Playing the Juve Way - a Journey into 3-5-2

[Mike J]

OK, so the title's a little misleading (I'll get to why in a minute) but the point of this thread is to document, and hopefully get some help in refining, my attempt to create a 3-5-2 similar to that used by Juve and several other sides in the last few years.

I've never tried using wingbacks before and it's been a long time since I had 3 at the back but a new version of the game seemed like a good time to try to get something working.

Key Features

Let's start by defining what I want to do. The basic formation is below. Ignore the set-up of the 3 DCs for now as there's another mini-experiment going on there. I want my wingbacks to provide the width, the DMC to be the deep-lying playmaker (the Pirlo role) with two MCs and 2 up front. The basic set-up I've gone for tries to emulate that.

The formation is set to play quite wide, with a normalish tempo and I've set it to counter attack too. I start with a Balanced style and a Standard strategy.

Now a brief overview before getting into some specifics.

The Defence

This is why the title is a little misleading. I know the ME has had problems with 3 DCs in the past, though my use of wingbacks should help with that, I hope. The main feature here is I wanted one of my DCs to step out of defence and provide an extra man in midfield so the central of the 3 defenders is a Ball-Playing Defender. His mentality is set very high and he's a Stopper so he should step out a bit and be quite pro-active with or without the ball. The other 2 are Covering with the wingbacks given Support roles. In attack this functions quite a bit like a narrow 4-4-2 with 2 defenders covering and one stepping out and the wingbacks bombing on.

The Midfield

To fully emulate Juventus I need the deepest player to be the playmaker, so he's a DM with the DLP role. I set him to Support because I don't want the BPD stepping into his space and making things too congested.

The other 2 MCs are a bit of a problem. One issue I've had is getting my players into space and stopping them falling over one another. So the AP here isn't quite right, I think, but he does take up roughly the right position, especially in attacking moves so it's OK for now. The BWM is required, I think, to provide me with a bit of bite in the middle since I already have 2 playmakers.

Strikers

Not much to say here really. A DLF on Support to help link midfield and attack and a Poacher. Ideally I'd like a Complete Forward or Advanced Forward instead but my team doesn't really have a good candidate for that role so Poacher it is.

So far I've played 14 league games with Boro and I'm top of the table, so not too many complaints there. The defence is particularly solid, conceding only 6 goals so far but the attack isn't too spectacular yet. One problem I have had is that when defending the formation seems to collapse back into the box with all but the strikers defending the 18-yard line, which leads to a lot of second balls landing at the feet of opposition midfielders but does make it very hard for teams to play through me. Although I'm doing quite well I don't feel as though I'm controlling games as I should be.

Does anyone have any advice on setting up the midfield to link with the attack a bit more effectively? Ideally I want to keep the DMC as a DLP but other than that I'm open to suggestions. Also, does anyone have any experience with setting the defenders up in a 3-man defence, especially bearing in mind my slightly weird choice to play a BPD in the middle of the three. So far I've been pretty impressed with how the BPD has been working, acting as an additional DM when in possession.

[Hagi_07]

If you're doing ok so far then I wouldn't suggest making major changes.

On the face of it, its a very defensive formation which is probably why you're defence has conceded so little and you're attacking is a bit laboured. If you want to be a bit more attacking why not just change you're standard strategy to control. Play a little bit wider, a little bit higher up, a bit more agreesive in closing down. This might help with the defence collapsing into the box.

What about having one of the wingbacks on attack? Maybe both but possibly just the right wing back?

[youngrookie]

im playing very much like you, in formation, style and strategy. i do move around the players slightly from game to game as i feel i haven't quite got it 100% to my liking. The defensive side is very good (14 conceded in 36 games, 0.4) but like you im having problems with the attacking side (52 scored in 36, 1.4). Im not sure if this is due to the quality of players i have (im AC Milan and i don't think the squad is at all good and apart from a small handful of free transfers all in their 30's the squad is not changed.

