Tactic advice 4-1-2-3

[Karrincha]

Hi everyone, 

I'd like your advice on my tactics. It's working well but I'm having trouble creating chances, I draw a lot of games. Several things:

I can't find the right role for my AML (Almada) and my AMR (Antony). 

My striker has a lot of trouble, and not a lot of chances. 

I'd like to play some kind of progressive possession. 

I don't know if I can use working in the box. Is my team good enough for that?

@Experienced Defender thanks for your help

Edited March 5, 2020 by Karrincha

[Experienced Defender]

23 minutes ago, Karrincha said:

You do not need the Overlap left team instruction. because you already have a natural overlap on that flank due to the roles and duties you are using (IFsu and WBat). Therefore, I would remove the Overlap left instruction. 

The right side is okay, although not ideal. Here are possible combinations you may want to consider if your current setup does not work as you want/expect (assuming you don't want to use a classic winger role):

                  IWat

        MEZsu

 DMsu

               IWBde

Or:

                IWsu

       MEZat

  HB

              IWBsu/au

Or:

                  IWat

        MEZsu

   HB

               WBsu/au

33 minutes ago, Karrincha said:

I'd like to play some kind of progressive possession

In that case, these are in-possession instructions you should consider:

- positive mentality

- shorter passing, play out of defence, be more expressive and work ball into box 

In transition, you basically do not need to tell the keeper where to distribute the ball, because you already use the Play out of defence instruction. Therefore, remove the Distribute to CBs and FBs and let the keeper decide how and where to distribute the ball in any given situation.

Out of possession instructions - higher DL and offside trap - are okay and absolutely make sense for a progressive possession style. You just need to create a split block via player instructions. 

NOTE: Make sure your players are good enough to play this style of football.

[Karrincha]

Thanks a lot. 

And what do you Think about the role of the striker and AML ? 

[Experienced Defender]

1 hour ago, Karrincha said:

what do you Think about the role of the striker and AML ?

In which sense? 

[Karrincha]

What do you think of the roles of and tasks for my striker and my AML? 

Almada is not very involved in building the game, and Vlahovic is not often found. 

And if the players are not good enough for progressive possession, what changes should I make for more normal possession? I would also like to have fast attacks.

[Experienced Defender]

5 hours ago, Karrincha said:

What do you think of the roles of and tasks for my striker and my AML? 

Almada is not very involved in building the game, and Vlahovic is not often found

IF on support absolutely makes sense in this setup. 

PF on attack is also okay as a role for the single striker, but I would rather pair him with the mezzala on attack and IW (or even winger) on support than the other way around. Like this:

PFat

IFsu                                     (I)Wsu

DLPsu     MEZat 

6 hours ago, Karrincha said:

And if the players are not good enough for progressive possession, what changes should I make for more normal possession?

Assuming you want to make as little change as possible to the current tactic, here is how a "normal" possession one could look like:

DLFsu

IWsu                                IFat

DLPsu    MEZsu

DMsu

FBat    CDde   CDde    IWBde

GK/SKde

Mentality - Balanced or Positive

In possession - shorter passing, play out of defence, overlap right and work ball into box

In transition - counter-press

Out of possession - higher DL, higher LOE and offside trap;

                                 or higher DL, standard LOE, prevent short GKD and offside trap;

                                  or higher DL, standard LOE, offside trap and split block via player instructions 

[DarJ]

I have been playing with this for 2 seasons now with an average possession of 61% after 18 games. It was designed for the IF to get most of the goals but the F9 contributes with goals too.

Against much better teams I change the F9 to DLF on attack, take off counter- press and work ball into box

[Karrincha]

@Experienced Defender Ok thanks ! And is it possible to play Target Man on attack for my striker ? 

[Experienced Defender]

2 hours ago, Karrincha said:

@Experienced Defender Ok thanks ! And is it possible to play Target Man on attack for my striker ? 

Not sure it's a good idea in this particular formation. Maybe it could work if the player is really highly capable and complete (fast, technically skilled and with good tactical intelligence, i.e. mental attributes). Otherwise, TM on support is a better choice if you want to use the TM role as such. Also, even if you use a TM on attack duty, you may need to tweak a couple of other roles/duties as well.

[Karrincha]

With TM on support, maybe this configuration :

        TMsu

IFat            IWsu

      Dlpsu Mezat

           HB

Wsu Cd Cd  Fsu

 

[Experienced Defender]

1 hour ago, Karrincha said:

With TM on support, maybe this configuration :

        TMsu

IFat            IWsu

      Dlpsu Mezat

           HB

Wsu Cd Cd  Fsu

 

Looks decent, although I would change the HB into either an anchor or DM on defend, because HB makes more sense when you have both fullbacks in attack-minded roles. Here only your LB will bomb forward regularly, whereas the RB is fairly conservative in terms of his role.

