Is 433 (4141 DM Wide) is the least exciting formation in the game?

[mister.cool40]

I have for the most part used this formation rigidly in my FM saves.As balanced this tactic is,I feel that brings  a degree of blandness to this tactic.During pressing the front 5 seems way too far from each other and in attacking phase the chemistry between front 3 doesn't feel that great.And I always feel no matter how you set up at least one of the 3 midfielder ( CM+CM+DM) remain not 100% utilized.This is strange but sometimes when I go down to 10 man and I don't put a player in ST or DM the team always perform better.

These are some of my thoughts regarding this formation.What do you guys think about this formation?Will be happy to learn your thoughts.

[HUNT3R]

So you have issues with setting it up.

I don't have problems with pressing, but I don't counter press.

My front three work well together, sharing assists and goals, though I have backups who are quite capable too.  My ST ended up as top goal scorer in the league.

In midfield, my DLP plays quarter back and the other 2 break up play and support the front 3.

I have a few special players who add a bit of spice to the tactic/formation. My DLP dictates tempo and likes to play long range passes. My BWM/S likes to run with the ball and so he provides some penetration that a 'normal' BWM may not. I have backups for the front 3 and they each provide something different to the 'main' 3, so I can interchange the players to suit what I deem is needed for the next match. I've added PIs to positions where I thought I needed them. 

Point is, I've made a tactic that suits my team and the players I have. In the last season or so, I've added players who I think can provide a different threat as well. I'm sure the tactic could be better, but for right now, it does what I need it to and it poses a threat to teams as I've consistently over-achieved. Beyond just a formation/tactic, I can also pose different threats depending on the players I pick.

I've had scorchers from distance, players rounding the keeper, constant 1 v 1 goals and I've even scored a lobbed goal.

If you're struggling with the formation, maybe it's best to post what you're doing/how you're setting up and the specific issues you have. Everyone is at different clubs and in different situations (top club for the league / relegation favourite etc) and we all have different players that make up our squads. A lot of what gets posted may not have any relevance to you at all. That's why I am suggesting it.

 

[WelshMourinho]

To follow on from @HUNT3R, I think it depends on the quality of your team, and where you're actually predicted. I use this formation (have done for the last few FMs, actually) and I'd say it's effectiveness as a club challenging for honours depends on who you play. I mean it's naturally bottom heavy so provided how you've set up a solid defence is likely. I conceded 20 goals in the prem all season last season, scoring 70. I had the best defence and attack in the league, but I'd say our attacking certainly wasn't incredible.

I find it can be thrilling to watch against teams who are actually going to be open against you, because you're not facing such stacked defences and there's a little more room for the front 3 to work, even if they don't have immediate support from midfield. Your striker becomes vitally important, because you either need someone capable of dropping deep to drag a Cb out and link with midfield, or someone capable of getting into the box if he's paired with a winger. 

If you are facing teams that don't overcommit then I find the formation to be a lot less punishing. You're more likely to win 1 or 2-0 than you are blow teams away (although that can still happen, West Brom, Newcastle and Man City will tell you as much after they faced us) but I think that's the beauty of the formation. You sacrifice all out attacking for a bit more control, and you're probably missing that if you think a midfielder isn't being utilised. The holding mid is always being utilised. 

As with everything with FM and tactics, it depends on the players you have and how you set up. But I would say this formation isn't intended for highly entertaining goalfests. If you use this formation you're better off looking for a tight defence, or to control possession. 

If you're looking for a high press or just more entertaining attacking, I'd suggest something top heavy with either 2 strikers or 3 AMs.

Edited July 29, 2020 by WelshMourinho

[mister.cool40]

1 hour ago, HUNT3R said:

So you have issues with setting it up.

I don't have problems with pressing, but I don't counter press.

My front three work well together, sharing assists and goals, though I have backups who are quite capable too.  My ST ended up as top goal scorer in the league.

In midfield, my DLP plays quarter back and the other 2 break up play and support the front 3.

I have a few special players who add a bit of spice to the tactic/formation. My DLP dictates tempo and likes to play long range passes. My BWM/S likes to run with the ball and so he provides some penetration that a 'normal' BWM may not. I have backups for the front 3 and they each provide something different to the 'main' 3, so I can interchange the players to suit what I deem is needed for the next match. I've added PIs to positions where I thought I needed them. 

