[4-3-3, inconsistency and invisible inside forwards]

Zaniolo also has that "shoots from distance" trait. As an attack duty inside forward he may end up taking too many  shots. 

He may be better as an inverted winger or at least on support duty. a game where he has, say, four shots and no goals or assists will be punished by the ratings. He's so good that he should more than make up for it throughout a season 

[4231 vs Deep 4231]

1 hour ago, Keyzer Soze said:

Hi,  

In my current save i've been using the deep version of the 4231 that @Cleoncreated, with only some minor changes.

DLF(a)

W(s)                  AMC(s)                   IF(a)

DM(s)      VOL(a)

WB(a)      CD(d)        CD(d)     WB(s)

GK(d)

Mentality: Positive

TI's: POOD, Counter-Press, Higher D-Line, Press More

PI's: 

AMC(s): take more risk passes

DM(s): Hold Position

The tactic is been working great. I'm playing with Benfica and so far had no problem winning in domestic league.

But recently i play against Porto away, drawn 0-0, but it was out of pure luck. They dominate every aspect of the game.

They play a very pressing 442, and i could just make any decent attack play.

 

Against Porto i used a tactic a bit more defensive.....

DLF(a)

W(s)                  AMC(s)                   IF(a)

DM(d)      VOL(a)

WB(a)      CD(d)        CD(d)     WB(au)

GK(d)

Mentality: Balanced

TI's: POOD, Regroup, Counter-Attack, Higher D-Line, Lower LOE, Press More

PI's: 

AMC(s): take more risk passes

 

But like i said it didn't work. I pressed very high with 4 players and i couldn' play from the back. Half time i decided to drop the POOD instruction, to try to pass more directly to attack but that also didn't work.

So, any sugestions for those harder games, against teams that will press very high?

 

Oh man, that 442 of theirs is such a pain to play against.  I had them in the Champions League and the way they press high up the pitch and the speed with which their wingers cut inside can be crippling for this formation.  What worked for me was cutting out PoD, increasing the tempo, and defending more narrow as it forces the likes of Consceciao to go outside and try to cross into my packed defense, as opposed to cutting inside and wreaking havoc. I also moved my LoE to "higher" and man-marked their wingbacks in order to prevent their insane overload up the flanks.

 

One thing with 4231 deep is the "other" more conservative DMC really needs to be involved in the build-up, and all too often, if he's on "defend" duty, he simply won't be there to recycle possession or provide an outlet.  I personally use DM on support as opposed to defend, and he actually ends up contributing a lot. When on "defend" or specifically told to hold position, the team ends up being too disjointed.  In your case, you've got the Volante on attack, which is very risky and means he ends up being all over the place. While a DM on defend may shield the back four, it seems he's not quite available as a feasable part of what might be a very potent attack, starting from two deep and potentially creative midfielders.  For this role, I generally use a more physical type of natural DLP - attributes and preferred moves that suit a playmaker, without the actual title. In my case I am lucky to have Nicholo Rovella, who is, apart from lacking areal ability, perfect for the role. When using a more of a "destroyer" or even "water-carrier" type, what often happens is he my attacks become too dull - especially if using the Volante on attack duty where he'll often get very high up the pitch.  In a previous season I was using a "natural" anchorman with the DM(d) role, and he ended up being responsible for so many attacks breaking down through missing out on opportunities, playing the safely stupid and ultimately dangerous passes.

At some point, you end up realizing that what you've got are not just two defensive midfielders in the center, but a huge advantage in terms of being afforded more chances to be adventurous. 

[4231 vs Deep 4231]

7 hours ago, neptune'sblue said:

I actually tried something similar to this. I tried WB-su instead of fb-su. Defense on the left flank was bad. I tried dm-su but found that they conflicted with am-su. Am I playing counter-attacking football according to your advice?

Would you suggest starting a separate thread? Sorry if I'm changing the subject. I'll open a new thread if I ask more questions about it. I was just wondering about tactical instructions in a deep formation. In this type of formation, when the team is without instructions; I see counter attack football. I just want to ask can we play this style? Or can we play games like possesion with this lineup? I don't have a specific game plan, I just want to score few goals and win. I chose this lineup because the AI was constantly hitting me with mezzela and AM. I have no idea about the instructions.

