So, a 4-3-3 then (4-1-2-2-1)

[jcw163]

So, I am currently in the midst of getting an absolute schooling in an FM multiplayer game, playing as Sampdoria in Serie A and genuinely battling relegation with a team comfortably good enough to finish in the top 8 or so as a minimum. I've been playing with a 4-2-3-1 and have tried almost everything I can think of to get things working, unfortunately this has been an abject failure. As a result I've been sacked and so, on taking back over Sampa (house rules for MP games), I'm going to try and switch to a 4-3-3 over the next season and a half in an attempt to fix my terrible, terrible performance. Apologies in advance for the lack of screenshots here, I am away from the game at the moment so can't include any for obvious reasons.

Right, a 4-3-3 then. The squad as it stands is reasonable and fairly well balanced in terms of options so we should be able to draw this formation up however we choose, with one or two caveats that we will look at later. Initially I am expecting to go with a DM triangle in midfield, rather than a flat 3, and I intend to play the wide men as AMR and AML as opposed to MR and ML as a result of their specific attributes.

Defence

In defence we're going to go for a flat 4. The players available are reasonable, if not spectacular, with solid centre backs and wide defenders who are capable of getting up and down the flanks in support of attacks, as well as of defending solidly. Neither of our first choice centre backs stick out as definitively stoppers or coverers, so we're going to go with 2 normal DCs on Defend, who will be instructed to pass the ball shorter into midfield. We will do this with individual instructions rather than the Play out of Defence TI due to the latter's effect on everyone else's passing. In the wide areas I intend to go symmetrical with 2 WBs on support. This is my favoured role for wide defenders as they appear to get forward to support attacks, offering an option to recycle possession as well as providing crosses, without getting carried away and leaving the side too exposed.

Attack

Let's look at the attacking 3 second, mainly because I think I have much clearer ideas of how I want this to work than I do the midfield 3, which we'll look at last. In attack I have 3 players who are an obvious first choice. On the right I have an out-and-out winger, who possesses exceptional pace, acceleration, dribbling and crossing and therefore we're going to play him as a Winger on an attack duty, to look to take advantage of these attributes. On the left hand side I have a player who is more of a striker type, with good pace, movement, dribbling and finishing. As such I will use him as an Inside Forward on an attack duty, to encourage him to get into the box and hopefully get some goals from the winger's crosses, as well as supporting the centre forward.

As a result of using two attack duties in the wide areas, and since we are playing a lone central striker I want a support duty for this player. I am going to use a Complete Forward Support here, in order to link up with the midfield three, and potentially be an option to move the ball to the wide players before getting into the area, or to link up well with the IFa in order to create chances.

Midfield

In the middle of the park we obviously want a spread of duties. This is where I'm less certain as to what I want to do, particularly when it comes to whether or not a playmaker role should be used. Initially, I want to use a player in the DMC position to break up attacks and support the defence, before playing simple passes into midfield, or out to the wing backs. I intend to start with an Anchor Man here, although I may later look at Defensive Midfielder - Defend if this doesn't work. I must confess I am not entirely sure how these two roles differ, as their PIs seem to be very similar?

Ahead of the DM we will have 2 CMs. Firstly, on the right hand side, I want to use a CM on an attack duty in order that they be encourage to get forward into the box in support of the lone striker, often running beyond him, as well as offering another option for the winger's crosses. I expect I will have to give him the Shoot Less Often PI so as to stop him smashing the ball over the bar from 35 yards every 5 minutes. The third midfielder, the MCl, therefore requires a support duty in order to bring balance to the force, I mean midfield. Here's where I have a quandry, as we have the CMa I do not think we really need an Advanced Playmaker, however I am not sure whether it would be preferable to try and use a DLP as a controller type playmaker, or whether I will be better off using a CM support, to stop the team consistently looking for one individual in midfield, and instead encourage our attacks to build using a variety of approached. I would be interested to hear anyone's perspective on the same.

The Team

So provisionally the line up is as follows:-

GK - GKd - Distribute to Full Backs

DR - WBs

DC - DCd - Pass shorter

DC - DCd - Pass shorter

DL - WBs

DM - Anchor

MC - CMa - Shoot less often

MC - CMs\DLPs

AMR - Wa

AML - IFa

ST - CFs

Mentality:- Standard

Structure:- Flexible

Team Instructions:- Slightly higher line (one notch up from normal), Slightly wider (One notch up from balanced), Higher Tempo (one notch up from the default with standard mentality), Exploit both flanks

Thanks for reading, I would welcome and and all CONSTRUCTIVE comment regarding this and hopefully next season I can get a measure of revenge on my friends, who are currently loving my travails.