Point is, I've made a tactic that suits my team and the players I have. In the last season or so, I've added players who I think can provide a different threat as well. I'm sure the tactic could be better, but for right now, it does what I need it to and it poses a threat to teams as I've consistently over-achieved. Beyond just a formation/tactic, I can also pose different threats depending on the players I pick.

I've had scorchers from distance, players rounding the keeper, constant 1 v 1 goals and I've even scored a lobbed goal.

If you're struggling with the formation, maybe it's best to post what you're doing/how you're setting up and the specific issues you have. Everyone is at different clubs and in different situations (top club for the league / relegation favourite etc) and we all have different players that make up our squads. A lot of what gets posted may not have any relevance to you at all. That's why I am suggesting it.

 

First of all,thanks for taking the time.

I actually think my setup isn't too bad ( I got excellent help from the community and especially the moderators).However,without going crazy with roles and duties, I feel this formation lacks the attacking thrust to really hurt the opposition. I don't use plug n play tactics and not even the presets ingame. I downloaded some just to see what makes these tactics tick and maybe use the concept in my tactic.Like they use both fullbacks on attack duty.However going overboard is not my style.I believe in reasonable selection of roles and duties.And I also don't go for the High Risk,High Reward strategy.My first priority is to nullify the opposition,then look for the ways I can hurt them.

In home I feel that nearly anything works,so it's tricky judging a tactic on home results.In away matches with my balanced approach (not necessarily balanced mentality ) matches against inferior teams turn into

 borefest.I believe I can generate the right attacking principles from my tactic ( width,vertical and horizontal stretching of opponents,late runs etc ).However the execution always seems off.I win many of the them - however the quality of play and amount of chances are not satisfactory.At least not with 433 and a sensible approach.

Yet the "exploit " tactics in these away matches seem to generate dashing attacking football.However the formation,roles and duties are not upto my taste and are unimmersive and unrealistic.That's why I am contemplating the limits of 433.

[GianniM]

5 minutes ago, mister.cool40 said:

I feel this formation lacks the attacking thrust to really hurt the opposition

FM19  - I've won the Spanish league four times in a row plus two Champions league titles with this formation with Sporting Gijon where I started in the second division. I'm currently in the 2024/2025 season. 

So yes, I do think you can make it work. 

That being said though, after a few successful years there are more and more teams that I'm facing that are really parking the bus on me, and lately I've been switching to 4-2-3-1 in those matches to add some more dynamics up front. 

[WelshMourinho]

4 minutes ago, mister.cool40 said:

Yet the "exploit " tactics in these away matches seem to generate dashing attacking football.However the formation,roles and duties are not upto my taste and are unimmersive and unrealistic.That's why I am contemplating the limits of 433.

I found this bit of what you said quite interesting. While I do agree the 4-3-3 has its limits, I think you might be expecting a bit too much from the formation. 

5 minutes ago, mister.cool40 said:

My first priority is to nullify the opposition,then look for the ways I can hurt them.

If your priority is to nullify the opposition first and foremost, I think you have one of the most effective formations for that. But it's going to be difficult to find any formation that can nullify the opposition while also providing incredible attacking football. You'd need to play the perfect opponent for that. Most teams you play (depending on your position as a club) simply wont give you that option. 

8 minutes ago, mister.cool40 said:

Like they use both fullbacks on attack duty.However going overboard is not my style.I believe in reasonable selection of roles and duties.And I also don't go for the High Risk,High Reward strategy.

You could go for a double pivot in the centre to free up the full backs? Although I really don't think the 4-3-3 is the best formation for that. Ultimately I think the fbs are probably your best bet to generate incredible attacks, but that doesn't seem to line up with your principles of how you want to play.

[mister.cool40]

36 minutes ago, WelshMourinho said:

You sacrifice all out attacking for a bit more control, and you're probably missing that if you think a midfielder isn't being utilised. The holding mid is always being utilised. 

hmm,I think you use two dynamic CMs who will go forward or run with the ball then you can properly utilise all 3.However  I use a DLP in one of CM strata to protect the respective flank.This results in the DLP in CM strata and the player from DM strata both sort of doing the same thing : recyling possession and dictating play.That's why I think in some cases they are not fully utilized.  