I have thou used a sweeper all of the time as i feel this helps with being caught out with a long ball. Lately im using an adv playmaker support behind one poacher. Im going to try what Hagi_07 said to see if this helps.

The only goals i seem to conceded is through corners and penalties, which frustratingly are alot (maybe a bug i dont know). Will post what i think after a few games.

[Draigh]

If you want to link midfield and attack I'd suggest using either one forward as AMC (pretty much the way Juve and Udinese have been playing, it's much more 3-5-1-1 than 3-5-2), or using CM-attack instead of APM-attack. The APM will mostly be looking to create instead of really getting forward, a CM-a has forward runs set to often and will do much more in getting forward to combine with the strikers, find space on the edge of the box and generally act as a third striker. Personally I'm a huge fan of the CM-a role, when you give him a solid platform to work from (which I think you have, defensively) then he has the freedom to be dangerous all over the pitch.

[Hagi_07]

If you want to link midfield and attack I'd suggest using either one forward as AMC (pretty much the way Juve and Udinese have been playing, it's much more 3-5-1-1 than 3-5-2), or using CM-attack instead of APM-attack. The APM will mostly be looking to create instead of really getting forward, a CM-a has forward runs set to often and will do much more in getting forward to combine with the strikers, find space on the edge of the box and generally act as a third striker. Personally I'm a huge fan of the CM-a role, when you give him a solid platform to work from (which I think you have, defensively) then he has the freedom to be dangerous all over the pitch.

I agree about withdrawing one of the strikers. Vucinic or Giovinco both tend to start deep and join the main striker. Also, I see Vidal (or your CM right) as more of a box to box kinda guy.

[youngrookie]

my central mid two are mcl as bwm (s) and b2b and they seem to work fine. I then have dmc as dlp (s) to try and link the defense to the attacking phase. The main 3 players for this position are

montolivio (dmc pos, dlp sup role), Dejong (mcl pos, bwm sup) and nocerino (mcr pos, bsb). The DLP is also set as main playmaker for team.

[Telemachos]

I ran a 3-5-2 that was:

-----------P---TM:S---------------

------------------------------------

DW--BW:S--APM:A--BW:d--DW

-----------------------------------

--------CD:S--CD:x--CD:S------

I would think your APM would need to be more support than attack since it sounds as if you want your DLP to be your playmaker. I would even consider making your APM possibly BxB or just a CM:S. You could try running both midfielders are BxB even. I did try running my BWM as BxB but since it was Welling United- it wasn't something I was able to run fully successful.

[Mike J]

The midfield pairing is definitely an area that needs work, I agree. Given the defenisve solidity of the system I'm wondering if going without a BWM might be useful. Maybe go for a partnership of CMs, one on Defend, the other on Attack?

As far as withdrawing a striker to become an AMC, I know Juve and other similar sides alternated between 2 strikers and a split of AMC/ST but at the moment the DLF is actually providing a very good goal threat, probably thanks to the movement of his strike partner and my experiments in moving hm back to an AMC have generally not been too succesful. I think it's something to look at once the wuality of the players improves and I have a more rounded striker who can play more effectively up front on his own.

One interesting aspect of the formation is that by setting the wingbacks as very attacking and with the willingness of the BPD to step up into midfield I can create a very attacking formation without having to change too much, effectively having 4 up front at most times. Obviously it's only useful when chasing a late goal because of how vulnerable it is down the flanks but it avoids having to change the formation round completely.

I'm going to mess around with the midfield pair for a few games and see where I can improve.

[sirgiorgio]

Here are my (unrequested) thoughts about real-life Juve.

A bit of history first: how did Conte, a self-proclaimed follower of the "4-2-4 orthodoxy", came up with that formation? When his DoF bought Vidal, in August 2011, he said "the only way he can play with Marchisio and Pirlo is when we'll play in 12". But soon he realised he didn't have "just" three midfielder, but THE mezz'ala (attacking CM), THE DLP, THE BBM. The perfect combination for a three-man midfield.