Of course, how this setup will work in practice depends on the style of football you want to implement and how you go about the instructions. If you happen to struggle, there is an alternative type of setup that would make more sense.

[Karrincha]

I have another question. If my playmaker is my defensive midfielder like this:

   X     X
     DLP(su or de) 

What type of configuration should I use?

[Experienced Defender]

6 hours ago, Karrincha said:

I have another question. If my playmaker is my defensive midfielder like this:

   X     X
     DLP(su or de) 

What type of configuration should I use?

Absolutely impossible to give any definite answer, because you cannot treat any role or a group of roles/duties separately. They are all part of a tactical system as a whole, so different combinations are possible. Which of them would be optimal basically depends on the style of play you intend to implement and of course the type of your players.

[Karrincha]

It will Be for possession or progressive possession. 

Also I would like to play with a mezzala. 

Maybe :

 

     PFat

IFat         Wsu

    ?   MezAt

      Dlpsu

Wsu CD CD  Fsu

 

Or

    PFat

IFat         Wsu

    Dlpsu  MezAt

      DMde

Wsu CD CD  Fsu

 

 

[Experienced Defender]

56 minutes ago, Karrincha said:

Maybe :

 

     PFat

IFat         Wsu

    ?   MezAt

      Dlpsu

Wsu CD CD  Fsu

 

Or

    PFat

IFat         Wsu

    Dlpsu  MezAt

      DMde

Wsu CD CD  Fsu

 

56 minutes ago, Karrincha said:

It will Be for possession or progressive possession

Neither of these setups is optimal for a possession-oriented style. I don't claim it cannot work, but your players may well struggle, especially in the final third. 

If you want to use the IF on attack duty, then better go with a DLF up front. For a possession-based style, the DLF would make more sense on support duty anyway.

[HanziZoloman]

5 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

 

Neither of these setups is optimal for a possession-oriented style. I don't claim it cannot work, but your players may well struggle, especially in the final third. 

If you want to use the IF on attack duty, then better go with a DLF up front. For a possession-based style, the DLF would make more sense on support duty anyway.

Why do you think it’s suboptimal for possession based play, why the struggle in the final third? I am interested in your ideas behind your statements.

another question is, why do you think is a DLF together with a IFa the better choice, because he is creating space for the IFa to attack? Like the F9?

and: when to use a PFs/a as a lone striker? Much of the lower league sides have players suiting for a PF or Poacher only. (Do you use a poacher as a single striker too?)

thanks

[Experienced Defender]

1 hour ago, HanziZoloman said:

Why do you think it’s suboptimal for possession based play, why the struggle in the final third? I am interested in your ideas behind your statements

Because if you want to play possession-oriented football, you need as many players as possible close to each other so that they could execute this short-passing manner of playing smoothly. Of course, you need a sufficient degree of penetration, but the distribution of your duties needs to be such as to provide each player with enough passing options in any phase of play. Therefore, the problem here is not the mere number of different duties but how you distribute them within the system. Again, this was about possession-based football, which is different from counter-attacking and/or fast attacking styles. 

 

1 hour ago, HanziZoloman said:

another question is, why do you think is a DLF together with a IFa the better choice, because he is creating space for the IFa to attack? Like the F9?

Yes, but not just that. DLF drops deeper and helps link up the play between the midfield and forward areas, which is directly related to what I explained above in reply to your first question. 

 

1 hour ago, HanziZoloman said:

when to use a PFs/a as a lone striker?

This is impossible to answer without looking at the whole tactic. 

 

1 hour ago, HanziZoloman said:

(Do you use a poacher as a single striker too?)

Rarely. The lone-striker system in which I would be most inclined to consider the poacher as a role is 4231. Another one is 4411. 

[HanziZoloman]

7 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

Because if you want to play possession-oriented football, you need as many players as possible close to each other so that they could execute this short-passing manner of playing smoothly

That makes sense! 
 

 

7 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

Again, this was about possession-based football, which is different from counter-attacking and/or fast attacking styles. 

Then for a fast attacking style you need to play the ball more direct up the pitch with players attacking the opponents final third more quickly (?)

a set-up could be like this (?)