[mister.cool40]

17 minutes ago, GianniM said:

FM19  - I've won the Spanish league four times in a row plus two Champions league titles with this formation with Sporting Gijon where I started in the second division. I'm currently in the 2024/2025 season. 

So yes, I do think you can make it work. 

That being said though, after a few successful years there are more and more teams that I'm facing that are really parking the bus on me, and lately I've been switching to 4-2-3-1 in those matches to add some more dynamics up front. 

hmm..you can make it work no doubt....but when you see the attacking play some other weird formations can generate,you just have to go wow.

[mister.cool40]

20 minutes ago, WelshMourinho said:

I found this bit of what you said quite interesting. While I do agree the 4-3-3 has its limits, I think you might be expecting a bit too much from the formation. 

fluid formation can help with that...I mean different formation for different phases of play.Modern teams don't maintain the same shape while attacking, defending and transitioning.If that could be implemented properly we could see a lot of variation in attacking/transition phases.I don't know if the current ME or near future iterations of it can handle Dynamic formation,but hopefully in the future it can be implemented.

[GianniM]

3 minutes ago, mister.cool40 said:

hmm..you can make it work no doubt....but when you see the attacking play some other weird formations can generate,you just have to go wow.

I regularly went wow with this formation as well. 

5-0 and 4-0 vs Napoli, 4-0 vs Real Madrid, 6-1 vs Dortmund, 4-0 away at Liverpool, 8-0 vs Legia Warschau

8 minutes ago, mister.cool40 said:

fluid formation

Use of roles can help with that. For example I'm using a half back combined with attacking fullbacks. 

Player traits as well, such as 'comes deep to get ball'. 

[mister.cool40]

2 minutes ago, GianniM said:

Use of roles can help with that. For example I'm using a half back combined with attacking fullbacks. 

Player traits as well, such as 'comes deep to get ball'. 

it's not that effective from my findings

[crusadertsar]

2 hours ago, mister.cool40 said:

First of all,thanks for taking the time.

I actually think my setup isn't too bad ( I got excellent help from the community and especially the moderators).However,without going crazy with roles and duties, I feel this formation lacks the attacking thrust to really hurt the opposition. I don't use plug n play tactics and not even the presets ingame. I downloaded some just to see what makes these tactics tick and maybe use the concept in my tactic.Like they use both fullbacks on attack duty.However going overboard is not my style.I believe in reasonable selection of roles and duties.And I also don't go for the High Risk,High Reward strategy.My first priority is to nullify the opposition,then look for the ways I can hurt them.

In home I feel that nearly anything works,so it's tricky judging a tactic on home results.In away matches with my balanced approach (not necessarily balanced mentality ) matches against inferior teams turn into

 borefest.I believe I can generate the right attacking principles from my tactic ( width,vertical and horizontal stretching of opponents,late runs etc ).However the execution always seems off.I win many of the them - however the quality of play and amount of chances are not satisfactory.At least not with 433 and a sensible approach.

Yet the "exploit " tactics in these away matches seem to generate dashing attacking football.However the formation,roles and duties are not upto my taste and are unimmersive and unrealistic.That's why I am contemplating the limits of 433.

So you still havent posted a screenshot of your tactic? Trust me there's something that's the matter even with the best tactics.

Edited July 29, 2020 by crusadertsar

[crusadertsar]

2 hours ago, mister.cool40 said:

hmm,I think you use two dynamic CMs who will go forward or run with the ball then you can properly utilise all 3.However  I use a DLP in one of CM strata to protect the respective flank.This results in the DLP in CM strata and the player from DM strata both sort of doing the same thing : recyling possession and dictating play.That's why I think in some cases they are not fully utilized.  

Well that's your problem then. You are using two holding midfielders where only one should suffice and you are not even using attacking wingbacks? There's the reason why you are not getting much attacking thrust. You can't be conservative and expect many goals.

