Improving my 4-4-2/4-2-4

[Gbrexiton]

Last Season

———-AF- At TM-SU————

W-At —————————W-Su 

———-DLP-Su CM-Au———

WB-Su —-CB-De CB-De —WB-At

—————-GK-De—————

Attacking version
———-AF- At TM-SU————

W-At —————————AP-Su

———-DLP-De CM-Su———

WB-Su —-CB-De CB-De —WB-At

—————-SK-Su—————
 

Defensive/Counter version

———-AF- At TM-SU————

——-———————————

W-At—-DLP-De CM-Su—IW-Su

WB-Su —-CB-De CB-De —WB-At

—————-GK-De—————
 

I am currently playing in the Icelandic 2nd division, doing the Youth Academy Challenge. Last season for the first half, I used the first formation stated and went undefeated. I hit a terrible run of form in the 2nd half of the season, picking up 4 points. I believe the first run of form only occurred because my team had one of the lowest reps in the division (We were predicted to finish bottom). This was also the first season we really tried to attack the opposition. After our terrible run of form, I tried to go more defensive, but nothing seemed to work. I lowered the tempo, lowered the pressing, changed to the two other formations, but we can’t seem to score at all. I currently plaid the first 5 games of the new season, and we have 1 goal with 3 clear cut chances. I want to stick with wing attack, but I’m flexible formation wise. My team has good wingers/CMs; Wingers are really pacey with ~15 pace and acceleration, while cms are creative. I’m lacking in strikers and wing backs. I am playing cms at wing back, so I am kind of lacking pace at left and right back. My CBs are pretty good, they are taller than they are fast. Last season for the first half, my wingers/cms were on fire, my strikers got plenty of chances.

Edited June 11, 2020 by Gbrexiton

[Experienced Defender]

You described your situation, but what is your actual question?

Btw, you sketched out as many as 3 setups of roles and duties, but nothing about the mentality and instructions. 

2 hours ago, Gbrexiton said:

W-At—-DLP-De CM-Su—IW-Su

W-Su —-CB-De CB-De —W-At

How can a winger role be selected in a fullback position? You perhaps meant "WB", not W? 

[Gbrexiton]

1 hour ago, Experienced Defender said:

You described your situation, but what is your actual question?

Ideally, I’d like to continue the form that I had at the beginning of last season. I would also like to find a defensive formation that works too. I would like to find a good wing attack tactic that suits my team, or to adjust the current tactic. I’m willing to try any wing attack tactic.

1 hour ago, Experienced Defender said:

Btw, you sketched out as many as 3 setups of roles and duties, but nothing about the mentality and instructions. 

Sure, last season for the first half:

TACTICAL STYLE: Wing Attack

MENTALITY: Counter

PASSING: Direct

Distribute to wings

Shoot on sight

Be More expressive

Overlap left/right

Stander D-Line

Lower Line of Engagement

More Urgent Pressing

Pass Into Space

 

The other tactics, I just lowered the pressing/ passing level

 

I can post screenshots later if you would like

1 hour ago, Experienced Defender said:

How can a winger role be selected in a fullback position? You perhaps meant "WB", not W? 

Yes, I meant WB

 

 

Edited June 11, 2020 by Gbrexiton

[Experienced Defender]

1 hour ago, Gbrexiton said:

I can post screenshots later if you would like

Yes, that would be great 

P.S: For now, post a screenshot of your main tactic only. 

[Gbrexiton]

This was the tactic I used for the first half of last year that worked so well. I detailed the changes I have made since (moved passing/tempo down, moving wingers to cm area)

 

 

 

Edited June 11, 2020 by Gbrexiton

[Experienced Defender]

50 minutes ago, Gbrexiton said:

 

51 minutes ago, Gbrexiton said:

This was the tactic I used for the first half of last year that worked so well

I'll first tell you what I like in this tactic (taking into account your preferred wing-play style): the setup of the front 4 

Now here is what I do not like: 

- the setup of roles/duties on the right side/flank (defensively vulnerable)

- needlessly too many in-possession instructions (basically tactical overkill in direct relation to the wing-play preset tactic)

- the use of tight marking instruction in a top-heavy formation (424) that does not suit such a manner of defending (and even more so when coupled with a higher D-line and/or more urgent pressing)

I cannot comment your selection of the cautious team mentality because I don't know what was your exact reasoning behind it, so I would first like to hear your explanation? 