So he started using the 4-3-3. But then another "problem" arose: Bonucci. He came from a disastrous season, but he impressed Conte with his work ethic and performances. However, the manager already had two pretty good central defenders, Chiellini and Barzagli. And so he converted his formation in a 3-5-2. It wasn't easy, especially considered that Juventus had no less than five wingers: Elia and Krasic found themselves out of the team, Estigarribia and Pepe recycled themselves as WBs, Giaccherini "became" a MC.

While 3-5-2 (or should I call it, 5-3-2?) is generally a defensive, speculative formation, what Conte looked for was offensive football, ball possession and teamwork: every outfield player (Chiellini and Barzagli sometimes excluded) should be ready to attack and every player (attackers included) should be ready to defend. That doesn't mean that they can't be speculative and defensive, when they want to...

After watching so many Juventus matches (and also Napoli, Inter, Udinese, Fiorentina, etc. they use similar formations, although for different reasons) I think the best representation of the "Conte way" is the following:

GK D

Lib. A

DC X

DC X

WB A

WB A

MC A

DLP S

BBM S

DLF S

AF (or P) A

[higgins]

Here are my (unrequested) thoughts about real-life Juve.

A bit of history first: how did Conte, a self-proclaimed follower of the "4-2-4 orthodoxy", came up with that formation? When his DoF bought Vidal, in August 2011, he said "the only way he can play with Marchisio and Pirlo is when we'll play in 12". But soon he realised he didn't have "just" three midfielder, but THE mezz'ala (attacking CM), THE DLP, THE BBM. The perfect combination for a three-man midfield.

So he started using the 4-3-3. But then another "problem" arose: Bonucci. He came from a disastrous season, but he impressed Conte with his work ethic and performances. However, the manager already had two pretty good central defenders, Chiellini and Barzagli. And so he converted his formation in a 3-5-2. It wasn't easy, especially considered that Juventus had no less than five wingers: Elia and Krasic found themselves out of the team, Estigarribia and Pepe recycled themselves as WBs, Giaccherini "became" a MC.

While 3-5-2 (or should I call it, 5-3-2?) is generally a defensive, speculative formation, what Conte looked for was offensive football, ball possession and teamwork: every outfield player (Chiellini and Barzagli sometimes excluded) should be ready to attack and every player (attackers included) should be ready to defend. That doesn't mean that they can't be speculative and defensive, when they want to...

After watching so many Juventus matches (and also Napoli, Inter, Udinese, Fiorentina, etc. they use similar formations, although for different reasons) I think the best representation of the "Conte way" is the following:

GK D

Lib. A

DC X

DC X

WB A

WB A

MC A

DLP S

BBM S

DLF S

AF (or P) A

I agree with you about Juventus tactical development , but I consider Bonucci more as a ball playing defender (he often starts Juve offensive moves when Pirlo is marked) than a classic libero.

[sirgiorgio]

I agree with you about Juventus tactical development , but I consider Bonucci more as a ball playing defender (he often starts Juve offensive moves when Pirlo is marked) than a classic libero.

A classic libero is exactly that: the one who starts offensive moves when the playmaker is marked. A number of technically gifted players (I remember Lothar Matthäus) recycled themselves as "libero" when they started losing pace and stamina.

I'm looking forward to playing the final release because I was really impressed with the way the libero-attack worked in the beta.

But yeah, a ball playing defender might do the job as well.

