[Discussion] Are Striker Roles Described Incorrectly?

[Jack722]

One thing about FM that's been annoying me for a while now is the description and attribute requirements of certain strikers. It's not a super deep issue, and it could be correct all along, but I think it might be negatively affecting AI decisions as well as AI and player scouting.

Deep Lying Forward VS False 9

I know that different people around the world use different terms for the same role, and that player roles in real life can be infinitely customized and difficult to put in a 'box', but I'm pretty sure the only real difference between a F9 and a DLF is the system around them. If a player is up front on his own and is dropping deep away from central defenders for most of the game, the average person would describe them as a False 9. Whereas if the same player was doing the exact same thing, but was playing up front with a striker partner, they'd be called a 'support striker' or 'deep lying forward'. Even FM describes it in this sort of way:

   

   

So, surely it shouldn't be possible to play a F9 with a strike partner? Similar to not being able to play wide centrebacks as part of a back two. And the same again for being allowed to play a DLF up front on his own. Maybe the roles should be merged with the name changing based on the surroundings?

As well as this, the DLF seems to have some attribute requirements and instructions that don't fully make sense to me. When I think of a deep lying forward in real life, like Rooney, Tevez, Greizmann.. They are normally the smaller, more technical of the two strikers. While maybe lacking the power and heading of a big target man, or the finishing and anticipation of a poacher, they can make use of their better playmaking abilities by picking the ball up in space between the midfield and defence where they can dribble, pass, or take a long shot. However, when you look at the required attributes of a DLF in game, they're a bit unexpected:

Most of the highlighted attributes look alright, but then you see that they seem to have little need for dribbling, while requiring strength.. You'd think that one of the reasons for playing a strike partnership with one of them dropping deep would be to let your deeper lying forward recieve the ball in more space away from the centrebacks, who should be pinned by your more advanced forward. How much strength is needed for that? I would think that dribbling is much more important in this situation, so your DLF can recieve the ball, then turn and run at the defence before trying to play the ball to the no.9.

 

Also if you look at who, in my opinion, is one of the most successfull deep lying forwards in recent years, Greizmann, his attributes don't quite match that of the game's description of a DLF. He has really poor strength but great dribbling. The AI even prefers to play him as more of a pure no.9 most likely because of this. While in real life, Greizmann couldn't really play so well as a 9 for Barca, before being sold for cheap and being replaced by De Jong and Braithwaite.

The role also has 'hold up ball' locked in, but if you're playing with an already more advanced strike partner, who are you holding the ball up for? You're already the deeper of the two players most likely. It sort of feels like that FM has created some strange mix between a target man and an actual deep lying forward. This brings me on to my next point..

Advanced Forward

Just as I was saying that the DLF feels a bit too close to a target man, I also think that the advanced forward seems a bit too far away from a pure target man.

As the player who is leading the line as well as laying off passes and creating chances for his teammates, this type of player should not only be someone who can run the channels and play on the shoulder, but also someone who can contribute to buildup play while being the furthest player forward. This means lots of involvement with their back to goal while being pressured by a centreback. Then as the focal point for attacking moves, you'd expect them to be at least some sort of danger in the box.. You don't need to be a big target man of course, but the bravery and ability to head the ball from a cross should be at least a desired (if not expected) attribute for this player. But when you look at the game's required attributes:

These attribute requirements to me look a bit too similar to an inside forward. I'm not too sure why dribbling is so important for this player, since, other than counter attacks, the only really time they'd be able to recieve the ball in enough space to dribble would be from a through ball when they're already behind the last defender. There is also no requirement for strength either, which I think is especially weird considering it's currently a requirement for a DLF. This player needs to try and contribute to play as the spearhead and focal point to the attack. They don't need to be bulldozing centrebacks over like Lukaku, but they need to not let themselves get bullied by at least two 6'+ opposition players who have their whole attention on your striker. I think lots of smaller strikers struggle as the lone forward for this reason, and tend to get moved out wide when they start playing senior football.

And Lastly, like I said previously, I'd like this player to be able to score with his head. If you're striker has 0 aerial ability, it becomes far too easy for a defensive team to just form a ridiculously narrow block and invite crosses in. I read an article a while ago about Mason Greenwood, and despite playing as a striker for most of his youth, and having the attributes required by FM to play AF really well, Ole would mostly play him out wide and told him to work on his heading before being allowed to be United's main no.9. As an inside forward, he could still use his excellent finishing and take more advantage of his dribbling and pace. Whereas if he was moved central, he would arguably make the attack quite one dimensional. CB's can get tighter to make it harder to dribble, and wingers can be forced outside and encouraged to cross, with the knowledge that Greenwood will have little threat in the air.

Anyway, I'm not set in my ways, and would be open to a discussion if you think I'm wrong, but I do think that a lot of these descriptions and attributes are misleading, and can damage AI decsisions. What do you think?

[Johnny Ace]

DLF v F9 - They're both very different roles, False 9 is exactly that,  a number 9 that drops much deeper (see Peps use of it at City) , collects the ball in deep positions & looks to drive forward with a hint of creativity with the Take More Risks instruction. Generally used in a 4-3-3 to allow the attacking wide players in behind the defense. As you can see this Greizmann, he has great PPMs for a F9, something I don't think the role & duty stars pick up on

You're right with the DLF/ TM comparisons, I see the DLF as a TM that drops off the back line, looks to hold off defender with his back to goal (that's why they need Strength)  so a Lukaku type player, they lay the ball off then get forward. I'll use a DLF instead of TM with a powerful striker if I don't want to be lumping balls forward to him. Generally forwards with the "plays with back to goal" are hinting at a the role they're suitable for . They don't have the Dribble More instruction so aren't expected to collect the ball & dribble forward like a F9. Greizmann gets tagged as 4 star for DLF-S (as well as other roles) because his attributes are so good for the requirements of the role. There are under the hood instructions for the F9 & TM too which make them very different from a DLF

You can use any sort of player in any sort of role, depending on their attributes & PPMs, they'll play the role differently to the next man 

AF - basically a more mobile Poacher, he's expected to Move into Channels so may find himself at times having to dribble, pass or cross the ball but his main focus is scoring, it doesn't mean he has to play with his back to goal because he doesn't hold the ball up & is more interested in scoring more than anything  

Any forward role can score with their head, a TM has heading required because crosses & long balls are played to his head & you can ask your GK to lump it to him because of his heading ability. You can play a player who's great with his head in any striker role you like, I don't think it needs to a role requirement. I always use a tall striker because I want him on the end of crosses, regardless of role 

I agree, plenty of roles need a description revamp to describe what they actually do in game but I don't see much wrong with the strikers tbh, maybe less emphasis on the AF for creativity 

[_mxrky]

I’ve actually found the dlf actaully drops deeper than a false nine in a two striker formation. The deep lying forward on support tends to stay deep whereas the false nine drops deep but still makes sure he gets into dangerous goalscoring positions.

in other words, in a single striker formation you could probably get your false 9 to score 30 goals on fm. You’d struggle for your dlf to score that 

[Tsuru]

Totally agree with the OP. I also think that they changed/adjusted the roles during the past versions but did not update the descriptions, so the result is a little bit weird.

