PIs look for this, doing a United save myself and looking to get a 433 working, got Sancho, Bruno Fernandes, and Ajer in for the first team

My Utd squad does not have these 3 players - and it's from FM19 btw - so I would need to see their profiles before I can give you a more specific opinion, but (starting) TIs I use for this tactic are:

Positive mentality

- shorter pass, PoD, be more expressive, WBiB

- start with nothing in transition, the counter can be added during a match (depending on the situation)

- higher DL, standard LOE and offside trap

PIs:

- the front 3 + mezzala - close down more (a.k.a. split block)

- MCR/BWMsu - hold position, dribble less (Herrera, Felaini)

- AML/IFsu - sit narrower (Martial, Lingard)

- AMR/APsu - roam from position (Mata)

and occasionally "Dribble more" for the mezzala (Pogba)

NOTE: I make small tweaks, so the tactic is not set in stone (and certainly not plug'n'play by any means). These tweaks depend on the situation/opposition and specific players I use in a particular match (when I rotate or when some first-choice players are unavailable etc.).

[caloides]

Hello all!

Would something like this work? The idea is having a strong back to get a chance to build up play. The LB(WB) stays wide, the RW(IFA) is instructed to cut inside, LM as DLP to give some cover to that flank and the RM as MEZ(AT) to help with an overload on the right, RB is instructed to stay narrower and hold position.

[Experienced Defender]

3 hours ago, caloides said:

 

3 hours ago, caloides said:

Would something like this work? The idea is having a strong back to get a chance to build up play. The LB(WB) stays wide, the RW(IFA) is instructed to cut inside, LM as DLP to give some cover to that flank and the RM as MEZ(AT) to help with an overload on the right, RB is instructed to stay narrower and hold position

The setup of roles and duties looks good and makes sense in general. Perhaps you don't need both CBs in the BPD role, but okay.

In terms of instructions, I think you are using more than necessary. You can start with fewer and then gradually add (or remove) some as you see fit.

[caloides]

36 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

 

The setup of roles and duties looks good and makes sense in general. Perhaps you don't need both CBs in the BPD role, but okay.

In terms of instructions, I think you are using more than necessary. You can start with fewer and then gradually add (or remove) some as you see fit.

@Experienced DefenderI've been lurking on your posts/guides, used to download plug and play tactics but it felt pretty bleak, now I see some pretty football being played, it's awsome and it's all on you mate!

I was thinking of changing the DCL to DC(D) as you suggested on other threads,  I have a split block, in which the defenders and DM(D) are all set to press the lowest and ease off tackles, CM(L) is normal press and tackle, and all the other players are set to press to max, tackle harder and tight marking, I'm unsure about the tight marking.. One of my main problems was the defenders getting pulled out of position, with the split block it seems much more tidy. I'm also unsure about defensive width, leaving it on narrow for now, If I see too many goals from crosses I should go wide, and too many from the center I should go tight right?

When you say instructions, do you mean player instructions or team instructions? 

Regarding team instructions I would prefer not to use play into space, as when I have that I feel all the highlights are counters and not build up plays, but when I take it off, I seem to never cause any problems. Any suggestions regarding that?

Many many thanks!

Edited January 13, 2020 by caloides

[Experienced Defender]

27 minutes ago, caloides said:

I have a split block, in which the defenders and DM(D) are all set to press the lowest and ease off tackles

No, that's not a split block. The split block is pretty much the opposite - you tell the 3-5 most advanced players to press more, whereas others' pressing is left on default. 

 

30 minutes ago, caloides said:

CM(L) is normal press and tackle, and all the other players are set to press to max, tackle harder and tight marking, I'm unsure about the tight marking

You don't need tight marking either as a team or player instruction in this particular tactic. Hard tackling can be applied only to the players doing the split block (i.e. 3-5 most advanced ones), but may not be necessary (at least not always). You also don't need to tell the defenders and DM to press less. Leave their pressing on default. 

On the other hand, if your tactic works well for you even with these (IMO unnecessary) player instructions, then use them (as long as it works). But I personally wouldn't. 