Cheers.

TL;DR - A 4-3-3, will it work? Is it garbage?

[RTHerringbone]

I like most things about it, except for the two Attack Duties at AML/R. They just won't defend well enough and if your 4-2-3-1 employed the same sort of approach on the flanks, then that could be a contributing factor to your woes so far. The logic regarding the Role / Duty selection there is fine, but you just need to see if it works at both ends of the pitch. If you aren't the type of person who worries about asymmetrical formations, then I'd suggest as a minimum dragging the Winger back to MR to increase his defensive contribution.

Exploit The Flanks also contains a defensive element of risk, as it will encourage more forward runs from the wing backs and more crosses. Given the wide midfield Duties, it's something to be mindful of and keep an eye on the number of crosses / the conversion rate of them. You might unintentionally be playing wasteful football unless the CF (S) is capable of winning lots of crosses.

[jcw163]

Thanks RT,

The two attack duties in the wide areas is my main concern aside from the playmaker\no playmaker question really. In light of your comment above, what would the practical difference be between picking the winger at MR but with an attack duty vs playing him at AMR with a support duty? I imagine I'd be better off playing him MR with attack, as his pace and dribbling would mean he was able to pick the ball up deeper and run at people, while still providing some defensive cover?

Also I didn't realise the exploit flanks instruction had that impact on the wide defenders, had always assumed it worked as a "pass focus" type instruction, so thanks for that, I'll keep an eye on the crosses etc. Without turning those instructions on is there a simple way to encourage the players to look for the wide men more often, or do I simply need to trust their judgment (their terrible, terrible judgment)?

[RTHerringbone]

A Winger on Support will tend to cross earlier than a Winger on Attack, that's the main difference. My instinct is that using him at MR will give you the best of the defensive and offensive worlds. He'll still bomb forward and be a great outlet, and the fact that he'll tend to start from a deeper position makes him more available for a pass when you start to build attacks. And, of course, he'll be better at tracking back than if used at AML/R.

As far as passing focus goes, you'll probably have to rely on that excellent judgement of your players Things like Play Wider / Narrow no longer affect passing focus, just width in attacking phases. One possible option is to actually set the Winger as a Wide Playmaker and modify that (if possible) to assume some Winger-type traits. The IF could then be changed to an AP (A) out wide and modified accordingly. Playmaker Roles automatically see more of the ball (where possible) - might be just what you're after.

[jcw163]

Things are going slightly better, we're up to the heady heights of 12th (nosebleed country), and have pulled 7 points clear of relegation, currently on a 6 game unbeaten streak in the league, broken only by a tonking by Juventus in the cups.

I listened to RTHerringbone above and shifted slightly, Explot flanks has been removed, as has play out of defence as sometimes we were struggling to pass our way out against strong midfields. In addition I moved the IF from attack to support, while leaving the winger at AMR on an attack duty, and this seems to be balancing up the front line nicely, although we remain less clinical than I'd like.

This means we're now playing a 4-1-2-2-1 with GK, WBs DC DC WBs, DMd, CMs CMa, Wa IFs, CFs on standard\flexible with TIs of slightly higher line and one notch higher tempo. I think there may be another TI currently in use but I can't remember which. This is working and things are mostly going ok, however in the unbeaten run of 6 games there are only 2 wins. I've played 3 times at home, winning twice and drawing with Roma (last minute equaliser for them, and a good result on balance) and drawing 3 times away which I'm not too unhappy with.

EDIT:- The other instructions in use are whipped crosses, as the CF is very mobile but not the greatest in the air and play offside as this seems to be stopping the opposition getting in behind as much, although I've also signed a fairly pacey centre half which definitely helps.

My problem now is really imposing ourselves on the opposition. We look able to score, and relatively solid at the back, however if we were able to take our chances and maintain possession better I think we'd be in a better position. For the games, both home and away, against nominally weaker opposition (who I'm often currently getting draws against), I was toying with adding Be more expressive in order to try and bring a little unpredictability to proceedings. Does this strike people as a decent idea? And how would you go about trying to impose your qualities on the opposition a little more, given the position we're starting in (see above as well as OP for details)?