For example, I played FM 17 for many years and you could easily use DLF-S/AF as an attacking pair on a traditional 4-4-2, it was the "basic combo". But nowadays I don´t like this combination.

Why not? I am almost sure that the DLF now has a moving PI (which I believe he didn´t have on previous versions) so he moves more than before, he is something now between a False 9 and a Target Man - and I prefer the old one. The AF is kind of irritating sometimes, he became kind of an "speedy Target Man" or "dribbling Poacher" - the team insists on hoofing him the ball for long runs even if we are not playing on the counter, even if they have better options around. And I truly believe that his description itself is much more suited to the Pressing Foward - Attack, which to me looks the "balanced goalscorer", helping in buildup and finishing, which I used to have with an AF on FM 17. Try and see, even the Poacher helps more on buildup than the AF!

I think all the descriptions need to improve a lot and the game would benefit from individual animations showing the player behaviour, the same way we have with tactical templates. Sometimes it is very, very difficult to understand if a role/duty is working properly, if opponents are countering it or both, and the descriptions do not help anyway.

 

Edited November 12, 2021 by Tsuru

[zyfon5]

The false 9 is an attacking midfielder playing nominally as a striker. He is a traditional no 10 nominated in the striker position hence in real life is always played with two wide forwards. Think of the 'wingers' that played alongside Messi or Firmino they are essentially strikers starting from a wider position. A deep lying forward on the other hand is what the English will describe as a second striker a player that will act as a link between the midfield and the frontline but will also rush forward to score goals. It is the more technical version of the target man. Regarding to why the deep lying forward need to hold the ball, I think we must not forget that the strike partner of the deep lying forward can also come from a deep attacking run from midfield aka the false 10 and not just a more advanced forward. Both of these roles might look similar at the surface but they have different functions in different systems. 

In summary, the deep lying forward is better if you want the pass to be made towards a deep attacking run from the midfield because the act of holding up the ball buys time for these deep attacking runs to happen. The false 9 is better if you are expecting to pass the ball to inside forwards or wide forwards making diagonal runs towards the goal since you are facing the play and will be in a better position to play these passes.

[zyfon5]

1 hour ago, Tsuru said:

Why not? I am almost sure that the DLF now has a moving PI (which I believe he didn´t have on previous versions) so he moves more than before, he is something now between a False 9 and a Target Man - and I prefer the old one. The AF is kind of irritating sometimes, he became kind of an "speedy Target Man" or "dribbling Poacher" - the team insists on hoofing him the ball for long runs even if we are not playing on the counter, even if they have better options around. And I truly believe that his description itself is much more suited to the Pressing Foward - Attack, which to me looks the "balanced goalscorer", helping in buildup and finishing, which I used to have with an AF on FM 17. Try and see, even the Poacher helps more on buildup than the AF!

 

I agree that the PF(a) actually fits the description in game for the AF much better than the AF itself. The PF(a) position is slightly deeper which means better availability for build up play compared with the AF which is positioned so high up that only a throughball behind the high defensive line can find him which at that point you are much better off playing a poacher. The main problem I see with the AF right now is the role moves wide too much which I believe is hardcoded into the role which means the AF is now playing like a winger that starts in the striker position and is completely useless when you play a patient build up play style.

[Tsuru]

1 minuto atrás, zyfon5 disse:

I agree that the PF(a) actually fits the description in game for the AF much better than the AF itself. The PF(a) position is slightly deeper which means better availability for build up play compared with the AF which is positioned so high up that only a throughball behind the high defensive line can find him which at that point you are much better off playing a poacher. The main problem I see with the AF right now is the role moves wide too much which I believe is hardcoded into the role which means the AF is now playing like a winger that starts in the striker position and is completely useless when you play a patient build up play style.

You see, sometimes I just want a simple striker - help on buildup, spread passes around, score goals. But all roles seem too specific sometimes, the behaviour looks to be too much hardcoded and it is very difficult to find a good and simple combination, specially when you play LLM. The PF is not exactly what I am looking for, but he works well on doing it.

Your description of the AF as a "winger that starts centrally" is very good, it is exactly like this. Even a Poacher helps the team much more on keeping possession and interacts much more with the midfield. And the AF was so good and effective before, I have no idea why they changed him like this.

[Jack722]

Here's the type of move that I instantly associate with a DLF. (Taken from here) warning:loud

 

 

Drops deep to recieve the ball in space, turns, and either shoots or dribbles or passes. Centrebacks can't really go to close him down because the CF is in between them. In this case he chooses to play the killer ball to his strike partner. It seems very much a more technical role. If you really wanted someone to act like a target man surely you'd just pick target man? I find the TM in game as well takes up fairly unique positions that you can't really replicate with a DLF.

 

Edited November 12, 2021 by Jack722

[(sic)]

2 hours ago, Tsuru said:

I think all the descriptions need to improve a lot and the game would benefit from individual animations showing the player behaviour, the same way we have with tactical templates.

That already exists in game.

 

I do agree with roles needing more up to date descriptions though. I'd even expand on the current animation showing how role plays, to actually include more animations for different duties (Defend, support, attack), PPMs and PIs.

[smeagoltonez]

Out of interest, which role would you say most closely resembles the one that Antonio plays for West Ham?

[zyfon5]

6 hours ago, Jack722 said:

Here's the type of move that I instantly associate with a DLF. (Taken from here) warning:loud

 

 

 

Drops deep to recieve the ball in space, turns, and either shoots or dribbles or passes. Centrebacks can't really go to close him down because the CF is in between them. In this case he chooses to play the killer ball to his strike partner. It seems very much a more technical role. If you really wanted someone to act like a target man surely you'd just pick target man? I find the TM in game as well takes up fairly unique positions that you can't really replicate with a DLF.

 

From what I can see that is pretty much a false 9. He is playing no different than a creative attacking midfielder. The deep lying forward is largely extinct in the modern game because creative midfielders are much physically fitter now and hence are able to perform the hybrid creator and scorer role that is associated with the deep lying forward. The deep lying forward existed in the past because English football evolved without a pure creative midfielder and hence there is a need for a striker to help link up the play while still providing a secondary goal threat. And herein lies the biggest difference between the false 9 and the deep lying forward. The false 9 is more of a pure creator role while the deep lying forward is a hybrid role.