[Gbrexiton]

50 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

the setup of roles/duties on the right side/flank (defensively vulnerable)

Would FB-Su make sense instead of WB-At? I’ve noticed that I’m also much better offensively on the left side that the right. I’m not sure, however, if this is because my RW is much better than my LW

50 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

needlessly too many in-possession instructions (basically tactical overkill in direct relation to the wing-play preset tactic)

Which ones do you mean specifically? I think the only odd one there is Be More Expressive, which I added because it suits my team (high flair)

50 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

I cannot comment your selection of the cautious team mentality because I don't know what was your exact reasoning behind it, so I would first like to hear your explanation? 

I don’t have too much of an explanation tbf. Cautious just seemed to work better than positive/attacking. I guess maybe I wanted to get the best out of my pacey wingers. If I played positive, there wouldn’t be as much space for them to break
 

Any other screenshots you would like to see? I’m happy to get advice

Also, I think I would like to draft a 4-4-2 as well. I’m 6 games into season 5 and haven’t won a single league game since midway through season 4...

Edited June 11, 2020 by Gbrexiton

[Experienced Defender]

2 hours ago, Gbrexiton said:

Would FB-Su make sense instead of WB-At?

Considering that you have a CM on support in MCR, FBsu looks like a good choice. Especially as focusing play down the flank(s) - as part of the wing-play style - already increases the fullback's individual mentality a bit. 

However, if you played a CM on defend duty (or even a carrilero) instead of the CM on support, a WB on support could also be a reasonable option on the right flank. 

2 hours ago, Gbrexiton said:

I’ve noticed that I’m also much better offensively on the left side that the right

Because your left side is notably better balanced than the right one. Good balance has a positive impact both on the defensive and attacking phases of play. People are often mistaken in believing that using as many attack-minded roles and/or attack duties as possible will make them more dangerous and potent in attack. But that's simply not how the game works (except in the so-called exploit tactics, but that's an entirely different pair of shoes). 

 

2 hours ago, Gbrexiton said:

Which ones do you mean specifically?

Well, considering that you opted for a wing-play as your playing style of choice, focusing play down (both) flanks does make sense, as well as a wide (or even extremely wide) attacking width. However, the Overlap team instructions are a bit of an overkill IMHO, because Focus play already increases your fullbacks' mentalities (along with encouraging players in general to use flanks as much as possible). 

 

2 hours ago, Gbrexiton said:

I think the only odd one there is Be More Expressive, which I added because it suits my team (high flair)

BME is not necessarily wrong per se. You can use it occasionally as an in-match tweak as you see fit, rather than as part of your regular (starting) tactic. That's how I would approach this particular instruction. The same applies to the Pass into space TI (use it on a situational basis, rather than all the time). 

On the other hand, an instructions you could add is Hit early crosses, because it does make sense in the wing-play, especially in the context of a top-heavy 424 formation. 

2 hours ago, Gbrexiton said:

I don’t have too much of an explanation tbf. Cautious just seemed to work better than positive/attacking

What about the Balanced? After all - if I remember correctly - the preset wing-play tactic employs specifically the Balanced mentality. 

 

2 hours ago, Gbrexiton said:

Any other screenshots you would like to see? I’m happy to get advice

Also, I think I would like to draft a 4-4-2 as well

Maybe a screenshot of the 442 tactic (i.e. how you envision it at the moment)? 

Btw, one more question: did you opt for the wing-play style because you believe it optimally suits your players, or you simply like that style of football regardless of your team's strengths and weaknesses?

[Gbrexiton]

15 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

Maybe a screenshot of the 442 tactic (i.e. how you envision it at the moment)? 

Btw, one more question: did you opt for the wing-play style because you believe it optimally suits your players, or you simply like that style of football regardless of your team's strengths and weaknesses?

I choose wing attack because I believe it suits my players. I also have a HOYD that prefers wing attacks. I’m open to anything that works, I don’t care about the style. Would you like to see screenshots of my players? If there was another formation fitted to my team I would definitely be willing to change.

For a 4-4-2 I envision something very similar. I really just want something to switch to if other teams start countering me instead of attacking. Perhaps this with the same instructions:

———-AF- At TM-SU————

——-———————————

W-At—-DLP-De CM-Su—IW-Su

WB-Su —-CB-De CB-De —WB-At

—————-GK-De—————

 

What is a CAR btw? I’d be interested in trying that.