 

You could start a separate thread.  I've used this formation for quite a few seasons as my team evolved, and the conflicts you're finding seem to be the opposite from my own interpretation. It could be player dependent, but when you're using a DLP alongside a Volante, you need to think about what happens when the ball is lost. With the wingback bombing forward, there is a high chance that you could be hit on the break with very little cover. The Volante is going to be all over the place, and particularly going "where the action is", while the DLP naturally gravitates towards the ball. I personally prefer to use a standard DMC(s), with abilities and traits of a playmaker - ie someone I would trust to create. 

Also, one of the compelling things about a deeper formation like this is the chance to provide a second or even third volley of attacks should things break down or your team starts camping against more organized opposition. Here, the wingback role on the right, coupled with the winger on support may not be as effective as a speedy and attack minded fullback on support.  From my observation, withe wingback getting up the pitch too early you end up overly commited to that part of the pitch - it can open up space elsewhere or allow for some great crossing or overlapping opportunities, but since you're using a DLP and since you're that deep, why not play it more patiently, let the build-up happen in a more measured way, and chances are, the fullback will get involved just as the opposition defense is ready to break down.

I'm very poor at uploading videos and graphics, but this happened to me in the CL final against Pochettino's ManCity. Of course they have a killer squad, and of course they had Milenkovic-Savic as a mezzala and Raheem "overpowered" Sterling on the flank.  If I had a DLP on that side, Savic would have eaten him alive, and Sterling would have destroyed my wingback.  Instead, my DMC with his "dictates tempo" preferred move still got involved in the build up, and my vanilla winger did his thing, and just as the attack was breaking down, the fullback made a run from deep to deliver the most conventional of crosses for the winning goal.

Start a new thread because this formation doesn't get nearly as much love as it should on the forum, and the possibilities for space distribution are endless, regardless of the type of team you have.

[4231 vs Deep 4231]

I've been using 4231 deep in it's various forms for the past few iterations of FM, to the point that to me, the setup for 4231 or even 433 looks a bit odd at first.  The SV is by far my favorite role in the game, and is really the key to the systems. I personally find the variety of roles in the DMC strata to offer a lot of flexibility, with plenty of space to play in.

For example, I'm currently playing as Genoa, and we are by far the best team in Italy, though our reputation is not yet high enough to strike fear in the top tier CL teams. Against the dreaded 3322 with wingbacks and quick forwards I could drop my DL and force the opposition to come at me. My DMC pair being a DM(S) and SV(s) offers plenty of security, and they do indeed get forward.  Of course, it's dependent on who is in front of them - if I want to really overrun the opposition's midfield, I'll use an SS or AM(a) , which essentially clears the way for the Volante to do his thing, even if not on Attack duty.  Otherwise, the natural layering you get from those duties and positions can be very difficult for the AI to deal with. As an aside, I played a CL semi final match against Barca, and went very aggressive, giving them no chance without having to sacrifice too much of my own strength down the flanks - there is a lot to be said for the security of having two deep and aggressive midfielders.

 

In my endless tinkering, I often get caught up with looking at the tactic screen and losing sight of the fact that a) It's my defensive shape and b) it's a snapshot of a vary dynamic system.  For example, dropping your AMC to the CM strata can actually end up being very aggressive and potent with the right player.  Not to mention the deep system can offer great protection for the regista or dlp against more aggressive opponents, or force the more organized defenses to actually come out.

Finally, I fully agree about the need for hard working attacking fullbacks, though I find it to be important to resist the temptation to make them too eager to get up the pitch. For example, in my system, on the right flank, the one with the Volante, I use a FB(s) and a W(s).  If I used a wingback, he would end up getting up the pitch too early and trying to dominate things too much, taking much of the spotlight from the Volante, and creating a bit of a cull-de-sac against packed defenses.  As an FB(s), he hangs back, gets involved later, and not only ensures the flank is solid, but is very difficult for defenses to deal with as he has so much more space to pick up steam and find the right cross.  The right volante is able to create this kind of space in a very unique way, even if on support duty.

As for forwards being isolated, I can't imagine it being that much of an issue, even if not using an AMC.

 

[Which roles would you apply DM and CMs?]

The thing with the Regista is it's a roaming and aggressive role, and tends to neglect his defensive duties.  As far as I remember, Tonali's off the ball is not great, so you could just put him as a DLP, so he stays in the hole spraying passes to the players in front. If you must use a Regista, then I'd recommend you use a more "responsible", less glamorous role in the center of the pitch.  In terms of ratings, good luck getting great ones for all three, because to ensure a team performance you'll still need a water-carrrier type who will do the simple things and ensure your machine is ticking. With the set-up you have now, who is going to be the one to slow things down or at least keep things steady if and when one of your players loses the ball?

