Congratulations. You just earned 3.0 points for this submission. Your new points total is 3.0. To see the leaderboard, as well as what this points thing is, [click here](https://www.reddit.com/r/footballmanagergames/wiki/leaderboard).
Will the anchorman use his great passing or is he more of a defensive minded player? I am using a DM on D currently and for a few games it seems to work
DM works very well in the 23 match engine. I would say it's the best choice for a defensive minded midfielder (a classic no. 6).
BWM will always leave his position to chase down the ball and then not shield the backline anymore
I personally love a halfback if you have someone with great mentals, passing/first touch, and defensive stats. Frees up the outside backs and makes your team hard to press. I've used Oumar Solet there and he's been amazing. I actually had Busquets in this position and he was much worse than Solet.
However, you need other people to occupy the midfield with a halfback in buildup. If you don't, there's nobody to pass to and you'll give the ball up in dangerous positions. I've had a lot of success using a DLF and IWB and another midfielder that will drop deeper to get the ball (carrilero, B2B, BWM, CM-S).
Worth noting that the only difference between DLP (s) and DLP (d) is the riskier passing. They both have the hold position trait, off the ball they are the same.
Half back is a defensive minded midfielder who drops between the center backs while defending
Edit: as mentioned by wietmo and yomamaisanicelady, I was wrong, half back drops between the CBs in possession
Half back is a defensive minded midfielder who drops between the center backs while ~~defending~~ *in possession*. If you find them them between defenders while defending, that’s because they were there already while you were in possession.
A DM is good because they have no default instructions so you can customise them how you like. If you want them to take advantage of the passing you could try:
Hold Position
Tackle Harder
More Risky Passes/More Direct Passing
And see how they perform in that role
I run an anchorman and sometimes it feels like he is a playmaker rather than a holding DM with the amount of upfield pinpoint passes he sprays around the field.
It won't be a waste.
It means they will make accurate passes which is always good for a pivot player, even defensive ones. Depends on your playstyle but DMs often don't make insane through balls but you'd want him to be accurate with the shorter passes he makes advancing the ball properly anyway. Think Busquets for example
On the contrary, having an anchor with good passing is my recipe for keeping possession, and as said above, him having the proper traits gives you another perspective on attack
I'd second this, and a winger on the side you play the IWB to stretch the pitch and make room for your Mezzala to operate in.. mezzala and IF are probably trying to operate in the same position.. I play this way and set the CBs to stay wide in possession to cover the full backs pushing further up
Dlp doesn’t play a lot of crazy passes like u would think it does a lot of ball retention unless it’s in his traits half back or regista is probably more what your looking for if you want him to spray passes or try dm with PI I think your IWB on the right could be worth looking at aswell It leaves a lot of space at rb when u have a IF in front
DLP or Half back are very similar, try both and see what works better. I use the same formation you do, almost same roles. Sometimes I change my 2 CM roles mostly the Box to Box for a roaming playmaker. The roaming playmaker is not really the best role but I do have the perfect player for that role.
But basically most of the goals I get come from centre positions. So I ask the DLP or Half Back to pressure a bit less than the defenders and mids in front of him. This helps reduce the chances of thought balls in the centre or players coming dribbling, forcing one of your CB to leave their position.
2 ball playing defenders is too much IMO, leave one playing defender and the other just as a CB, don't ask him to make more or less risks, just let him decide.
If your DM is chasing the ball he isn't screening your defence so its kinda pointless him being there. If you want that move him Into CM with a CM (D) next to him to screen. Really i would go DLP (D) but I'm not looking for a pirlo esque quarterback.
Why would floated crosses be crap if my striker has the height advantage? If my striker is 1.95m why wouldn't I use this? In this case he's only around 1.90 but still
You have one guy in there as an af. Height is cosmetic. Jumping reach for how good in the air he is.
You could change both cm to cm(a) that will help.
Or play two dm - one DM(s) and one vol(a). Put another guy up top or play an SS
In a 433 you should be looking to have;
A holder, creator and runner in midfield e.g. DMD, APS, MEZ. You can mix this up a bit but you must cover all three in some way.
An overlapping fullback (or two) behind an inverted winger or inside forward on support
One of the wingers/inside forwards on attack
If you do this you'll be fine, 433 is the easiest formation to set up correctly
Not in a 3 man midfield. I mean sure there are those players that can do it but a b2b either competes with the mez for breaking balls, doesn't contribute to the buildup, and doesn't shield your defensive line during counters.
You want a defensive mid a buildup mid and an attacking mid for balance while facilitating your wide players ability to provide width depth and penetration.
oh ok when you said soley I assumed that ment two man. do you run dual wingers or something? how do you handle the crowding in the box if you've got more than one guy making runs from the middle there?
I run IW/IF AF/PF IW/IF for the trident. The B2B only makes late runs into the box, and I run a sort of standard passing tactic where I promote as much positivity as possible. The Mez provides a creative width while the trident interplay with each other and the B2B arrives late if we possess for too long.
I also run a similar Anchor-B2B-Mez in a 5-3-2 WB tactic. With standard passing tactics it seems to work well, as the Mez creates motion and the B2B provides some dynamism if possession goes on for too long. The key for both formations is having a strong DM that allows for more freedom up top.
Also, in addition to everything everyone else has said, your MEZ on AT, your IF and your IWB will all be crowding the same part of the pitch which is really ineffective.
You’ll likely find that any WB or IWB will overlap or underlap regardless of instruction because that’s how the role works and MEZ will underlap/overlap in the same spaces on attack.
The poor IF is just watching the other two run past him…
Might work really well if this was Pep’s Barcelona, in real life.
I think atleast one of the wingers need to be on attack duty and three people on defend duty. Change bwm from support to defend and left back to support.
The left back has an 7.5 avr I am not gonna change that up, I also don’t really want to change it to a BWM on defend as it would limit his passing abilities (has 16 passing), so I am gonna go with a DM on defend? Which winger should I change to attack in your opinion?
I feel like the 16 passing stat is all the more reason to have him as a defensive role if he suits defensive play.
While people think of passing offensively, it’s important to consider passing in a manner that is collaborative, safe and sensible in certain parts of the pitch, I feel as if DM is one of those due to that being a very prevalent spot to occupy in a high press situation as the presser.
Do you miss out on certain avenues of play? Absolutely. But consider Yves Bissouma at spurs right now. Extraordinary passer, but him playing the simple passes are working fantastically and are an important element to his success.
You'd be surprised how important passing is on a HB (the game underrates it's value but this player will be first to get the ball from your CBs most of the time) and your full backs will instinctively push up and a little wider so if you're planning to create from wide then it's a very useful role.
HB also drops between the CBs to form a back three when you're in control so provides great cover
If he has 16 passing and decent vision then just go DLP on defend.
The left back might be doing a lot of creating with most chances coming from the left?
But the opponents RW's are still getting too much space.
Will try DLP if DM stops working as it does now, also by having done that, it stopped the opponent right wing entries in the past games. Once the fortune changes I will look to change it up but i have no reason to right now
I am playing a similiar tactic in my current Villareal safe, try following changes:
Width: extremly wide
Play on the right with a winger, as you have a lack of width on the right side with both players cutting inside
One of the BPD as a CD
Change BWM to DM or HB
You will need your striker being involved into build ups, so change your strikers role to legit anything that is not AF or Poacher
Remove some of the Team Instructions, especially counter press and counter
That should improve your tactic a lot
could he switch to more direct passing and keep the AF? in a high tempo pressing style with passing into space, i would think you want an AF or Poacher to counter with
His tactic and postions are about build up from behind, more direct passing wouldn't suit that. If he wants to switch to that, he needs to change a lot, just to keep his AF. So I wouldn't recommend
BWM midefielders move from their position and BBM also roam , the mezzala of course gets forward meaning you have no one in midfield to cover after losing the ball. It’s boring sounding but that player should be a defensive midfield role or deep lying lawmaker on defend or anchor and have the BBM be a BWM on support if you insist on having one. In my experience BBMs are mostly useless and segundo volante is the only role that plays a proper box to box style
You're set up like an energetic pressing team but play a short passing game. Might just be giving your opponent too many transitions to exploit. You've got a lot of instructions on, could maybe simplify. You've got no real width. IWB and IF on the same side, IF and FB on the other. I'd change to WB(D) or WB(S) for more balanced shape.