Warning: below are my personal opinions of the game and should not be taken as fact

You can play a technically proficient target man and will look exactly the same as a deep lying forward in FM. Both roles still exist individually because of how the game codes the target man by increasing long balls towards the role. If you have a short but strong player that you want to hold up the ball you are screwed by playing him as a target man due the hidden mechanic of the role that it attracts aerial balls from the team.

[Johnny Ace]

20 hours ago, Tsuru said:

TThe AF is kind of irritating sometimes, he became kind of an "speedy Target Man" or "dribbling Poacher" - the team insists on hoofing him the ball for long runs even if we are not playing on the counter, even if they have better options around.

Is that true though? There's nothing under the hood to suggest that, maybe it's because he's the further option up the pitch (the spearhead) & players are seeing him as a good option to pass to?

15 hours ago, smeagoltonez said:

Out of interest, which role would you say most closely resembles the one that Antonio plays for West Ham?

A DLF(A) or CF(A), he seems to link up play, use his strength, create & score 

12 hours ago, zyfon5 said:

Warning: below are my personal opinions of the game and should not be taken as fact

You can play a technically proficient target man and will look exactly the same as a deep lying forward in FM. Both roles still exist individually because of how the game codes the target man by increasing long balls towards the role. If you have a short but strong player that you want to hold up the ball you are screwed by playing him as a target man due the hidden mechanic of the role that it attracts aerial balls from the team.

That's how I see it too. A 6 5' striker that's strong would be an obvious choice as a Target Forward, a 5 11' physically strong player, I'd be more inclined to use him as a DLF because of the in game mechanics. Style of play fits it too, a DLF is a great option for a shorter passing style because of his link up, where a TF is ideal for default or more direct styles

19 hours ago, Tsuru said:

You see, sometimes I just want a simple striker - help on buildup, spread passes around, score goals. But all roles seem too specific sometimes, the behaviour looks to be too much hardcoded and it is very difficult to find a good and simple combination, specially when you play LLM. The PF is not exactly what I am looking for, but he works well on doing it.

 I've requested a generic striker role for a few years now because of this, I think the problem with it would be the AI wouldn't know how to use it. I think a PF(S) would be a good generic type striker but has the Hold up ball hardcoded 

19 hours ago, zyfon5 said:

The false 9 is an attacking midfielder playing nominally as a striker. He is a traditional no 10 nominated in the striker position hence in real life is always played with two wide forwards. Think of the 'wingers' that played alongside Messi or Firmino they are essentially strikers starting from a wider position.

100% your number 9 doesn't have to be in the striker slot, they can be AMLRC. Like Salah for Liverpool is the 9, Bobby Firmino is the creative 10. In the AMC thread, the first post, I had a DLF(S) (the number 10) with an AMC(A) the 9. So in FM having roles like the F9, DLF, TM  etc let us have the creative 10 in the striker slot then the number 9 from deep (a SS(A), AM(A) etc) or wide (IF(A, RMD(A), WTF(A) etc) 

[AidanH96]

On 13/11/2021 at 12:34, Johnny Ace said:

I've requested a generic striker role for a few years now because of this, I think the problem with it would be the AI wouldn't know how to use it. I think a PF(S) would be a good generic type striker but has the Hold up ball hardcoded 

I’d love the PF(S) if you could tell him to take more risks. I feel like I’m limited to only using the DLF(S) if my player doesn’t have good dribbling & isn't good enough in the air to be a TF.

[yonko]

Interesting discussion. I wish someone from SI would chime in or maybe @Rashidi as the tactics moderator and someone with long deep knowledge of the roles coding into the ME. 

I do agree that the F9 role should be only available as a lone striker role. To me the idea of that role has always been someone who drops deep in the build up but then ends in the box to finish moves - aka Messi for Barca under Pep. Though it could also be replicated as SS-A in strikerless setup depending on how the ME has been coded in different FM editions. 

The difference with the DLF-S is or it should be that the F9 is more creative and mobile role with more attacking treat in the penalty box. 

My question is why do we even have DLF-A option and how is it different from other roles? Is this role really necessary or can it be replaced/renamed?

[Johnny Ace]

16 minutes ago, yonko said:

My question is why do we even have DLF-A option and how is it different from other roles? Is this role really necessary or can it be replaced/renamed?

Look at the hardcoded PI's for each role & check the mentalities, they're all different & require different attributes 

DLF- holds up the ball, links & creates on Attack has a more aggressive goal scoring mentality, not sure what else you could call it 

F9 - drops very deep (hidden PI), runs on the ball & creates. Should only be available with the use with a single striker 

PF - presses and defends more aggressively on all mentalities 

TF - similar to a DLF with less mobility & has the ball magnet effect

 

[yonko]

10 hours ago, Johnny Ace said:

Look at the hardcoded PI's for each role & check the mentalities, they're all different & require different attributes 

DLF- holds up the ball, links & creates on Attack has a more aggressive goal scoring mentality, not sure what else you could call it 

F9 - drops very deep (hidden PI), runs on the ball & creates. Should only be available with the use with a single striker 

PF - presses and defends more aggressively on all mentalities 

TF - similar to a DLF with less mobility & has the ball magnet effect

 

My point is that DLF on Attack duty is kind of contradictory. The name "deep lying" doesn't go well with attacking duty IMO. That is why it should be renamed and made into a generic forward role that others want. Call it "Center Forward" or "Basic Forward", something like that. 

[Cleon]

You all put far too much stock in the labelling rather than focusing on the settings the role comes with. That's the important thing not what its called. The name doesn't matter. No matter what you call a role someone will always claim it should be changed as it wont fit their idea of what the label should be. Ask any real life coach worth his salt and he'll tell you role names don't really exist like we make out anyway. 

The actual descriptions though have always been off and needed updating. I also agree that the F9 should only be allowed to be used in single formations. It's a change I called for quite some time ago.

[Johnny Ace]

4 hours ago, yonko said:

My point is that DLF on Attack duty is kind of contradictory. The name "deep lying" doesn't go well with attacking duty IMO. That is why it should be renamed and made into a generic forward role that others want. Call it "Center Forward" or "Basic Forward", something like that. 

It does attack though, just because it drops off the backline during phases of play it stands out from other attack duty roles. A CF(A) or Treq(A) will also drop off but has different PIs from the DLF(A) & require more from a player. A DLF(S) you might use with two upfront to help link with a more offensive partner, a DLF(A) you might use as a lone striker to score & link with wide &/or deep  

I'd like a generic role in addition to what we already have 

[Tsuru]

Em 13/11/2021 em 12:34, Johnny Ace disse:

Is that true though? There's nothing under the hood to suggest that, maybe it's because he's the further option up the pitch (the spearhead) & players are seeing him as a good option to pass to?

