Definitive Illegal Formation Rules

[Razz]

This thread will no longer be updated or maintained by me, as of March 8, 2014.




Regarding the wiki:
The requirements originally listed in the wiki have been proven WRONG where they differed from those given here (e.g. the wiki listed a requirement of TWO defenders vs our findings of THREE.) The wiki now (as of 12/30/2013) matches the requirements given here.

This is the summary of the findings in the thread:

Theoretical Legal Formation Requirements:

The * in a position (e.g. DM*) is a wildcard, standing for any of L, C or R

• Goalkeeper (Must be player's natural position i.e. a GK) ** see note below
• Some combination of at least 3 defenders (i.e. 3 players anywhere in the back row [DL, DC, DR] )
• At least 1, but no more than 2, players on EACH outside flank. {the DL/DR, DML/DMR, ML/MR, AML/AMR slots}
• at least 3 midfielders (DM*, M*, AM*) at least one of which has to be an DMC or MC
• At least 4 players on the opponent's side of the pitch.
• at least 1 Striker

Please note:

1. "Illegal formation" means it incurs a possession penalty in the game Top Eleven.
2. We can't change that, if you don't like it, take it up with Nordeus.
3. Using an Illegal formation results in 20% possession. Yes, you might still win.
4. The above "rules" have been TESTED and confirmed many times. They are accurate to the best of my knowledge.
5. Please provide evidence (in-game screenshots) if you believe the findings above are wrong. "That's not true" because "I used ...." or "I played against ..." comments will be ignored without supporting evidence (screenshots).
6. Post-match results are inconclusive for various reasons. If a formation appears to be legal, but shows a 20% possession in post-match results (one you didn't watch), first check the GK in the game - if that is his natural position, and you find no other reason for the possession penalty, test the formation yourself. If it IS illegal, make a screenshot and post here please.

Anyone thats unsure whats illegal formation or not should test it in a friendly against a known legal formation such as 4-4-2 and if they only get 20% possession with the formation in question then the formation is illegal.

**This doesn't appear to be the case now. Last known occurrence was April 19, 2013.
This does not now result in an illegal formation in tests, BUT it does still seem valid when an opponent has 20% possession and an otherwise legal formation. Either there's another unknown reason for the illegal formation results, or this has been changed in-game.


Last Edit:
December 30, 2013 :: Minor aesthetic fixes.
September 1, 2013 :: Updated midfielder rule to this:

• at least 3 midfielders (DM*, M*, AM*) at least one of which has to be an DMC or MC

from this, Previously:

• at least 3 midfielders (DM*, M*, AM*) at least one of which has to be an DM* or M*

ONLY TEXT ABOVE THIS POINT IS UPDATED AND CURRENT
(Original post follows broken line)
==================================================
Hi. Razz. 2nd Season.
Down to business:

Ok, so I've read and reread the forums, and the general consensus is that a legal formation requires:

• Some combination of 3 DBs/FBs (3 players anywhere in the back row )
• 2 'wingers' - some combination of 2 players in the D(L/R), DM(L/R), M(L/R), AM(L/R) slots
• at least 1 Striker

Probable requirement: 2 midfielders ??? MAYBE? which positions count?
Goalie?


Here's an illegal formation, yet it seems to meet all the requirements:
--- ST --- ST ---
------ AC -------
ML -- MC --- MR
------ -- -- DMR
DL -- DC --- DR

July Fourth et al have speculated that 3 wingers on one side is illegal.

=============
Other observed illegal formations:

--- --- ST ------
AML -- -- --- --
-- MC MC MC --
DML -DMC -- --
-- DC DC DC --
(No winger on R)


--- ST ST --- ---
-- AMC -- --- ---
-- --- --- MC MR
--DMC -- --- ---
-- DC DC DC DR
(No winger on L)

Hypothetical rule for wingers:
At least 1, but no more than 2, players on EACH outside flank.
[redacted]
I think the hypothesis for wingers is supported, and it seems you need at least 1 MC as well.
I'll continue to test.