[Fast, attacking football, 4-2-3-1. Help!]

Ok  some of this may seem insane but, as always it's squad related.

First, imho Ozil at the center of the pitch, as your focal point, in this tactic, could work but he's got a lot of ground to cover - or it could be that his teammates have a lot of weight to carry for him.  An AP on attack duty should be driving up the pitch with the ball, and his teammates will look for him.

I play with Roma, and my CM is Lorenzo Pelligrini. Now he's no Ozil but a bit similar in that he's a classing Advanced Playmaker (runs with ball often, tries killer balls, pass rather than attempting to score). When giving him the role of CM(a), as unglamorous and "vanilla" as it seems, he's actually able to express himself via the ppm's, while also ensuring he's not the (only) focal point for attacks.  I absolutely do not want my fullbacks playing it to him too early and too often while he's stranded in the pressure cooker that the midfield becomes.  Any midfield featuring two DMC's especially one with a Volante gets pretty ugly for the more glamorous footballers - by winter break, lil Mesut will be off taking selfies on a yacht while nursing his broken nail.  Giving him a non-playmaking role could allow your play to develop more before finding him or another player in better position.  Also, keep in mind a playmaker in the center will inevitably compete for space with the Volante who is given a lot of license to roam and essentially boss the midfield.

One thing to keep in mind is this tactic can be a powerhouse but that comes with a price. For me, I was dominating the Juventus-dominated Seria A, until about February, when injuries and fatigue started to take their toll. With the likes of Partey in your line-up, you run the danger of not having adequate cover. One advantage of the SV role is that he tends to do a bit of everything and "impose" himself on the pitch - that can lead to some flatteringlly spectacular performances, but you also need to ensure you've got enough depth and cover for the long season.

Now here's what worked for me in my second season. I know it sounds strange, but by switching my mentality to Attacking, my defending and overall play improved tremendously. Suddenly, the urgency of build up this kind of formation needs was there.  I could actually see the aggression in both my defending and attacking.  The beauty of the tactic came from getting it up the pitch quickly to the wide players, through sudden crossfield passes and seeing the opposition get punished when they enter my zone.  The way I did it was by shortening the team passing while focusing down the flanks or the middle depending on the opponent. Ideally, what I wanted was to create the overloads, with the knockout punch being a less characteristic long diagonal ball to my advanced players or a cutback to the onrushing central one. 

One other thing you may want to do is turn your striker into a pressing forward or give him more aggressive pressing.  You need someone who will be a nuisance to the opposition and disrupt their build up.  You may find ratings for your centerbacks to be on the low side even (or especially) when you win, because either the dmc's deal with opposition attacks or they have not much to do.  There is a risk of the opposition being able to set up shop in your central midfield, so having someone (other than Ozil, you don't want him to break his nail) and add a bit of steel to your central area.

 

[Wolfsburg 523]

I used this formation a couple of versions ago, with Hoffenheim, which were, when I took over, in disarray - underachieving squad and the previous manager used 352 so they had a load of wingbacks and no decent wingers, so decided to try it.  We ended up playing some great defensive football, which was ugly at times but very effective. As the team evolved the style improved but the foundation stayed the same - attacks mostly down the flanks, and a load of 1:0 wins. I managed to change things with inverted wingbacks later on and things got a bit more stylish, but that's another topic.

In FM, even when they're pushed to the wb slot, wingbacks tend to drop deep to join the rest of the defensive line. What you have, essentially, is a 5 defender formation.  This can be good defending if you set your roles right, and the wingbacks can absolutely wreak havoc, but the most important part is your midfield engine room - the center of the pitch, where you only have two players.  I personally used an MC(d) and a BWM(s) for a while, and switched the duties of the two from time to time, but had little luck with the deep lying playmaker as, unless he's amazing, there will just be too much of a burden on him. The two central midfielders in this formation need to cover a lot of ground and boss this area of the pitch, often against three opponents in the center of the pitch.  Yes there are three cenrterbacks behind them, but without either an AMC to drop deep or DMC to clean up the mess, a lot of the dirty work will be done in the center - defensively as well as linking the attack and midfield.

