Definitive Illegal Formation Rules

That is weird lol. Anyway i'm not going to use 43w3.

2DC-2(DML/DMR)-2MCs-AMC/AML/AMR-ST - this is illegal formation, so far he won every game in our league. any ideas on countering it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kylos

4-3w-3 seems to be back to normal...

Attachment 30142

Attachment 30143

---

Thanks for information

Now this is trolling... and I'm really :mad:

Attachment 31692

And opponent played this formation entire game :mad:

Attachment 31693

I watched two games: in the first game, the one team had only one player at the sides and the possession was only 56-44 against him (his rival played a legal 4-3N-2W-1).
In the second game, one team had 3 players at the left and the possession was only 39-61 against him and he even managed to win a legal 4-4-2 (for this game i can give a screenshot).

So, they may have changed the rules about illegal formations

Is 3N-2(DMC)-2(MC)-2W-1 a legal formation?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by swelzfc

Is 3N-2(DMC)-2(MC)-2W-1 a legal formation?

---

Yes, It is legal

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by t11_fan

Yes, It is legal

---

Great, planning to use in a league rematch.

Here's a formation that should be considered illegal per your second rule (Some combination of at least 3 defenders (i.e. 3 players anywhere in the back row [DL, DC, DR] )) , but as you can see, it's not. I've considered recently trying a formation with 2 DCs and 3 DMs (DML, DMR, DMR) and I don't think it should be deemed illegal as well.

View image: Screenshot (29)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Theodor Dinu

Here's a formation that should be considered illegal per your second rule (Some combination of at least 3 defenders (i.e. 3 players anywhere in the back row [DL, DC, DR] )) , but as you can see, it's not. I've considered recently trying a formation with 2 DCs and 3 DMs (DML, DMR, DMR) and I don't think it should be deemed illegal as well.

View image: Screenshot (29)

---

Formation rules and penatlies are 'not as intended' at the moment

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dennis Vasin

2DC-2(DML/DMR)-2MCs-AMC/AML/AMR-ST - this is illegal formation, so far he won every game in our league. any ideas on countering it?

---

yepp played against them seem no penalties in possession !! WTF?
that put in bed the 3 at back minimum theory , seem 2 is more than enough if they have DML/DMR

well supported a friend today who played against team with no wingers at left side !! possession was almost 50-50 !!?
WTF? did Nordeus changed the amount of penalties for playing an illegal formation?

Nordeus says its a bug!
Its not on all servers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dman2pt

Nordeus says its a bug!
Its not on all servers.

---

people are losing points tbh bcz of it ..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dennis Vasin

2DC-2(DML/DMR)-2MCs-AMC/AML/AMR-ST - this is illegal formation, so far he won every game in our league. any ideas on countering it?

---

I used this tactic today. Not seriously, I'm trying to stay below the 7th in the League. But, to my surprise, my team did not lose possession (far from the 20% expected).

Attachment 32475

and here, a more radical example:

Attachment 32476

When will come the illegal formations back? Does someone know this???

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by L30

I used this tactic today. Not seriously, I'm trying to stay below the 7th in the League. But, to my surprise, my team did not lose possession (far from the 20% expected).

Attachment 32475

and here, a more radical example:

Attachment 32476

---

You have dmcs,which can take place of dcs for necessity...

Thats a new thing then, because up til recently you *had* to have at least 3 on the back line.

you can even play with no ST and you won't have any penalty. it becomes...... funny

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by L30

I used this tactic today. Not seriously, I'm trying to stay below the 7th in the League. But, to my surprise, my team did not lose possession (far from the 20% expected).

Attachment 32475

and here, a more radical example:

Attachment 32476

---

at 2nd pic in the real football is like using sweeper and DMC/DMR/DML as defensive player

i think everybody choose his formation this is why i'm not agree

Hi guys!
Since illegal formations are turned off, and anyone can use them, does anybody know how to beat this guy?
It just pisses me off when I face players that use illegal formations.
Thanx for any help or comments, and sorry if I posted this on the wrong section.

Here is his formation:
Attachment 32671

I'm actually in favour of not having ilegal formations anymore, hope they don't fix it, I mean honestly what should be fixed, there's no illegal formation in football, so why fix something what should not be wrong in first place...
Without having illegal formations now Nordeus now fixed the game to right, i hope that having illegal formations punished was the bug which is finally fixed...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by caco contreras

hi guys!
Since illegal formations are turned off, and anyone can use them, does anybody know how to beat this guy?
It just pisses me off when i face players that use illegal formations.
Thanx for any help or comments, and sorry if i posted this on the wrong section.

Here is his formation:
Attachment 32671

---

451 v

How do you feel about this .
Attachment 34575

Illegal Formations still turned off?

.....?

WITH 15% Home advantage, I get this. X.X I don't have a problem with having no illegal formations, but if you state that certain formations are illegal, people will tend to expect to see repercussions.

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}

Attachment 39434
Attachment 39435
No manual substitutions were used (Injured MC off for fit MC)

Where is a logic???2 deffenders.....And u are stronger :) I havent see in a real footbal formation without wingers....

How about illegal formation
Attachment 41554

Dats not ilegal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 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?

---

Good post. There are no illegal formations in real life.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 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

---

What I concluded
First line(row,slot): At least Goalkeeper
Second line(row,slot):At least 3 defenders
At least 4 players on opponent side
Maybe At least
Third line(row,slot): No players required Maybe
Fourth line(row,slot): Maybe At least one player Midfielder
Fifth line(row,slot): No players required Maybe
Six line(row,slot): At least one Striker maybe

Can someone give answer

No illegal formations in the game anymore...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Steppenwolf

No illegal formations in the game anymore...

---

thanks for answer but I still got 20:80 possession on some formations
Why

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Visionary S

thanks for answer but I still got 20:80 possession on some formations
Why

---

Only if a goalie is in position of an outfield player, formation doesn't matter...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Steppenwolf

Only if a goalie is in position of an outfield player, formation doesn't matter...

---

Tnx
That is why my opponent had 20% possession.

hi everyone, want to ask:-

is this formation illegal?
-------------GK------------------
DR DC DC ----
-----------DM------------DML
---------------------------------
AMR----------AMC------------
-------ST-----ST-----ST----

and this;

-------------GK------------------
------------ DC ------ DC ----
DMR---------DM------------DML
---------------------------------
AMR----------AMC------------
-------ST-----ST-----ST----