Please post your KNOWN illegal formations here and we'll be able to nail down the formation requirements with certainty. Thanks

[Razz]

THIS POST IS NOT CURRENT

(Original post follows broken line)
==================================================
Based on the known facts, here are my Hypothetical formation rules:

Requirements:

• Goalkeeper
• Some combination of 3 DBs/FBs (3 players anywhere in the back row )
• At least 1, but no more than 2, players on EACH outside flank. {the D(L/R), DM(L/R), M(L/R), AM(L/R) slots}
• at least 1 MC (DMC doesn't qualify)
• at least 1 Striker

[Jay_]

As I've replied in another thread, I'd like to know why and how a formation can be deemed illegal?

The formation a team manager chooses to play should be deemed appropriate! How can it be deemed inappropriate by anyone other than then manager?

[July Fourth]

Good topic this, think a moderator should make it a sticky thread perhaps, many managers still don't even know what exactly an illegal formation is.

[Accyrover]

It is a good topic but like Justdome stated when he was a mod on the old board, yes there are illegal formation but the programmers will not disclose which.
I remember justdome stating he played with two DC's and a DML/DMR for several seasons but then it became ineffective, assuming the rest of his formation was 3MC's AML/AMR and a ST that was a fair set up.
I assume this would have been when certain formations were clamped down on.
What will give us a more conclusive guide is by others like Razz bench testing the formations against as many managers with secondry teams as possible
I do not have one and friendlies for me are out of the question.

[Rapyer]

you dont need MC, i played without one with no problems

[Lê Anh Minh]

1 of my friend uses this formation and got 20% ball possesion. It meets ALL requirements. I don't know why it's illegal.

---ST ST ST---

----MC MC-----

DL DC DC DC DR
------GK-------

[Potemy]

1 of my friend uses this formation and got 20% ball possesion. It meets ALL requirements. I don't know why it's illegal.

---ST ST ST---

----MC MC-----

DL DC DC DC DR
------GK-------

Looks fine to me, 5-2-3 is actually a real life formation, albeit a rare one. Maybe his team is just really bad, or maybe you need 3 midfielders? The yellow players, that is.

Based on the known facts, here are my Hypothetical formation rules:

Requirements:

• Goalkeeper
• Some combination of 3 DBs/FBs (3 players anywhere in the back row )
• At least 1, but no more than 2, players on EACH outside flank. {the D(L/R), DM(L/R), M(L/R), AM(L/R) slots}
• at least 1 MC (DMC doesn't qualify)
• at least 1 Striker

You don't need at least one MC, you need at least one player in that row. Having just an ML or MR is fine as well. The rest is all correct, but I'd just write defenders, I don't think anyone uses DB, and FB is only used for the side defenders. I think those are all the rules regarding illegal formations. Tentatively, I'm suggesting that you need at least 3 midfielders, yellow dots in the formation box in-game.

There's no need to list out all the known illegal formations, because let's say we're listing out illegal formations due to no right sided player, you can have any combination of 10 players in the other 19 positions as long as they aren't on the right, and then there are other rules for illegal formations, left sided, 3 defenders, etc, so a final list would be too long.

[Lê Anh Minh]

Looks fine to me, 5-2-3 is actually a real life formation, albeit a rare one. Maybe his team is just really bad, or maybe you need 3 midfielders? The yellow players, that is.



You don't need at least one MC, you need at least one player in that row. Having just an ML or MR is fine as well. The rest is all correct, but I'd just write defenders, I don't think anyone uses DB, and FB is only used for the side defenders. I think those are all the rules regarding illegal formations. Tentatively, I'm suggesting that you need at least 3 midfielders, yellow dots in the formation box in-game.

There's no need to list out all the known illegal formations, because let's say we're listing out illegal formations due to no right sided player, you can have any combination of 10 players in the other 19 positions as long as they aren't on the right, and then there are other rules for illegal formations, left sided, 3 defenders, etc, so a final list would be too long.

His team is very strong and everyone's in the right position. That why I said that "I don't know why"

[Potemy]

That's why I said maybe the team is weak and it's not illegal, but now I'm thinking we need at least 3 midfielders.