Jump to content

My tactic is working...and I don't know why.


Recommended Posts

Let me preface this all by saying that I am brand new to developing tactics. I've downloaded tactics as far back as FM  2007 but it's now feeling a bit empty without doing any work myself.  As the title says, I've stumbled across a working tactic but I don't really understand why. I originally threw this tactic together with no team instructions, just the roles and duties. 

The two instructions I added were Higher Tempo because I found naturally we were keeping possession really well, over 60% most games. So I wanted us to be a bit quicker with the ball as the possession system won't just disappear with that tempo, at least that's my thinking. And distribute to playmaker, this is there because I mention below I want to stretch the pitch. Having distribute to playmaker I've noticed it often means my DLP drops between my center halves and pushes my fullbacks wide , which in turn creates more space for everyone else and stretch the pitch. 

image.thumb.png.21a30b5b48a88fc50621236bca04892e.png

 

So let me explain the tactic with my thoughts when I put it together versus what's actually happening. I knew I wanted a tactic with depth. I wanted the opposition to defend right across the pitch. So in my mind that meant stretching the pitch horizontally. So this is why I have a Winger on the right and Wingback on the left. Both of these roles have run wide with ball in them so theoretically it would mean that this ticks off my goal to stretch the pitch.  I didn't want two identical flanks because I had a specific goal in mind for my left wing. I originally put the tactic together wanting to overload the right side with combinations and interplay to try and free up our Inside Forward on the left. The goal was for the Mezzala, Winger and Fullback to interlink and draw attention of the opposition and then any of them or the supporting DLP  could switch the play to the left where either the overlapping WB or IF could be in space. The idea was for my AF to pin back opposition defenders and leave space for my IF to run at them as they retreat. 

Now, this isn't happening. The interplay is there on the right , I like the way the players link up.  My Mezzala has created the most chances in the side and the FB(a) has the most assists. And my side quite often finds my LWB in acres of space near the box. Unfortunately his assist numbers are a little bit lower.  However my Inside Forward struggles to get involved. A handful of goals and no assists.  I guess I'm not really complaining , I'm more perplexed? Is Inside Forward(A) the right role for what I'm trying to achieve?  I don't want to break my tactic as its very clearly working as I am top of the league (predicted 7th) but I also am confused as to how I can get my vision working. Are overloads like this even possible or would I have to offset my roles and make an asymmetric formation? I would really like the IF to contribute more and have a more varied route to scoring. 

 

image.thumb.png.7ce3f44a22401220217ed7bd36f564ba.png

 

As a slight aside I have also somehow become the side with the best possession stats in the league. This wasn't intentional and again I'm not complaining I'm just confused as to why its come about this way. That's actually the reason I added the higher tempo instruction as I figured as I naturally have most of the ball I may as well be a bit quicker with it. Is there anything I could be doing with my roles to make them a touch more aggressive or attacking? Would that even help with my goal of unlocking my Left sided Inside Forward?

 

 

Edited by liamhanley93
Link to post
Share on other sites

Dude, your tactic is working because is a very logic formation and set of instructions.

The roles and duties make perfect sense, altough i woud probably invert the duties of your left side, WB(a) + IF(s) instead of WB(s) + IF(a). But this a personnal preference.

On top of very wise choice of roles, the team instructions are simple. Sometimes less is better!

And most important.... you are winning, so despite all the opinions on the quality of your tactic, the results show that it works! :thup:

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Keyzer Soze said:

Dude, your tactic is working because is a very logic formation and set of instructions.

The roles and duties make perfect sense, altough i woud probably invert the duties of your left side, WB(a) + IF(s) instead of WB(s) + IF(a). But this a personnal preference.

On top of very wise choice of roles, the team instructions are simple. Sometimes less is better!

And most important.... you are winning, so despite all the opinions on the quality of your tactic, the results show that it works! :thup:

Thanks for your kind words. I guess I should have said it's working, just not quite as I envisioned. I'd really like my IF to get a bit more involved so I might see if a support role gets him in the play a bit more.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with the fact this tactic is well balanced and the roles and duties are very, very coherent. 