Edited July 29, 2020 by crusadertsar

[crusadertsar]

1 hour ago, mister.cool40 said:

it's not that effective from my findings

Attacking fullbacks and halfback combo is one of the most effective combos in the game. If you cannot make it work well then there's something wrong with your setup. But again I'll stop commenting until I see your tactic and can properly analyze it. Just complaining about your supposed woes with 4-3-3 will get us nowhere. Otherwise we could sit here all day you saying how ineffective it is for you and me listing all the various teams it allowed me to overarchive with this year (and it very much did, with Real Sociedad and Lille specifically).

Edited July 29, 2020 by crusadertsar

[mister.cool40]

31 minutes ago, crusadertsar said:

So you still havent posted a screenshot of your tactic? Trust me there's something that's the matter even with the best 

Because maybe I already posted my tactic and troubleshooted it?.....And if this post was about problems of my tactic specifically I would have posted the screenshot and described it..as I have done previously in the forum.However,this is not the case.I am talking about 433 in general and the possible limitations of the formation.I don't have much problem with results but with the volume of chances in away matches (in home matches its never been a problem)

[crusadertsar]

12 minutes ago, mister.cool40 said:

Because maybe I already posted my tactic and troubleshooted it?.....And if this post was about problems of my tactic specifically I would have posted the screenshot and described it..as I have done previously in the forum.However,this is not the case.I am talking about 433 in general and the possible limitations of the formation.I don't have much problem with results but with the volume of chances in away matches (in home matches its never been a problem)

Well in general posting very general threads like this doesn't really get you much on this forum. I mean I can just start a thread about any formation and just say something like "I think that 4-2-3-1 sucks because it's ineffective for me, do you think it's a problem with the game?" Then you will get 10 people commenting that they agree with me and another 10 who don't. See where I am going with.

The endpoint is that this game is so wide-open, many different tactic and role variations can work. It all depends on the players and your club's reputation. My 4-3-3 could seem overpowered when I play it with my Lille team and then when you try it with your Man City it will barely create any chances. It's all very relative. So even if in that other thread they told you your tactic was perfect from the instruction and role standpoint, it might not work for you because your team is too reputable and most other teams sit back too much against you. I dont know what you expect from this thread? Do you want us to just agree with you that 4-3-3 is ineffective? Because that's most definitely not true my friend.

Edited July 29, 2020 by crusadertsar

[mister.cool40]

41 minutes ago, crusadertsar said:

Attacking fullbacks and halfback combo is one of the most effective combos in the game. If you cannot make it work well then there's something wrong with your setup. But again I'll stop commenting until I see your tactic and can properly analyze it. Just complaining about your supposed woes with 4-3-3 will get us nowhere. Otherwise we could sit here all day you saying how ineffective it is for you and me listing all the various teams it allowed me to overarchive with this year (and it very much did, with Real Sociedad and Lille specifically).

In my eye this is a problem,why you MUST use two attacking fullbacks to achieve thrust in a 433? Shouldn't there be other ways too?

[crusadertsar]

13 minutes ago, mister.cool40 said:

In my eye this is a problem,why you MUST use two attacking fullbacks to achieve thrust in a 433? Shouldn't there be other ways too?

I didn't say you need to put them on attack duty did I now? You can achieve that with roles on support. I simply meant that if you have a double pivot in your midfield then you must achieve more width on the wings or your attack is going to become stale. So if you are using two inside forwards or another combination of wide forwards that cut inside (as is usual with this formation) then your width must come from the fullbacks. It's not that complicated. In 4-3-3, your ideal attacking shape is 2-3-5 afterall. Or you can do the opposite and use wingers upfront combined with inverted wingbacks.

And you don't need super aggressive fullbacks for this. One CWB or WB on support with overlap instruction should suffice while another one could be more conservative as just wingback on support. 

Edited July 29, 2020 by crusadertsar

[GianniM]

4-3-3 in real life in many cases is also using attacking fullbacks.

But nobody here said it's the only way. 

Edited July 29, 2020 by GianniM

[crusadertsar]

But in the end of the day, 4-1-4-1 DM Wide is one of my favourite shapes that I used consistently with variety of teams from FM14 to FM20 with quite a bit of success. BUT it's not a formation that I would use for every team and every situation. It needs specific players and roles to work well. Pep has got it down to a science and I tend to follow his lessons. But it's still one of the more complicated formations. You can't just play it with any role and expect results. It's definitely the case of many parts making up a whole that becomes  better overall

Edited July 29, 2020 by crusadertsar

[crusadertsar]

Like something as simple as this could be very effective. But you still need a specific combination of roles, instructions and the right players for the whole thing to work.