[alsocan]

i read ur starting post.. and also this article http://fmtacticalnewspaper.fmcrowd.com/understanding-football-formations-the-5-3-2/ plus articles abt the Italy and Spain match at the first round of Euro 2012 where Italy played 3-5-2

created my own 3-5-2 tactic last nite as a counter attacking tactic against stronger sides or sides having a go at me even at home.. im using Everton 1st season...

the tweaks i used are dependant on how many strikers im facing and whether the opposition uses an AMC.

if facing 1 striker.. i use DCL and DCR on cover duty to the space in behind from breaking midfielders or wingers..

i use DCC on defend duty to get on to the lone striker

if facing 2 strikers, i use DCC on cover duty and DCL and DCR on defend duty.. quite straight forward

if facing AMC... i will put in a DMC and 2 MC infront of him. the role of DMC depends on if im playing counter or not.. if counter.. then he will be a DLP.. if not on counter.. than anchor man (will explain the rationale later)

if not facing AMC, then either 3 MC in a line (centre MC on DLP) if playing counter or 2 MCs and 1 AMC if not playing counter

i use wingback support with crossing from byline...

for the 2 strikers i pair a adv forward with run from deep reduced to mixed and free role ticked and 1 poacher

both strikers move into channels...

i faced Man city at home and they lined up with the dreaded 4-2-3-1 narrow... their squad was much better than mine...

fullbacks snra and clichy

DCs kompany lescott

MCs toure barry

amc silva nasri ganso

st aguero

Opp instructions

tight mark and close down always on both fullbacks and AMCL and AMCR

read on website tat if the opp. striker is inferior in the air, shld show the wingers or wide midfielders to their correct sides.

so AMCL show to left and AMCR to right.. reasoning is to show them the byline for them to cross to a player weak in the air

DL and DR show to weaker foot to prevent them from rampaging forward on their strong foot.. hopefully the cut infield and lay off a short pass

AMCc and ST show to weaker foot...

the match turned out almost as i hoped for... we strangled Man City's narrow formation and they just kept hitting out defensive wall of 5 defenders plus our DMC.

balls over the top to the 2 strikers resulted in a good chances.. just tat Joe hart was on form... it constantly became a 2 on 2 scenario on the counter.. kompany and lescott were able to race back to cover the angles and hart kept us out for the 1st half...

in the second half when their defence was tired and their attack frustrated.. we created 1 chance and we took it.. the poacher received the ball from the fullback in the penalty box, turned and shot past hart.. 1-0 to Everton...

the match ended 1-0... fantastic victory for the underdog home side...

wat i liked abt this formation is the numerical advantage at the back.. this to me.. allows me to have the flexibility of bombing forward to attack or to soak up pressure and break with numbers.. knowing i always have at least 1 spare man at the back..

and with 5 defenders.. i can arrange my midfield to counter or plug in the gaps of the opposition midfield.

and we have 2 strikers to test the opp. defence... which u can alter to suit... 1 striker can drop into midfield if ur a fav. or both can play on the shoulder of the defence if u play on the counter...

[Ivan787]

The Defence

This is why the title is a little misleading. I know the ME has had problems with 3 DCs in the past, though my use of wingbacks should help with that, I hope. The main feature here is I wanted one of my DCs to step out of defence and provide an extra man in midfield so the central of the 3 defenders is a Ball-Playing Defender. His mentality is set very high and he's a Stopper so he should step out a bit and be quite pro-active with or without the ball. The other 2 are Covering with the wingbacks given Support roles. In attack this functions quite a bit like a narrow 4-4-2 with 2 defenders covering and one stepping out and the wingbacks bombing on.

The Midfield

To fully emulate Juventus I need the deepest player to be the playmaker, so he's a DM with the DLP role. I set him to Support because I don't want the BPD stepping into his space and making things too congested.

The other 2 MCs are a bit of a problem. One issue I've had is getting my players into space and stopping them falling over one another. So the AP here isn't quite right, I think, but he does take up roughly the right position, especially in attacking moves so it's OK for now. The BWM is required, I think, to provide me with a bit of bite in the middle since I already have 2 playmakers.

Strikers

Not much to say here really. A DLF on Support to help link midfield and attack and a Poacher. Ideally I'd like a Complete Forward or Advanced Forward instead but my team doesn't really have a good candidate for that role so Poacher it is.