You see, I don´t want the team to lump the ball foward to the AF, we are not playing direct or on the counter. But anytime I use the role it happens, even with different players. It is a behaviour that looks much more suited to a Poacher but it happens with an AF even on Balanced mentality (maybe I would expect it to happen on Positive, ok). Why? I have no idea, as you said there is nothing under the hood to suggest that but it keeps happening. 

3 horas atrás, Johnny Ace disse:

It does attack though, just because it drops off the backline during phases of play it stands out from other attack duty roles. A CF(A) or Treq(A) will also drop off but has different PIs from the DLF(A) & require more from a player. A DLF(S) you might use with two upfront to help link with a more offensive partner, a DLF(A) you might use as a lone striker to score & link with wide &/or deep  

I'd like a generic role in addition to what we already have 

I was thinking about this the other day. Would you use for example a DLF-A as the main goalscorer on an attacking pair (with a supportive partner on support besides him) in a narrow possession system? This specific situation looks to be ones in which neither roles are exactly what I need for a goalscorer. DLF-A looks too much focused on linking play, the Pressing Foward looks to be a little direct oriented and the Complete Foward is very demanding. In these situations the generic role would help a lot.

[Johnny Ace]

24 minutes ago, Tsuru said:

You see, I don´t want the team to lump the ball foward to the AF, we are not playing direct or on the counter. But anytime I use the role it happens, even with different players. It is a behaviour that looks much more suited to a Poacher but it happens with an AF even on Balanced mentality (maybe I would expect it to happen on Positive, ok). Why? I have no idea, as you said there is nothing under the hood to suggest that but it keeps happening. 

Interesting that part to be honest, have never really noticed it specifically but will look out for it 

24 minutes ago, Tsuru said:

I was thinking about this the other day. Would you use for example a DLF-A as the main goalscorer on an attacking pair (with a supportive partner on support besides him) in a narrow possession system? 

Personally, I wouldn't in say a 4-4-2 diamond if you have a DLF(A) with a PF(S) because at certain points there's no other player to get in behind the defence to take advantage of those two dropping off the backline. In a 4-3-3 DM having a DLF(A) & say an IF(A), when the DLF drops deeps the IF should be making a run ahead of him. Not to say it doesn't work, just in general   

24 minutes ago, Tsuru said:

This specific situation looks to be ones in which neither roles are exactly what I need for a goalscorer. DLF-A looks too much focused on linking play, the Pressing Foward looks to be a little direct oriented and the Complete Foward is very demanding. In these situations the generic role would help a lot.

Other spearhead roles? AF(A) or P(A). You could probably list out the out & out goalscorer roles , runners, creators & combinations or all three then adding PPMs & attributes on top can add twists to the role. Like an Advanced Forward that comes deep to collect the ball will play differently to a player without the PPM, the same with all roles   

[yonko]

6 hours ago, Johnny Ace said:

It does attack though, just because it drops off the backline during phases of play it stands out from other attack duty roles. A CF(A) or Treq(A) will also drop off but has different PIs from the DLF(A) & require more from a player. A DLF(S) you might use with two upfront to help link with a more offensive partner, a DLF(A) you might use as a lone striker to score & link with wide &/or deep  

I'd like a generic role in addition to what we already have 

CF-A and Treq have roaming instructions so I get why they drop even though they are Attack duty. But I don't get the DLF-A and I think it should be renamed. DLF should be only with Support duty. 

[Johnny Ace]

1 minute ago, yonko said:

CF-A and Treq have roaming instructions so I get why they drop even though they are Attack duty. But I don't get the DLF-A and I think it should be renamed. DLF should be only with Support duty. 

So you'd scrap the Attack option? I'm not even being funny, it's an interesting discussion, but have you played with a DLF on Support & Attack? There are notable differences when you watch them. the DLF on Attack will drop deep, back to goal, hold off a defender, receive a pass, lay it off to a team mate then on the turn burst into the box, it's an absolute delight to watch, especially if he gets on the end of the play & scores. A DLF on Support will do the same but will be less eager to get forward, I'd cry a little if the Attack option got removed 

[yonko]

2 minutes ago, Johnny Ace said:

So you'd scrap the Attack option? I'm not even being funny, it's an interesting discussion, but have you played with a DLF on Support & Attack? There are notable differences when you watch them. the DLF on Attack will drop deep, back to goal, hold off a defender, receive a pass, lay it off to a team mate then on the turn burst into the box, it's an absolute delight to watch, especially if he gets on the end of the play & scores. A DLF on Support will do the same but will be less eager to get forward, I'd cry a little if the Attack option got removed 

There are other roles that do the same. 

[Johnny Ace]

7 minutes ago, yonko said:

There are other roles that do the same. 

Like which specifically?

I know CF might but he might doing other things I don't want from him 

 

[yonko]

12 hours ago, Johnny Ace said:

Like which specifically?

I know CF might but he might doing other things I don't want from him 

 

F9, CF, Treq. 

[Johnny Ace]

4 hours ago, yonko said:

F9, CF, Treq. 

F9 drops much deeper, doesn't hold the ball up. CF does everything, Trq has the playmaker tag, creative freedom etc Completely different roles for me 

[nidhar.ram]

I thought @Cleon was spot on with his comment. The default player instructions for each role gives a good idea of the role. I also use the primary attributes highlighted for each role and then decide what to choose from based on the system.

The PPM's also play a major part on top of attributes for getting the most out of the role. For example: the game describes Luis Suarez as a DLF and his attributes are excellent for this role. However, his PPM "Likes to beat offside trap" completely goes against the DLF role especially if he is on support duty. Same applies to the other end of the striker spectrum which is the Advanced Forward. He is expected to be the spearhead of attack and is the farthest player on the pitch and such a player with "Comes deep to get ball" is such a contrast to what the PI specified and attributes required for the role.

The PI's, primary attributes and the PPM's should dictate his role and obviously the system around him

 

[Cleon]

19 minutes ago, Johnny Ace said:

F9 drops much deeper, doesn't hold the ball up. CF does everything, Trq has the playmaker tag, creative freedom etc Completely different roles for me 

Agree.

F9 is the striker who drops really deep and can carry the ball forward and play others in. This is a good option for lone striker formations where you want to play strikerless but with someone in the striker positions. His starting position is the deepest of all strikers and his play is all primary central.

The CF does everything. Roams about, works the channels, can lead the line, drops off the front (notice I say drops off the front rather than comes deep). Often the majority of the CF's work is done in non central areas and will see him chase balls and so on.

