Definitive Illegal Formation Rules

[Xavier E. Lahm]

i think its totally unfair, cause i had my strikers injured so y played without a striker without knowing and lost 5 - 1 in the cup match and i could not buy any strikers with all those token masters around and i get to know about this after i lose

[Razz]

i think its totally unfair, cause i had my strikers injured so y played without a striker without knowing and lost 5 - 1 in the cup match and i could not buy any strikers with all those token masters around and i get to know about this after i lose

You could have played, say, an AM out of position at ST.
Unfortunate for you, but that's Nordeus stated policy: They want you to discover yourself the intricacies of the game.

[Rob Ot]

so, following the OP rules, 4-2-4 is an illegal formation?? It sounds really weird

[Maiko Frenz]

I played the left formation below and it was illegal despite meeting the requirements on the first page. All players met their positions too.


The illegal problem arose as i changed a DMC for an AMC. Maybe there is a problem with the pitch being 4 players on my side and 6 on the opponents half on the field.

[Razz]

I played the left formation below and it was illegal despite meeting the requirements on the first page. All players met her positions too.


The illegal problem arose as i changed a DMC for an AMC. Maybe there is a problem with the pitch being 4 players on my side and 6 on the opponents half on the field.

Thanks, Malko.
My guess is it has something to do with not having a player in midfield ( an MC or DMC)

We've revised this rule several times:

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

Maybe it should be:

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

If you can do any testing of this, i'd appreciate it. I can probably do some testing as I got bounced from the Cup in the first round this season :-(

[casper™]

Thanks, Malko.
My guess is it has something to do with not having a player in midfield ( an MC or DMC)

We've revised this rule several times:

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

Maybe it should be:

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

If you can do any testing of this, i'd appreciate it. I can probably do some testing as I got bounced from the Cup in the first round this season :-(

So, 4-2-2-2 Hegaxon it's a legal formation, correct?

[Naretafra]

is this illegal?
how to beat this amazing team? i have same skillz...

[pnr8555]

is this illegal?
how to beat this amazing team? i have same skillz...

This is a legal formation. It seems to meet all requirements.

[duchao]

Will have a cases GK position can not be kicked, then forced to choose one other player to make a goalkeeper, whether it be illegal???

[Razz]

Will have a cases GK position can not be kicked, then forced to choose one other player to make a goalkeeper, whether it be illegal???

It doesn't appear to be illegal. But, sometimes a weaker opponent will end up with 20% possession in that case, so there MAY be a small possession penalty for this.