3Man Midfield Roles?

[Pezman123]

Should i do this:

LCM (CM support) - CCM (CM Defend) - RCM (CM Attack)

or

LCM (BBM support) - CCM ( BWM Defend) - RCM (Adv Playmaker Attack)

there both similar, but would i benefit more from having them all CMs or all different and more specific to there roles?

Thanks

 

[drhay53]

What do you see as the primary goal of the central player? Your second setup would not be very good at holding possession, I don't think. I've really moved away from BWM because they usually don't care at all about holding shape. They have much higher closing down than the players around them and can mess up what you want your defense to be like. If you want the player to sit deep and break up opponent counter attacks before they get started, while recycling possession, then CM_D or DLP_D are the way to go. If you want the player running all around trying to tackle everyone, the BWM is the way to go.

IMO there is very little difference in the tactical instructions between a CM attack and an AP attack. The style they play will be mostly affected by the type of player you put there. One annoying thing is that CM-ATTACK has hard tackling by default.

I've never really used a BBM but IIRC their instructions all almost all on "sometimes". I'm not sure I should comment on that side.

Expanding on what I said, a key part of the CM vs AP argument is whether or not you want your team to focus on passing him the ball. If you see yourself as a quick counter attacking team where he will get the ball in his own half, then decide how to proceed, AP is probably good. But if most of your attacks come from slow buildup in the opponent's half, then the player will be too far forward, close to the opponents defensive line, and will be dispossessed quickly when your team forces the ball to him because he is listed as playmaker.

 

[Pezman123]

What do you see as the primary goal of the central player? Your second setup would not be very good at holding possession, I don't think. I've really moved away from BWM because they usually don't care at all about holding shape. They have much higher closing down than the players around them and can mess up what you want your defense to be like. If you want the player to sit deep and break up opponent counter attacks before they get started, while recycling possession, then CM_D or DLP_D are the way to go. If you want the player running all around trying to tackle everyone, the BWM is the way to go.

IMO there is very little difference in the tactical instructions between a CM attack and an AP attack. The style they play will be mostly affected by the type of player you put there. One annoying thing is that CM-ATTACK has hard tackling by default.

I've never really used a BBM but IIRC their instructions all almost all on "sometimes". I'm not sure I should comment on that side.

Expanding on what I said, a key part of the CM vs AP argument is whether or not you want your team to focus on passing him the ball. If you see yourself as a quick counter attacking team where he will get the ball in his own half, then decide how to proceed, AP is probably good. But if most of your attacks come from slow buildup in the opponent's half, then the player will be too far forward, close to the opponents defensive line, and will be dispossessed quickly when your team forces the ball to him because he is listed as playmaker.

i want all 3 of them to be good all rounders, but focus on 1 thing slightly more, im juventus, im going to play:

asamoah - vidal - marchisio

so i guessed, there all good all rounders so put all CM

support - defend - attack

and there slightly better at each of these themselves

 

[drhay53]

I would just start them all on CM roles, and then change if you aren't satisfied. Or maybe BBM + CM_Defend + CM_Attack to start, if you want. I don't have the player's attributes in front of me but I'm not sure you'd be happy with a BWM_D as your primary defender in a 3 man midfield.

 

[epic terrorist]

what is the rest of your tactic? How are you intending to play? have you got one up with wingers/inside forwards 4-5-1 style? the roles you give these three players need to reflect the rest of your tactic

 

[Pezman123]

what is the rest of your tactic? How are you intending to play? have you got one up with wingers/inside forwards 4-5-1 style? the roles you give these three players need to reflect the rest of your tactic

im juventus and i made my own 5-3-2 tactic or 3-2-3-2:

DLF Attack - AF Attack
CM Support - CM Defend - CM Attack
WB Attack - WB Attack
BPD Defend - CD Cover - BPD Defend
GK Defend

 

[herne79]

I also play Juventus and, assuming you are starting a new save from 13.3, there is a couple of things I'd recommend.

First, Pirlo - even at 34 - is just too good not to have in the team, especially in his preferred DLP Support role at the DM position. This could then leave you with Marchisio and Vidal in central midfield using either wing backs or wingers in support (I prefer wingers using Asamoah on the left - train him in crosses to start). Marchisio to be used as the attack minded CM and Vidal in a holding role.

Second, you will be getting Llorente on a free at the start of the 2nd season, who is possibly the best Target Man in the game. Until then, you have Bendter on loan for the first season, also a decent Target Man. Not the "best" individual striker in the side, but combined with either Vucinic, Matri or Giovinco, provides a lethal combination if you get the right supply to them, plus it will get you and the team used to playing with a TM while you wait for Llorente.

Take a look at JP's 352 Conte Tactics on this site to get more of an idea and maybe a good starting point for you

The only real problem will be how to replace Pirlo in a couple of seasons...

 

[Montanaro]

The general rule of thumb with 3 midfielders is that you need a creator, a passer, and a destroyer.

Either one of your setups can work as their individual instructions fit into the C/P/D mold.

The "box to box, ball winner, Advanced playmaker" roles are all just extreme forms of the C/P/D setup.

The extreme forms may not fit your tactic or your players. I'd seriously suggest manually changing their individual instructions (one instruction at a time) to see how it affects the role and your tactic.

You can choose either format to start with, but based on your personal taste (by editing instructions) you will ultimately mold the roles that best suit you.