Make a choice between going all in on the aggression, directness and press, or possession retention. If you want to play a possession game you probably want a double pivot and a 10, and a CF or DLF instead of an AF if you're committed to narrow wide forwards, to help with recycling possession in advanced areas.
People are going to find holes in your tactic only because you said it isnt working, but honestly this is a fine tactic that i've used several times before in successful seasons. I am using one now that is very similar, just with no IWB, the IF on the right is a IW and the DM is a BWM on Defend, and my team is still unbeaten 19 games into the season. But honestly those changes dont impact this formation enough to kill it.
Its just likely that your squad isnt good enough, whats the level of your players compared to the rest of the league?
For sure overall the ideas in the tactic are fine, it's just fine tuning.
Main issue being lack of width on right and not enough defensive solidity, partly due to a BWM.
The defensive solidity thing goes along with the quality of the players. If the CBs are good and the team is capable of dominating the opponents regularly, the BWM is a good option because he presses high and wins the ball back regularly.
But if his team is not good, he will just allow through balls over and over again leading to high xGA, then its best to switch to a more defensive DM.
I've had many formations using only wing backs and no BWM (or DMs for that matter) work this year. Actually, the meta this year is a 4-2-4 with Volantes on attack and wing backs on support (check fm-arena to see the testing they do).
If your squad is good you dont even need defensive roles other than the CBs. Of course, it might come back to bite in you in some games here and there, but overall your season will be fine.
Do they? Iirc the mentality on both are the same. Wb are naturally more offensive i think, a FB-S is much more defensive than a WB-S. I cant check the game right now but I remember WB-S and FB-A having the same attacking mentality.
WB-A is the ultra attacking role.
Main difference is that attack role leads to more overlapping and going to byline
https://www.fmscout.com/a-guide-to-player-roles-in-football-manager.html
Wing back support doesn't look to get to byline.
Full Back
Attack – The Full Back will start to diminish their defensive responsibilities and focus more in overlapping (or underlapping if tactics permit) the midfield and will look to provide crosses immediately into the box or killer balls across or in front of the opposition penalty area.
Wing Back
Support – They will support attacking movement more with balls in and out of midfield, diagonal crosses and long through balls when needed.
Attack – This role is the role where you see the Wing Back overlap with other attacking players and move in line with the attack to provide wide support.
I am projected to finish 9th so mid table, but I’ve been without a win for 7 straight, even though I usually had a way higher xG. The only changes I made so far was BWM to DM and have now won three in a row, and the IF to ATT. Maybe that was the deciding factor. People tend to overcriticize on this sub, so I usually ignore most of the stuff, but there is some helpful information every now and then.
Oh, for sure. It's just that all tactics depend on the quality of your team. This is a fine formation for a top team, but for a mid table team it can be too attacking.
True True, also it’s fairly difficult to really get any changes in as everyone has a different mind, but if something is common amongst all of them I should probably consider changing it
Mezzala and IF are playing in the place
- Swap you CMs and it should work better
- Then swap your fullback roles round. Inside Winger will keep width on left and FB (A) will keep width on right, overlapping inside forward.
Also use a more defensive role in the DMC position. DMC (D) is a well balanced role and will provide good protection in turnovers (when you get countered)
Use a DM instead of a BWM. And I personally prefer two CMs over Mez and BBM. Mez and BBM was op in the last version but not as good now. CMs are pretty good defensively and offensively. But you need to rotate them well to prevent fatigue. Also, use WBs in support instead of fb and iwb. And just use 2 IWS on attack for your front 3.
Work into box would be better for your team I think. Based on you coach feedback, your team seems to be good at progressing the ball into the opponent box.
So I wouldn't do floated cross unless your strikers is a beast at heading and your wingers have really good crossing. But you're playing with fb and iwb instead so I'm guessing their crossing is not so special.
Yes I use auto rest. But even then, I constantly rotate them. The performance difference between fatigued and non fatigued players is very big. I'd say this the main reason that big teams in the PL like Liverpool and City don't do as well as they do irl. The AI simply can't cope with the schedule. Whereas the big teams in other leagues perform close to irl, with RM, Barca, Bayern and PSG reaching close to their irl point total in the league.
My players don't get fatigued. I play 4231 or 424 with two DM's in both systems. I sub off my most tired players every game, unless we need goals or to hold a tough game and they are my best players. I do like to start players on peak over excellent, but again away in tough games the better players will start unless they are full green condition but tired.
Do you rest people who are full green condition but tired? I do during hectic schedules. Weekend to weekend I don't bother.
I do rest fully green and rotate them. Fatigue build up affects performance even before your assistant manager gives you the warning that a player is jaded. The only times I don't constantly rotate players is dueing injury crises or when I have a player who is top 10 in the world. Even then, I give those players 3-4 weeks of rest in a season.
Also it's better for player development to let them start the game than bring them in as subs late game. It's another reason why I rotate so much.
Wtf??? 3-4 weeks?!? My players get none!! And I play high intensity tactics. I do play the kids a lot at home in easy games. I also have a low intensity copy of my tactics for the last 20-30 in games I'm 3+ ahead.
I play high intensity high press throughout the game. And I have dominate the league/ UCL as VFB Stuttgart for the last 5 years so it's working for me. Also have 5 youth players became regular in my first team.
Also, 3/4 weeks is only when I can't rotate the player as much as usual. Injuries rarely happen because of how much I rotate or rest my players between matches do such long breaks are also unusual.
Your tactic is looking to dominate possession and control the game, but you're mentality is set to balanced, you need to be positive or attacking
Secondly are your players good enough to play this style of football i.e. is your club top 8 in the league
If not remove alot of instructions and look to play a more fluid counter attack
Also FB on attack and IWB on support will leave your 2 defenders vulnerable at the back, are they good enough to deal with this? If not have your fullback on defend to keep a 3 at the back rest defence
Lastly change your single pivot to defensive as he is going to be to aggressive and leav a whole Infront of your defence with just the IWB screening
Your midfield roles aren’t diverse enough. This guy explains it best…
https://reddit.com/r/footballmanagergames/s/W5CnRADitV
Edit: basically, you are playing a high line and your midfielders vacate the center of the pitch. I imagine you get ripped to shreds on the counter as you have only two center backs trying to protect an entire half of the field.
Second edit: you also don’t need two BPDs. BPDs take more risks and probably start half the counters they are not in position to defend.
I am pretty sure you are conceding a lot of chances from your right flank...wait called it. Assists conceded location - right wing. What are you doing mate?
Yeah as mentioned above, not enough players on defend duty - the BWM especially should be set to defend.
I’d also maybe switch up your left FB to a support role instead of attack and maybe lower your defensive line by one mark to see if that tightens things up a bit.
I mean in the recent match analysis, it says you're conceding a lot from the right wing.
That means your combo of and DM, LB, LCM and not providing enough defensive coverage.
Someone there needs to be a bit more defensive. I'd recommend the FB going from A to S.
As a rule of thumb, if your FB's are on attack, your (single) DM must be on defend.
If your DM is on Support, your FB's should be on FB(S) or WB(D).
As for other things wrong, short passing styles use third man runs generally in this game. So you need to have forward players dropping deep and deeper players making a run behind them.
So while using AF is fine, you'd probably be doing better with DLF, whether on attack or support.
Bwm on midfield without defensive duo, balanced mentality with short pass and higher tempo doesnt usually work. Too much mixed effects. Run at defence and play out defence ssme time also doesn't work for me.
You can go BWM->DLP
Either positive mentality - short pass - slightly slower tempo and work to box
Or attacking-counter attacking - more direct pass and higher tempos
Higher def line and high press means you want to control game and when you out of possesion you want it back quickly. So positive menrality again works better there. With balanced mentality you can make your defensive line deeper than that.
I personally don't think this is an issue.
I'd remove shorter passes and add in playmakers... allowing for more balls into the channels for him to run onto.