Edited June 11, 2020 by Gbrexiton

[Experienced Defender]

9 minutes ago, Gbrexiton said:

What is a CAR btw?

How do you mean "what is a CAR"? The carrilero role. Can be very useful as a defensive cover for attack-minded fullbacks/wing-backs (provided of course that you have a suitable/capable player for the role). Can also provide a useful link between a more conservative fullback/wing-back and a winger. 

 

14 minutes ago, Gbrexiton said:

I choose wing attack because I believe it suits my players

That sounds reasonable  

 

14 minutes ago, Gbrexiton said:

I also have a HOYD that prefers wing attacks

You are the boss, not him  

 

14 minutes ago, Gbrexiton said:

I’m open to anything that works, I don’t care about the style

Well, what works for one (type of) team will not necessarily work for another. That's why analyzing your players before creating a tactic is so important (at least for me). 

 

16 minutes ago, Gbrexiton said:

Would you like to see screenshots of my players?

Sure  Although I might not have enough time to analyze them properly (due to my other responsibilities as a mod). 

 

19 minutes ago, Gbrexiton said:

For a 4-4-2 I envision something very similar. I really just want something to switch to if other teams start countering me instead of attacking. Perhaps this with the same instructions:

———-AF- At TM-SU————

——-———————————

W-At—-DLP-De CM-Su—IW-Su

WB-Su —-CB-De CB-De —WB-At

—————-GK-De—————

What about this (slightly tweaked for better balance):

TMsu   AF

Wat     DLPde    CAR    IWsu

WBsu   CDde  CDde   WBsu

I only swapped the sides of your strikers, changed the CMsu into a carrilero and toned down the RB's duty to support (instead of attack). 

[Gbrexiton]

 

[Gbrexiton]

Sorry the screenshots are really unorganized. Also, for the 4-4-2 formation, what instructions should I put? Should it be similar to the 4-2-4?

Edited June 12, 2020 by Gbrexiton

[Experienced Defender]

1 hour ago, Gbrexiton said:

 

1 hour ago, Gbrexiton said:

for the 4-4-2 formation, what instructions should I put? Should it be similar to the 4-2-4?

Well, looking at some of your (new) instructions - such as short passing and lower tempo - it seems that you want to abandon wing-play as your primary style (although extreme width and focus down the flanks are still there)? 

[Gbrexiton]

18 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

Well, looking at some of your (new) instructions - such as short passing and lower tempo - it seems that you want to abandon wing-play as your primary style (although extreme width and focus down the flanks are still there)? 

I forgot to change the instructions when I changed formations. Ignore them. Refer to the instructions on the 4-2-4 and the changes we made.

Edited June 12, 2020 by Gbrexiton

[Experienced Defender]

4 hours ago, Gbrexiton said:

I forgot to change the instructions when I changed formations. Ignore them. Refer to the instructions on the 4-2-4 and the changes we made.

If you still want wing-play, instructions from the 424 should basically still apply (including the tweaks I suggested - e.g. no overlaps).

[Gbrexiton]

5 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

If you still want wing-play, instructions from the 424 should basically still apply (including the tweaks I suggested - e.g. no overlaps).

Even early cross?

[Experienced Defender]

2 hours ago, Gbrexiton said:

Even early cross?

You can experiment with it. Try the tactic without early crosses and then try with them and compare. Do not treat the tactic as a plug'n'play. Watch your matches and tweak accordingly - but slowly and gradually - if or when needed. 

[Gbrexiton]

4 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

You can experiment with it. Try the tactic without early crosses and then try with them and compare. Do not treat the tactic as a plug'n'play. Watch your matches and tweak accordingly - but slowly and gradually - if or when needed. 

Ok, thanks

Do you agree with my decision of wing play when you see my players

[Experienced Defender]

1 hour ago, Gbrexiton said:

Do you agree with my decision of wing play when you see my players

Hard to say, because I haven't managed a team in Iceland thus far, so I don't know how I should rate your players' attributes compared to the league standards. 

[Gbrexiton]

27 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

Hard to say, because I haven't managed a team in Iceland thus far, so I don't know how I should rate your players' attributes compared to the league standards. 

Well we are predicted to get relegated, so not great. My real question tho is if wing attack best suit my team, and are the any instructions that would better suit my team.

 

Would a team report of comparison help?

[Experienced Defender]

Just now, Gbrexiton said:

My real question tho is if wing attack best suit my team

As I said, I cannot know that for sure because I don't know what player attribute standards are like in Iceland (i.e. the league your team competes in). 