What worked for me were fast transitions to the wide men with the forward as either a holding pivot up the pitch (which is the case for Wolfsburg) or a counterattacking threat clearing up the space for the wingers to cut inside.  Against teams that push up, especially those with wide forwards, this is very difficult to cope against. A striker like Mandzhukic in with his mentals could be ideal for that.

I'm personally not a fan of both wide players on Attack, and considering the numbers you have on the wings, some variety wouldn't hurt.  If you have such a player, a wide AP with an overlapping wingback behind him and overloading IF (or even RMD) on the opposite flank is very hard to defend against. It almost creates a "pick and roll" situation to use a basketball term - get ready for 6.9 ratings for said AP and your wingback getting loads of assists, but it certainly works.

Finally if you really want to get adventurous, you could try a Libero. I must say it didn't work nearly as well for me as I had imagined, but that could be down to my lack of tactical knowledge than anything else. 

[4231 deep low block help]

Well, judging by the players you have your team is pretty good. You can play a low block, but with the quality you have, it would certainly have to utterly punish and break the will of your opponents, and it starts and ends in your central midfield, even if the rewards are devoured by your wide men. 

The anchor-rpm tandem, with Harry Kane as the enganche is way too demanding on poor Tonali, both in attack and defense. You may consider a Segundo Volante to dominate this space. The anchorman will not contribute much in terms of build-up, and is much too conservative to be of much help in transitions.  Suppose Tonali gets marked out, you're asking Josko and Tomyasu to carry the load on their own, with Harry Kane hanging in the hole just probably shaking his head screaming for the ball. A volante is given license to cover that space without always having to carry the entire burden the way an rpm is.  Also, changing from an anchorman to a DM might help not only to contain in the defensive phase, but also in attacking transitions.  The anchorman, particularly a natural central defender, is a bit too passive. 

 

Now for Harry the enganche...In this particular formation, it leaves the rest of midfield too exposed and is very demanding on him. Especially if you want to play a low block, you'd need someone who will contribute defensively. I personally had a lot of luck with MC(a) as he'd bomb forward when we'd get the ball back, but also close down and be a bit of a nuisance, giving my DMC's enough time to get back into position. Also, changing your striker to a Pressing Forward (a) might still offer the runs going forward, while also contributing.  Remember, for the low block to work, the entire team should be involved and you've got to have a shock effect on the defense at the right times - otherwise you run the risk of just being overrun.

 

One final word on Tomyasu.  While he's a half decent wingback, he can also do a very competent job as part of a DMC pairing.  I play him as an SV as he has the workrate and all around abilty to patrol that area while also offering defensive stability and a bit of creativity when needed.

[Fast, attacking football, 4-2-3-1. Help!]

Actually that series by Cleon is one of my favorites of all time and inspired me to a sometimes hair-pulling obsession with the SV role and the two DMC formation in general.

I could very well be wrong, but one of the things which has been reworked in this match engine has been central play.  Still, as with previous versions, space is most important, as is the relation of roles and duties to each other. 

I used this formation quite successfully with a hard working team of runners and grafters, and it was a joy to watch seeing the team simply overpower the opposition with the volante doing just what he should do - be the heartbeat of the team. I then took over Roma with dreams of Zanolo, Vertout, and Pelligrini slotting into the tactic to create a European powerhouse.  What ended up happening were logjams with Zanolo shooting from everywhere or Pelligrini getting his knees stomped on the halfway line. 

What works for me now is turning the AM to a CM (a), and having him provide a direct, simple, yet deadly option from deep. He not only creates space as a runner from relatively deep, pitching in with plenty of goals and assists, but also creates that effect of the attacking monsoon from the center of the pitch.  Coupled with a right kind of SV, you end up with a sort of double barrel effect.  When the attacking midfielder is in the AMC slot, he simply doesn't create that because he's already positioned where he can be marked out, especially as you're playing with a team like Arsenal. Basically what you'd be left with is one of your widemen to dribble through a packed defense and make something happen. 

 

Also, I initially used the other dmc as either a DM(d) or DLP, and found it lacking.  Considering he is capable of contributing to the attack, giving him support duty actually helped create this pivot, but he ends up being a bit more active defensively without being a ball magnet.  I tend to keep PI's blank, allowing for player selection to color the approach - you can use a natural playmaker type of a destroyer, depending on what you need and who you're up against. 