IFs   F9.   IWa

   APa  MCa

        DMs

[Karrincha]

For progressive possession, what doit you Think about this formation :

 

     PFat

IFsu      Wsu

   Dlpsu  MezAt

       DMde

Wat CD CD  Fsu

[Karrincha]

Another question, what PPI will Be important for a Deeplying forward or for a F9 ? 

[Experienced Defender]

8 hours ago, HanziZoloman said:

Then for a fast attacking style you need to play the ball more direct up the pitch with players attacking the opponents final third more quickly (?)

a set-up could be like this (?)

IFs   F9.   IWa

   APa  MCa

        DMs

No. Even though this setup is not complete (because the defense is missing), I would never ever set up the midfield like this, regardless of the style of football I want to play.

[HanziZoloman]

2 hours ago, Karrincha said:

Another question, what PPI will Be important for a Deeplying forward or for a F9 ? 

Plays one-twos for linking the play (?)

[HanziZoloman]

6 hours ago, Karrincha said:

PFat

IFsu      Wsu

   Dlpsu  MezAt

       DMde

Wat CD CD  Fsu

As @Experienced Defender mentioned above and also with my experience in FM a PF as lone striker is not working (for me).

but I have almost the same set-up (the W is an IFs and the PF a F9) with my hearts working fine. Shorter and quicker passing, we‘re playing a possession based style overperforming every year (2nd/3rd/4th)

[Experienced Defender]

7 hours ago, Karrincha said:

For progressive possession, what doit you Think about this formation :

 

     PFat

IFsu      Wsu

   Dlpsu  MezAt

       DMde

Wat CD CD  Fsu

Looks okay.

[Karrincha]

I just don't get it. I've modified my training, but I don't get many chances to score... The mezzala's no good, I never see him. It's the same with my AML or the striker.

 

        DLFat

IFat                 Wsu

        DLPsu MezAt

              DMde

Wsu CD  CD  Iwsu

 

Positive mentality, Short passing, work into the box, play out the defense

[Karrincha]

Any idea @Experienced Defender ? 

[Experienced Defender]

8 hours ago, Karrincha said:

I just don't get it. I've modified my training, but I don't get many chances to score... The mezzala's no good, I never see him. It's the same with my AML or the striker.

 

        DLFat

IFat                 Wsu

        DLPsu MezAt

              DMde

Wsu CD  CD  Iwsu

 

Positive mentality, Short passing, work into the box, play out the defense

 

3 hours ago, Karrincha said:

Any idea @Experienced Defender ? 

The fact that a tactic looks decent and/or makes sense overall is no guarantee that it will be successful. Because besides being well-constructed, it needs to suit the players playing it. 

Each role requires a certain type of player. In your tactic for example, there is a mezzala on attack duty, which is a fairly demanding role, both in terms of technical ability and mental attributes (tactical intelligence). Plus the fair amount of speed that the role requires. Does your mezzala have all that? No less demanding is the IWB role. Again, is your IWB good enough to play such a role?

Now, assuming that you have suitable players for all roles, here are some tweaks you may consider:

- change the DLF's duty to support instead of attack, so that your possession-oriented tactic could be executed more smoothly

- either remove the Work ball into box or add the Be more expressive, so that these 2 instructions would somewhat offset each other

- try the Overlap left, to encourage more wide support by your LB in the final third and create more dynamic interplay among him, IF and DLP

Do not apply these tweaks all at once, but one by one. 

[Keyzer Soze]

I think you must realize that this year ME is not the better balanced one that SI made, and because of that some logic concepts about roles and duties will not have the usual effect in a tactic like in previous years. 

It's not the first time this happens. In fact it's normal... An unbalanced ME will have this effect. 

So, you can have a perfect role/duties choice and perfect players to play those roles/duties... And still the tactic could not work. 

In the end of the day you must not forget something: this is not real like football, this is a game, and sometimes the real life logic will not work. 

If the ME is good real life logic will work, if not, then the alternative is to find the best way to work with the "rules" that the ME gives you. 

[HanziZoloman]

15 minutes ago, Keyzer Soze said:

An unbalanced ME will have this effect.

Why it is unbalanced or more precise, what point of the ME is unbalanced?

i can‘t see it maybe I’m blind but I struggle as well as with FM19 but I’m also making some progress. 
with the Football Manager from EA Sports it was every year the same. You found the perfect tactic and then you win almost every game. 
In my experience with FM 19 & 20 it’s different, I have to work it out year for year and sometimes week for week. Great game! My girlfriend told me I‘m addicted. Wonderful! 
Guys like @Experienced Defender just help with suggestions, he almost always add to his ideas the point, that you have to work it out properly yourself because it depends on the facts in the game.

it would be boring the other way around. In real life it’s the same, the Coaches have to work it out every damn Sunday.