36 minutes ago, caloides said:

I'm also unsure about defensive width, leaving it on narrow for now, If I see too many goals from crosses I should go wide, and too many from the center I should go tight right?

An optimal defensive width depends on your players. Basically, if you are confident that your defense can deal with crosses (jumping reach, positioning, marking, heading, strength...), then narrower def width makes sense. If not, either wider or standard. Anyway, if you are unsure about the optimal option for your team, then simply leave it on default. And remember: no instruction - whether defensive or attacking - should be viewed in isolation, because all elements of a tactic work in conjunction with one another. Always keep that in mind. 

 

40 minutes ago, caloides said:

When you say instructions, do you mean player instructions or team instructions? 

Team instructions. There were no player instructions in the screenshot anyway. 

 

42 minutes ago, caloides said:

Regarding team instructions I would prefer not to use play into space, as when I have that I feel all the highlights are counters and not build up plays, but when I take it off, I seem to never cause any problems. Any suggestions regarding that?

Well, I did not see pass into space in your tactic. I use pass into space only situationally (not as part of a starting tactic). 

[poobington]

On 12/01/2020 at 17:16, Experienced Defender said:

If you want to play on the Attacking mentality, you may need to loosen your defensive TIs (DL and LOE) up a bit. I would drop both by 1 notch, so as to create more space in attack while also reducing the risk of being hit by balls over the top. The overall level of compactness remains unchanged.

If you want to use the RMD role, not only that you need to pay more attention to his flank defense-wise (because RMD is pretty much irresponsible defensively) but I fear he'll also need better support in attack in order to be utilized to full effect.

This is an example of what I would look to change in your setup on that score:

F9/DLFsu

IWsu                                    RMD

CAR/BWMsu RPM/MEZsu

HB

FBat   CDde  CDde   FBsu/IWBde*

SKsu

* If you have a player in DR position that is good/reliable enough, you might be able to proceed with a WB on support (as in your original tactic)

Now, let me explain the other tweaks I made above:

- by putting a highly creative and mobile role (RPM or MEZ on support) behind the RMD, he should get more direct and qualitatively better support

- by playing the striker in a role that looks to drop deep in the attacking build-up phase (F9 or DLF on support), you create more space for the RMD that he can take advantage of more effectively while still retaining the creative type of support than with a CF (who is inherently more attack-minded and higher-positioned than F9/DLF)

- with a FB on attack on the left flank, you now have a player that will naturally overlap the IW (AML) and deliver crosses for both the RMD and those supporting him

- the carrilero (or BWM on support) in MCL is meant to provide defensive cover for the attacking FB as well as help with recycling possession when needed

Hope this helps.

The lack of cutting edge is frustrating me. We dominate possession but don't finish. 

Made the changes you suggested, and the movement and balance is certainly better, but still don't seem to be getting anywhere which is a bit disheartening. 

 

[caloides]

8 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

54 minutes ago, caloides said:

When you say instructions, do you mean player instructions or team instructions? 

Team instructions. There were no player instructions in the screenshot anyway. 

I have quite a few, mostly because of what I envision the gameplay to be, but maybe I'm overdoing it and "confusing" players, not sure if that's possible..

Adjusted with the tips about the split block (completely misunderstood it), and now I have:

GK-none

WBL(S)-cross byline, stay wider

CD(L) and BPD(R)-none

FB(R)-hold position, sit narrow

DM-fewer risks

DLP(L)-stay wider (to cover for WB(L), bad idea?)

MEZ(R)-close down more, tackle harder

IF(L)-roam, sit narrower, close down more, tackle harder

IW(R)-roam, close down more, tackle harder

DLF-roam, close down more, tackle harder

 

[caloides]

4 minutes ago, poobington said:

The lack of cutting edge is frustrating me. We dominate possession but don't finish. 

Made the changes you suggested, and the movement and balance is certainly better, but still don't seem to be getting anywhere which is a bit disheartening. 