Edited July 29, 2020 by crusadertsar

[mister.cool40]

19 minutes ago, crusadertsar said:

Well in general posting very general threads like this doesn't really get you much on this forum. I mean I can just start a thread about any formation and just say something like "I think that 4-2-3-1 sucks because it's ineffective for me, do you think it's a problem with the game?" Then you will get 10 people commenting that they agree with me and another 10 who don't. See where I am going with.

The thing I don't get sometimes is the suggestions that are offered on the forum.Most of the time it is offered as a SET of  roles,duties and instructions but as football being a dynamic game,it shouldn't  work against every team.You need  different tactical setup ( not change of formation,but different roles/duties/TI,mentalities) for different matches,even for different phases of a single match. But all is said is show your tactic,change this role and that instruction etc etc.That's why I am not very big on showing the tactic,rather asking for a general approach.

[crusadertsar]

3 minutes ago, mister.cool40 said:

The thing I don't get sometimes is the suggestions that are offered on the forum.Most of the time it is offered as a SET of  roles,duties and instructions but as football being a dynamic game,it shouldn't  work against every team.You need  different tactical setup ( not change of formation,but different roles/duties/TI,mentalities) for different matches,even for different phases of a single match. But all is said is show your tactic,change this role and that instruction etc etc.That's why I am not very big on showing the tactic,rather asking for a general approach.

Well I don't really agree with you on that. The game offers you the freedom. You can be a very reactive manager like Mourinho or you could stick to one system and make it into a lean mean machine that AI needs to adapt to. You dont really see Guardiola using 4-1-4-1 in one match and then switching to 4-4-2 or 4-2-3-1 for the next one, now do you?

Edited July 29, 2020 by crusadertsar

[mister.cool40]

20 minutes ago, crusadertsar said:

Well I don't really agree with you on that. The game offers you the freedom. You can be a very reactive manager like Mourinho or you could stick to one system and make it into a lean mean machine that AI needs to adapt to. You dont really see Guardiola using 4-1-4-1 in one match and then switching to 4-4-2 or 4-2-3-1 for the next one, now do you?

Please read thoroughly before commenting.I didn't said anything about changing formation.I in fact mentioned I expected different tactical setup but NOT CHANGE OF FORMATION.Surely Pep wouldn't play the same way against Liverpool as he would play against Norwich?The formation remains the same,but the instructions to the players will surely change.

And I don't know why you are continuously dumbing down what I am saying and trying to make me look like I don't know anything.Just because I am asking something doesn't mean I am stupid.

You showed a tactical setup.Will it work in all 90 minutes against every team and every formation? Most probably not.So I don't see the point of seeing a setup that will work in a specific condition.

Edited July 29, 2020 by mister.cool40

[crusadertsar]

7 minutes ago, mister.cool40 said:

Please read thoroughly before commenting.I didn't said anything about changing formation.I in fact mentioned I expected different tactical setup but NOT CHANGE OF FORMATION.Surely Pep wouldn't play the same against Liverpool as he would play against Norwich?The formation remains the same,but the instructions to the players will surely change.

And I don't know why you are continuously dumbing down what I am saying and trying to make me look like I don't know anything.Just because I am asking something doesn't mean I am stupid.

You showed a tactical setup.Will it work in all 90 minutes against every team and every formation? Most probably not.So I don't see the point of seeing a setup that will work in a specific condition.

Of course that goes without saying that you need to make little adjustments against different teams, like switching to mezzala on attack against a more defesive side such as Norwich.  I was definitely not try to "dumb down" what you were saying. I was just trying to show that your original statement that it is the least exciting formation makes no sense. You will get many different opinions. Like from my experience it's anything but least exciting and leads to some very exciting plays and goals from my teams. It all depends on how you set it up. 