Nonetheless, your "problem" with your IF(A) might be that he shares his space with the AF(A). Your IF(A) cuts inside to go deep in the box, just where the AF(A) lies.

Check your heatmap and the average position of your players, your should see your AF(A) competing with your IF(A).

And you say you have a Mezzala but on the screenshot it's a CM(A).

Two possibilities :

- if you want your AF(A) to push back the defensive line and your IF to come behind your AF to take this space, then make him a IF(s)

- if you want your forward to drop deep to allow your IF to get into the box, then make your AF a F9 (or another creator role) and let your IF on Attack duty.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, xavierm said:

I agree with the fact this tactic is well balanced and the roles and duties are very, very coherent. 

Nonetheless, your "problem" with your IF(A) might be that he shares his space with the AF(A). Your IF(A) cuts inside to go deep in the box, just where the AF(A) lies.

Check your heatmap and the average position of your players, your should see your AF(A) competing with your IF(A).

And you say you have a Mezzala but on the screenshot it's a CM(A).

Two possibilities :

- if you want your AF(A) to push back the defensive line and your IF to come behind your AF to take this space, then make him a IF(s)

- if you want your forward to drop deep to allow your IF to get into the box, then make your AF a F9 (or another creator role) and let your IF on Attack duty.

 

Oh good point, it normally is a Mezzala(A). Was experimenting with the CM(a) for a cup game. 

Very good point on the AF and IF sharing the same space. Here's the heat maps showing that. On the right is the original tactic and I can definetely see why there is no space for him to attack. On the left is my most recent game where I changed the AF to a DLF(s). My IF didn't get involved in the play as much as I had envisioned , however he was very good at playing the pass before the pass to WB who got 2 assists to my DLF.  My IF did bag a goal but it was a set piece so not putting to much stock on that just yet. Overall a much better performance. 

 

image.thumb.png.2a33f0654f46007ce313967fec154a8a.pngimage.thumb.png.d746c2a267d08c410370a80cdf9162bc.png

 

As another aside, I had no idea these analysis screens existed. As I mentioned above I've been plug and play for over a decade so I've never had a need to look under the hood so to speak. This is all fascinating and a massive learning curve. Thanks for your help. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, liamhanley93 said:

Oh good point, it normally is a Mezzala(A). Was experimenting with the CM(a) for a cup game. 

Very good point on the AF and IF sharing the same space. Here's the heat maps showing that. On the right is the original tactic and I can definetely see why there is no space for him to attack. On the left is my most recent game where I changed the AF to a DLF(s). My IF didn't get involved in the play as much as I had envisioned , however he was very good at playing the pass before the pass to WB who got 2 assists to my DLF.  My IF did bag a goal but it was a set piece so not putting to much stock on that just yet. Overall a much better performance. 

 

image.thumb.png.2a33f0654f46007ce313967fec154a8a.pngimage.thumb.png.d746c2a267d08c410370a80cdf9162bc.png

 

As another aside, I had no idea these analysis screens existed. As I mentioned above I've been plug and play for over a decade so I've never had a need to look under the hood so to speak. This is all fascinating and a massive learning curve. Thanks for your help. 

Hello there. I don't have an answer to your question. However, I am using a similar lineup. I wonder if you use any player instructions

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, liamhanley93 said:

Oh good point, it normally is a Mezzala(A). Was experimenting with the CM(a) for a cup game. 

Very good point on the AF and IF sharing the same space. Here's the heat maps showing that. On the right is the original tactic and I can definetely see why there is no space for him to attack. On the left is my most recent game where I changed the AF to a DLF(s). My IF didn't get involved in the play as much as I had envisioned , however he was very good at playing the pass before the pass to WB who got 2 assists to my DLF.  My IF did bag a goal but it was a set piece so not putting to much stock on that just yet. Overall a much better performance. 

 

image.thumb.png.2a33f0654f46007ce313967fec154a8a.pngimage.thumb.png.d746c2a267d08c410370a80cdf9162bc.png

 

As another aside, I had no idea these analysis screens existed. As I mentioned above I've been plug and play for over a decade so I've never had a need to look under the hood so to speak. This is all fascinating and a massive learning curve. Thanks for your help. 