Treq is an aggressive playmaker type who searches for the ball and has a free role. This will see him pop up anywhere on the pitch. Could be outwide, central, deep. It depends on where the ball is. He seeks the ball constantly and isn't a workhorse type of striker who is willing to get stuck in. Instead he just wants to attract the ball.

A DLF is someone who passes the ball and isn't really a goal threat initially. That's not to say he can't score a lot of goals but his primary job is to move the ball on to others in better positions than he is. He doesn't really care for running with the ball and is more focused on creating space for others and being a passing outlet for everyone further forward or who advance from midfield.

Yes you might think all the roles do similar to others but that's the game throughout, ofc things will overlap at times. But the primary jobs of all strikers and all their duties differ a lot, they're not just subtle changes.

[mikcheck]

@Cleonwhat role/duty would you use for a single striker formation where you'd want him to drop a bit deeper sometimes and be a passing outlet but also a goalscorer? DLF(a) maybe?

[Tsuru]

2 horas atrás, mikcheck disse:

@Cleonwhat role/duty would you use for a single striker formation where you'd want him to drop a bit deeper sometimes and be a passing outlet but also a goalscorer? DLF(a) maybe?

I know I am not Cleon  but I believe in this situation a DLF-A or PF-A could work well, depending on your general strategy and also depending on the roles/duties around him.

[yonko]

6 hours ago, Cleon said:

Agree.

F9 is the striker who drops really deep and can carry the ball forward and play others in. This is a good option for lone striker formations where you want to play strikerless but with someone in the striker positions. His starting position is the deepest of all strikers and his play is all primary central.

The CF does everything. Roams about, works the channels, can lead the line, drops off the front (notice I say drops off the front rather than comes deep). Often the majority of the CF's work is done in non central areas and will see him chase balls and so on.

Treq is an aggressive playmaker type who searches for the ball and has a free role. This will see him pop up anywhere on the pitch. Could be outwide, central, deep. It depends on where the ball is. He seeks the ball constantly and isn't a workhorse type of striker who is willing to get stuck in. Instead he just wants to attract the ball.

A DLF is someone who passes the ball and isn't really a goal threat initially. That's not to say he can't score a lot of goals but his primary job is to move the ball on to others in better positions than he is. He doesn't really care for running with the ball and is more focused on creating space for others and being a passing outlet for everyone further forward or who advance from midfield.

Yes you might think all the roles do similar to others but that's the game throughout, ofc things will overlap at times. But the primary jobs of all strikers and all their duties differ a lot, they're not just subtle changes.

To me it's strange to have the DLF with Attack duty. "Deep lying" and "attack" is a bit contradictory to me. I guess I'm the only one who thinks this. 

[Cleon]

5 hours ago, mikcheck said:

@Cleonwhat role/duty would you use for a single striker formation where you'd want him to drop a bit deeper sometimes and be a passing outlet but also a goalscorer? DLF(a) maybe?

 

2 hours ago, Tsuru said:

I know I am not Cleon  but I believe in this situation a DLF-A or PF-A could work well, depending on your general strategy and also depending on the roles/duties around him.

You're spot on, that's what I would have said 

Just now, yonko said:

To me it's strange to have the DLF with Attack duty. "Deep lying" and "attack" is a bit contradictory to me. I guess I'm the only one who thinks this. 

Names and duties don't exist in the real world either so they're all alien to everyone. Only gamers or those in the media who like to label everything use names like this. No one inside football does because a striker for example, may fulfil every single role at some stage in a game. This is why I originally said the names don't matter, they're just labels to help the gamer. They don't have to make sense because they're made up anyway.

[_mxrky]

I’m using a 442 right now with a false nine. , but I’m unsure what role to use. Advanced forward works well, but I ideally want my striker to be involved in the build up as well as be the main goal scorer. Which role would be best. For that purpose. Cf(a), dlf (a) or pf (a)

[yonko]

4 hours ago, Cleon said:

Names and duties don't exist in the real world either so they're all alien to everyone. Only gamers or those in the media who like to label everything use names like this. No one inside football does because a striker for example, may fulfil every single role at some stage in a game. This is why I originally said the names don't matter, they're just labels to help the gamer. They don't have to make sense because they're made up anyway.

I was speaking in-game obviously. Most other roles and duties make sense but not DLF on Attack duty. The way the roles plays in FM is Standard Forward to me. 

[nick1408]

3 hours ago, yonko said:

I was speaking in-game obviously. Most other roles and duties make sense but not DLF on Attack duty. The way the roles plays in FM is Standard Forward to me. 

I always look at both the role and duty in isolation. I know attack is more aggressive than support and defensive is more passive than support. The role is the indication of what the player will do as per the blurb attached to each role. 
 

I do get your point though and SI has in the past too with the removal of the attacking DW. Personally, I’m happy with what we have now as I find it easy to understand and I like the isolation of terms. 

[Jack722]

I'll add that I don't think a complete forward on attack is necessary either.

Supposedly the CF is an all round striker that can and will do everything. So why do we have two versions of it?

If you wanted your striker to drop deep a bit more and be involved in building, you'd choose f9 or dlf, but if you wanted them not to roam around , but stay up front, you'd pick an AF or P.

I think with CF duties you can start blurring the lines with other roles. Since the CF can do what it wants, I would rather it just have an attack duty. Kind of like the Treq only being on attack because, to play with complete freedom as a forward, you'd probably need a high mentality. 

[The #9.5]

Personally, I found the availability of the different type of forwards and their roles in FM replicating real-life quite well. 

Initially @Jack722 asked whether the DLF and F9 are confusing; but if you turn to real-life examples, they really aren't. DLF/s is the old-school 'creative forward' from the 4-4-2 era of the mid-90s - not really a proper F9 (as they were still playing 4-4-2 and not 4-3-3 back then), but not really a proper Target-Man. Think about Cantona, Bergkamp, Zola, Le Tissier et all. They were technical and mobile, hence why they were dropping off the front to link with the midfield 4 and play the main forward in behind. Neither of them were that typical physical players but they still had good balance and strength, so sometimes could be seen receiving the ball into feet (instead of in the air as a proper TM) and hold it up/shield it up a few seconds to wait for support or some passing angle to open up. 

Then in mid-2000s, that role started to be more and more replaced by the proper F9 as formations moved more and more to 4-2-3-1 and especially 4-3-3. In contrast to the DLF/s, F9 is more of a creator, a #10 starting up front but dropping deep. Hence why he needs more mobility, dribbling and vision and less physicality. And FM captures that with their different requirements and PIs. The fact this player will still score goals is just an effect of the whole tactical approach and their participation in the overall movement patterns. Obviously, the prime examples are Totti and Messi (but for me Cruyff remains the godfather of that role). 