Away from home I'm going to stick with the current approach for now, draws are not bad results, and we can look at countering away from home a bit better once the base system has been refined.

As ever all comments etc welcome, although in many ways this thread is really a way for me to keep tabs on exactly how my tactics are developing.

[jcw163]

Right, season 2, we recovered to 10th and kept our job (the second time round) and now Summer of 2016 is here and we're tweaking the tactics very slightly from the above.

This season I'm looking to run with three approaches for differing situations, and, broadly, trying to keep things fairly simple (KISS). The target for the board this season is mid-table, but I think that's a little unambitious and will be aiming for a top 8 finish with Europa League qualification. Italy has also gained a 4th Champions League place, so this will be our "stretch goal" so to speak.

The three approaches I intend to use are as follows:-

1) A 'controlling' tactic, based on maintaining possession high up the field, moving the ball relatively quickly with short passes and trying to create chances either through short passing into the striker, or working the ball wide and crossing

2) A counter-attack based system relying on the extraordinary pace of our front 3, with support from midfield, in the hopes of breaking against teams who will control possession against us, often to be used away from home

3) A more defensive system, featuring longer balls up to a lone front man who is capable of holding the ball up.

NB:- All 3 of these tactics will use the 4-3-3 shape with minor tweaks to that contained in post #5 above.

Control

The control tactic is as follows:-

Control\Fluid

SWGKd

WBs DCd DCd WBs

Ad

APa BBMs (with shoot less)

Wa IFs

DLFa

The team instructions are Play Offside, Higher Line and Shorter passing. I have found the offside trap instruction to be essential when playing a higher line, although am mindful of the fact we may still get caught on the break if teams get behind us

Counter

Counter\Fluid

This features almost the same roles as the control system, but with the Winger brought back to a support duty, and the APa replaced with a CMs as we do not want to funnel play through one man too much. In keeping with the KISS theory I have not added any TIs to this tactic

Defensive

Defensive\Fluid

Two tweaks from the counter tactic, the DLFa is now a TMs in order that we have someone up front who we can hit long balls to, who should be able to hold possession and relieve pressure to an extent. In addition in order to offset the fluid shape (chosen so as to remain relatively compact vertically) I have added the TI Be more disciplined

Hopefully this will be enough to help Sampdoria punch solidly above their weight this season, and without the added pressure of European football, maybe even push for those CL places.

Fingers crossed eh.

TL;DR:- Some new 4-3-3 variations, hopefully not rubbish

[Siven]

Thanks RT,

Also I didn't realise the exploit flanks instruction had that impact on the wide defenders, had always assumed it worked as a "pass focus" type instruction, so thanks for that, I'll keep an eye on the crosses etc. Without turning those instructions on is there a simple way to encourage the players to look for the wide men more often, or do I simply need to trust their judgment (their terrible, terrible judgment)?

I also thought that was the new focus passing shout, and am really dissapointed that they removed it altogether

Man, these simplified tactical instructions and kinda depressing.

[RTHerringbone]

You can still just use Playmaker Roles at AML/R or ML/R or Target Man Roles out at AML/R, which achieves passing focus without affecting other players. Most things have a solution.

[Siven]

You can still just use Playmaker Roles at AML/R or ML/R or Target Man Roles out at AML/R, which achieves passing focus without affecting other players. Most things have a solution.

Yeah, its more of a workaround i guess, though i dont like to play with targetmen or playmakers. While i used to use playmaker role in previous FM games, i always turned the playmaker option off in team instructions (FM13).

Anyway, i have a similar 4-1-2-3 formation which is doing well for my Liverpool team.

SK-s

WBs

CDd

CDd

WBs

DMd

BBMs

CMs

Ws

IFa

CFs

I like to keep instructions to a minimum and let the players decide whats best at that time (usually) so use: Fluid, Standard, Higher tempo, more closing down and short passing.

I start the game in Standard and then only change it if i need to be more offensive or defensive. My AMR/L roles do change depending on the player, and i may occasionally switch the CMs to attack for more forward runs.

[jcw163]

Game 1 of the season, home vs Roma who are much stronger than me, went with the control tactic and tbh it worked quite well. Were much better in the first half but didn't take chances. Roma started to take over in the second half, I switched to the counter, but on 75mins they scored from a cross and won 1-0.

We created chances though, the winger got in a couple of times, the IF at AML had a goal disallowed, the BBM went clear and put a Clear Cut Chance wide, and the ST should've had at least one, maybe two. Relatively positive signs for the control tactic at least.