Edited July 29, 2020 by crusadertsar

[_mxrky]

27 minutes ago, crusadertsar said:

Well I don't really agree with you on that. The game offers you the freedom. You can be a very reactive manager like Mourinho or you could stick to one system and make it into a lean mean machine that AI needs to adapt to. You dont really see Guardiola using 4-1-4-1 in one match and then switching to 4-4-2 or 4-2-3-1 for the next one, now do you?

Actually Guardiola has switched to a 4231 against Liverpool 

[crusadertsar]

2 minutes ago, _mxrky said:

Actually Guardiola has switched to a 4231 against Liverpool 

Ok he might have. I will change to that too from time to time when i need more aggressive approach. But how often is he using it as part of his overall strategy? Compared to his usual formation.

Edited July 29, 2020 by crusadertsar

[XuluBak]

Every formation has its limitations, so not entirely sure what point you're trying to make. I don't think 433 is the best formation in FM20, but it's absolutely one of the most, if not the most, balanced. Because of that, I think it's one of the easiest formations to build a good tactic around. That doesn't mean you're automatically going to dominate every game, or that you're not going to have games where you can't score. That's not how the game works, IRL, or FM. 433 is also one of the more flexible formations. That doesn't mean anything will work, your tactic still has to make sense holistically, but there's no you must do X, Y, and Z to succeed with it. It's one of the few formations where you can really fit any (eligible) role into and build around that. Using an HB with bombarding FBs is absolutely a common approach, but it's by no means required. 

 

[Fatkidscantjump]

To me it felt like my usual 433 definitely felt more sluggish coming from FM19 to FM20.

But that just might be that i was used to my 2033 save with world class regens and i've went to FM20 with a mid table team, so obviously i'm gonna have more of a "vanilla" play.

[OJ403]

In my opinion no formations are either exciting nor boring. A 4-3-3 is a 4-3-3, a 4-4-2 is a 4-4-2 and so on. What makes a formations "exciting" is the roles, duties, TIs, PIs, mentality and players (and they're PPMs too).

For example in my Derby County save I play a 4-4-2. Stereotypically a 4-4-2 wouldn't be considered as overly exciting, but through making specific choices in the things I've listed above I've made an exciting system.

You also seem to have encountered issues with the idea of attacking full backs being necessary for exciting football - they aren't. In my 4-4-2 I play a WB-D (occasionally IWB-D) and as he is more conservative I can afford to give other players more freedom. Similarly in previous systems Ive used a IWB-D, MEZ-A and W-S partnership down one side and I definitely found attacks down that flank excited.

If you want help I'd advise you posted a screenshot of your tactic and heed the advice of others, particularly those with high level tactical understanding.

[beverage1982]

I find this a really interesting discussion. I've really struggled this year with this formation. That's partly because I'm Villa and like in real life we struggle, but I also just find the transitions nigh on impossible to get right. Therein lies the biggest problem IMHO as other formations are much easier to get those quick transitions, whereas the natural gaps in the 433 make those transitions harder to accomplish. As a result it's easier to set it up as a possession orientated system (hence the effectiveness of flying wingbacks and a HB), but attempting to create something more direct or counter attacking is harder.

It's entirely my fault not the engine or the tactics, but my solution was to drop the AML / R back. It's not what I wanted to do (it'a amazing how attached you can get to the aesthetic positions of a tactic screen) but it made it \easier to create the excitement and thrust I wanted for my style of football. 

I still tear my hair out trying to get a fast transitioning 433 though. What I'm saying is essentially, I feel the poster's pain, but also hear the advice from various repsonders. 

[beverage1982]

2 hours ago, crusadertsar said:

Like something as simple as this could be very effective. But you still need a specific combination of roles, instructions and the right players for the whole thing to work.

Am intrigued what the duties were here? Not to copy, but just for context. 

Am assuming Attack on the DLF, then is it either/ both wingbacks? The Mezzala? Contextual? 

[mister.cool40]

3 minutes ago, beverage1982 said:

(it'a amazing how attached you can get to the aesthetic positions of a tactic screen)

This is probably the most heartfelt sentence I have heard this year ❤❤

[WelshMourinho]

15 minutes ago, beverage1982 said:

I find this a really interesting discussion. I've really struggled this year with this formation. That's partly because I'm Villa and like in real life we struggle, but I also just find the transitions nigh on impossible to get right. Therein lies the biggest problem IMHO as other formations are much easier to get those quick transitions, whereas the natural gaps in the 433 make those transitions harder to accomplish. As a result it's easier to set it up as a possession orientated system (hence the effectiveness of flying wingbacks and a HB), but attempting to create something more direct or counter attacking is harder.