I think of the Complete Forward as a combination of all (or most) other forward roles. He can do it all and he needs the freedom and tactical framework to show it. Hence why I think they are at best when used as a lone forward. For me, Zlatan Ibrahimovic is the main example of a CF, especially in his PSG days. Then depending on the overall framework, he varied his duty (to use the FM language) to S or A. For example, domestically, when PSG were so dominant, he was often a CF/a as he stayed higher up and just waited for support. But the freedom of his CF role meant he was often seem roaming the channels or sometimes dropping deep to participate in chance creation. Ligue 1 defences were generally inferior, so the midfielders behind him were dominant enough on their own to create channels and not to need his support too often.

In CL, especially against equally quality teams, Zlatan was often CF/s, as the whole team needed that extra tactical versatility and movement fluidity. So he was even more often dropping deeper and act as a proper #10/#9 hybrid. Something similar could be said for Lewandowski at Bayern, as another great example of a proper CF role but with a varying duties (i.e. either S or A depending on overall needs etc).

Another great example is Benzema. Once Ronaldo was gone and Bale was out of form/injured, Benzema was the main attacking threat at Real. They were still playing 4-3-3 and their midfield were still mostly playmakers, so this didn't change. What changed was his role. Instead of the selfless creator who played mostly to serve Bale and especially Ronaldo, he was now the main goal-scorer. So he stayed higher up, started roam the. channels more instead of dropping deep and mostly waited for support. 'Mostly', as he still used his supreme movement and intelligence to roam around and help in build-up, instead of always sitting on the last shoulder and simple waiting for a through ball in behind (as a AF/a would do). Hence why I'd term his role as a CF/a recently.

DLF/a is very similar to the CF/a but is someone who is generally less creative, less technical and less mobile/able to dribble his way forward. For me Drogba was a good example as a DLF/a in his Chelsea days (Cavani in his PSG days after Zlatan left is another one). He wasn't limited just to drop deep and act as de-facto #10 (as a DLF/s or F9 would do, even in a slightly different way), but he wasn't limited to simply staying higher up and waiting to run on through balls in behind (as a AF/a) would do. But he wasn't as technical or creative to roam around and participate in complex pass&move patterns, so he wasn't really the complete package, so can't really be termed CF. 

His contribution to the build up was to sometimes drop a bit deeper and play with his back to goal, receive long pass and hold up the ball, waiting for support. And this is where the DLF/a excels. It is still an 'attack'-duty role in that such a player will look to get on the end of chances and score. But he will look to contribute elsewhere too, just in a less technical way (primary via dropping a bit deeper, holding up the ball and laying off simple passes to on-rushing players). Mandzukic in his Bayern M days was also a good example for a DLF/a. 

Personally, the only thing I don't really make sense of is the availability of the TQ role from the FW position. I can't really think of a player who played that role from a FW position. In older times, when the TQ was still rolling the world - obviously mostly in Italy - this role was used from the #10 position in Italy's narrow formations (mostly the diamond and the 3-4-1-2). Having a playmaker role from a FW position makes little sense in that you can't really be a playmaker if you're playing from FW (even if you will, obviously, look to drop deep). F9 is a creator-first role but it isn't a playmaker. To be a playmaker you need to receive the ball as often as possible, preferably in Zone 14 or its edges (the half-spaces). Even considering the full movement freedom of the TQ, it's harder to achieve this from a FW compared to AM position. The F9 is different in that they create even when they don't touch the ball - simply due to their movement creating angles to onrushing attackers. Any playmaker role is different in that they attack the ball, so they create 95% of the time with the ball at their feet, which is why they have the ball magnet effect (as we use it in FM world) to attack the ball. 

Players like Baggio, Mancini, Signori, Fiore, Totti et all, were all used in the #10 position and not as FWs. They were given full freedom to roam around and drift wide, as they were playing ahead of defensive-minded midfield unit and behind a proper front pair. So they needed to be given full movement freedom and full creative freedom to provide that spark as otherwise the teams back then were lacking any kind of tactical and creative spark.

On a side note, I very much liked SI's decision to make the TQ available from AML/AMR positions. But for me they need to remove it from the FW position.

[Tsuru]

1 hora atrás, The #9.5 disse:

Personally, the only thing I don't really make sense of is the availability of the TQ role from the FW position. I can't really think of a player who played that role from a FW position. In older times, when the TQ was still rolling the world - obviously mostly in Italy - this role was used from the #10 position in Italy's narrow formations (mostly the diamond and the 3-4-1-2). Having a playmaker role from a FW position makes little sense in that you can't really be a playmaker if you're playing from FW (even if you will, obviously, look to drop deep). F9 is a creator-first role but it isn't a playmaker. To be a playmaker you need to receive the ball as often as possible, preferably in Zone 14 or its edges (the half-spaces). Even considering the full movement freedom of the TQ, it's harder to achieve this from a FW compared to AM position. The F9 is different in that they create even when they don't touch the ball - simply due to their movement creating angles to onrushing attackers. Any playmaker role is different in that they attack the ball, so they create 95% of the time with the ball at their feet, which is why they have the ball magnet effect (as we use it in FM world) to attack the ball. 

Players like Baggio, Mancini, Signori, Fiore, Totti et all, were all used in the #10 position and not as FWs. They were given full freedom to roam around and drift wide, as they were playing ahead of defensive-minded midfield unit and behind a proper front pair. So they needed to be given full movement freedom and full creative freedom to provide that spark as otherwise the teams back then were lacking any kind of tactical and creative spark.

On a side note, I very much liked SI's decision to make the TQ available from AML/AMR positions. But for me they need to remove it from the FW position.

You see, I used the TQ role at the FW position sometimes and I don´t see him exactly as a playmaker (although I know it is), at least I don´t see that behaviour the same way I do when I play him on AMC position. The TQ striker looks to me a striker that does exactly what you described: roam around the attack, drift wide, dribble, do risky passes, try to score...almost like a Complete Foward, but even with more freedom and less defensive responsibilities.

Many people say that Romario was a natural Poacher, but maybe he could have been also seen as a "TQ striker". Why? I never saw him with defensive/marking responsibilities, he could play the way he wanted and, if you want to look at the "playmaker part", he was a reference in every team he played.

On the other hand, I agree that this "more freedom-creative/less pressing" striker maybe should receive a different name on FM, because as I said, I see him on a very different way from the traditional AMC Treq, almost like a completely different role.

