Why is this working?

[itsallaboutthierry]

A bit of a deviation from the usual help thread this...

I've struggled so far tactically this year and have read a lot about what's working and what isn't from the forum. In my most recent save though I've (finally) found some moderate success with my beloved Arsenal, but I can't really figure out why this tactic is working so well.

Here's the tactic:

And the team instructions:

And here's why I'm confused:

It's a 4-2-3-1 which seems to be causing problems generally so far. Not only that, but one of my central midfield 2 has an attack duty which leaves the DLP exposed... yet whoever I play there copes just fine with that. I've got both of my wingbacks on attack duties too so there shouldn't be a lot of cover on the flanks right? Especially on the side with the AP (A). You can probably tell I made this tactic with a bit of a gung ho approach, looking to score my way out of trouble, but it's been pretty solid defensively with the league's joint 2nd best defence on 18 goals conceded from 21 games. The best is a freak United side who have only conceded 9 in the same time.

You might say why am I posting about this if it's working. But I want to understand why this tactic is able to provide a stable defensive base when other things I've tried (flat 4-4-1-1, 2 DMs, all 4 defenders on defend duty, 1 FB(S) 1 FB(A), Stopper/Cover setup, defensive strategy, higher D-line, lower D-line, high pressing, stand off more...) haven't worked nearly as well. I haven't touched any set piece settings at all either.

[Auqakuh]

It works because:

Wingbacks are providing good support and attacking options when your IFs cut inside; your AF drops wide when he can't find space, dragging a marker at least partway with him, giving room for an IF (or Ramsey) to move into the space vacated; there's lots of movement between the lines, such as Ozil sitting in place and Ramsey pushing beyond him, while Arteta is free to slip deep to provide a source for recycling failed moves and protecting the back line to some extent. On fluid, mentalities are closer together, leading to more active defending despite all the attack/support settings throughout the team, so you have a nice, compact unit with plenty of movement and plenty of passing options both in transition and attack.

Defensively it's solid simply because, again, on fluid, the lines are closer together because mentalities are more similar throughout the team, and, perhaps more importantly, I suspect you keep possession pretty well. Can't score if you don't have the ball!

[imabearlol]

To really analyse how your tactic works, you need to ask a few questions. Where are the goals coming from? How are they being created? What sort of movement are you seeing which is succesful? You need to watch the match in full and rewind goals to see what happens, and also check the analysis tab to really know why. Without knowing this I'll try and apply some theory to your setup.

In a Fluid Philosophy, your team is split into two broad mentalities, attacking and defending. Any players in the MC line are set according to their role. This means:

1. Despite you setting up your WBs as attack duty their mentalities are closer to that of your DCs. They still get up the pitch due to their Forward Runs=Often, but they do not take the same risks they do in a Balanced system.

2. Your midfield mentalities are set according to their task, so your DLP will have a defensive mentality. You therefore have 5 defenders and 5 attackers in this setup. This is much like Mourinho's Chelsea played with Makelele - 4 defenders and a holding midfielder stay back and contribute little to the attack.

3. Your 3 AMs on support provide a nice passing triangle on the right side. I am guessing a good proportion of your passing is focused down this side.

---AF

AP---IF

--DLP

4. I see two main options for an attack down the right. Either the ball is knocked out to the WB wide who crosses in, or the ball gets to the AF and he likely has a runner from the left to thread a through ball to (either your AP(a) from CM or the IF/WB on the left flank). You may have even more success if you set the AP(a) to a CM(a) or a BBM, and the IF(s) to an IF(a).

5. Retain Possession and Short Passing are good shouts to take advantage of your triangles. However I'd be wary about setting them at the same time. Try setting Shorter Passing only, and Retain Possession only if you really feel you want to hold onto the ball (say if you are protecting a lead). Also remove Lower Tempo unless you specifically feel you need it during the game.

6. As mentioned before a Fluid strategy means your 5 attackers don't contribute as much to defence. However you have your AM line on support so they probably close down a fair amount.

Again, it's quite hard to say for certain unless we can watch your games in full. Why don't you do this and report back on why you think the tactic is doing well?

[Steve Odom]

The fact your attack is wel organised and the pressure it puts on the opposition defencemakes the opposition crumble. If you keep this tactic post patch you will pronably be punished by organised teams on the wings imo.

[itsallaboutthierry]

Thank you for the exceptional feedback - you've really helped me to understand what's going on. The attacking side of the tactic I was happy with in terms of what was going on and you're pretty much spot on with the way moves develop. The key to the goals we score in attack, and the reason I think the lower tempo shout works so well, is that the attacks that build down the flanks often come back out to the DLP(d) who switches play very quickly to the opposite flank creating spaces in the back line as they reshuffle.