A disappointing start but not a bad performance, my awful awful fixture list (Milan, Juve, Napoli, Fiorentina all in the next 5) suggests it could be a rocky start, will stick with these tactics and see what happens, but staring down the barrel of being 2 points from 8 games again. (How do you get 2 points from 8 games)

[isignedupfornorealreason]

I like most things about it, except for the two Attack Duties at AML/R. They just won't defend well enough and if your 4-2-3-1 employed the same sort of approach on the flanks, then that could be a contributing factor to your woes so far. The logic regarding the Role / Duty selection there is fine, but you just need to see if it works at both ends of the pitch. If you aren't the type of person who worries about asymmetrical formations, then I'd suggest as a minimum dragging the Winger back to MR to increase his defensive contribution.

Exploit The Flanks also contains a defensive element of risk, as it will encourage more forward runs from the wing backs and more crosses. Given the wide midfield Duties, it's something to be mindful of and keep an eye on the number of crosses / the conversion rate of them. You might unintentionally be playing wasteful football unless the CF (S) is capable of winning lots of crosses.

I assume it's still usually beneficial to pull everything back? So a 4-4-1-1 if you want a 'true' 4-2-3-1 etc in this years edition? Asking as I'm seeing a lot of mentions about the 4-2-3-1 again on other forums.

[Cleon]

I assume it's still usually beneficial to pull everything back? So a 4-4-1-1 if you want a 'true' 4-2-3-1 etc in this years edition? Asking as I'm seeing a lot of mentions about the 4-2-3-1 again on other forums.

A true 4-2-3-1 in FM terms would be 4 defenders, 2 DMC, MC, ML/MR, SC. That's if you wanted the correct shape in defence and attack.

[isignedupfornorealreason]

A true 4-2-3-1 in FM terms would be 4 defenders, 2 DMC, MC, ML/MR, SC. That's if you wanted the correct shape in defence and attack.

If I may bounce an idea off you;

So, would a modern day '4-4-2' in FM terms be:

2DM, ML/MR, AMC, FWD?

Although, I know there's a variety of ways to set it up, when I think of most 4-4-2's thesedays I think they'd have 2 holding central midfielders and a very withdrawn striker. A variation of the 4-2-3-1 in someways.

[Cleon]

If I may bounce an idea off you;

So, would a modern day '4-4-2' in FM terms be:

2DM, ML/MR, AMC, FWD?

Although, I know there's a variety of ways to set it up, when I think of most 4-4-2's thesedays I think they'd have 2 holding central midfielders and a very withdrawn striker. A variation of the 4-2-3-1 in someways.

Possibly yeah you could do it with two deep DMC's. You could just use a standard 4-4-1-1 as well as that's the best modern day 442 base to work from I'd say.

[baddragon62]

If I may bounce an idea off you;

So, would a modern day '4-4-2' in FM terms be:

2DM, ML/MR, AMC, FWD?

Although, I know there's a variety of ways to set it up, when I think of most 4-4-2's thesedays I think they'd have 2 holding central midfielders and a very withdrawn striker. A variation of the 4-2-3-1 in someways.

I have noticd that in this years version of FM if the DM strata is empty the MC strata seems to drop a little more deeper when on support/defend duty. Have you guys noticed this as well?

[isignedupfornorealreason]

I have noticd that in this years version of FM if the DM strata is empty the MC strata seems to drop a little more deeper when on support/defend duty. Have you guys noticed this as well?

DLP's always dropped into that area, especially on a 'defend' duty for me. But yes, I notice them dropping back more this year.

I'm wondering if having a DM still causes the backline to drop deeper automatically. I'm finding with the 4-2-3-1 set up like Cleon suggests that my backline sometimes goes so deep as to camp in their own box, even on Control.

[Cleon]

DLP's always dropped into that area, especially on a 'defend' duty for me. But yes, I notice them dropping back more this year.

I'm wondering if having a DM still causes the backline to drop deeper automatically. I'm finding with the 4-2-3-1 set up like Cleon suggests that my backline sometimes goes so deep as to camp in their own box, even on Control.

Yes DM players cause the d-line to naturally be deeper.

[isignedupfornorealreason]

Yes DM players cause the d-line to naturally be deeper.

Cool, I got that right! I'll push the line up and keep an eye on it, hopefully it won't expose us too much at the back.