Edited March 14, 2020 by HanziZoloman

[Experienced Defender]

59 minutes ago, Keyzer Soze said:

I think you must realize that this year ME is not the better balanced one that SI made, and because of that some logic concepts about roles and duties will not have the usual effect in a tactic like in previous years. 

It's not the first time this happens. In fact it's normal... An unbalanced ME will have this effect. 

So, you can have a perfect role/duties choice and perfect players to play those roles/duties... And still the tactic could not work. 

In the end of the day you must not forget something: this is not real like football, this is a game, and sometimes the real life logic will not work. 

If the ME is good real life logic will work, if not, then the alternative is to find the best way to work with the "rules" that the ME gives you. 

Please do not spread misinformation. The ME has its weaknesses - as every ME does - but the game still rewards sensibly constructed tactics based on proper analysis of the team you manage. 

You are absolutely entitled to complain about the ME if you believe it's "unbalanced" or "broken" or whatever, but not in this Tactical section of the forum. There is another section where you can express such type of complaint. This one is solely for tactical help and advice.

[Keyzer Soze]

9 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

Please do not spread misinformation. The ME has its weaknesses - as every ME does - but the game still rewards sensibly constructed tactics based on proper analysis of the team you manage. 

You are absolutely entitled to complain about the ME if you believe it's "unbalanced" or "broken" or whatever, but not in this Tactical section of the forum. There is another section where you can express such type of complaint. This one is solely for tactical help and advice.

But what misinformation am I spreading? 

What I say is different from you saying that the ME "has is weaknesses"? 

I'm stating my opinion that for me this year ME don't reflect real life football as good as others did, and because of that sometimes even those "sensibly constructed tactic" will not work as expected. 

I'm not saying that we must exploit something in order to win, or that only tactic Y can work. NO! I'm saying that in many cases tactics will not work as expected. 

For example, you set team A (strong team) playing with preset control possession tactic, against team B (weak team) playing with preset fluid counter attack tactic, and in the end of the game you might have the weak team with much more possession. 

 

[Experienced Defender]

3 hours ago, Keyzer Soze said:

But what misinformation am I spreading?

Blaming the ME for tactical issues and claiming that even "perfectly" constructed tactics will not work because the ME is "unbalanced": 

15 hours ago, Keyzer Soze said:

An unbalanced ME will have this effect. 

So, you can have a perfect role/duties choice and perfect players to play those roles/duties... And still the tactic could not work

To clarify: you can complain about the ME, but not in this particular (tactical) section of the forum. There are other sections (e.g. feedback, bugs forum) in which you absolutely can raise a complaint regarding the ME. 

This specific section of the forum is only for tactical help and advice, regardless of what you or anyone may think about the ME. I hope you now understand what was the problem (not what you wrote, but where). 

4 hours ago, Keyzer Soze said:

What I say is different from you saying that the ME "has is weaknesses"?

Every ME has some weaknesses, not just this current one. And that's normal, because no game can ever be a perfect and literal simulation of real life. But despite those weaknesses, people are still able to create sensible and well-balanced tactics that work nicely, as long as they take into account and pay attention to all relevant factors relative to the art of tactical creation. 

 

4 hours ago, Keyzer Soze said:

I'm stating my opinion that for me this year ME don't reflect real life football as good as others did

As I already explained above  - you have the right to claim that, but in a different section of the forum. 

 

4 hours ago, Keyzer Soze said:

and because of that sometimes even those "sensibly constructed tactic" will not work as expected

When a tactic does not work as its creator expected, it's still not proof that the tactic is "sensibly constructed". There are a lot of tactics that are well-balanced per se, but they still do not work because people apply them to wrong types of teams. What works for my team is not necessarily going to work for yours, and vice versa. So the question of what is a good or sensibly constructed tactic is always relative. That's why people need to analyze their players and pay attention to as many details as possible. 

 

4 hours ago, Keyzer Soze said:

I'm not saying that we must exploit something in order to win, or that only tactic Y can work. NO! I'm saying that in many cases tactics will not work as expected. 

For example, you set team A (strong team) playing with preset control possession tactic, against team B (weak team) playing with preset fluid counter attack tactic, and in the end of the game you might have the weak team with much more possession

But who said that preset tactics are "sensibly constructed" and/or well-balanced? Most of them are not, and in fact are full of tactical overkill. That's why I never use presets.