I found that lowering mentality, defensive line and loe ended up netting me much more chances, I did lose much of the dominance but I recon that dominance only came from not letting the opposition come out at all. Also taking off the counter pressure and adding be more expressive and pass into space seems to help on some games when I expect the opposition to sit back.

Hope this helps!

[Experienced Defender]

1 hour ago, poobington said:

The lack of cutting edge is frustrating me. We dominate possession but don't finish. 

Made the changes you suggested, and the movement and balance is certainly better, but still don't seem to be getting anywhere which is a bit disheartening

Which changes have you exactly made? I have some ideas on potential tweaks, but I would first need to take a look at the tactic you are using at the moment.

Solely in terms of roles and duties - assuming you want to keep the RMD - this is an optional setup for you to consider:

F9/TQ

IWsu                             RMD

MEZat   DLPsu

HB

IWBsu   CDde  CDde  WBsu

SKsu

But I'll still need to see the whole tactic, because it's possible some instructions may need tweaking as well.

[poobington]

24 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

Which changes have you exactly made? I have some ideas on potential tweaks, but I would first need to take a look at the tactic you are using at the moment.

Solely in terms of roles and duties - assuming you want to keep the RMD - this is an optional setup for you to consider:

F9/TQ

IWsu                             RMD

MEZat   DLPsu

HB

IWBsu   CDde  CDde  WBsu

SKsu

But I'll still need to see the whole tactic, because it's possible some instructions may need tweaking as well.

I have a couple of different variations, but the most successful, was this. I get high possession numbers 60%+. and I do get some CCs, but the majority of goals come from set pieces, or the 2nd phase ball after a set piece.

[Experienced Defender]

1 hour ago, caloides said:

DM-fewer risks

Reason? 

 

1 hour ago, caloides said:

DLP(L)-stay wider (to cover for WB(L), bad idea?)

Not necessary IMHO. I'd rather tell the LCB to stay wider, but even that is not necessary. 

 

2 hours ago, caloides said:

IF(L)-roam, sit narrower, close down more, tackle harder

IW(R)-roam, close down more, tackle harder

DLF-roam, close down more, tackle harder

Telling all these 3 players to roam is an overkill, as you already use the Be more expressive TI.

[Experienced Defender]

1 hour ago, poobington said:

But this tactic is very different from what I was suggesting back then + there is no RMD anymore. So you cannot say that you followed my suggestions: 

 

3 hours ago, poobington said:

Made the changes you suggested

 

[caloides]

12 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

14 hours ago, caloides said:

DM-fewer risks

Reason? 

I've seen him making a few mistakes regarding simple passes, but it could be because of his decision making. Taking it off to see how it goes.

 

12 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

14 hours ago, caloides said:

DLP(L)-stay wider (to cover for WB(L), bad idea?)

Not necessary IMHO. I'd rather tell the LCB to stay wider, but even that is not necessary. 

 

I was aiming for solidity at the back. Most of the conceded goals from that side happened because the wing back didn't recover in time and we got countered, since I already have the DM in the middle I tought the DLP could cover a bit more to the side. But then again I don't know if this won't already be achieved because of the tuck inside on the RB, The central defenders will be naturally pushed a bit to the left because of this, or not?

 

12 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

14 hours ago, caloides said:

IF(L)-roam, sit narrower, close down more, tackle harder

IW(R)-roam, close down more, tackle harder

DLF-roam, close down more, tackle harder

Telling all these 3 players to roam is an overkill, as you already use the Be more expressive TI.

I think I will take out the be more expressive and give these players roam instead, I would like these to be very mobile but to keep shape in the back, do you think this is a good way to do it?

[poobington]

15 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

But this tactic is very different from what I was suggesting back then + there is no RMD anymore. So you cannot say that you followed my suggestions: 

 

 

To clarify, I tried what you suggested, but wasn't having any luck, so I incorporated things which I was using before, and saw a bit more success, but still not quite where I want it.