 

2 minutes ago, Gbrexiton said:

Would a team report of comparison help?

To some extent, yes 

[Gbrexiton]

[Experienced Defender]

Well, crossing and dribbling seem to be above average, so I guess wing-play should be okay (generally speaking).

[Gbrexiton]

Alright, I’ll give it a try and tell you any problems I encounter.

[Urotsukidoji]

there are two 442 I know of that work well

Chelsea when they won the ecl = two banks of four, no pressing, stand back and then counter. Sit Deep etc. Concentrate on set pieces.

daglish and Fergie = get the ball down the wings and get as many crosses into the box as possible for the two strikers to score. 

 

[Gbrexiton]

The changes don’t seem to work much  I don’t understand what is wrong. We seem to have good chances, but we miss penalties, waste chances, etc.. I tried to switch to FBs instead of WBs because their wingers kept passing my WBs, but it didn't work. Also, my star players are out injured or with the Iceland U19s... Any data I can show you that would help? I don’t want to just waste 5 seasons of work by getting relegated  Looking at my player attributes, would there be anything else that would be better than wing attack?

Edited June 15, 2020 by Gbrexiton

[Experienced Defender]

12 hours ago, Gbrexiton said:

The changes don’t seem to work much  I don’t understand what is wrong

Can you post a screenshot of that last tactic you've been using most recently? 

 

12 hours ago, Gbrexiton said:

We seem to have good chances, but we miss penalties, waste chances, etc

It can partly be due to the quality of players. 

 

12 hours ago, Gbrexiton said:

I tried to switch to FBs instead of WBs because their wingers kept passing my WBs, but it didn't work

Because nothing works in isolation. If you make changes without taking the whole tactical context into account, it usually does not work as you may hope for. 

 

12 hours ago, Gbrexiton said:

Looking at my player attributes, would there be anything else that would be better than wing attack?

For teams like yours, so-called "hybrid" styles are usually the best option, because such styles are pragmatic (as opposed to being "obsessed" with / insisting on any particular style of play). 

[Gbrexiton]

6 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

Can you post a screenshot of that last tactic you've been using most recently? 

I meant the changes we made; the only changes I made were to change the FBs in the last two games.

 

6 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

It can partly be due to the quality of players. 

I guess, but I’ve stayed up for the past 4 seasons, and my players have gotten better each season.

 

7 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

 For teams like yours, so-called "hybrid" styles are usually the best option, because such styles are pragmatic (as opposed to being "obsessed" with / insisting on any particular style of play). 

What do you suggest?

[Experienced Defender]

1 hour ago, Gbrexiton said:

What do you suggest?

In a 442 or another formation?

[Gbrexiton]

9 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

In a 442 or another formation?

I think perhaps another one might work best. Whatever works with my players is fine with me. I’m thinking maybe only 1 striker. Maybe a 4-1-4-1? Or 4-1-2-3? I don’t know, I just want to find something that works.

[hyrule_king]

I have recently won the prem and cl wth norwich using my 442 :

Edited June 15, 2020 by hyrule_king

[Experienced Defender]

12 minutes ago, Gbrexiton said:

I think perhaps another one might work best. Whatever works with my players is fine with me. I’m thinking maybe only 1 striker. Maybe a 4-1-4-1? Or 4-1-2-3? I don’t know, I just want to find something that works

Honestly, the 4123 wide - or 4141dm wide, as the game calls it - is generally the best balanced formation and hence easiest to set up properly in terms of roles, duties and instructions. 

The question is however whether you want to win the title with your team or be realistic (i.e. play within or slightly above expectations)? 

[Gbrexiton]

50 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

Honestly, the 4123 wide - or 4141dm wide, as the game calls it - is generally the best balanced formation and hence easiest to set up properly in terms of roles, duties and instructions. 

The question is however whether you want to win the title with your team or be realistic (i.e. play within or slightly above expectations)? 

This season I just want to stay up... Then we can take it from there. Any suggestions?

[Experienced Defender]

1 hour ago, Gbrexiton said:

This season I just want to stay up... Then we can take it from there. Any suggestions?