 

My approach play is at times very different from the "kill moves" because of the nature of the tactic.  I would say half my goals come from the neat interplay through the middle or down the wings.  The other half, of course, happen when play breaks down - usually through the ccounterattack or counterpress, where the opposition is overwhelmed by the defensive shape.

Finally, you've got a very nice overload possibility on your right with the IF and Volante (I'd personally have an IW there as he tends to start a bit wider), so be sure to put a bit of creativity through the left in order to take advantage of that.

[Critique This 4-3-1-2]

“If I have to make a tackle then I have already made a mistake.” - Paolo Maldini.
I wouldn't worry about tackles  Personally I focus more on the interception stats, although if the football is as I intend it to be, why worry?

For example, when I win fairly easily, my defensive minded cm tends to get fairly low ratings. He completes 90% of his passes, makes one or two interceptions, and his kit is clean as he's had no tackle to make .

 

[update]

Fullbacks tucking in more or player positioning being considerably different affects the way a tactic plays out - I'm not sure if it's a matter of loopholes opening up or being plugged. Regardless, I'm curious if the changes in the ME are affecting people's tactics and results or do sound principles trump those changes.

[update]

I know I should post this in the bugs forum and really don't want to disrupt the flow of this forum, but I updated to the live Beta patch, and since then, I feel like I'm playing a new game.  Yes, the overpowered "lump it to the vardy" bug is gone, which is refreshing, but there are so many other things which seem to require a tactical overhaul.  For example, I use a 4312, and fullbacks are a huge part of my tactic.  Since the patch, when I don't have the ball, they just tuck in and hide behind my CB's, more likely to clear the ball off the goal line than close down or follow the opposition winger.  When we have the ball, they turn to deep lying raumdauters, wide open and ready to cut inside regardless of instructions I give them.

I don't want to turn this into a complaint session, and I know this isn't the place for it. I just want to know how others approach this change in the ME.  Does updating mean the entire tactic should be reworked, and if so, would it be better to just use the old engine until the new update is stabilized?

 

[Football Manager 2020 Feedback Thread]

After playing a few games with this patch, I'm noticing a few things which are really nice. The dribbling and skirmishes for the ball in certain spots look more realistic.  The whole long ball counterattack thing seems to be finally fixed, which makes for far more pleasant gameplay and tactical planning.  I like the variety of goals being scored, as well as a few other things that have been mentioned here.

One troubling thing I find is the positioning of my players seems to have morphed and gone a bit weird. This is particularly the case with fullbacks.  I play a 4312 formation, using the fullbacks in the wingback role, and since the patch came out it seems they always either tuck in right next to the CB's, or just wander around. Out of possession they seem as likely to make a clearance in our own six yard box as my centerbacks, while when in possession, even if I instruct them to stay wider, they  seem to just roam around when the ball is not on their "side" of the pitch.  At times, the central midfielders also seem a bit "unhinged" in their positioning, but it's especially troubling when it's the fullbacks, since they're so vital to the overall "shape" of my team.

[4-3-1-2 Vertical Tiki-Taka]

I use virtually the same roles with Parma in the first season, so the squad is not good by any stretch of the imagination, particularly in defense. I started using it because I had a number of decent central midfielders and it's a formation I've always enjoyed.

One of the advantages of this tactic is the "space" you get if you lump it under pressure, particularly in this match engine. I'm not saying play hoofball, but don't get caught up on the possession stats. I usually play a shorter passing game and my dlp or mezzala is still able to lump it to the rabid PF for a one of one (and he doesn't miss from time to time).

High tempo/short passing/play out of defense?  Yup, unless you've got regens of Beckenbauer and Maldini with Nesta waiting in the wings, you're lumping it long for all the wrong reasons. To play that kind of game, stringing gorgeous short passes together you need even more gorgeous weather conditions and players with excellent technique.

Personally, I play somewhat wider, keeping my passing length at mixed, and allow myself as much of the pitch as possible, especially as I don't trust my players to get out of tight spaces. 

I imagine your AMC is particularly frustrating to watch. The idea of him spraying passes or running on to flick ons from your DLF just doesn't pan out, does it?  I set mine to roam and as a AP, so that he can have a more dynamic interplay with the mezzala.  Also, I found that putting the striker as a Complete Forward as opposed to DLF helps create space and reduce congestion in that middle area. 