I think I hadn't quite realised the impact of the fluid philosophy on the team's defensive approach. We do tend to pin teams back with the pressure from the AM strata, and I often use the 'hassle opponents' shouts at home or when I'm chasing a game which really accentuates this.

When you say 'the lines are closer together', are you suggesting that the fluid philosophy affects the D-line or are you talking about the mentalities on the old slider system?

I'm tempted to try the AP(a) in central midfield as a CM(a) - are there any specific instructions you'd recommend to get a better goals/assists return? Ramsey currently has an 88% pass completion rate from there but only 1 goal and 2 assists and I'd like him (or Wilshere) to be a bit more potent from such an advanced position.

Thanks again for the great feedback on limited info!

[imabearlol]

Fluid Philosophy itself wouldn't change the D-line, only the mentalities. I know sliders have been removed but I believe the engine still works in a similar way under the hood, and it does help to understand what is happening by still thinking in old terms to a certain extent.

If you use Wilshere as a CM(a), I would maybe set Shoot Less so he is more likely to get in a good position before shooting, possibly laying it off to someone else in a better position. I'd also set Mark Tighter to cut down options for the opponents on the ball. This is especially effective as your AM line is pressing the ball holder and you want to cut down the options they can pass to. In real life, you can set players to close down passing lanes but I don't believe this is possible in FM, so tightly marking the opposition CMs is the next best thing. Also, I would say Wilshere is probably better for this role due to his Gets Forward PPM.

[Steve Odom]

Itsallaboutthierry

About fluidity, NakS made an an overview, he posted it in this thread. It is in French but common sense should easily translate the terms.

[itsallaboutthierry]

I tried toying with the marking settings imabearlol to help the high press but it ended up costing me in goals. I think it just ended up pulling players out of position and opening up gaps that weren't there before. I've changed the AP(a) in central midfield to a BBM and whilst positionally I'm getting more of what I wanted with the player getting into the box, he feels less involved in the play than the AP(a). Wilshere in that role ended up with 3 goals and 3 assists in 21 appearances and I'd like for that player to be getting closer to double figures for both so it still needs tweaking there.

Thanks for the link Steve Odom. I appreciate that we're only assuming that sliders for mentality still exist 'under the hood' of the ME, but maybe we should take advantage of the fact that we're free to make a new analogy since they've been removed. It's fine having sensible rules linking specialised roles to philosophy, but if you have to explain the effect of changing philosophy in terms of slider settings that can't be seen anymore to explain why a more fluid philosophy leads to a tighter defence, then I think the explanation is flawed on some level. It might just be semantics, but I'd expect a very rigid system to be tighter in defence than a fluid one which isn't the case.

[Steve Odom]

I tried toying with the marking settings imabearlol to help the high press but it ended up costing me in goals. I think it just ended up pulling players out of position and opening up gaps that weren't there before. I've changed the AP(a) in central midfield to a BBM and whilst positionally I'm getting more of what I wanted with the player getting into the box, he feels less involved in the play than the AP(a). Wilshere in that role ended up with 3 goals and 3 assists in 21 appearances and I'd like for that player to be getting closer to double figures for both so it still needs tweaking there.

Thanks for the link Steve Odom. I appreciate that we're only assuming that sliders for mentality still exist 'under the hood' of the ME, but maybe we should take advantage of the fact that we're free to make a new analogy since they've been removed. It's fine having sensible rules linking specialised roles to philosophy, but if you have to explain the effect of changing philosophy in terms of slider settings that can't be seen anymore to explain why a more fluid philosophy leads to a tighter defence, then I think the explanation is flawed on some level. It might just be semantics, but I'd expect a very rigid system to be tighter in defence than a fluid one which isn't the case.

I agree, but you should be able to judge the effect of some of your decisions in fluidity. You can read the graph any way you want (+3 meens more attacking, +6 means a lot more attacking,...) There 's no point in using exact slider settings, these are just examples of how players relate to others on the pitch.

By the way, a very fluid could be more defensive, but that's not necessarily so in every setup you create.

[itsallaboutthierry]

If you keep this tactic post patch you will pronably be punished by organised teams on the wings imo.

Since the update I've tended to concede goals through the middle, normally where both my centre backs decide to both close down the lone striker leaving their number 10 unattended beween the full backs with a clear path to goal. I've switched to stopper/cover to try and address this.

It has become a pretty toothless tactic though. It creates chances - and good ones from watching the highlights - but we're just not taking taking them. I've made a few tweaks to try and make it a bit more clinical - told the wing backs to cross more often, changed the inside forwards to attack duties and told the AP(s) to dribble more but we just don't take the chances we did pre-patch and the AF gets poor ratings in most games to boot.