I’d be careful jumping to conclusions after just one game. I’d also be wary of changing the role of a successful component of your tactic (AF) to cure an apparently less successful aspect of your tactic.

In your analysis screens, it appears the IF has less space to attack when paired with the AF compared to the DLF. Can you be sure that’s actually the case? It actually looks that the AF has drifted more towards the left for the Plymouth match. There could be a number of reasons for that in a one-off match. However what if those one-off factors are the reason for the additional space rather than AF v DLF?

Watch some games on full highlights. Just a 15 mins spell is fine but the idea is to get an understanding of how the 2 players work together before decided what needs changing. If the AF drifting to the left is a regular thing maybe move him to the STCR spot. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Like previously mentioned, this is a very good tactic. That’s why it’s working. Additionally, this 433 with a DLP is very popular IRL (think barcelona, man city, liverpool) and the game reflects that. 
your balance between ball retention and attacking penetration is close to optimal in my opinion. As a matter of fact i would like to ask you to do a big favour to these forums and post your tactic on those “i cant break down defensive teams with my brilliant possession tactic with 8 playmakers and no one attacking the box” threads, there are quite a few of them.

Edited by Enzo_Francescoli
Link to post
Share on other sites

Good stuff OP :-)

In regards to your question about getting the L-IF involved, I'll offer up the following, which is similar to above...

             DLF(A or S)
IF-S                            W-A

WB-A                         WB-S

For the IF-S adding get inside/get forward in possession. That will get your IF more into the match attacking the far post/getting into the box more - and should create an overload with your rightside W, WB, CM to feed the IF on the back post -  but will it improve results? IDK, that's part of the fun finding out.

Conversely leave the striker as an AF and only give the IF-S the get inside instruction and he could occupy the deeper box position on the left when the AF pushes forward. Anyhoo let us know how you get on, as I really like the limited TIs, formation and roles way to set up.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As a general philosophy is the balance of duties in the formation is one of the most important things in FM.  Its the main thing to move players to use create combinations, overloads or isolations etc, especially how far forward/deep the move.  Role then refines this and adds some extra settings, though a playmaker role vs non-playmaker role is a massive change.  For example BBM-Su vs CM-Su I think most manager wouldn't see the difference.  CM-Su vs CM-At its easier to see the difference, even though same role.  CM-Su vs AP-Su again I think most people would see how the AP moves to collect the ball compared to the CM-Su.   Players further refine how the role+duty plays with there attributes and traits.

In your system your overloading the right flank with the MEZ/CM-At, W-Su and FB-At.  Yes it leaves it a bit open but holding DM who is typically behind the ball and less risky LB (not sure you need a WB-Su, maybe just a FB-Su) still give good cover.  The AML and ST will attack quickly with the CM/MEZ-At and W-Su also joining them, ideal for a switch of play from left to right.  If the ball is progressed down the right flank by the W-Su + FB-At it could also create a good switch (though DLP and/or CM) to the AML.

You haven't added any TI's that hurt these patterns, for example trying to add possession through Shorter Passing which could hurt those switches of play.  Having forwards looking to run in behind needs quick attacks, the players having the choice of direct (but not long) passes, especially at a higher tempo should help.  With minimal TI you've left a lot of choice to the players, passing is mixed not more short or direct, they can choose to counter press or to counter when they think its a good idea without resorting to less lower chance opportunities.

As far as the IF-At + AF-At discussion thats going on, I have no issue if the AF drifts to the left, if the IF's run with the ball draws out a defender it could create space for the AF.  If the AF occupies the DCR that could put the AML 1v1 vs the DR.  If I was to change anything, probably the DL to FB-Su, he will still provide width in the final third but really, I don't think he needs to do much more than that to help the attack.  The extra depth could help create space for the AML.  I'd also consider the CM-Su and DLP-Su, i'm thinking rather than relying on the DLP to have to play longer through balls, don't have him as a playmaker and instead add Risky Passes Often to the CM-Su that way the ball shouldn't go as deep as often and the CM could feed the IF?