So far I've played 14 league games with Boro and I'm top of the table, so not too many complaints there. The defence is particularly solid, conceding only 6 goals so far but the attack isn't too spectacular yet. One problem I have had is that when defending the formation seems to collapse back into the box with all but the strikers defending the 18-yard line, which leads to a lot of second balls landing at the feet of opposition midfielders but does make it very hard for teams to play through me. Although I'm doing quite well I don't feel as though I'm controlling games as I should be.

Does anyone have any advice on setting up the midfield to link with the attack a bit more effectively? Ideally I want to keep the DMC as a DLP but other than that I'm open to suggestions. Also, does anyone have any experience with setting the defenders up in a 3-man defence, especially bearing in mind my slightly weird choice to play a BPD in the middle of the three. So far I've been pretty impressed with how the BPD has been working, acting as an additional DM when in possession.

Some suggestions about Conte's 3-5-2.

I think the defense layout is correct. Chiellini and Barzagli are obviously central defender with marking duty, and Bonucci is a BPD. This fact was very clear on last match against Inter when, in second half, a man-marked Pirlo leaves game construction to Bonucci, who had more space to run with ball.

Midfield and Attack is more complicated to emulate, and I think there are some features very difficult to achieve in ME.

Talking about 2 WB, this year there is a big difference from last year: Asamoah. Last season Lichsteiner and De Ceglie played in a quite similar manner, but this year Asamoah plays more as a left wing, who often have one counter one with ball. This is the most difficult aspect to emulate. Other midfielder are, in my opinion, a flat 3 CM, with Pirlo setted as DLP, Vidal as box to box, and Marchisio as central midfielder with support or attack duty. This is not enough to replicate Juve tactic, also is very importan PPM. Pirlo must have "come deep to get ball" so he can drop deep to form a diamond-like midfielder trio, Vidal must have "move forward whenever possible" and Marchisio "goes into opposite area".

Also attack is very difficult to emulate. Juve doesn't have any advanced forward or poacher (it's easily noted from poor scoring of its forward) but there is Giovinco playing as deep lying forward with attack duty, and Vucinic as complete forward.

It's very important to achieve correct forward movement to create space for Marchisio and Vidal who are the real goleador of Juventus.

[Smoothiebaloo]

I have actually just begun a game with Juventus now.

Problems

DCL (Chiellini) cannot step into the DL posision when ML (Asamoah) leaves this position going into attack.

Ballwinning/closing down!!!!! I have 3 DC why do I need DMC and 2 x MC playing 5 yards from the last-16. I need Vidal and Marchisio (also WBR (Lichtsteiner) and ML (Asamoah)) to pesk the opposition all over the place.

I am really really dissapointed in FM13. As I used 5 hours tweaking 6 different tactics (as I need 3 similar tactics when Pirlo is not playing). All the new features with different roles seemed very cool, but when I am watching the games (1 hours each game ) the players are not doing anything of the things I thought they would (meaning they are not doing the things my tweaking tells them).

As I am not winning any balls because all my players (except 2 attackers) backs down and backs down into my own last-16, I never seem to be able to play any offense. I'm so very dissapointed now.

It's a difference between knowing how a player is moving when you tell him to close down all over the pitch and what the 11100001001001001110010010100101011 is doing when you tell it to 10010010010100101000101010100101001111.

[midori]

I play with a near identical tactic. How about changing your poacher to an advanced forward. My impression is that a poacher will tend to think about one thing only, whereas an advanced forward will be more open to interchange with his strike partner. I think this is important especially if you have both wingbacks on support and you are playing counter attacking football because your strikers will often times find themselves up front with no support.

When I decided I wanted more goals I pushed my DLP into midfield and switched him to defend. This worked as far as I can tell but of course it is work in progress. My DC is covering except when we play teams with 1 upfront when he becomes a stopper to help out in midfield.

