Counter for 3N-2-3W(AML/AMC/AMR)-2

[Cloverfield]

So I have played against 3N-2-3W(AML/AMC/AMR)-2, with 451v

The game went terribly wrong. Losing 4-0 in half time. 2 goals conceded before 10min, and at 7' it was penalty and red card.

Although playing with 10players and conceded early goals, my stats were better but efficiency was 0% for me and 70% for oppo.

Looks like trolling but I am not sure.
Checked the counter formations thread and found this


Many teams in my league played 4-4-2nd, they all have won him.

Now I do not get why 4-4-2nd could be a great counter but 451v not.

I mean they have the same defense and middle center.


The only difference is attack but with 3DC I would expect 2AMw-1 would work better than 1AMC-2ST.

So any thoughts?

Should I counter in second match the oppo with 442nd.
Or should I trust the stats of the first match, consider the result bad luck / troll and counter him with 451v

[sgreenaway1348]

I would go with 4-4-2. Personally I think 4-5-1V is dead now. Doesn't seem to counter very well anymore.

[Cloverfield]

Pffff I can't say how much I hate this kind of vague opinions

[sgreenaway1348]

Don't ask then mate

[Cloverfield]

Ι asked for something that needs to be analyzed.
I will collect the info other managers give, and I will come up with the formation I will use.

I wont a use a formation just because someone dreamed it.

I play 451v and it still works so you give a false/misleading argument as well.

[stinkybg]

Well 451v seems the perfect counter on paper

[gizzmo]

Nice you have posted this thread Cloverfield as I was about to start one I would have called the "3 WAM era". I have a very stong team this season (on the high 120s) and play mostly 4-5-1V. Every time I played any formation with 3 WAM, I had hard times. I agree, to me on paper you should have had an easy victory but something seems to be problematic with these formations. A couple of seasons ago, I noticed that 4-2-3WAM-1 was better than my 4-5-1V for some reason. But now, this kind of formation with only 3DC is enough to annoy me a lot. Of course, most of times I win, but I think that I owe this to the quality of my squad and not to tactic. Yesterday, I beat at home a 3DC-1-1-3WAM-2 team (20% inferior with manager absent) who was on a 4 defeat streak. It took all my small change to win and I just had 12 shots (to 11). Against a better prepared team I would have lost without any doubt. Why is that ?
In general, my question would be: how do you handle these formations (I do not ask for OPINIONS but for FACTS) ?

[Cloverfield]

Still I have not come to a conclusion on this.

But statistically what I have observed (by collecting data from oppo's matches) is that the system I mention has many issues against the 1AMC-2ST combo.
It seems that the code checks that you have 2ST and AMC so let's say 2,5 attackers against 3 defenders.
I bet that the AM will blink telling him that his defenders will have problem against oppo attackers.

Now for defense I cannot imagine a better solution than 4dc-1dmc.
One alternative could be 3DC-2DMR/L but I am afraid of the oppo's amc and I have not tested this formation.

So at least for now it seems that 442nd could be a counter.

(and this comes in contradiction of the counter formation I use for 442nd which is 3dc-1-2-3w-1 which seems the ultimate counter of 442nd... ahhhh )

[Cloverfield]

After my tests I concluded that below formations are a good counter:
3dc-3dmw-2mc-1amc-1
3dc-2dmw-2mc-1amc-2
3dc-2dmw-2mc-2amw-1

If team has no dmr/l then statistically it seems that 442nd counters the formation as well (with a high percentage ~75%)

The clue is that 3 dc are boosting the middle defense so you are not exposed to many shots.
DM are helping defense but most important they boost your possession so oppo cannot have many attacks.

His defense is weak with only 3 dc but as are they are in the middle it is concrete defense and that's why oppo cannot be outplayed easily

Interesting would be what would happen if someone countered it with ultra attacking system
But I bet game would be a rodeo of who scores more, and I want to exclude luck as much as I can from the algorithm.

[gizzmo]

I like to play the first tactic you mentioned but with a little twist: I use asymetrical formation with AM(R or L) instead of AMC. But never tried it against this specific tactic.