Broadly speaking, the TIs haven't changed in any iteration, and neither have the PIs (More closing down on LW,RW,ST,CML, CMR) 

[Experienced Defender]

6 hours ago, caloides said:

I was aiming for solidity at the back. Most of the conceded goals from that side happened because the wing back didn't recover in time and we got countered, since I already have the DM in the middle I tought the DLP could cover a bit more to the side

A number of different reasons can cause what you described. It may be that your WB is not good enough as a player. Or that your DLP in MCL is not good enough to act as defensive cover. Or your DM... or even LCB. 

Or your players may all be good enough in general, but maybe not for the particular style of football you want to play. 

Maybe your defense is not good enough to play on a higher DL (or at least not when coupled with the Positive mentality). 

Too many factors can contribute to this to be able to give you any definite suggestion(s). Sometimes defensive issues can be primarily caused by your in-possession instructions (not defensive ones).

So a lot of different things to watch.

[Razor940]

How would support Messi on a wing with the role AP (a)?

[caloides]

On 14/01/2020 at 15:56, Experienced Defender said:

A number of different reasons can cause what you described. It may be that your WB is not good enough as a player. Or that your DLP in MCL is not good enough to act as defensive cover. Or your DM... or even LCB. 

Or your players may all be good enough in general, but maybe not for the particular style of football you want to play. 

Maybe your defense is not good enough to play on a higher DL (or at least not when coupled with the Positive mentality). 

Too many factors can contribute to this to be able to give you any definite suggestion(s). Sometimes defensive issues can be primarily caused by your in-possession instructions (not defensive ones).

So a lot of different things to watch.

So far, defensive wise, so good, only goals I'm conceding are mostly mistakes, I'm usually adjusting width depending on what I see my oposition doing, if they are mainly posing threats from middle i make it more narrow, and if they come mostly from crosses I make it wider, and it's working!

My main problems are scoring goals, but I think that's due to the gelling of the team with the tactics still (I hope), most of the games end in 1-0, 2-1, and only lost a league game so far in 11 (playing ass Benfica, media prediction is second place).

Against teams that play open it's easier to score, but most teams just park the bus. Any tips on what to do against those? My usual changes are two ticks right on attacking width, increase tempo and tick shoot when possible and take off play from defense, but I don't see much changes..

My MEZ(A) and the DLF(S) are the ones I don't feel are contributing much, I wonder if it's because I have counter attack ticked?

 

EDIT:

Do you think changing the AMR IW(S) to IF(S), MCL DLP(S) to AP(S),  MCR MEZ(A) to MEZ(S), RB FB(S) to WB(A) would be way too adventurous? The idea came from playing against the AI Barcelona, I really enjoyed the way the team was working regarding movement, and defensively they looked really nice.

Edited January 16, 2020 by caloides

[Experienced Defender]

4 hours ago, caloides said:

So far, defensive wise, so good, only goals I'm conceding are mostly mistakes, I'm usually adjusting width depending on what I see my oposition doing, if they are mainly posing threats from middle i make it more narrow, and if they come mostly from crosses I make it wider, and it's working!

My main problems are scoring goals, but I think that's due to the gelling of the team with the tactics still (I hope), most of the games end in 1-0, 2-1, and only lost a league game so far in 11 (playing ass Benfica, media prediction is second place).

Against teams that play open it's easier to score, but most teams just park the bus. Any tips on what to do against those? My usual changes are two ticks right on attacking width, increase tempo and tick shoot when possible and take off play from defense, but I don't see much changes..

My MEZ(A) and the DLF(S) are the ones I don't feel are contributing much, I wonder if it's because I have counter attack ticked?

 

EDIT:

Do you think changing the AMR IW(S) to IF(S), MCL DLP(S) to AP(S),  MCR MEZ(A) to MEZ(S), RB FB(S) to WB(A) would be way too adventurous? The idea came from playing against the AI Barcelona, I really enjoyed the way the team was working regarding movement, and defensively they looked really nice.

Sorry, but you have too many questions. It would be easier for me to analyze and offer suggestions if you posted a screenshot of your current tactic. There are too many people posting their tactics and asking for advice in this particular thread, so I really cannot remember everything. 