The line of engagement thing is another thing you may want to take a look at.  Do you really want your front three in the center of midfield praying for your poor fullbacks to somehow release them?  Personally, especially against teams that like to build from the back, I like to up the line of engagement to "higher".  This gets the front three actually defending from the front and posing more of a threat.  Even if they're bypassed, if by chance you actually win the ball deeper, you'll have three players in the center to keep the opposition honest.  On support duty, your AMC will still track back, and if you give him more closing down, he'll help out a lot. 

"Play out of defense" works - until it doesn't.  If the defenders don't have any safer options, they'll play it long, especially as you have a deep lying playmaker on defend there.  He'll try to make himself available, and if he's marked, then the only other option is to lump it to the pressing forward and hope for the best.  I countered that by having my Advanced playmaker on "roam from position" so that there is another option high up the pitch. Another option would be putting your DLP on Support so that he has the option of riskier passes - otherwise he just chooses the safest, shortest, and easiest option of recycling possession (more often than not back to your centerbacks. 

Playing against teams that clog the midfield and have outlets on the wings, this is a very dangerous system to play if you want to keep possession and have a slow build up.  Even the mezzala's real estate is limited, and if he loses the ball, it's very dangerous.  My own midfield three are CM DLP(D) and B2B / Mezz, depending on the system I'm up against.  Up front I have a complete forward, who is still eager to drop deep, but more often than not finds pockets of space in the more advanced wide areas. 

 

As for short vertical passes, I would guess having a combo of DLP (D) and AP, along with slighly more static outer midfielders might work - but only if your players have very strong technique and mental stats, since you'd basically be playing through the opposition's midfield. 

 

Anyway I hope that helps. I personally enjoy the 4312, as it's very flexible and can produce some beautiful football when it works - and utter shambles when it doesn't. 

[FM17 Help me make Conte's Chelsea 3-4-3]

@grazdoztrez It's not really a plug and play tactic and the problems of players far apart of far from the ball are actually not that hard to fix.  Anyway, good luck.  Hamburg have a pretty decent squad  so you should be fine...

[FM17 Help me make Conte's Chelsea 3-4-3]

Quote

@Contexx Just wanted to say great reading your opinions on here.  I've yet to get fully engrossed in FM17, but will definitely take your points on board.   How have you done with the 3-4-3? Are Hoffenheim still bossing the Bundesliga?

The Hoffe are indeed still bossing the Budesliga and we're on our way to securing the third CL trophy in a row.  The system is pretty much the same although it's evolved due to having better players.  I don't want o hijack the thread too much as it's going into a new direction, and perhaps I should start my own humble little thread, but with teams now starting to treat us as one of the big boys in the league, we've had to attack more, which ironically is starting to happen with reducing mentality and pulling back the wide men in order to make more of a 541 when defending, and morphing into a 343 in attack.  Using the inverted wingback has also been a bit of revelation, particularly when attacking as it allows for one of my cm's to bomb forward and seems to really put the AI (who obviously didn't get the new patch yet), in a bit of confusion.

The system is still very solid, with focus on defense above all - apart from a blip when we went a bit braindead in defense having wrapped up the title already, we don't allow more than 25 goals in a season,  and it certainly fares better in the CL where teams have more quality and are more willing to attack.  The most difficult types of opponents are aggressive and defensive teams which are happy to sit back and break knees when defending and go direct when attacking. 

I'd give a lot of credit to Rashidi for his videos and helping me understand the effects of changing shape.  In this type of system, it is very important because of its reliance of overloads in particular areas, depending on opponent and personnel (of course). Having a Kante is never going to be the same as having a Krenvitter, just as a Costa gives you something different from a Kramaric.   I'll start a humble thread and let this one Conte on...

[FM17 Help me make Conte's Chelsea 3-4-3]

I keep the TI's and PI's very basic and change them according to the player or team faced.  Most of the changes would occur with the central midfield - against a 2 man midfield I'd usually usually use a B2B midfielder, whereas I keep a CM(s) to add a level of stability when facing three man midfields, particularly where the AMC seems more of withdrawn. Same goes for the other TI's.  As for PI's, they're also player specific, although the forward has "close down much more" and "shoot less".