[Johnny Ace]

Great post 

1 hour ago, The #9.5 said:

For me Drogba was a good example as a DLF/a in his Chelsea days 

That's the role I have him on in FM11 & you could say Lukaku plays in a similar way for Chelsea now

 

 

[Christopher S]

On 15/11/2021 at 08:47, Cleon said:

You all put far too much stock in the labelling rather than focusing on the settings the role comes with. That's the important thing not what its called.

This is the problem though; several roles in the game have 'invisible' instructions the player can't see (eg. the False 9). Saying people should focus on the settings the role comes with is disingenious when the game is intentionally hiding role specific settings from the player. Combine that with the fact the descriptions for most, if not all, roles are vague and slightly inaccurate at best, or directly misleading and wrong at worst, it doesn't feel good to work with.

Edited November 17, 2021 by Christopher S

[bibird.]

On 17/11/2021 at 05:48, Jack722 said:

I'll add that I don't think a complete forward on attack is necessary either.

Supposedly the CF is an all round striker that can and will do everything. So why do we have two versions of it?

If you wanted your striker to drop deep a bit more and be involved in building, you'd choose f9 or dlf, but if you wanted them not to roam around , but stay up front, you'd pick an AF or P.

I think with CF duties you can start blurring the lines with other roles. Since the CF can do what it wants, I would rather it just have an attack duty. Kind of like the Treq only being on attack because, to play with complete freedom as a forward, you'd probably need a high mentality. 

I like the two options for CF.

With it being a role that requires a larger spread of attributes, it's going to be easier to use at the higher levels of the game. When I think of Complete Forwards IRL, Lewandowski, Ibra and Benzema spring to mind. You still want to allow this sort of players to have the freedom to play an expansive game that utilises the full capabilties of their skillset. You will have games, though, where your strategy would perhaps require them to be more of an enabler type forward, than a guy who is hoovering up chances.

For example, say you're playing with Lewandowski in the early round of the DFB Pokal. Chuck him in as a CFa with creators from wide and deep providing him the bullets and you'll notch up a cricket scoreline.

When you're reaching the business end of the Champions League and perhaps need a bit more measure to your play (a lower individual player mentality, with less inherant risk taking) using him as a CFs means he'll roam around and facilitate the play in a more nuanced manner.

In short, I believe the option to use Complete Forward on support and attack duties is simply to provide the elite players the role is (perhaps) intended for more flexibility in how they can be used, without YOU, the manager, being hamstrung by them only having one option for individual player mentality in the tactics creator.

Hat tip to @The #9.5 for their thoughts on this further up, got my juices flowing on the topic.

[Jack722]

Here's what I meant in the OP about desired attribute spreads affecting AI decisions. (I wanted to add this to the OP but I couldn't find any examples at the time).

Here are Inter's two first choice strikers:

Looking at the comparison between the two, I think it's quite obvious who the more creative player is, and who the better goalscorer is. Lautaro Martinez, while fairly well rounded, makes a great spearhead to any attack. Despite not being an obvious target man, he has a good enough combination of first touch, balance and strength, in order to make the ball stick when he has to be an outlet as the furthest player forward. He is also a a huge threat in the box with an elite mix of finishing, bravery, anticipation and heading. lastly he has the movement and pace to make lethal runs in behind the defence. In my opinion, an ideal AF. Maybe even a CF.

But if you look at Correa, he seems like he has more of a niche role. He has fairly poor strength and balance for the top level, while also being quite non threatening in the box, with poor heading and bravery. He is also not a lethal finisher. What he excels at though are in the more creative attributes. Excellent dribbling and flair with decent passing and vision makes him the perfect sort of striker to drop off into space, where he can either take on a defender or play the final pass. 

I don't watch much Serie A, but Correa has always striked me as the type of player to play just off of the main striker, like Griezmann. He also had a good patnership with the 'purer' no.9 Immobile at Lazio. A quick google search agrees with me on this:

Looking at the highlights of his Inter Milan debut as well, you can clearly see that after he was subbed on, he was playing just off the main striker and recieving the ball in between the lines.

But then, probably due to his lack of strength and good pace, FM sees him as an AF, even playing Martinez slightly deeper as a pressing forward, which really doesn't make much sense. This lineup IMO would end up being fairly one-dimensional, and have to rely on throughballs into space, which Correa might not even finish due to his poor to average finishing attribute.

 

I see the similar things in other AI teams as well, off the top of my head I remember that PSG in FM21 would always play Mbappe as an AF, when it's quite obvious irl that most managers prefer him on the wing. When Mbappe plays as an AF I always found it super easy to park the bus against PSG and get a 0-0 draw, since the attack would be one dimensional, and rely on Mbappe's pace and finishng. It was pretty simple just to drop deeper and defend narrower.

[The #9.5]

The problem here is not the description of the roles; or if they match the real-life roles. It's how the AI is programmed to make his choices, be it for transfers or tactics. And we all know this is one of the biggest weak areas in FM. 

One of my favourite example in FM17 is how the AI Wenger is using Ramsey as DLP/d next to Cazorla as AP/s in a 4-2-3-1 (often behind Ozil as AP/s). Looking at Ramsey's profile, we can easily deduct he is a quality playmaker but totally unsuited to a DLP/d role, especially in a 4-2-3-1.

It's such things that eventually render any long-term save in any FM totally unplayable; at least for me. 

Edited November 21, 2021 by The #9.5

[Jack722]

1 hour ago, The #9.5 said:

The problem here is not the description of the roles; or if they match the real-life roles. It's how the AI is programmed to make his choices, be it for transfers or tactics. And we all know this is one of the biggest weak areas in FM. 

One of my favourite example in FM17 is how the AI Wenger is using Ramsey as DLP/d next to Cazorla as AP/s in a 4-2-3-1 (often behind Ozil as AP/s). Looking at Ramsey's profile, we can easily deduct he is a quality playmaker but totally unsuited to a DLP/d role, especially in a 4-2-3-1.

It's such things that eventually render any long-term save in any FM totally unplayable; at least for me. 

I think that's more a formation issue my guy.

The AI (AFAIK) doesn't know the difference between a CM in a 4231 and a CM in a 4141. A CM pairing as Ramsey and Cazorla both as playmakers makes a fair bit of sense if you put them in a 4141 or 5122. The same happened with Man Utd in FM21, they always played Van de Beek and Pogba as the pivot in a 4231, but in reality, this would probably never work.

I think the big issue with a 4231 is that a 4231 irl is best translated as a 4231DM in FM, I reckon if the 4231DM was made the default, we would no longer get these issues, and the AI would rightfully play better defensive players in the pivot. I think that what I'm trying to describe would be more similar to if the AI were playing a midfield two of Pirlo and Kante, while having Pirlo as a BBM and Kante as a DLP - due to the desired attributes for a BBM to not include something quite essential, like work rate, and the DLP to require stamina more than it does vision. You know what I mean?