[caloides]

49 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

Sorry, but you have too many questions. It would be easier for me to analyze and offer suggestions if you posted a screenshot of your current tactic. There are too many people posting their tactics and asking for advice in this particular thread, so I really cannot remember everything. 

I understand, sorry, I'll open my own thread, it was not polite from me to post on this one and it's too much to ask from you to be scrolling around trying to piece together information.

[poobington]

Alright so to steer this slightly back on track. I have experimented a bit and set up a new game with Arsenal. Better team, and harder league, but arguably have all the players of the system I have been trying to replicate.

So far so good. We really dominate games well and create a good number of chances and finish them. Still can be inconsistent, but I think with a full season and improvements in the squad this could be a settled tactic.

Things I'm particularly pleased with. 

DLPd - This guy is instructed to stay wider and close down more. In play he covers the wide flank whilst the attacking wing back goes up the pitch. He's not stationed very far wide, but wide enough that he can thwart counters, and with his inclination to take risks he can launch some good through balls or switch the ball to the other flank. I am thinking about putting him on a support duty, but with my left side so attacking with the WBa and the Raumdeuter, I think he will stay as is.

APs - I struggled a lot with this guy. Initially had him in the mcl slot, and tried all sorts of rolls. Had an attacking mezalla, attacking AP. Both dropped a little to deep in build up and were leaving my front 3 really isolated. On an attack duty he would often wander to far up the pitch, and also as a mezalla he would get in the way of my RW. He was running around too much and not really threading through any passes. Moved him to the AM strat and his positioning is far better, and with a support duty he still drops deep to help out but not too deep in the build up.

I've also dropped the teh mentality to Balanced. On attacking and even positive it was all just a bit rushed, and it was affecting far too many things for my liking. By stripping it back to balanced I had a bit more freedom to experiment with more aggressive roles. 

If anyone wants to try I have attached the tactic to this post.

That's all i've got for now. I know the balance of rolls is somewhat unconventional but its seems to be working.

433 high press arteta.fmf

[poobington]

Little update. Moved the APs to the middle rather than the left halfspace. Instructed him to 'roam from position' and 'move into channels' which gives him more freedom to pop up all over the pitch and offer an option in space as a spare man. In the AMCL slot he rigidly stuck to that position, but moving him to AM allows him to roam but still slot into the left half space in build up.

Biggest issue is consistency in front of goal. We are profligate in front of goal but very strong defensively, mainly because we hardly give away possession. I am seeing very nice interplay down the left flank, where we draw them to the centre with passes between the HB, DLP and AP, before unleashing the WB who then delivers a cross to the onrushing striker who hits it straight at the keeper.  

I have experimented with making the striker a DLF on attack, but then he is far too isolated and doesn't help out in defence. ANy ideas on what I can do to boost our threat/ ability to convert chances?

 

Edited January 22, 2020 by poobington

[Irn Rvd]

I am having a similar issue with my tactic. really inconsistent in front of goal. This suggests to me that we are not creating the right kind of chances. Maybe we are making it too realistic lol. 
I had your AP(s) on the mcr position as a MEZZ(a) but its not working out too well for me either. Im going to try your advice and try moving him higher up the pitch to AMC slot but im skeptical about having three midfield playmakers, with the DLP, and HB already. 

Let me know if you make any breakthroughs.

[poobington]

Right! After much tinkering I'm back and I think I may have cracked, he says with baited breath. 

TLDR: I changed some stuff and the tactic scores goals now and has a tight defense based on a high agressive press. Tested it with Arsenal. Don't know yet how it will fare with Underdogs or lower league players. 

Key Changes are Based on 3 things:

1. Team Mentality Change

2. TI Changes to temper mentality change and enhance pressing.

3. Role Changes

Team Mentality Change

One of the best threads I read was @Ö-zil to the Arsenal!'s Caixa Development Thread. There was a specific discussion to do with team mentality, and how it can affect a multitude of different things, but most notably the individual mentality of players. Now in FM 18 these could be boiled down to numbers, but in FM20 these are a spectrum of Individual Mentality labels, ranging from Defensive, Cautious, Balanced, Positive, Attacking and Very Attacking. 