It's entirely my fault not the engine or the tactics, but my solution was to drop the AML / R back. It's not what I wanted to do (it'a amazing how attached you can get to the aesthetic positions of a tactic screen) but it made it \easier to create the excitement and thrust I wanted for my style of football. 

I still tear my hair out trying to get a fast transitioning 433 though. What I'm saying is essentially, I feel the poster's pain, but also hear the advice from various repsonders. 

My thinking on this (I could be completely wrong) but just from what I've seen myself on my save is that you really do need good fbs and players who can play the long passes. I'm Liverpool so I only really get the chance to hit these on the bigger sides when they throw people forward. The best example I have of it is vs Chelsea. I've caught them out numerous times over the last season or two with a long diagonal from deep in our half to a more advanced winger who can run at them.

As you're Villa I imagine you have two main problems.  The first is that you haven't got defenders with the quality of composure and passing range that I would have. The second problem is that bigger sides will find it a lot easier working the ball around you, forcing you back and then killing you with overloads on the flank.  I imagine that's why you have such an issue with the transition - you haven't really had the chance to get going on it. 

I think another part of the issue is how well the switching of the flank works on FM. It should be very dangerous, of course it should, the problem is practically every team uses it and uses it well, regardless of player quality. It's pretty much the main way goals are scored on FM20. So essentially what I've seen to me before when I've tried it at smaller teams is that the wingers are advanced so they aren't in positions to intercept the switch of play so you just get overloaded. Even if you win the ball back here your players have been forced so deep to defend that you never really get the chance to transition to attack. 

That's why you're probably having a lot more success with ml/mr. Yes they start deeper in position, but that means they're closer to the fb initially so when the switch of play comes, they can intercept it and then you can break because you've actually caught them out further up the pitch, even with deeper midfielders. Anyone who has played against a really solid 4-1-4-1 dm with a flat 4 will notice this, the balls out wide get intercepted more often and it's extremely dangerous on the counter. With the AMR/AML positioning, the ai can pop into the space between fb and winger all day long until they've forced you deep enough to kill you.

Edited July 29, 2020 by WelshMourinho

[crusadertsar]

21 minutes ago, beverage1982 said:

Am intrigued what the duties were here? Not to copy, but just for context. 

Am assuming Attack on the DLF, then is it either/ both wingbacks? The Mezzala? Contextual? 

You can play a DLF on attack or support depending on what kind of player you have. A great dribbler with very good attacking attributes can definitely do well as DLF (A) and still provide good support to the other players. If you have a very good wigback then I would play him as CWB (a) to act almost as another winger - or an oldschool Brazilian wingback. But you could also use him on support duty with IW infront him put on Attack duty and additional overlap instruction on that side to bring down winger's mentality and increase wingback's. Mezzala is usually support but I switch him to attack for certain games when I need more offence. So very much contextual. 

However this is a pure pass and move, progressive possession tactic so not really made for fast transitions that you mention.

Edited July 29, 2020 by crusadertsar

[GianniM]

17 hours ago, WelshMourinho said:

That's why you're probably having a lot more success with ml/mr. Yes they start deeper in position, but that means they're closer to the fb initially so when the switch of play comes, they can intercept it and then you can break because you've actually caught them out further up the pitch, even with deeper midfielders. Anyone who has played against a really solid 4-1-4-1 dm with a flat 4 will notice this, the balls out wide get intercepted more often and it's extremely dangerous on the counter. With the AMR/AML positioning, the ai can pop into the space between fb and winger all day long until they've forced you deep enough to kill you.

Instead of bringing back thos AMR/AML, moving the LOD and LOE closer to each other helps with this too I've found

[zyfon5]

18 hours ago, beverage1982 said:

I find this a really interesting discussion. I've really struggled this year with this formation. That's partly because I'm Villa and like in real life we struggle, but I also just find the transitions nigh on impossible to get right. Therein lies the biggest problem IMHO as other formations are much easier to get those quick transitions, whereas the natural gaps in the 433 make those transitions harder to accomplish. As a result it's easier to set it up as a possession orientated system (hence the effectiveness of flying wingbacks and a HB), but attempting to create something more direct or counter attacking is harder.