[RTHerringbone]

Since the update I've tended to concede goals through the middle, normally where both my centre backs decide to both close down the lone striker leaving their number 10 unattended beween the full backs with a clear path to goal. I've switched to stopper/cover to try and address this.

This issue has been flagged by a few people, and I'm keen to understand why some people see it and others don't.

Since your original tactic has changed a bit, can you confirm what your latest set up is please?

Especially interested in Team and Player Instructions, as I'm pretty sure it is combinations of these which are creating defensive issues.

[itsallaboutthierry]

Sure RT - before I changed to stopper/cover I played a 4-2-3-1 like in the OP:

---------------GK-------------

WB(a)---CB(d)---CB(d)---WB(a)

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

--------DLP(d)---AP(a)--------

IF(s)---------AP(s)----------IF(s)

-------------AF(a)--------------

Team Instructions of:

-Hassle Opponents

-Retain Possession

-Shorter Passing

-Work Ball into Box

-Play Out of Defence

-Lower Tempo

Fluid & Control philosophy & strategy

The only additional player instruction when this was happening was that the AP(a) in the CM slot had the shoot more instruction.

[RTHerringbone]

I posted this in a thread where the poster was seeing similar issues:

I literally have no idea why you are seeing this strange stuff as I've not seen it once.

There are a few things which would influence this sort of behaviour, and if you have none applied, then it sounds like a bug.

The things that might contribute to this are:

1. Team Instruction of Hassle Opponents

2. Player Instruction of Close Down More

3. Player Instruction of Specific Man Marking - with DCs this is just a strictly off limits option!

4. Some weird combination of opposition instructions

5. Possible PPM, although this isn't really likely

Try removing Hassle Opponents and see what happens.

[itsallaboutthierry]

Stopper/Cover seems to have stopped it. I'd still want the team to press though so wouldn't want to remove hassle opponents. Maybe just set the CBs to close down less could help?

[RTHerringbone]

Stopper/Cover seems to have stopped it. I'd still want the team to press though so wouldn't want to remove hassle opponents. Maybe just set the CBs to close down less could help?

I would just experiment and see what happens. You don't want them to become so apathetic that they don't engage the man until it's too late.

Interestingly, some people reckoned that using a Stopper caused the issue!

With regard to Hassle Opponents and Pressing, to an extent a Higher Defensive Line will by default make you Press more than a deeper line, because your marking zones creep up field with your defensive line.

Hassle Opponents encourages players to Close Down More, which includes leaving their position to press.

So it could be argued that you hold shape better with a less aggressive Press that a higher line gives, but that this also risks you being more susceptible to a pass round the back.

[Auqakuh]

When you say 'the lines are closer together', are you suggesting that the fluid philosophy affects the D-line or are you talking about the mentalities on the old slider system?

The lines are closer together because of mentalities, yes, specifically that more players in the team on fluid have mentalities similar to one another. In old terms, the slider settings for defenders would be closer to that of the midfielders, meaning that there's more "blurring" of positioning between the lines. So support players will push up/drop back further, but in order to accomodate that, generally defenders will push higher up the pitch (because of mentality), partly in order to support the midfield in possession. They do have to then drop back further in transition, because the D-line setting is not actually changed, as someone else I think already said.

[itsallaboutthierry]

Swings and roundabouts as always- have to find the balance

[Auqakuh]

Hassle Opponents encourages players to Close Down More, which includes leaving their position to press.

So it could be argued that you hold shape better with a less aggressive Press that a higher line gives, but that this also risks you being more susceptible to a pass round the back.

This sort of depends - if you ensure that the active playing area is as small as possible, which is counter-intuitive to breaking down opponents' defensively, you can press AND maintain shape, more or less. In my system, also fluid in philosophy, but a wide 4-3-2-1, we actually play narrow and exceptionally high to contract playing space so long as we have the ball. With supporting wingbacks set to play wider when they get forward, though, it means that we have lots of players compressed into a small space and wide runners supporting them, so that teams still get stretched laterally even though they're compressed vertically.

Defensively, though, any attempt to play out through the middle results in them being penned into the centre-circle with no passing options, or caught in possession in front of their own defence with no recourse but to whack one upfield. Players rare finish pressing because just moving in the right direction with the right weaker foot setting on each player ensures that they can't do anything but pass, and then in a direction that only tightens the noose (most of the time).

Result is that we concede about once every 8 games and have possession well over 60% after the most recent patch... but I do also have a big squad and stamina is required for such high-end pressing, especially since we run a total of about 2 miles more per match than any other team.

Doesn't work so well against certain Italian teams and a certain Portuguese manager, mind...