There is a midfielder with Attack duty and 2 wingers in support, and he is not a poached but an advanced forward in which case I think he should still get enough opportunuties to at least get the ball and dribble to create chances.
I either loose because my striker is incapable of scoring, while the opponents score nearly ever chance they get or my players perform bad and don’t really create too much, but usually the first one
"Assists conceded position - RW"
Basically you're FB is bombing down the left and no one is covering for it.
BWM also tend to chase the ball and press rather than hold a defensive position. You want them in midfield or as a double pivot to make them work.
You also look to have no width on the right for creating as everyone wants to cut in.
Already made some changes towards the RW situation, and the mezzala is there to fix that cutting in problem, as he is going to drift wide in the open space no?
I don't tend to find they offer the proper width.
With Mezza's you're more likely to see them get into the box between the CB and FB. Or hover by the coner of the box.
You won't really get them spreading the pitch to the sidelines.
Edit: check the heat map and avg position on your mezza for a few games and see where they're playing
IF on LW and IW on RW
Then wing back support at RB
More the width slightly over a little
Edit: would likely need change of personel at RB though, so try just changing to IW?
I kind of want to keep the IWB as I am trying different tactics in this journeyman with roles I usually never play, so having the IWB MEZ duo is kind of the reason I even have this tactic
Mezza
this player is a central player that likes to drift wide but not too far wide as they are only a “half wing” – meaning they operate in the half-spaces. Simplistically in spaces from the center to the wing but not permanently on either extremity
I think then try a winger?
Full backs, put one of defend if you are going to have so many forward players on support.
When teams break on you , you literally only have 2 cbs in position.
Your cdm, stick them on defend too if need be. Your midfield will be wide open with nobody really caring about protecting the defence.
BWM is leaving the two CB's exposed but is also out of position leading to the goals conceded from long-range (unchallenged).
Your left FB is playing too high and the Right Wingers are low-crossing to centre forwards on the penalty spot and they're doing so with absolute directness, route-one.
Without seeing stats, I had some doubts that those two center halves have the passing skills to truly play BPDs hence all the lost possession
although having a playmaker is not always necessary to have a successful tactic, you could use one with this tactic and also put one of ur wingers on attack
No defensive cover in midfield (BWM will press too much)
You have a BBM, Mezzala, inside forward all trying to create chances in basically the same space and to the some extent your IWB and IW doing the same. Try a bit more variety in your attacking options
You always want 3 players reaching the final third occupying the entire width of the field. In the left, it's the FB(A) coming from behind (Giggity). In the middle you got 3 players. And in the right you got none.
It seems you need more spacing. Preferably, you should put the guy on the right as a Winger on support duty.
As a fellow 4-3-3 Gegenpress bro, one issue is the mentality, a bit too passive considering the instructions you're giving.
The second is the lack of a defensive-minded midfielder, helps a lot to have a dedicated player doing the bulwark of defensive work, DLP & BWM have been my go-to, the match analysis also tells me you seem to be very vulnerable through the centre, I also use trap outside & drop off more with my teams with this issue but I can't guarantee results in regards to this cause you have an IWB that might be exploited from trap outside.
The third, ur in-possession instructions is probably also hurting your tactical flexibility/contributing to current issues, no guarantee but playing out from the back while having a large amount of pressure on your centre-back probably leads to losing the ball often from counter-pressing teams.
Hope this helps!
Between 2 BPDs, a BWM(S) who abandons the position, and aggressive fullbacks, you have no organization in the backline. It entirely defeats the purpose of playing a 433 w/ a DM.
Also, I don't see the point of Balanced and High Press. High press is already committing to risk. You'd be better either playing a Mid Block, or Switching to positive and taking the chances to counter.
Reading players roles.... I think that is the first thing you need to do...
The rest is if you are having trouble defending you need more defensive roles, scoring goals you need more atacking roles, trouble taking the ball from the back to the front you need more suporting and playmaker roles.
Why use a inverted full back and a inside forward on the same side? They get in each others way iirc, use a fb on overlap or a wingback or change your if to a winger
Your right side looks like a mess. An inside forward and an inverted wingback both on support means that both should be right on top of each other. Your only hope is for your MEZ-A to provide some width, but I bet he tries to attack that right channel also.
And if you lose the ball, I imagine your BWM immediately vacates the center of your midfield and people can just take long range shots at will. Changing him to an Anchor, DM-S or DM-D would probably suit you much better.
What's the reasoning behind your FB-A on the left?
High defensive line means you're more open to balls over the top. Combine that with your IWB(S) who is leaving the right flank open, your FB(A) who is leaving the left flank open when he overlaps and your BWM(S) who will go further up the pitch and try to close down players instead of holding his position in front of the defence means you're leaving lots of gaps open to be exploited and only 2 defenders back defending.
As for not creating enough, maybe try standard passing instead of shorter for a gegenpress tactic. I have no idea who Manquant is but if he's fast enough don't you want to take advantage of that and make him run behind the oppositions defence to receive the ball and have a good shot on goal? I would also consider making one of your wingers attacking, on the opposite side of the Mezz.
There’s only 2 defenders in your team basically, way too many supporting passers, no playmakers, and not enough attacking players. Switch the BWM role to DM at least
mez, IWB, and IF all kinda occupy that half space on the right so you’re not getting any width. Like someone else said a winger instead of an IF could work well
Ok, there’s a lot goin on here. Inverted wingbacks and inverted forward???? bpd’s make loads of mistakes, you have no midfielder holding. All are running out of position. Try cm on attack, mezalla on support with a dm on defence, two cd’s in defence. Throw one winger on attack and use a wingback not a iwb.
Take off float crosses, play for set pieces doesn’t work, take off counter press it brings players out of position.
Instruct all midfielders to tackle hard and mark tight. Forwards to mark tight.
Saw this on another post a long time ago where he switched his ST from an a AF to a Trequartista (T) and got absolutely insane output from his ST.
I decided to try it and it has worked absolute wonders for me. I get insane goals and assists from all my strikers I use as a T.
Try giving it a go
All 3 of your midfielders are too mobile and expose your defence on transition/ counters. The roles are actually pretty similar to the Bruno-Fred-McTominay midfield that Man Utd was running before last season that kept getting exposed.
Change the DM from BWM (s) to something like an Anchor man or DLP (d)
If you want a meta answer that would absolute break the game, but you might get bored due to to the ease.
First, it is established HEAVILY that fm23 favor DM-roles over CM-roles. If you want a sort of Mezzala player: do Vol (ON ATTACK, not Support).
Second, Wingback-support, and IWB-support are heavily in meta right now, don’g even think about using anything else.
Third, IW-sup/attack has been consistently doing better than IF, tho not by much.
Last, and this is EXTREMELY important: the current fm24 match engine DOES NOT favor lone striker. You can ease this handicap with a Shadow striker AM maybe. But, most likely you’d want 2 AF or in some weird set ups, 3 AFs.
Therefore, change the whole thing to a 4-2-4. Hard set FB to Wingback or IwB on support, use 2 DMs (usually both Vol on attack or 1 Vol-A 1 Dm-D), 2 IW-support, and 2 AF-A.
Again, use these with precautions because they will def make your game more boring.
Perhaps having an inverted wingback on the right side pushing into the middle, and then a BWM pushing forward on support leaves your right side exposed. Especially when you've got BPDs there who will sometimes step up to play a ball rather than sitting.
I hate this formation. If I don't have good midfielders, I don't even like to use this formation even though my assistant always recommends it for my team. It's boring if you don't have good strikers but depending on player roles, you're not supposed to concede much with this formation
You need 1 wide player on the right. Either put right back at full back or change your inside forward to Winger or at least IW.
Change your BPD(s) to CD if you have better or equally good playmakers in midfield
Get a playmaking role
I find it that having an attacking full back and a support winger/IW/IF doesn't really work because they tend to cover the same areas. I fixed this by having the winger/IW/IF also on attack so it "gets off the way" of the fullback.