It's entirely my fault not the engine or the tactics, but my solution was to drop the AML / R back. It's not what I wanted to do (it'a amazing how attached you can get to the aesthetic positions of a tactic screen) but it made it \easier to create the excitement and thrust I wanted for my style of football. 

I still tear my hair out trying to get a fast transitioning 433 though. What I'm saying is essentially, I feel the poster's pain, but also hear the advice from various repsonders. 

Ive played with a 433 with counter attacking tactics before (check my counter attacking thread)

Two piece of advice for using 433 in a counter attacking tactic:

1) You will need to set the two wingers to mark the opposing full backs in player instructions. Otherwise your full back will end up in a 1 v 2 situation if the opposing team decides to push their full back up for overlaps or underlaps. A major advantage of not putting the wingers in the ML/ MR position is they can start their attacks higher up the pitch compared to a winger in the ML/MR position. Hence good teams will not be able to counter press which is a bit too good in this year's game. By setting them to mark the opposing full backs, they still retain that advantage while not leaving your full back helpless.

2) The attributes of your lone striker in a 433 for a counter attacking tactic team is very crucial. He needs to be a all around type of striker since he is the first point to start a counter attack. He needs to be able to hold the ball up when necessary, make a pass for a teammate running from deep, or latch onto a through ball or a cross or dribble with the ball when necessary. Him not being able to do any one of these things decently is going to cost your counter attack.

[WelshMourinho]

1 hour ago, GianniM said:

Instead of bringing back thos AMR/AML, moving the LOD and LOE closer to each other helps with this too I've found

Yeah I usually use a higher LOE and higher DL, but I've noticed quite a bit against teams that play out from the back that eventually my wide players will get sucked into closing down the CB/GK and it allows for an easy pass out to the FB which can lead to us getting overlapped.  It wouldn't be as much of an issue if I was using maybe  BWM or some other cautious role in CM, but as a club challenging for honours most of my midfielders are better on the ball.

I'm going to drop my LOE to standard and leave the higher DL so we're a little bit more compact in those areas next season. I used it towards the close of last season and we ended being  a lot more solid and won the CL so I'm hoping it's the way forward.

[beverage1982]

3 hours ago, zyfon5 said:

Ive played with a 433 with counter attacking tactics before (check my counter attacking thread)

Two piece of advice for using 433 in a counter attacking tactic:

1) You will need to set the two wingers to mark the opposing full backs in player instructions. Otherwise your full back will end up in a 1 v 2 situation if the opposing team decides to push their full back up for overlaps or underlaps. A major advantage of not putting the wingers in the ML/ MR position is they can start their attacks higher up the pitch compared to a winger in the ML/MR position. Hence good teams will not be able to counter press which is a bit too good in this year's game. By setting them to mark the opposing full backs, they still retain that advantage while not leaving your full back helpless.

2) The attributes of your lone striker in a 433 for a counter attacking tactic team is very crucial. He needs to be a all around type of striker since he is the first point to start a counter attack. He needs to be able to hold the ball up when necessary, make a pass for a teammate running from deep, or latch onto a through ball or a cross or dribble with the ball when necessary. Him not being able to do any one of these things decently is going to cost your counter attack.

Very valid points.

 

Strirer is vital to this formation for sure but always hard to pick the right role. I feel on pre patched versions you could get in behind with regularity so it didn't matter if you played a role that stretched the play (af or of a for example).

 

In recent saves since patches I don't see that however so something with holds up ball makes sense. Problem I have is getting support up quick enough. Innevitably the opposition are able to get back into shape and we become a passive possession team rather than a quick counter.

 

I know the answer is to encourage more risk, maybe a higher mentality. I just find it hard this year for some reason.

 

The man marking fullbacks is also key. Ive lost count of the number of goals where one overlapping fullback crosses it to the other and they score from the edge of the area. Again, tactical fault, but doesn't make seeing Erik Pieters smashing a ludicrous ball in like he's Messi any more palatable 😀