Note:  In my interpretation, TI's are modifiers to the system, rather than absolutes.  So, when I use the shout of "shortER" passing it doesn't mean players will only pass it short.  Even when the CM(d) has the ball and my IF is waving at him like "hey homeboy, look at me! ping it long cuz I'm very open", I expect him to deviate from my instructions and let him make that pass. But what I'm saying to the team is "generally, I want you to pass it shorter".  When "more direct" for example, they will lump it - hopefully to the AP as the only recognizable playmaker, or one of the other forward players, and I usually don't want that because it stunts the build up.

Also, sometimes when struggling to break teams down, or needing a more complete team effort in defending, I'm happy to go "fluid" shape, as it makes the team a bit more creative and unpredictable.  I generally don't trust my defenders to do much more than defend, and happy to keep the likes of Pulisic only attacking, although as the squad becomes more "intelligent" I'm starting to go more and more fluid.

Again, this is far from a plug and play supertactic, but rather a system I used for my particular squad. 

As a basic set-up, it works very well because it's quite solid.  I started it with a mid-table Croatian side and won everything in the first season, then made it to the group stages of the CL the next year, and the football at times was turgid, but as the quality of players increased to fit the tactic, it improved. Alas, the cosmopolitan lights of Hoffenheim came calling and took over a hard-working but slightly limited squad.  Since then, won two straight titles and lost ugly to PSG in the CL semis.

The key, as always, is to step back, and get to know your squad.

 

 

 

 

      

                              

 

[FM17 Help me make Conte's Chelsea 3-4-3]

I use the same set up but with a lot fewer TI's.  Unless your players are geniuses, it might really be hard to keep the ball, in spite (because?) of all the shouts.  Really high line, work into the box,  retain possession, play out of defense and exploit the flanks while also asking them to be more expressive might be overkill. I'd be a bit worried about getting caught in possession. 

I've won the Bundesliga with a very average Hoffenheim using a similar tactic, and went on a run of 12 games without conceding.  The funny thing is, I was allowing a lot of shots, although most were wild long range efforts, and the majority of those would be blocked by that ugly clump of narrowness this tactic creates.  It's especially effective against the different breeds of 433, because it gives no space for all those fancy inside forwards who like to cut inside.

My advice is keep it simple(r).  Forget the high line.  That deep defensive line this formation naturally results in is actually a blessing.  The BWM is good, provided you have the right player and plenty of back up if and when he gets into card trouble.  For the other CM, you really need someone who is comfortable on the ball.  B2B is ok, although unless he's very disciplined and skilled, he won't do much for keeping possession.  Personally, I use a modified CM(s) and ask him to "get forward" when feeling a bit frisky.  Otherwise, he collects his customary 6.8 rating and keeps things ticking. 

For your wingbacks, I would keep the right one on support duty.  You've got a pretty adventurous central midfielder and an inside forward, so you should have someone on that side who is on support.  More importantly, your IF will not do much defending when the opposition has possession, so let this WB be more conservative, and ignore the fact that he will inevitably rarely get more than a 6.9 rating, rarely get crosses in.  That will be for your left, AP side.

With the AP cutting inside, you've got a delightful little situation with a wingback overlapping and crossing, while the AP himself gives the pass before the assist, or a throughball to your IF and striker.  In my tactic, the vast majority of assists occur from that side, to the point that it starts looking ridiculous. However, it's a really difficult thing for the AI to deal with because of the imbalance created with your other wingback being on support.  The combo of wbs/IFa on one side and wba/Aps on the other is very awkward to deal with - especially when you have a technical and intelligent forward in the mix....

...which brings me to that forward.  Personally I use a CF(s) or even False 9, because he's more involved in the build up and is a greater danger for opening up the opposition.  More importantly, he can pull and drag the opposition defenders, clearing plenty of room for your Inside Forward or even BBM to take advantage of. 

The overlaps will happen naturally - you don't need that TI as it asks your wide forwards to hold up the ball.  You don't want that Inside forward to hold up the ball and wait for support.  You want him to stretch the defense by running at them, or at least to keep them pegged back.  Unless he's Christiano Ronaldo's unselfish twin, it will simply slow down, stagnate, and ultimately break down your attacks in awkward positions.  Think about it - when he holds it up and your wing based attack starts coming closer to him, what happens when an opposition DMC takes the ball off him and launches a counter though the middle? You'll have your BWM and three CB's running back like mad through an area you've left unprotected.  Luckily, the sheer numbers - the ugly and narrow back three and BWM - should deal with the threat more often than now, but it kills your own attacks.