Maybe something like this:

PFat

IWsu                          Wsu

BWMsu   CMat

DMde

FBat    CDde  CDde   FBsu

GK/SKde

Of course, I don't know your players and how good/bad they are in relation to the Iceland league standards and/or which roles suit each of them, so please take the above with a pinch of salt. But the point is to keep it as simple and balanced as possible, both in terms of roles/duties and instructions. And when it comes to instructions, you can start with the following and then tweak it slightly and gradually based on what you observe while watching a given match:

Mentality - Balanced

In possession - shorter (or standard) passing

In transition - distribute to CBs and FBs

Out of possession - no instructions (for a start)

[Gbrexiton]

2 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

Maybe something like this:

PFat

IWsu                          Wsu

BWMsu   CMat

DMde

FBat    CDde  CDde   FBsu

GK/SKde

Of course, I don't know your players and how good/bad they are in relation to the Iceland league standards and/or which roles suit each of them, so please take the above with a pinch of salt. But the point is to keep it as simple and balanced as possible, both in terms of roles/duties and instructions. And when it comes to instructions, you can start with the following and then tweak it slightly and gradually based on what you observe while watching a given match:

Mentality - Balanced

In possession - shorter (or standard) passing

In transition - distribute to CBs and FBs

Out of possession - no instructions (for a start)

I managed to scrape a win. Does the waste time instruction actually work? Does it make sense? Also, should I drop my wingers to the dm area towards the end of the match? I just paused a match. 88 mins in, I just conceded. Now it is 2-1. I am 90% sure I will concede again... What do I do?

Edited June 15, 2020 by Gbrexiton

[Experienced Defender]

1 hour ago, Gbrexiton said:

Does the waste time instruction actually work? Does it make sense?

I don't understand in what context you are asking about the time-wasting TI, since we haven't mentioned it anywhere during the discussion. Can you explain the actual context? 

 

1 hour ago, Gbrexiton said:

Also, should I drop my wingers to the dm area towards the end of the match? I just paused a match. 88 mins in, I just conceded. Now it is 2-1. I am 90% sure I will concede again... What do I do?

These are questions that I really cannot know answers to, because I don't watch your matches. I did not even say that the tactic I proposed as an example will necessarily suit your team. Perhaps your team is too weak even for this kind of tactic, but again - how can I know that?

[Gbrexiton]

2 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

I don't understand in what context you are asking about the time-wasting TI, since we haven't mentioned it anywhere during the discussion. Can you explain the actual context? 

Towards the end of the match when preserving a lead

 

2 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

These are questions that I really cannot know answers to, because I don't watch your matches. I did not even say that the tactic I proposed as an example will necessarily suit your team. Perhaps your team is too weak even for this kind of tactic, but again - how can I know that?

7 points in my last 4 with this tactic compared to 8 points in 13 shows that this tactic is definitely an improvement. What information could I provide that would help you determine if dropping to wingers down would work?

[Experienced Defender]

2 minutes ago, Gbrexiton said:

Towards the end of the match when preserving a lead

The instruction as such does work and it makes sense for preserving a lead, although it can backfire if employed too early. 

 

4 minutes ago, Gbrexiton said:

7 points in my last 4 with this tactic compared to 8 points in 13 shows that this tactic is definitely an improvement

Okay, that looks like a good sign. You now have some foundation to build upon. 

 

5 minutes ago, Gbrexiton said:

What information could I provide that would help you determine if dropping to wingers down would work?

I don't know. I personally almost never have to make such particular kind of tactical change, so I would assume that you may need to reconsider the formation. Given that you previously played in a 442, maybe the 4132 wide would suit your team better than 4123? Btw, that's one of my favorite formations when managing underdogs. Especially if you have fast strikers (or at least one of them).

[Gbrexiton]

1 minute ago, Experienced Defender said:

The instruction as such does work and it makes sense for preserving a lead, although it can backfire if employed too early. 

80 minutes a good time?
 

 

1 minute ago, Experienced Defender said:

I don't know. I personally almost never have to make such particular kind of tactical change, so I would assume that you may need to reconsider the formation. Given that you previously played in a 442, maybe the 4132 wide would suit your team better than 4123? Btw, that's one of my favorite formations when managing underdogs. Especially if you have fast strikers (or at least one of them).

My strikers are slow. Can I see an example?

[Experienced Defender]

20 minutes ago, Gbrexiton said:

80 minutes a good time?

Usually yes, although I would increase time-wasting gradually - start with sometimes and after a few minutes switch to frequently. Other instructions you can combine with time-wasting are slow pace down (for keeper distribution) and play for set pieces. 

 

23 minutes ago, Gbrexiton said:

My strikers are slow. Can I see an example?