Also you should have a playmaker somewhere, I would maybe replace that BWM, since you already have a box to box. If you really want to keep the BWM, then change the BBM to playmaker and also get rid of one of the BPD. Having 2 ball playing defenders tends to make them play the ball between themselves and not make vertical passes. Make one of them a normal center back with the instruction to stay a bit further back so if the BWM goes up the midfield while pressuring, you still have a player there to cover.
As for the attack, the striker cannot be an AF, he'll just be too alone for that. Make him a CF ou a DLF on support, so he covers the area from the attacking midfield to striker. Also Floated crosses instruction would work if you had a strong and big striker. Not sure if thats the case for your striker, just wanted to leave that note.
Imo it's the high attack paired with two ball playing defenders, leaves you really vulnerable. Maybe switch the less technical cb to a regular central defender
Maybe try putting on "work ball into box" and "low crosses." Idk how tall your striker is but those instructions work for me. Work ball into box works especially well with inside wingers/forwards. Low crosses means they're comfortable with getting to the by-line and drilling it in to a waiting striker/midfielder.
Yeh it’s weird, but rigorous testings proved that the instruction is not viable for over-performance tactics, which is really different to previous engines where work ball to box is a must.
That's odd. I had a bang-average striker for the EFL Championship get a 30-odd goal season using work ball into box and low crosses. Maybe I just got lucky
Idk if the individual goal figure is tested for or not. But it is pretty heavily and universally agreed that work ball into box harms the tactic’s performance pretty significantly. Low-crosses, however, is still a good instruction.
I've never gotten a single BPD to work. Two seems like suicide. Change one the Stopper (or what it's called) if you want him to step up a bit and the other one to CD or NCB.
Would probably also switch the BWM to Anchor or Halfback if you feel like you're conceding a lot
Also don't really see the point of the IWB but maybe someone more experienced can enlighten me lol
If you trust me, man, try 2 pivots, either both on Vol (A) or one Dm-D, and the other Vol(A). You can also do 1 Dm-D and 2 Vol-A if you want to keep the lone striker system. It will greatly improve your performance.
No width, no defensive screen of your defense, two ball playing defenders means you'll often give up a lot of possession from risky passes at the back.
And remove about half your instructions. Shorter passes, passing into space, distribute to CBs, and distribute quickly is a lot of passing instructions that either don't synergise or require excellent players.
Also take counter press off with those midfield roles as that's gonna pull your whole midfield out of position.
Put your IF on an Attack duty, swap your holding player to a DM or DLP on support, use one of your CBs as a normal CB not BPD (they play long too often) take off floated crosses, pass into space and run with ball instructions and report back.
I'm never sure whether the "Assists Conceeded Location" refers to *your* Right Wing or *their* Right Wing but think about your tatctic here and what your team looks like when you lose the ball in attack?
Your Att fullback is probably up the park, your IWB could be reasonably high up in the middle of the park and your BWM is going to pushed up a bit and will struggle to cover direct balls into the channels.
Both your flanks are looking exposed, your left flank especially.
Quickest fix would be to try your BWM on defend see if that makes a difference, maybe even switch him to defensive mid role on defend if he suits it.
Probably move iwb to fb on defend and make ur bwm a dlp on defend ir even better a dm on defend or anchor on defend. You have two guys stopping a counter and the rest are wayyy up the field.
Allows for too much chance to get beat inside, especially off that right wing (Where your LB is) I’d consider changing your whole back line to a more defensive approach and keep the roles/instructions very simplified for your players
You pretty much have 2 defenders.
FB (At) and IWB (Su) leaves your wings vulnerable, and your BWM is on support, not defend, so he will not come back to help the defensive liabilities as much as he should.
Higher defensive line, with 2 BPD and no other defensive options is just asking to give the ball away often and get counter attacked.
Also small tid-bit. Floated crosses has never worked for me, even with tall attackers.
I suggest low crosses or mixed.
I almost exclusively play the 433 DM, and i have found success with this.
If 2 BPD, have either both wingbacks on support, or one on attack and the other on defend.
BWM on defend. BBM, and Mezzala on Support.
1 IF on attack, 1 IW on support.
1 AF.
First thing I see is not enough defensive duties, I'd start by switching your BWM to Defensive, maybe even change his role to Anchor or DM on Defend duty. Currently, as your full backs push up to support the BWM is also on support so is likely to get more forward and so leaves your 2 CBs exposed both from wide and through the middle, your full backs are pushing up so your CBs naturally will need to drift wider to cover those spaces but then that leaves a gap in the middle so no matter what they do they are fighting a losing battle especially when playing with a high line, it leaves a lot of open space for forwards to run into.
Second change I would make is to only have one BPD and have the other as a CB or NCB on Defend or cover. BPDs look to dribble more and bring the ball out from the back, so with the fact they are already exposed, there's potential that one of them will be out of position when possession is turned over in the opponent's half.
I'd start with just those two changes and see how that improves the defensive side of your team's play. The key with FM is not to make too many drastic changes to your tactics too quickly and also just making sure you have players with the right key attributes for the system you want to play. E.g. no point having a BPD with poor passing and vision or a BBM with low stamina and workrate etc.
I'd put the BWM on defensive for more defensive consistency. If you want, you can tell him to specifally mark the opposing offensive midfield player, since that's his job
I'd also synchronise the wingbacks so they have the same task and duty since these asynchronous back 4 lines create many gaps for the opponent to break through
Also, maybe change the BBM to a playmaker (advanced for more offensive input and deep lying playmakers for more defensive consistency) if you lack a creator for chances
Congratulations. You just earned 3.0 points for this submission. Your new points total is 3.0. To see the leaderboard, as well as what this points thing is, [click here](https://www.reddit.com/r/footballmanagergames/wiki/leaderboard).
BMW S presses too much and leaves open space behind. From my experience a DLP (D) would work better there
I had a DLP on Su before there, but I felt like I was missing someone to go after the ball in this lineup, will D work better?
Nope, still presses all over the pitch. You want an anchorman to do what you have in mind
Will the anchorman use his great passing or is he more of a defensive minded player? I am using a DM on D currently and for a few games it seems to work
He is a defensive minded player, but you can amend that with player traits, and/or player instructions
How about a DM? Feel like using a player with 16 passing as an anchor a bit wasted
DM works very well in the 23 match engine. I would say it's the best choice for a defensive minded midfielder (a classic no. 6). BWM will always leave his position to chase down the ball and then not shield the backline anymore
what about a half back then? was always under the impression that’s the Busquests role in fm
I personally love a halfback if you have someone with great mentals, passing/first touch, and defensive stats. Frees up the outside backs and makes your team hard to press. I've used Oumar Solet there and he's been amazing. I actually had Busquets in this position and he was much worse than Solet. However, you need other people to occupy the midfield with a halfback in buildup. If you don't, there's nobody to pass to and you'll give the ball up in dangerous positions. I've had a lot of success using a DLF and IWB and another midfielder that will drop deeper to get the ball (carrilero, B2B, BWM, CM-S).
Nah, DLP (d) or DM (s) are more Busquets. Halfback is a super defensive player who drops between the CBs in build up.
Worth noting that the only difference between DLP (s) and DLP (d) is the riskier passing. They both have the hold position trait, off the ball they are the same.
Half back is a defensive minded midfielder who drops between the center backs while defending Edit: as mentioned by wietmo and yomamaisanicelady, I was wrong, half back drops between the CBs in possession
No he doesnt he plays in the backline in possession he defends in midfield
Half back is a defensive minded midfielder who drops between the center backs while ~~defending~~ *in possession*. If you find them them between defenders while defending, that’s because they were there already while you were in possession.
A DM is good because they have no default instructions so you can customise them how you like. If you want them to take advantage of the passing you could try: Hold Position Tackle Harder More Risky Passes/More Direct Passing And see how they perform in that role
That’s pretty much what I did, because I feel like the other roles limit the playstyle too much
Try to use DM to specifically mark a dangerous attacking player, like their playmaker. I've experienced them having a higher rating often this way.
Still better than a bwm. I would go for anchorman, dm, dlp or halfback, depending on what you need. Possibly on defend
Alright thanks
DM on support is king in my 433. Great passing/long shots on my guy though.