One last thing. I think to make this tactic work you need good wing backs. Set up right and they will constantly find themselves in advanced attacking positions, I would question whether Justin Hoyte and Del Horno are good enough in the final third to make this pay for you. Also if you can find someone who is good with both feet to play one of those roles your on to a winner. My LWB is constantly cutting inside and scoring on his right foot and he is given huge amounts of room because when we attack its basically 7 players going forward.

Although this looks like a defensive formation in my opinion it can be shaped into something ultra attacking.

[nampuk]

What kind of playing style do you guys think would work best with 3-5-2/5-3-2 formation? I'm also using this formation with Juve and I'm trying to recreate real life style, currently using 'Very Rigid' playing style, what is your oppinion?

[Smoothiebaloo]

IRL I think they are more fluid than rigid, although their work rate (which make it look rigid at times) excels all other italian clubs.

[nameless]

Just give up on that Juve style -> 3-5-2 is one of the most difficult formations to learn in real football. That's why most of the teams that use it are from Italy where the tactical education is above all technical, physical etc. abilities. This 3-5-2 is way too complicated to be successfully replicated in FM and to see the same things in the match engine as when you watch Juve on the TV. Unfortunately it's like Barcelona's style - after all these years you still cannot copy it in FM but that's the difference between games and real football.

[VladarI]

I tried to work on Juve 352, tested it for a while, looks very good, pretty dominant in Serie A. The way i play it:

gk defend

dcr,dcl central defender defend

dc central defender cover

wbl,wbr automatic

mcr,mcl box to box

mc deep lying play

stcl trequartista

stcr advanced forward

Defensive line is closer to deep, width close to narrow, tempo is slow, time wasting sometimes(just a lttle bit closer to often than).

Cover defender an play have defending menatality, and af is set to attackinh, other ones on normal from 11-13, deppending on their positions.

I use Giovinco on treq, he is outsanding in this set up, best assistent, and best goalscorer.

Of course, playmaker is Pirlo on dlp, and target is Gio, with supply to feet.

[PeeKay]

The problem with replicating Conte's 3-5-2 is that I don't believe Conte has one version of this tactic but many with slight variations depending on the opposition. This is probably why Juve have been on a 49 match unbeaten run; the opposing manager doesn't know what version he is playing.

From the matches I have seen, the only thing he keeps the same are the 3 midfielders with the DLP at DMC and the 2 ball winners (one more attacking than the other) and the 3 centre backs. However, the CB's roles depend on the opposing formation. This makes sense because 3 centre backs against a lone striker means 2 spare men in defence.

If I was going to simulate Conte's Juve then I would be creating multi tactics to counter specific threats.

Version 1 - the standard 3-5-2 with Pirlo in DMC and 2 strikers

Version 2 - a control 3-5-2 with Giovinco in AMC and a staggers def mentality (e.g. DCR=CB©, DC=CB(d)+man marking, DCL (BPD(s)) for teams that play 1 striker

Version 3 - attacking with 2 strikers and move the DMC to AMC or a flat midfield 3

[demonen]

Version 3 - attacking with 2 strikers and move the DMC to AMC or a flat midfield 3

I don't think I have ever seen Conte play a back three with a tridente up top.

[PeeKay]

I don't think I have ever seen Conte play a back three with a tridente up top.

Sorry, I got carried away with what I would do and thats not what the thread is about.

[Smoothiebaloo]

Just give up on that Juve style -> 3-5-2 is one of the most difficult formations to learn in real football. That's why most of the teams that use it are from Italy where the tactical education is above all technical, physical etc. abilities. This 3-5-2 is way too complicated to be successfully replicated in FM and to see the same things in the match engine as when you watch Juve on the TV. Unfortunately it's like Barcelona's style - after all these years you still cannot copy it in FM but that's the difference between games and real football.

Hear hear!!

[sirgiorgio]

The problem with replicating Conte's 3-5-2 is that I don't believe Conte has one version of this tactic but many with slight variations depending on the opposition. This is probably why Juve have been on a 49 match unbeaten run; the opposing manager doesn't know what version he is playing.