DLFsu    PFat

IWsu        CMat         WMsu

A/DMde

FBat    CDde   CDde   WBsu

[Gbrexiton]

3 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

Usually yes, although I would increase time-wasting gradually - start with sometimes and after a few minutes switch to frequently. Other instructions you can combine with time-wasting are slow pace down (for keeper distribution) and play for set pieces. 

 

DLFsu    PFat

IWsu        CMat         WMsu

A/DMde

FBat    CDde   CDde   WBsu

I’m going to stick with what I’ve got right now but I might give that a try. What instructions should I use in the other formation to see out a match? I’m really bad at seeing out a match. Or even any shouts that might work?

 

Also, I’ve conceded a lot of corners/set pieces. What should I do to stop this? Any good pre sets?

Edited June 16, 2020 by Gbrexiton

[Experienced Defender]

17 hours ago, Gbrexiton said:

What instructions should I use in the other formation to see out a match? I’m really bad at seeing out a match. Or even any shouts that might work?

Whatever suggestion I may offer can prove wrong, because these are dependent solely on what I see while watching a match. I do not have any universal recipe that applies to every team or every situation (except for the previously mentioned time wasting, set pieces and slow play down). 

 

17 hours ago, Gbrexiton said:

Also, I’ve conceded a lot of corners/set pieces. What should I do to stop this? Any good pre sets?

Not my area of "expertise", sorry. But there have been some threads discussing set pieces recently, so you can browse and find them. 

[Gbrexiton]

1 hour ago, Experienced Defender said:

(except for the previously mentioned time wasting, set pieces and slow play down). 

When do you do this? Around 80 mins?

[Experienced Defender]

49 minutes ago, Gbrexiton said:

When do you do this? Around 80 mins?

Usually yes. But only if I have a narrow lead and notice that the opposition are really threatening to equalize. But if I control the game, there is no need for panic. 

[Gbrexiton]

Thanks for your help, the new tactic worked wonders. I stayed up on the final day! 14 points in 9 games compared to 8 points in 13

[Gbrexiton]

With this tactic:

PFat

IWsu                          Wsu

BWMsu   CMat

DMde

FBat    CDde  CDde   FBsu

GK/SKde
Is there any way I could fit W-At/S in the system instead of IW? I’m not sure I want to play with IWs. My LW is left footed only. Or even changing my PF? Also, I still only have one instruction... Is that OK? What data should I look at to maybe choose another instruction?

The LW:

For example, would something like be considered balanced?
AF-At

                                                                       W-Su                                 W-Su

BBM - Su CM- Su(or Au?)

DM - De

FB - Su CB - De CB-De FB-Su

G-De

 

And with this, what roles would be appropriate?

Edited June 17, 2020 by Gbrexiton

[Gbrexiton]

On 17/06/2020 at 15:59, Gbrexiton said:

With this tactic:

PFat

IWsu                          Wsu

BWMsu   CMat

DMde

FBat    CDde  CDde   FBsu

GK/SKde
Is there any way I could fit W-At/S in the system instead of IW? I’m not sure I want to play with IWs. My LW is left footed only. Or even changing my PF? Also, I still only have one instruction... Is that OK? What data should I look at to maybe choose another instruction?

The LW:

For example, would something like be considered balanced?
AF-At

                                                                       W-Su                                 W-Su

BBM - Su CM- Su(or Au?)

DM - De

FB - Su CB - De CB-De FB-Su

G-De

 

And with this, what roles would be appropriate?

This is an unrelated question, but should you use less instructions for a lower team than a world class one?

[Gbrexiton]

On 17/06/2020 at 15:59, Gbrexiton said:

With this tactic:

PFat

IWsu                          Wsu

BWMsu   CMat

DMde

FBat    CDde  CDde   FBsu

GK/SKde
Is there any way I could fit W-At/S in the system instead of IW? I’m not sure I want to play with IWs. My LW is left footed only. Or even changing my PF? Also, I still only have one instruction... Is that OK? What data should I look at to maybe choose another instruction?

The LW:

For example, would something like be considered balanced?
AF-At

                                                                       W-Su                                 W-Su

BBM - Su CM- Su(or Au?)

DM - De

FB - Su CB - De CB-De FB-Su

G-De

 

And with this, what roles would be appropriate?

 

On 19/06/2020 at 13:11, Gbrexiton said:

This is an unrelated question, but should you use less instructions for a lower team than a world class one?