For increasing possession, my only TI is "shorter passing", as it ensures the side is patient enough with the ball before it eventually gets to the AP.  Remember, also, that both of your wing-forwards cut inside.  The flanks will be exploited in some phases, but the meat of your attacks will still occur in the middle.  The true advantage of this system (and maybe conte's), is when those wingbacks morph into wingers, and those wide players have taken dangerous central positions - the opponent is left with too many threats to deal with.  A solid base of slightly more disciplined CM's, and more CB's keeps you safe.  More importantly, if your defensive line is not so high, it gives you more room to exploit space.  If you're so high up the pitch, it can often lead to crowding - something you don't want.  Keeping your defensive line somewhat normal allows you enough space for play to develop, giving your AP that all important bit of elbow room and time, your IF some real estate to run past defenders, and it forces the opposition to make awkward choices.  When your this high up the pitch, the "structured" (literally) shape of your formation loses a lot of its value.  In real life, Conte's Chelsea are not nearly so high up the pitch.  Yeah, their line gets pretty high if the opponents let or force them, but I have a feeling Conte would rather let the cede some of that space, giving Hazard and company better looks and reducing the amount Cahill has to sprint back. 

One more thing about the striker.  At Chelsea, Diego Costa is no longer just a defensive forward.  By nature, he's one tough and aggressive person, but he's far too involved in build up play and even finishing moves to be a mere defensive forward.  The sheer anguish of dealing with Hazard and Pedro is difficult enough - imagine having Costa breathing down your neck, and then realizing he can also pass and shoot and play football.  In FM, I haven't had the fortune of having a player like that, but I'd used Mandzukic (sort of similar, less technical), as a CF, but asking him to close down like mad and shoot less, and it had a very good effect.

Finally, as with all tactics, personnel is important.  In my first year at Hoffenheim, I had a bunch of aggressive DMC's and not much creativity and skill relative to my opponents.  As I got richer, reputation increased, the trophy cabinet got more full, opponents were less likely to camp out in front of my penalty area taking silly pot shots.  Eventually, getting the types of players that could open up defenders, or central midfielders which could dominate "box to box", the tactic itself started looking more attractive.  Don't forget, Chelsea play with a midfield composed of two human beings, although Kante covers enough ground for three players. Matic himself is ok on the ball, but he's a tank.  Fabregasc is way more skilled, but to pull of a midfield screen like that, you need a wall, not a picket fence.

In my opinion, this tactic is fantastic. It produces some truly gorgeous football and could very well be the next evolutionary step to grow out of the ashes of 433.  It's sometimes ugly, but when it works it's beautiful. 

[Johan Cruyff's 3-4-3 Diamond (Very Fluid)]

Really interesting thread.  I've been playing around with 3 cb tactics recently, and managed to make a pretty effective 3142, although it was vulnerable to 433, and I was left with constant headaches regarding what to do with my wide players.  I couldn't exactly trust them as "wingers", and defensive wingers just seemed to leave us too vulnerable when missing tackles, and didn't offer enough in attack for my liking.  Having accepted a job with Hoffenheim in the Bundesliga, I found they had been playing 352 with wingbacks, which had left them in the relegation zone, short on attacking wingers, and in a mess.  What they did have was good, quick strikers.

So wingbacks it had to be then!  Playing on structured, it seemed to really take care of attacking wingers.  The problem was it would turn too much into a 532, leaving too many gaps.  What would inevitably happen is a speedy Konan-esque winger could simply strart running with the ball from deep, and by the time he was closed down, he will have already made it into a dangerous position.  Without wishing to hijack the thread, the answer was to turn my team "very fluid".  It ensured more movement between lines, especially in defense.  Players would "help out" on defense more.  More importantly, when one wingback would step up to deal with danger, the other would drop into the defensive line (of sorts) in order to maintain a sort of "back four".  The beautiful thing with using so many generic roles and a very fluid shape is that every member of the team is involved.  Early days yet, but what I'm noticing is the defense being less "solid" in the traditional sense, but much more active, especially when pressing.  I'm seeing more interceptions leading to counters, rather than tackles which would lead to clearances.  Also,  because players are less restricted by position, they're more available to receive incisive passing.  What it reminds me of is Croatia around Euro 2008, under Bilic, where the compactness of the team would force the opposition into mistakes, without having to fully press so much, and they could play their way out of trouble via shorter passes. 

Anyway, I don't mean to hijack the thread, just to offer some observations on the advantages of very fluid shape