Some things are left unchanged no matter what:

1) Pirlo (or Pogba or Marrone) M C (NOT DM) Support + Bonucci (or Marrone) Libero (NOT BPD, at least not as this role is interpreted by FM) Attack = That's the whole point. This way, Conte has a "defensive playmaker" who starts the action and a mix of DLP/AP (which is pretty hard to emulate in the current FM engine) who's basically free to find himself the right position.

2) Marchisio M C L Attack (the mezz'ala) + Vidal M C R (box-to-box) which are, basically, two different ways to play the same role. Both players can do a bit of everything. Marchisio, "the little prince", is tactically impeccable, and does the right thing at the right moment: brains and feet. Vidal, "the warrior", is more anarchic and "generous": lungs and legs. But in no way they are "Italian ball winning midfielders" (Gattuso, for instance).

The things that change are:

1) player-dependent: Barzagli "always stays back", Chiellini and Lucio "runs with ball through the middle" (and when they do, their teammates aren't happy...) - Vucinic is a DLF, Giovinco is an ADF, Matri is a Poacher (or so he thinks), Quagliarella is a complete forward (good at anything, great at nothing), Bendtner, at the moment, is a question mark;

2) opponent-dependent: against weaker teams and/or when they need to score, the wing-backs (NOT WM) almost play on the same line of the strikers. Against Pescara, last week, Alessio (Conte's assistant) explicitly asked for a 3-3-4 when the team had the ball. But the starting formation is always a 5 ( 3 DC + 2 WB) - 3 - 2.

How does FM replicates this tactic? Pretty well, I'd say: the five defenders give you excellent cover, the two "playmakers" give you a fair amount of ball possession, the attacking mentality gives you a lot of chances to score. I'd go as far as saying that it's almost a "killer tactic", given the right men, of course. The only downside: Pirlo's PPMs (killer balls, through balls) are not as effective as they should.

Just for the record, I'd say it again: it's not a 3-5-2, it's a 5-3-2!!! The current default 3-5-2 doesn't work in FM because it doesn't exist irl (you can probaly use it as a hung-ho tactic, but not as a starting tactic).

[Mike J]

Thanks for all the responses here - a really interesting read so far.

A quick update first: I've abandoned the experiment, unfortunately. i think the ME still has some issues with a back 3 and while I could remedy that by going to a back 5, as has been suggested, it just didn't feel right. There still seems to be a problem with pushing the DM a bit further up the pitch as well, so he tends to drop too deep and get in the way of the defense. Finally, I think this is more of an "expert" formation that requires very specific players and is quite unforgiving if done wrong and frankly Boro don't have the required players and their financial and league situation means you have to give up your ideals to get some success.

I may come back to it in the future, once I have some success and therefore better players. The formation seems to require a high degree of tactical awareness wich is something the ME still struggles with IMO.

[tommonufc]

I'm currently having great success with a system influenced from Juve's 5--3--2 - although mine is set up more as a 3--5--2 or 3--4--1--2 - with the basic set up looking like below;

GK

CB --------- CB --------- CB

W(A)--------- CM --------- CM--------- CM --------- W(A)

TRQ --------- ST

The overall philosophy is attacking, in quite a quick paced passing from defence to attack. Although looking to improve the distribution of my back line in attack - how have people been fairing with the offensive side of playing with a back three?

I downloaded Juve's match away at Chelsea in the Champions League and had a look in greater detail of how the side was set up. What was clear that often Juve had an advantage in playing out from the back against Chelsea in a 3 vs. 1 situation with their center backs; and when high up the pitch either side, a center back would have the ability to move higher up the field to support and offer an extra passing option.

What I've gathered that when playing with the following set up I can play out from the back with great ease, and whilst I can get the full backs to stay back and defend as a three - they just don't defend the center higher up the pitch, leaving opposition runners from midfield to overload the single center back.

FB(D) ------- BPD ------ FB(D)

The below I've found to be a happy medium, with one defensive full back offering greater offensive options.