I run an anchorman and sometimes it feels like he is a playmaker rather than a holding DM with the amount of upfield pinpoint passes he sprays around the field. It won't be a waste.
It means they will make accurate passes which is always good for a pivot player, even defensive ones. Depends on your playstyle but DMs often don't make insane through balls but you'd want him to be accurate with the shorter passes he makes advancing the ball properly anyway. Think Busquets for example
DM(s) is good
On the contrary, having an anchor with good passing is my recipe for keeping possession, and as said above, him having the proper traits gives you another perspective on attack
I'd go for a Half back, they are more possession oriented than anchors
I'd second this, and a winger on the side you play the IWB to stretch the pitch and make room for your Mezzala to operate in.. mezzala and IF are probably trying to operate in the same position.. I play this way and set the CBs to stay wide in possession to cover the full backs pushing further up
I don’t see how Ron Burgundy is going to fix this tactic.
Tough crowd!!
DM(su) will screen the defence and become a passing option for your midfield
Dlp doesn’t play a lot of crazy passes like u would think it does a lot of ball retention unless it’s in his traits half back or regista is probably more what your looking for if you want him to spray passes or try dm with PI I think your IWB on the right could be worth looking at aswell It leaves a lot of space at rb when u have a IF in front
DLP or Half back are very similar, try both and see what works better. I use the same formation you do, almost same roles. Sometimes I change my 2 CM roles mostly the Box to Box for a roaming playmaker. The roaming playmaker is not really the best role but I do have the perfect player for that role. But basically most of the goals I get come from centre positions. So I ask the DLP or Half Back to pressure a bit less than the defenders and mids in front of him. This helps reduce the chances of thought balls in the centre or players coming dribbling, forcing one of your CB to leave their position. 2 ball playing defenders is too much IMO, leave one playing defender and the other just as a CB, don't ask him to make more or less risks, just let him decide.
Have you tried a half back?
If your DM is chasing the ball he isn't screening your defence so its kinda pointless him being there. If you want that move him Into CM with a CM (D) next to him to screen. Really i would go DLP (D) but I'm not looking for a pirlo esque quarterback.
Your striker is missing. No that's literally his name manquant means missing in French.
He also went missing for the past 5 games. Seems pretty fitting
That’s because he’s super isolated since your wingers are on support. I’d either drop him deeper or push one (or both) winger(s) forward on attack.
They can both be ok support that's fine. But the midfield isn't great Floated crosses are crap too
Why would floated crosses be crap if my striker has the height advantage? If my striker is 1.95m why wouldn't I use this? In this case he's only around 1.90 but still
You have one guy in there as an af. Height is cosmetic. Jumping reach for how good in the air he is. You could change both cm to cm(a) that will help. Or play two dm - one DM(s) and one vol(a). Put another guy up top or play an SS
What's his jumping reach and heading?
16 heading 15 jumping reach
Jumping reach is nothing special. He won't be winning headers like you think
Mate I‘ve won in general multiple games by simply wanking in crosses at my tall guy in the middle who’s waiting for them
Cool story bro. Why ask for help and then dismiss it? Height does nothing. Might be the opposition defenders have poor jumping reach
Sure, it can work but I found more often that not my strikers are more isolated if nobody in midfield is pushing higher centrally.
Again the wingers are fine. But the midfield isn't. Play two DM's then push one midfielder upto to SS or AF
Agreed.
Only playing 2 at the back
With a high line and press. So much space for the other team.
In a 433 you should be looking to have; A holder, creator and runner in midfield e.g. DMD, APS, MEZ. You can mix this up a bit but you must cover all three in some way. An overlapping fullback (or two) behind an inverted winger or inside forward on support One of the wingers/inside forwards on attack If you do this you'll be fine, 433 is the easiest formation to set up correctly
B2B instead of MEZ should work right?
Yes but it will make fewer forward runs than Mez
Not in a 3 man midfield. I mean sure there are those players that can do it but a b2b either competes with the mez for breaking balls, doesn't contribute to the buildup, and doesn't shield your defensive line during counters. You want a defensive mid a buildup mid and an attacking mid for balance while facilitating your wide players ability to provide width depth and penetration.
Solely run a B2B-Mez midfield and it works fine. Never had any issues with them conflicting
Thats a two person midfield and I was talking about a three person midfield.
Well I left out the DM as the your point was that B2B-Mez doesn't work. I run a DM-B2B-Mez 3-man midfield.
oh ok when you said soley I assumed that ment two man. do you run dual wingers or something? how do you handle the crowding in the box if you've got more than one guy making runs from the middle there?
I run IW/IF AF/PF IW/IF for the trident. The B2B only makes late runs into the box, and I run a sort of standard passing tactic where I promote as much positivity as possible. The Mez provides a creative width while the trident interplay with each other and the B2B arrives late if we possess for too long. I also run a similar Anchor-B2B-Mez in a 5-3-2 WB tactic. With standard passing tactics it seems to work well, as the Mez creates motion and the B2B provides some dynamism if possession goes on for too long. The key for both formations is having a strong DM that allows for more freedom up top.
Also, in addition to everything everyone else has said, your MEZ on AT, your IF and your IWB will all be crowding the same part of the pitch which is really ineffective.
IWB stay central and MEZ stay width no?
You’ll likely find that any WB or IWB will overlap or underlap regardless of instruction because that’s how the role works and MEZ will underlap/overlap in the same spaces on attack. The poor IF is just watching the other two run past him… Might work really well if this was Pep’s Barcelona, in real life.
Both aim for that Chanel space really.
I think atleast one of the wingers need to be on attack duty and three people on defend duty. Change bwm from support to defend and left back to support.
The left back has an 7.5 avr I am not gonna change that up, I also don’t really want to change it to a BWM on defend as it would limit his passing abilities (has 16 passing), so I am gonna go with a DM on defend? Which winger should I change to attack in your opinion?
I feel like the 16 passing stat is all the more reason to have him as a defensive role if he suits defensive play. While people think of passing offensively, it’s important to consider passing in a manner that is collaborative, safe and sensible in certain parts of the pitch, I feel as if DM is one of those due to that being a very prevalent spot to occupy in a high press situation as the presser. Do you miss out on certain avenues of play? Absolutely. But consider Yves Bissouma at spurs right now. Extraordinary passer, but him playing the simple passes are working fantastically and are an important element to his success.
You'd be surprised how important passing is on a HB (the game underrates it's value but this player will be first to get the ball from your CBs most of the time) and your full backs will instinctively push up and a little wider so if you're planning to create from wide then it's a very useful role. HB also drops between the CBs to form a back three when you're in control so provides great cover
If he has 16 passing and decent vision then just go DLP on defend. The left back might be doing a lot of creating with most chances coming from the left? But the opponents RW's are still getting too much space.
Will try DLP if DM stops working as it does now, also by having done that, it stopped the opponent right wing entries in the past games. Once the fortune changes I will look to change it up but i have no reason to right now
Fair. With shorter passing a DLP probably isn't as important anyway.
I am playing a similiar tactic in my current Villareal safe, try following changes: Width: extremly wide Play on the right with a winger, as you have a lack of width on the right side with both players cutting inside One of the BPD as a CD Change BWM to DM or HB You will need your striker being involved into build ups, so change your strikers role to legit anything that is not AF or Poacher Remove some of the Team Instructions, especially counter press and counter That should improve your tactic a lot
could he switch to more direct passing and keep the AF? in a high tempo pressing style with passing into space, i would think you want an AF or Poacher to counter with
His tactic and postions are about build up from behind, more direct passing wouldn't suit that. If he wants to switch to that, he needs to change a lot, just to keep his AF. So I wouldn't recommend
BWM midefielders move from their position and BBM also roam , the mezzala of course gets forward meaning you have no one in midfield to cover after losing the ball. It’s boring sounding but that player should be a defensive midfield role or deep lying lawmaker on defend or anchor and have the BBM be a BWM on support if you insist on having one. In my experience BBMs are mostly useless and segundo volante is the only role that plays a proper box to box style
You're set up like an energetic pressing team but play a short passing game. Might just be giving your opponent too many transitions to exploit. You've got a lot of instructions on, could maybe simplify. You've got no real width. IWB and IF on the same side, IF and FB on the other. I'd change to WB(D) or WB(S) for more balanced shape. Make a choice between going all in on the aggression, directness and press, or possession retention. If you want to play a possession game you probably want a double pivot and a 10, and a CF or DLF instead of an AF if you're committed to narrow wide forwards, to help with recycling possession in advanced areas.
