Quote Originally Posted by LesterMind View Post
Great job.

Using your phillosophy about counter formations, I am trying to imagine which formation would be more effective to fight against next formation.....

DR---DC---DL
-----DMC----
MR---MC---ML
---AMC-AMC--
------ST-----

(reverse)

------ST------
---AMC-AMC--
ML---MC---MR
-----DMC-----
DL---DC---DR
(-----GK-----)
Maybe it can be called a (christmas) tree.

Allways supossing could be using attacking arrows for middlewings.

Any suggestion from you?
My suggestion trying to use your phillosphy as I understand, could be next ones...
having not any MR and not any DMR at my list players (I have for the others positions)

with 3 strikers...

--ST-ST-ST--
--------------
---MC--MC---
---DMC-DMC-
DL---DC---DR
with red arrows for wingsbacks?

or better...

with 2 strikers

---ST---ST--
--AMC-AMC--
-----MC-----
--DMC-DMC--
DR---DC---DL
and again red arrows?

or...

---ST---ST---
--------------
ML---MC---(MR) (dont have MR but may be using it excepcionally)
--DMC-DMC---
--DC-DC-DC--

red arrows for middelwingers?

or just enought 1 st with 2 amc maybe like this...

------ST------
--AMC--AMC--
ML---MC---(MR)
--DMC--DMC--
--DC-DC-DC-- (or DL---DC---DR)

red arrows at middlewingers?

Some of these looks like a tree as well.

Thank you if still are answering at this thread.

Cheers.
Reverse tactics are not the countering formations.If he has strong DMC,why you put AMC?Put AML and AMR.The philosofy is to fill your defense according to his attack and use your attack according to his holes in the defense.For an example : he has strong DMC,your AMC is not necessary.He doesn't have DL and DR,so use AML and AMR.Or for an example in the defense : he has strong AMC,always use DMC in that case.Or he has AML and AMR.Use DL and DR without arrows or blue arrows.