Because the AI makes decisions more based on the role familiarity, which is calcualted from the player's position familiarity, and the player's attributes compared with the role required attributes.

Edited November 21, 2021 by Jack722

[The #9.5]

I'm not quite sure that even in a 4-3-3, Ramsey and Cazorla would've had a different roles. Also, not sure even if the 4-2D-3-1 is made default, we would see more logical double pivots just because of the formations witch.

But I think you're right here about the potential issues with formations. Which in turn is more about the research and how SI and the researchers are perceiving formations in the ME.

I've for a few versions thought that the formations, players positioning (in terms of within the formations) and roles aspect need a big overhaul. And they need to be done in tandem. If done properly, this would certainly help for issues like your and mine examples. 

 

[Jack722]

On 17/11/2021 at 08:34, The #9.5 said:

nitially @Jack722 asked whether the DLF and F9 are confusing; but if you turn to real-life examples, they really aren't. DLF/s is the old-school 'creative forward' from the 4-4-2 era of the mid-90s - not really a proper F9 (as they were still playing 4-4-2 and not 4-3-3 back then), but not really a proper Target-Man. Think about Cantona, Bergkamp, Zola, Le Tissier et all. They were technical and mobile, hence why they were dropping off the front to link with the midfield 4 and play the main forward in behind. Neither of them were that typical physical players but they still had good balance and strength, so sometimes could be seen receiving the ball into feet (instead of in the air as a proper TM) and hold it up/shield it up a few seconds to wait for support or some passing angle to open up. 

I absolutely agree that the DLF is the creative forward in a strike partnership (or as you say from a 442). But with the players you listed.. Every single one could dribble past players really well. They were played in that position for their technique, not their strength. And while you could argue strength is important for any forward role, it has to be much more important for an AF, or the player leading the line, than the supporting striker.

the only player I can think of (off the top of my head) that fits the FM's version of DLF is Che Adams at Southampton. But even then, I'd argue that he plays more as a supporting TM. he frequently drops off the forward line to recieve the ball with his back to goal as a way of moving the ball up the pitch with direct passes. Not as a way to recieve the ball when your team has moved up the pitch already and try to create chances for his strike partner through dribbling and flair and passing, like the players you listed.

Edited November 21, 2021 by Jack722

[The #9.5]

8 minutes ago, Jack722 said:

I absolutely agree that the DLF is the creative forward in a strike partnership (or as you say from a 442). But with the players you listed.. Every single one could dribble past players really well. They were played in that position for their technique, not their strength. And while you could argue strength is important for any forward role, it has to be much more important for an AF, or the player leading the line, than the supporting striker.

the only player I can think of (off the top of my head) that fits the FM's version of DLF is Che Adams at Southampton. But even then, I'd argue that he plays more as a supporting TM. he frequently drops off the forward line to recieve the ball with his back to goal as a way of moving the ball up the pitch with direct passes. Not as a way to recieve the ball when your team has moved up the pitch already and try to create chances for his strike partner through dribbling and flair and passing, like the players you listed.

This doesn't meant DLF/s won't dribble. I've recently had a short testing career with Juve in FM17 and used Dybala DLF/s in a 3-5-2 with Higuain as the AF. Dybala was exactly what I expected and what one would expect him to act as the more creative forward in a proper pair up front. To be fair, I've rarely (if ever) saw him hold up the ball as such, as upon receiving he was always quick to either pass short, dribble forward or try a through ball. 

The more recent 'creative' strikers roles are more about dribbling due to the nature of how tactics moved from the old-school 4-4-2 to the 4-3-3 and 4-2-3-1 with plenty of F9s. 

[Jack722]

On 12/11/2021 at 17:17, Tsuru said:

You see, sometimes I just want a simple striker - help on buildup, spread passes around, score goals. But all roles seem too specific sometimes, the behaviour looks to be too much hardcoded and it is very difficult to find a good and simple combination, specially when you play LLM. The PF is not exactly what I am looking for, but he works well on doing it.

Your description of the AF as a "winger that starts centrally" is very good, it is exactly like this. Even a Poacher helps the team much more on keeping possession and interacts much more with the midfield. And the AF was so good and effective before, I have no idea why they changed him like this.

Sorry, I haven't had the time to reply to all the messages, but I've read all of them and appreciate the input.

IMO the AF is, and should be recognised more as this 'simple' striker role. If you play a normal Centre forward as an AF, like Vlahovic or Halaand, they will do what your asking for. Partly why I made this post was because I think that the desired attributes for an AF confuse people, and they think of them more like poachers who can dribble.. or a winger playing centrally, If you watch a full game in FM with a lone AF, you will see that they frequently drop off the line slightly to help buildup and hold up the ball, as well as run the channels and try to get in behind the defence, basically what you want your typical centre forward to do. 

Edited November 21, 2021 by Jack722

[Jack722]

2 minutes ago, The #9.5 said:

This doesn't meant DLF/s won't dribble. I've recently had a short testing career with Juve in FM17 and used Dybala DLF/s in a 3-5-2 with Higuain as the AF. Dybala was exactly what I expected and what one would expect him to act as the more creative forward in a proper pair up front. To be fair, I've rarely (if ever) saw him hold up the ball as such, as upon receiving he was always quick to either pass short, dribble forward or try a through ball. 

The more recent 'creative' strikers roles are more about dribbling due to the nature of how tactics moved from the old-school 4-4-2 to the 4-3-3 and 4-2-3-1 with plenty of F9s. 

Yes, I already know this and I'm glad you recognise it as well. I think playing Dybala as the DLF and Higuain as an AF is a really good combination. But, because of the desired attributes for the roles, I'm 90% sure that the AI would play this the other way round, with Higuain as the DLF. This is because Higauin isn't so fast, and has decent hold up play. I think it also confuses lots of players of the game as well.

I already play this way, players with good hold up, but aren't 'true' target men, as an AF (like Halaand and Vlahovic in my previous post) and good technical players with good dribbling and poor strength in the DLF role, and we play good football. My issue was never with this, but more due to the descriptions and desired attrbitue spreads, which I think are wrong.

[The #9.5]

Quote

but more due to the descriptions and desired attrbitue spreads, which I think are wrong.

To be fair, I rarely pay attention to what FM says about players' best role and the most important attributes of a certain role. So I'm far from familiar what FM is listing as the most important for DLF, for example. But I'm sure if they aren't entirely wrong, they are at least up to debate and could be improved massively. But as I said above, unless these changes happen in tandem with some crucial formation and overall positioning overhaul, we're splitting hairs so to speak.