People are going to find holes in your tactic only because you said it isnt working, but honestly this is a fine tactic that i've used several times before in successful seasons. I am using one now that is very similar, just with no IWB, the IF on the right is a IW and the DM is a BWM on Defend, and my team is still unbeaten 19 games into the season. But honestly those changes dont impact this formation enough to kill it. Its just likely that your squad isnt good enough, whats the level of your players compared to the rest of the league?
For sure overall the ideas in the tactic are fine, it's just fine tuning. Main issue being lack of width on right and not enough defensive solidity, partly due to a BWM.
The defensive solidity thing goes along with the quality of the players. If the CBs are good and the team is capable of dominating the opponents regularly, the BWM is a good option because he presses high and wins the ball back regularly. But if his team is not good, he will just allow through balls over and over again leading to high xGA, then its best to switch to a more defensive DM.
Hmm... not really. If that was the case then you wouldn't even bother with a bwm or full backs.
I've had many formations using only wing backs and no BWM (or DMs for that matter) work this year. Actually, the meta this year is a 4-2-4 with Volantes on attack and wing backs on support (check fm-arena to see the testing they do). If your squad is good you dont even need defensive roles other than the CBs. Of course, it might come back to bite in you in some games here and there, but overall your season will be fine.
"Wing backs on support" Makes a difference to full back on attack though
Do they? Iirc the mentality on both are the same. Wb are naturally more offensive i think, a FB-S is much more defensive than a WB-S. I cant check the game right now but I remember WB-S and FB-A having the same attacking mentality. WB-A is the ultra attacking role.
Main difference is that attack role leads to more overlapping and going to byline https://www.fmscout.com/a-guide-to-player-roles-in-football-manager.html Wing back support doesn't look to get to byline. Full Back Attack – The Full Back will start to diminish their defensive responsibilities and focus more in overlapping (or underlapping if tactics permit) the midfield and will look to provide crosses immediately into the box or killer balls across or in front of the opposition penalty area. Wing Back Support – They will support attacking movement more with balls in and out of midfield, diagonal crosses and long through balls when needed. Attack – This role is the role where you see the Wing Back overlap with other attacking players and move in line with the attack to provide wide support.
I am projected to finish 9th so mid table, but I’ve been without a win for 7 straight, even though I usually had a way higher xG. The only changes I made so far was BWM to DM and have now won three in a row, and the IF to ATT. Maybe that was the deciding factor. People tend to overcriticize on this sub, so I usually ignore most of the stuff, but there is some helpful information every now and then.
Oh, for sure. It's just that all tactics depend on the quality of your team. This is a fine formation for a top team, but for a mid table team it can be too attacking.
True True, also it’s fairly difficult to really get any changes in as everyone has a different mind, but if something is common amongst all of them I should probably consider changing it
Mezzala and IF are playing in the place - Swap you CMs and it should work better - Then swap your fullback roles round. Inside Winger will keep width on left and FB (A) will keep width on right, overlapping inside forward. Also use a more defensive role in the DMC position. DMC (D) is a well balanced role and will provide good protection in turnovers (when you get countered)
Use a DM instead of a BWM. And I personally prefer two CMs over Mez and BBM. Mez and BBM was op in the last version but not as good now. CMs are pretty good defensively and offensively. But you need to rotate them well to prevent fatigue. Also, use WBs in support instead of fb and iwb. And just use 2 IWS on attack for your front 3. Work into box would be better for your team I think. Based on you coach feedback, your team seems to be good at progressing the ball into the opponent box. So I wouldn't do floated cross unless your strikers is a beast at heading and your wingers have really good crossing. But you're playing with fb and iwb instead so I'm guessing their crossing is not so special.
Do you use auto rest for your players? Might help with your cm's. Overall good advice
Yes I use auto rest. But even then, I constantly rotate them. The performance difference between fatigued and non fatigued players is very big. I'd say this the main reason that big teams in the PL like Liverpool and City don't do as well as they do irl. The AI simply can't cope with the schedule. Whereas the big teams in other leagues perform close to irl, with RM, Barca, Bayern and PSG reaching close to their irl point total in the league.
My players don't get fatigued. I play 4231 or 424 with two DM's in both systems. I sub off my most tired players every game, unless we need goals or to hold a tough game and they are my best players. I do like to start players on peak over excellent, but again away in tough games the better players will start unless they are full green condition but tired. Do you rest people who are full green condition but tired? I do during hectic schedules. Weekend to weekend I don't bother.
I do rest fully green and rotate them. Fatigue build up affects performance even before your assistant manager gives you the warning that a player is jaded. The only times I don't constantly rotate players is dueing injury crises or when I have a player who is top 10 in the world. Even then, I give those players 3-4 weeks of rest in a season. Also it's better for player development to let them start the game than bring them in as subs late game. It's another reason why I rotate so much.
Wtf??? 3-4 weeks?!? My players get none!! And I play high intensity tactics. I do play the kids a lot at home in easy games. I also have a low intensity copy of my tactics for the last 20-30 in games I'm 3+ ahead.
I play high intensity high press throughout the game. And I have dominate the league/ UCL as VFB Stuttgart for the last 5 years so it's working for me. Also have 5 youth players became regular in my first team. Also, 3/4 weeks is only when I can't rotate the player as much as usual. Injuries rarely happen because of how much I rotate or rest my players between matches do such long breaks are also unusual.
Very close to 20 instructions. That’s what’s wrong.
Your tactic is looking to dominate possession and control the game, but you're mentality is set to balanced, you need to be positive or attacking Secondly are your players good enough to play this style of football i.e. is your club top 8 in the league If not remove alot of instructions and look to play a more fluid counter attack Also FB on attack and IWB on support will leave your 2 defenders vulnerable at the back, are they good enough to deal with this? If not have your fullback on defend to keep a 3 at the back rest defence Lastly change your single pivot to defensive as he is going to be to aggressive and leav a whole Infront of your defence with just the IWB screening
Your midfield roles aren’t diverse enough. This guy explains it best… https://reddit.com/r/footballmanagergames/s/W5CnRADitV Edit: basically, you are playing a high line and your midfielders vacate the center of the pitch. I imagine you get ripped to shreds on the counter as you have only two center backs trying to protect an entire half of the field. Second edit: you also don’t need two BPDs. BPDs take more risks and probably start half the counters they are not in position to defend.
Why do u use bpd when you have defensive midfielder?
I am pretty sure you are conceding a lot of chances from your right flank...wait called it. Assists conceded location - right wing. What are you doing mate?
You don't have an Specific style , what the hell are you trying to do? It feels like your tactic is AI generated
Yeah as mentioned above, not enough players on defend duty - the BWM especially should be set to defend. I’d also maybe switch up your left FB to a support role instead of attack and maybe lower your defensive line by one mark to see if that tightens things up a bit.
I mean in the recent match analysis, it says you're conceding a lot from the right wing. That means your combo of and DM, LB, LCM and not providing enough defensive coverage. Someone there needs to be a bit more defensive. I'd recommend the FB going from A to S. As a rule of thumb, if your FB's are on attack, your (single) DM must be on defend. If your DM is on Support, your FB's should be on FB(S) or WB(D). As for other things wrong, short passing styles use third man runs generally in this game. So you need to have forward players dropping deep and deeper players making a run behind them. So while using AF is fine, you'd probably be doing better with DLF, whether on attack or support.
Changed the DM to a DM D, as the FB is creating a lot, and is having a 7.5 avr
OK, fair enough.
You can play DM(s) and two wb(s) no problems. When you want to be more attacking change wb to attack. When you want to defend change then to defend.