I can see how some systems might cause you more issues than others, but thats really not uncommon.  I think a lot of good tactics get ruined by constant tweaking when some changes should just be temporary against certain opponents/systems.

Edited by summatsupeer
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, neptune'sblue said:

Hello there. I don't have an answer to your question. However, I am using a similar lineup. I wonder if you use any player instructions

Only the one below. 

5 hours ago, CaptCanuck said:

 

For the IF-S adding get inside/get forward in possession. That will get your IF more into the match attacking the far post/getting into the box more - and should create an overload with your rightside W, WB, CM to feed the IF on the back post -  but will it improve results? IDK, that's part of the fun finding out.

So 7 games ago I added "Roam from position" to my IF and he has since scored 6 goals and provided 2 assists in those games. Now, I don't think this was one the only change that influenced this. I've put a lot of stock into PPM's this save and have really wanted to tailor players around this style.My CM(s) recently added the "Tries killer balls often" and my Mezzala(a) just added runs with balls through center around the same time so I think a combination of all these things have lead to my IF finally being unlocked. He was also just awarded player of the month for the league and scored the winner against a team 2 divisions higher. So it's all looking very good right now, will continue to monitor to see if there are other ways it can be improved but right now I really like the combination of the DLF(s) and IF(a). 

image.thumb.png.21d5067dce40e3916aae287af7a4ff87.pngimage.thumb.png.6a51b155b404c6523ec664660f84bebe.png

5 hours ago, summatsupeer said:

In your system your overloading the right flank with the MEZ/CM-At, W-Su and FB-At.  Yes it leaves it a bit open but holding DM who is typically behind the ball and less risky LB (not sure you need a WB-Su, maybe just a FB-Su) still give good cover.  The AML and ST will attack quickly with the CM/MEZ-At and W-Su also joining them, ideal for a switch of play from left to right.  If the ball is progressed down the right flank by the W-Su + FB-At it could also create a good switch (though DLP and/or CM) to the AML.

Yes this is definitely what I'm going for and if you'll indulge me here's a recent goal I scored that highlights the overload. It wasn't scored by my IF but I am not to concerned by that because the general pattern is what I wanted and he still took up great positions throughout the move. 

image.thumb.png.6edcbe8ce453f0999165c5aa802c3dc8.png

So we've just had a good move saved by the keeper who has launched it up field and we've swept up and given the ball to our right full back. Now I really like this as the start of the move because I can kind of already see the goal before it happens. I can see that my Mezzala Flanagan is already drifting like he does and I can already see the opposition defense being indecisive around how to deal with my DLF.

image.thumb.png.2cd44986cc7e90d7343201e3dc7fa5ba.png

When the winger is on the ball my Mezzala is already taking the attention away from Mansfield's left sided centre half. Leaving their Wingback isolated against my overload. There are three things that can happen here. My winger is going to have a go at his fullback due to his trait and commit him. He's either going to rinse him, flick it onto my DLP or find the fullback. Either way the wingback is now out of the game and I'm in behind. Due to his attacking mentality my Fullback is going to bomb beyond my winger. I've seen it happen a million times. But more importantly the entire opposition is shifting and being dragged across the pitch. Look how much space my left side is in already after two passes. 

image.thumb.png.e700988ddf81b25bbfb4685b4dd5322e.png

So my Winger commited his man, drew a challenge and quickly popped it back to our DLP. The ball he plays kind of took me by surprise a bit I have to admit at first but looking back I can see why he chose it. I thought the logical ball would have been to our Wingback to progress the ball further up the pitch. What he actually does is ping a perfect, first time through ball to our rampaging fullback who's now near the byline in acres of space.

image.thumb.png.f5c1f2a056082899a5cec85862fa1540.png

At this point he has so much time to pick out the perfect ball I'm already celebrating. In the end he picks out our DLF(s) who attacks the near post and it's 1-0. A very good goal against the team 2nd in the league. 

image.thumb.png.03b1412dcaa9f6574551e4ab23bd1610.png

Buzzing. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...