The change I made from Balanced to Positive, was one motivated by trying to increase the urgency and forward passing of my players, and so that they would take more risk. Now the change affects a lot more than individual mentalities of the players, but to keep it simple that was all I was focussed on, I wanted to ensure that broadly speaking amongst there wasn't to great a disconnect between the individual mentalities of players. The Team mentality did this. My attacking players became more attacking, and my defensive players did too, but by not as much.

TI Changes

So to temper the increased individual attacking mentalities the two shouts I used were, Overlap on the Left, and Focus Playthrough the middle.

Overlap on the Left - Reduced mentality of raumdeuter by a notch, increased WBa mentality by a notch. Both are now Attacking, instead of being Very Attacking, and Positive respectively. Allowed the Raumdeuter not to get to high up the field and get isolated. Allowed WB to be closer and provide better support.

Focus Play through middle - mentalities of CDs, CDM, and MC, were increased by a notch from defensive and cautious, to cautious and balanced. Allowed my midfielders to play more forward passes rather than sideways.

Pressing changes - Here I went to extremely urgent pressing, a higher line and a much higher line of engagement. This was inspired by some of the plug and play tactics I have used in the passed. They seem to successfully implement a high press so I just copied what they were doing. It turns out it works pretty well and restricts opposition chances.

Higher Tempo - I got this idea from the tactics screen. It was a saying a negative aspect of my tactic was a low touches to scoring chance ratio. Effectively my players were taking a whole load of touches in the box with very few goals. The game was essentially confirming what I knew along. Cheers. What it did do though was offer a solution! What?! I could either try Shooting on Sight or Higher Tempo. I played with the former but found players having a go from anywhere which was not what I wanted. The Higher Tempo created a greater sense of urgency and to me it seemed like players too decisive actions (i.e shots and key passes) more quickly. 

Role Changes

AMCL  - Relatively simple here. I changed the APs to an AMs, but set to take more risks, and roam from position. The APs was attracting the ball too much for the sake of it. He was quite literally a magnet, and often play would be forced through him when often there was a better option. By making him an AMs he is just another cog in the machine, but at the same time he has the ability to play decisive passes with hims PIs.

ST - This for so long had me . I always had a DLFs thinking him dropping deep would create space for Raumdeuter on the left to run into. This did work but often the Raumdeuter was isolated. The DLF would often hold up the ball too much and not really make any sort of positive movement. This is where I noticed that the individual Mentality of a DLF, is Cautious, when combined with a Balanced Team Mentality, and only goes up to Balanced, when paired with a Positive Team Mentality. Take into account that the DLF also Holds Up the ball, and this explains why my striker was so passive. He was literally just a body to pop passes to. I rectified this with an Attacking Pressing Forward instructed to take more risks and dribble more. Combined with the Positive Team Mentality, he has a Very Attacking, individual mentality. This seems him getting forward and creating space, but still being involved in buildup, and of course contributing to the build up.

Tactic

Congratulations if you made it through that! Tactic is below. I have also attached it to this post if anyone wants to give it a go.

433 high press Arteta v5.fmf

Edited February 11, 2020 by poobington

[poobington]

RESULTS POST

Took the plunge and bought FM20 so actually played through a whole season. Tried the tactic out with Leeds and played some of the best football I have seen. Very enjoyable.

Results Highlights

Championship: 1st (6 point gap)

FA Cup: Semi-Final

Carbao Cup: Semi-Final

Stats Highlights

Goals For: 1st (77 goals)

Goals Conceded: 1st (28 goals)

Best Average Possession: 1st (62% 25711passes completed 90% accuracy) - we had almost 5100 completed passes more than 2nd place

Best Shooting Accuracy: 2nd (51% with 369 shots on target)

Most Clean Sheets: Joint 1st (24 clean sheets)

Overall very happy will see how it fairs now in the Premier League