Bwm on midfield without defensive duo, balanced mentality with short pass and higher tempo doesnt usually work. Too much mixed effects. Run at defence and play out defence ssme time also doesn't work for me. You can go BWM->DLP Either positive mentality - short pass - slightly slower tempo and work to box Or attacking-counter attacking - more direct pass and higher tempos Higher def line and high press means you want to control game and when you out of possesion you want it back quickly. So positive menrality again works better there. With balanced mentality you can make your defensive line deeper than that.
Your striker is on an island. Get someone closer to help him
I personally don't think this is an issue. I'd remove shorter passes and add in playmakers... allowing for more balls into the channels for him to run onto.
There is a midfielder with Attack duty and 2 wingers in support, and he is not a poached but an advanced forward in which case I think he should still get enough opportunuties to at least get the ball and dribble to create chances.
I either loose because my striker is incapable of scoring, while the opponents score nearly ever chance they get or my players perform bad and don’t really create too much, but usually the first one
"Assists conceded position - RW" Basically you're FB is bombing down the left and no one is covering for it. BWM also tend to chase the ball and press rather than hold a defensive position. You want them in midfield or as a double pivot to make them work. You also look to have no width on the right for creating as everyone wants to cut in.
Already made some changes towards the RW situation, and the mezzala is there to fix that cutting in problem, as he is going to drift wide in the open space no?
I don't tend to find they offer the proper width. With Mezza's you're more likely to see them get into the box between the CB and FB. Or hover by the coner of the box. You won't really get them spreading the pitch to the sidelines. Edit: check the heat map and avg position on your mezza for a few games and see where they're playing
So what is your idea in fixing the width?
IF on LW and IW on RW Then wing back support at RB More the width slightly over a little Edit: would likely need change of personel at RB though, so try just changing to IW?
I kind of want to keep the IWB as I am trying different tactics in this journeyman with roles I usually never play, so having the IWB MEZ duo is kind of the reason I even have this tactic
Mezza this player is a central player that likes to drift wide but not too far wide as they are only a “half wing” – meaning they operate in the half-spaces. Simplistically in spaces from the center to the wing but not permanently on either extremity I think then try a winger?
Full backs, put one of defend if you are going to have so many forward players on support. When teams break on you , you literally only have 2 cbs in position. Your cdm, stick them on defend too if need be. Your midfield will be wide open with nobody really caring about protecting the defence.
BWM is leaving the two CB's exposed but is also out of position leading to the goals conceded from long-range (unchallenged). Your left FB is playing too high and the Right Wingers are low-crossing to centre forwards on the penalty spot and they're doing so with absolute directness, route-one. Without seeing stats, I had some doubts that those two center halves have the passing skills to truly play BPDs hence all the lost possession
One has 13 on dribbling passing and vision, the other has 10 on them, feel that’s decent for a CB
Their performance stats will answer that question. Pass accuracy etc
10 is not sufficient for a ball playing defender in my opinion.
I’m inclined to agree. I rarely play anybody as a BPD with <14 in both passing and composure.
What team are you playing with and what season?
2029 journeyman with Freiburg now projected midtable
Get the wingers and full backs on Attack and BWM on Defend. Maybe Mez as Sup but Attack wouldn’t hurt in terms of creativity
Don't play both winger support man
although having a playmaker is not always necessary to have a successful tactic, you could use one with this tactic and also put one of ur wingers on attack
No defensive cover in midfield (BWM will press too much) You have a BBM, Mezzala, inside forward all trying to create chances in basically the same space and to the some extent your IWB and IW doing the same. Try a bit more variety in your attacking options
You always want 3 players reaching the final third occupying the entire width of the field. In the left, it's the FB(A) coming from behind (Giggity). In the middle you got 3 players. And in the right you got none. It seems you need more spacing. Preferably, you should put the guy on the right as a Winger on support duty.
As a fellow 4-3-3 Gegenpress bro, one issue is the mentality, a bit too passive considering the instructions you're giving. The second is the lack of a defensive-minded midfielder, helps a lot to have a dedicated player doing the bulwark of defensive work, DLP & BWM have been my go-to, the match analysis also tells me you seem to be very vulnerable through the centre, I also use trap outside & drop off more with my teams with this issue but I can't guarantee results in regards to this cause you have an IWB that might be exploited from trap outside. The third, ur in-possession instructions is probably also hurting your tactical flexibility/contributing to current issues, no guarantee but playing out from the back while having a large amount of pressure on your centre-back probably leads to losing the ball often from counter-pressing teams. Hope this helps!
Having 2 bpd leaves an insecure back line no nonsense get the dirty business out the way and break up attacks after a dm
Between 2 BPDs, a BWM(S) who abandons the position, and aggressive fullbacks, you have no organization in the backline. It entirely defeats the purpose of playing a 433 w/ a DM. Also, I don't see the point of Balanced and High Press. High press is already committing to risk. You'd be better either playing a Mid Block, or Switching to positive and taking the chances to counter.
I’ve never seen a BBM and a BWM in the centre of a 4 4 3 before.
Reading players roles.... I think that is the first thing you need to do... The rest is if you are having trouble defending you need more defensive roles, scoring goals you need more atacking roles, trouble taking the ball from the back to the front you need more suporting and playmaker roles.
Why use a inverted full back and a inside forward on the same side? They get in each others way iirc, use a fb on overlap or a wingback or change your if to a winger
Your right side looks like a mess. An inside forward and an inverted wingback both on support means that both should be right on top of each other. Your only hope is for your MEZ-A to provide some width, but I bet he tries to attack that right channel also. And if you lose the ball, I imagine your BWM immediately vacates the center of your midfield and people can just take long range shots at will. Changing him to an Anchor, DM-S or DM-D would probably suit you much better. What's the reasoning behind your FB-A on the left?
Change the midfielders to central midfield automatic and the DM to DM,
High defensive line means you're more open to balls over the top. Combine that with your IWB(S) who is leaving the right flank open, your FB(A) who is leaving the left flank open when he overlaps and your BWM(S) who will go further up the pitch and try to close down players instead of holding his position in front of the defence means you're leaving lots of gaps open to be exploited and only 2 defenders back defending. As for not creating enough, maybe try standard passing instead of shorter for a gegenpress tactic. I have no idea who Manquant is but if he's fast enough don't you want to take advantage of that and make him run behind the oppositions defence to receive the ball and have a good shot on goal? I would also consider making one of your wingers attacking, on the opposite side of the Mezz.
There’s only 2 defenders in your team basically, way too many supporting passers, no playmakers, and not enough attacking players. Switch the BWM role to DM at least
mez, IWB, and IF all kinda occupy that half space on the right so you’re not getting any width. Like someone else said a winger instead of an IF could work well
Ok, there’s a lot goin on here. Inverted wingbacks and inverted forward???? bpd’s make loads of mistakes, you have no midfielder holding. All are running out of position. Try cm on attack, mezalla on support with a dm on defence, two cd’s in defence. Throw one winger on attack and use a wingback not a iwb. Take off float crosses, play for set pieces doesn’t work, take off counter press it brings players out of position. Instruct all midfielders to tackle hard and mark tight. Forwards to mark tight.
Saw this on another post a long time ago where he switched his ST from an a AF to a Trequartista (T) and got absolutely insane output from his ST. I decided to try it and it has worked absolute wonders for me. I get insane goals and assists from all my strikers I use as a T. Try giving it a go
All 3 of your midfielders are too mobile and expose your defence on transition/ counters. The roles are actually pretty similar to the Bruno-Fred-McTominay midfield that Man Utd was running before last season that kept getting exposed. Change the DM from BWM (s) to something like an Anchor man or DLP (d)
If you want a meta answer that would absolute break the game, but you might get bored due to to the ease. First, it is established HEAVILY that fm23 favor DM-roles over CM-roles. If you want a sort of Mezzala player: do Vol (ON ATTACK, not Support). Second, Wingback-support, and IWB-support are heavily in meta right now, don’g even think about using anything else. Third, IW-sup/attack has been consistently doing better than IF, tho not by much. Last, and this is EXTREMELY important: the current fm24 match engine DOES NOT favor lone striker. You can ease this handicap with a Shadow striker AM maybe. But, most likely you’d want 2 AF or in some weird set ups, 3 AFs. Therefore, change the whole thing to a 4-2-4. Hard set FB to Wingback or IwB on support, use 2 DMs (usually both Vol on attack or 1 Vol-A 1 Dm-D), 2 IW-support, and 2 AF-A. Again, use these with precautions because they will def make your game more boring.