LIB(A)

FB(D) ---------------------- CB(D)

Any thoughts on this guys?

Also, how have been been fairing with the 'Pirlo' role - what sort of passing and levels of controls have people been able to get from their deep lying playmaker?

[Smoothiebaloo]

I'm currently having great success with a system influenced from Juve's 5--3--2 - ....

Are you playing Lichtsteiner?

As I see threadstarter is giving up because the 3-d isn't working. I have been thinking about setting up a 4 - 1 - 3 - 2 tactic.. With Chiellini DL with few offensive assignments. Asamoah on ML with a lot of assigments. And Lichtsteiner on DR with a lot of offensive assigmnets.

[tommonufc]

Not playing as Juve, so no, no Lichsteiner.

Playing as Newcastle, with this side;

Krul

Taylor -- Vidic -- Bocchetti

Gotze -- Cabaye -- Dzagoev -- Ayew

Ben Arfa

Munian -- Campbell

[mitjamvp]

i am trying to do the same, not with Juve but in some obscure league .

as i have seen till now it works best using AMC instead as he really helps the attack and makes it easier to make some fast counter-attacks.

I am playing like this:

I use high defensive line, sweeper keeper, 3 central defenders, 2 attacking wingbacks, 2 central midfielders (left one is deeplying playmaker, right one is ball-winning midfielder) and an attaking midfielder in front of them. I also try playing more narrow as usual, as it helps my wingbacks to get more involved into the game. It works quite well, the last match i played was against Metalist Kharkiv with my local side (slovenian second division ) and although we did concede 4 we also managed to score 2 and have 3 clear cut chances. (they just had 4, one of their goals was penalty, others were after after cross.

[Blavdes]

Used a 3-5-2 with Sevilla for 4years, made 2 european finals and won the league last season. I've used two CMs with an AM. fifth season though isn't going well, partly down to not having good tactic familiarity start of this season (stupid idea by si imo) so probably going to modify it slightly but keep 5 at the back as the full backs create so many goals.

[PeeKay]

Earlier in this thread I mentioned that conte used slight variations on the 3-5-2 depending on the situation so I have created a play book of 3 tactics that should cover most situations. The tactics are an attacking 3-4-1-2, control 3-5-1-1 and a counter 3-5-2. The roles for players vary between tactics depending what I'm trying to achieve. I have finished tweaking for a coupe of game months and I plan to publish a new (as this no longer has to do with juve) thread once I reach half a season with the results. The results look positive so far and it does seem possible to play a sucessful back 3 in FM.

All 3 tactics use the same players in each formation and does not depend on players too much so hopefully can be used in the low leagues as its strong against 4-4-2. The positives are that the tactics very rarely concedes to counters, rarely concedes in general and strong for set pieces. The negative is that even the possession tactic won't dominate against wide formation because the opposing full backs always being free (easy pass) but I have noticed that they have low shots on goals and mostly from range so it doesn't seem to be a problem.

Unfortunately, I'm in hospital at the moment and won't have access to my PC for a coupe of days so can't get any screennies

[Hagi_07]

Starting to implement a 3-5-2 with wingbacks in my new Parma save. My starting point is...

Balanced

Standard

More direct

More pressing

Zonal marking

Float crosses

GK (def)

CBl (CD def)

CB (CD cover)

CBr (CD def)

WBl (wingback support)

WBr (wingback attack)

MCl (MC attack)

MC (dlp defend)

MCr (BWM support)

STl (TM attack)

STr (DLF support)

Still pre-season but working ok for now. My strikers are slow, tall and lack pace but beasts in the air so hoping to get the wingbacks into space and float balls into the TM. I'll keep you posted.

[Hagi_07]

Started the season ok. Played 7 games, including against Inter, AC and Juve and was sitting pretty in 8th. Was only favourites to win one of those seven. Unfortunately FM crashes every time I try to go past October and so my Parma save is gubbed.

I did struggle to score goals though.