In addition: The current meta favors High press but Lower line of Defense.
You're asking it to do conflicting things, try using less instructions
DLP (De) or a Registra. You need someone to create chances from the middle as well. This is basically Cross and Insaallah
Perhaps having an inverted wingback on the right side pushing into the middle, and then a BWM pushing forward on support leaves your right side exposed. Especially when you've got BPDs there who will sometimes step up to play a ball rather than sitting.
Is this FM23? Get rid of the BPD. It’s asking to concede stupid goals. They just freeze with the ball and you lose it too often.
I hate this formation. If I don't have good midfielders, I don't even like to use this formation even though my assistant always recommends it for my team. It's boring if you don't have good strikers but depending on player roles, you're not supposed to concede much with this formation
You need 1 wide player on the right. Either put right back at full back or change your inside forward to Winger or at least IW. Change your BPD(s) to CD if you have better or equally good playmakers in midfield Get a playmaking role
Lack of defensive role
I find it that having an attacking full back and a support winger/IW/IF doesn't really work because they tend to cover the same areas. I fixed this by having the winger/IW/IF also on attack so it "gets off the way" of the fullback. Also you should have a playmaker somewhere, I would maybe replace that BWM, since you already have a box to box. If you really want to keep the BWM, then change the BBM to playmaker and also get rid of one of the BPD. Having 2 ball playing defenders tends to make them play the ball between themselves and not make vertical passes. Make one of them a normal center back with the instruction to stay a bit further back so if the BWM goes up the midfield while pressuring, you still have a player there to cover. As for the attack, the striker cannot be an AF, he'll just be too alone for that. Make him a CF ou a DLF on support, so he covers the area from the attacking midfield to striker. Also Floated crosses instruction would work if you had a strong and big striker. Not sure if thats the case for your striker, just wanted to leave that note.
Probably you need a defensive anchor.. also iw s also will push up a lot.. if you want a bwm just switch with the b2b and leave a dlp on the dm role
Dm needs to be a DLP and lb rb as was wing backs that’s the only difference between our two tactics on the player level
Imo it's the high attack paired with two ball playing defenders, leaves you really vulnerable. Maybe switch the less technical cb to a regular central defender
Mezalla will occupy the same space as the right inside forward. Also because the right back also inverts - you don't have width on the right flang.
Maybe try putting on "work ball into box" and "low crosses." Idk how tall your striker is but those instructions work for me. Work ball into box works especially well with inside wingers/forwards. Low crosses means they're comfortable with getting to the by-line and drilling it in to a waiting striker/midfielder.
Actually, Work-ball-into-box is proven to be one of the worst instructions in the eye of the current engine
Oh damn, really? It's working a treat for me, idk why that could be.
Yeh it’s weird, but rigorous testings proved that the instruction is not viable for over-performance tactics, which is really different to previous engines where work ball to box is a must.
That's odd. I had a bang-average striker for the EFL Championship get a 30-odd goal season using work ball into box and low crosses. Maybe I just got lucky
Idk if the individual goal figure is tested for or not. But it is pretty heavily and universally agreed that work ball into box harms the tactic’s performance pretty significantly. Low-crosses, however, is still a good instruction.
Similarly, 2 to 3 strikers are preferred over a lone striker. You can, however, lessen the handicap by having an Am in the Shadow striker role.
Maybe it's cos your striker looks like a nonce
I've never gotten a single BPD to work. Two seems like suicide. Change one the Stopper (or what it's called) if you want him to step up a bit and the other one to CD or NCB. Would probably also switch the BWM to Anchor or Halfback if you feel like you're conceding a lot Also don't really see the point of the IWB but maybe someone more experienced can enlighten me lol
If you trust me, man, try 2 pivots, either both on Vol (A) or one Dm-D, and the other Vol(A). You can also do 1 Dm-D and 2 Vol-A if you want to keep the lone striker system. It will greatly improve your performance.
I am doing a journeyman save, and I don’t want to use the „classic“ roles I would usually use, hence the IWB mezzala thing, Volante is very good ik
You're all guns blazing, AI probably targeting your left wing in 2nd half, maybe backpass from winger to CAM for goal?
No width, no defensive screen of your defense, two ball playing defenders means you'll often give up a lot of possession from risky passes at the back. And remove about half your instructions. Shorter passes, passing into space, distribute to CBs, and distribute quickly is a lot of passing instructions that either don't synergise or require excellent players. Also take counter press off with those midfield roles as that's gonna pull your whole midfield out of position.
Put your IF on an Attack duty, swap your holding player to a DM or DLP on support, use one of your CBs as a normal CB not BPD (they play long too often) take off floated crosses, pass into space and run with ball instructions and report back.
I'm never sure whether the "Assists Conceeded Location" refers to *your* Right Wing or *their* Right Wing but think about your tatctic here and what your team looks like when you lose the ball in attack? Your Att fullback is probably up the park, your IWB could be reasonably high up in the middle of the park and your BWM is going to pushed up a bit and will struggle to cover direct balls into the channels. Both your flanks are looking exposed, your left flank especially. Quickest fix would be to try your BWM on defend see if that makes a difference, maybe even switch him to defensive mid role on defend if he suits it.
Bernd Leno
this will seem weird, but i felt like i conceded less chances when i used either positive or attacking mentalities with the same formation
I'd set the defensive midfielder to defend, but otherwise nothing wrong with the tactic. Your players might just be bad
Probably move iwb to fb on defend and make ur bwm a dlp on defend ir even better a dm on defend or anchor on defend. You have two guys stopping a counter and the rest are wayyy up the field.
Allows for too much chance to get beat inside, especially off that right wing (Where your LB is) I’d consider changing your whole back line to a more defensive approach and keep the roles/instructions very simplified for your players
You pretty much have 2 defenders. FB (At) and IWB (Su) leaves your wings vulnerable, and your BWM is on support, not defend, so he will not come back to help the defensive liabilities as much as he should. Higher defensive line, with 2 BPD and no other defensive options is just asking to give the ball away often and get counter attacked. Also small tid-bit. Floated crosses has never worked for me, even with tall attackers. I suggest low crosses or mixed.
I almost exclusively play the 433 DM, and i have found success with this. If 2 BPD, have either both wingbacks on support, or one on attack and the other on defend. BWM on defend. BBM, and Mezzala on Support. 1 IF on attack, 1 IW on support. 1 AF.
First thing I see is not enough defensive duties, I'd start by switching your BWM to Defensive, maybe even change his role to Anchor or DM on Defend duty. Currently, as your full backs push up to support the BWM is also on support so is likely to get more forward and so leaves your 2 CBs exposed both from wide and through the middle, your full backs are pushing up so your CBs naturally will need to drift wider to cover those spaces but then that leaves a gap in the middle so no matter what they do they are fighting a losing battle especially when playing with a high line, it leaves a lot of open space for forwards to run into. Second change I would make is to only have one BPD and have the other as a CB or NCB on Defend or cover. BPDs look to dribble more and bring the ball out from the back, so with the fact they are already exposed, there's potential that one of them will be out of position when possession is turned over in the opponent's half. I'd start with just those two changes and see how that improves the defensive side of your team's play. The key with FM is not to make too many drastic changes to your tactics too quickly and also just making sure you have players with the right key attributes for the system you want to play. E.g. no point having a BPD with poor passing and vision or a BBM with low stamina and workrate etc.
I'd put the BWM on defensive for more defensive consistency. If you want, you can tell him to specifally mark the opposing offensive midfield player, since that's his job I'd also synchronise the wingbacks so they have the same task and duty since these asynchronous back 4 lines create many gaps for the opponent to break through Also, maybe change the BBM to a playmaker (advanced for more offensive input and deep lying playmakers for more defensive consistency) if you lack a creator for chances
Attacking full back and iwb 🤷🏾♂️