451v Move Screen by Screen

I wanted to get a feel for how 451v (Blue) actually looked against 433 (Red) - although I don't try it usually I did a friendly and took some screenies from a vidcap.

Since I normally play 4141 v 433 I used similar orders and arrows for the 451v including blues on DCs and DMC with no reds on DL & DR (just in case). Wingers and Striker did get Reds.

Now I've no idea why the DL & DR started so deep or why the DCs were caught so far up but they did/were.

Play went from *someone deep* to AML. DMC drifted across to more 'correct' position as MCs and wingers advanced, AML passed back into MC and he tried to bomb through the middle solo, did a little dribble back then forward and shot - his shot was blocked and the action ended.

(AMR seemed a bit disinterested - maybe he looked for a dropped contact lens before realising he needed to move. :p)

I make no comment about whether its a good or bad sim, Epic or borked, just simply.....it's what happened. ;)

http://i60.tinypic.com/6zrmzc.jpg

http://i57.tinypic.com/j9onxg.jpg

http://i60.tinypic.com/2yypj6w.jpg

http://i61.tinypic.com/264ke34.jpg

http://i62.tinypic.com/2hwfdqu.jpg

http://i57.tinypic.com/v30uj6.jpg

PS. Key settings for 433 was Attacking, zonal defence with offside trap on. Although there was a Q gap in favour of Blue the red 433 was very aggressive, mostly narrow but wide too, and my feeling was wit the Q it could have went badly for Blue. ;)

Thanks for the post. :)

What is happening at the back for the blue side in the first and second picture is nonsense. This shows how much Nordeus know about formations and tactics. This is why 4-3-3 always causes problems to 4-5-1 V-style in this game, despite that in reality, it should not.

Picture 4
If blue loses the ball, a pass towards number 18, and red will be 3 against 1. The positioning of the blue defenders are poor. This is probably why there are so many successful counter attacks in this games (even when you do not force counter).

Red 17 doesn't want to play he keeps to him self :p

.

But joins the action at last pic :D

we need a good explanation of those arrows

sometimes it seems when you set a blue arrow they push forward and with the red backwards (defending)

see some commentary"s when you play the game

Then there no logic in the game-engine


ps ill hope we get the livematch -animation for pc-version also (its great)

Thanks again Buffs for the great work. I find it very interesting to see the animations compared with your detailed tactics description.

Baxter is more offensive than your striker :o

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Buster Keaton

we need a good explanation of those arrows

sometimes it seems when you set a blue arrow they push forward and with the red backwards (defending)

see some commentary"s when you play the game

Then there no logic in the game-engine


ps ill hope we get the livematch -animation for pc-version also (its great)

---

Yes. In pictures 1 and 2, it is as if the orders given to the 2 DCs were reversed. In picture 1, the 3 ST are neither marked nor played offside. No wonder why there are so many 'troll' results.

Many of you know i'am narrow-diamond whore... soooo

i like to watching game with this "table-soccer" variation :D

And almost every time if my team are attacking, my winger defs are playing roles as they were (A)Mx... funny to see they crossing the ball from AMx position to my STs :)

my DL and DR has up arrow btw every time(<- does it matter anyway?) (if i play against power oppo they are neutral) :)

The last answer on arrows was pretty clear imo: red arrow = focuses more on attacking. So if you want more detail.....as I always say, ask yourself "What is attacking?" :p

PS. its a game >.<

Here is one of the reasons I suggested marking commentary where an SA was activated.

Player with FK SA taking a FK

http://i60.tinypic.com/2ntus6q.jpg

Player without FK SA taking a FK.

http://i57.tinypic.com/qp2l3n.jpg

Seems to be indicative or maybe not ;)

*passes round the cheese*

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Buffs Mad

Player with FK SA taking a FK

http://i60.tinypic.com/2ntus6q.jpg

Player without FK SA taking a FK.

Seems to be indicative or maybe not ;)

*passes round the cheese*

---

Is the FK icon actually shown in animation? I haven't noticed that:confused:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gert Funck

Is the FK icon actually shown in animation? I haven't noticed that:confused:

---

no, it's static.

Buffs: Active SA displayed in animation would be awesome :cool:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gabez Teh

no, it's static.

---

Attachment 50885

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by khris

Attachment 50885

---

Looks legit ;)

If you're asking did I fake it.....no. Its there in the animation but ofc it is static:p - although I thought I saw the little guy on the left of the wall shimmy ;)

Can't see any transparency effect, shadowing or whatever. I'd need to check another if it was a one-off but I can definately say its there, just not if its there by design ;)

i'd say the defense looking wonky in some pictures is due to playing zonal defense.

We must ofc *looks at Tactician* remember these were in BETA. I suspect even that there was some experimenting with prioritising which actions were shown from game to game - I have 1 capture which shows around 3 moves starting with a kickout by the GK as well as a few starting from the touchline (Throw-ins?) which was a big change from previous matches. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by khris

Attachment 50885

---

beg your pardon?

Here is a sequence you don't see from a commentary based view.

http://i62.tinypic.com/sxc3zr.jpg
http://i57.tinypic.com/66xn2h.jpg
http://i60.tinypic.com/2n65iq.jpg

Here's another move started by a GK in the same match.

http://i62.tinypic.com/2s7t24w.jpg
http://i60.tinypic.com/qohoug.jpg
http://i59.tinypic.com/1ylrhj.jpg
http://i61.tinypic.com/1z6gvpu.jpg
http://i59.tinypic.com/34zknlf.jpg

i think to solve the problem you need the option to set passing for each individual player also for the gk

instead whole team(short/ mixed/long)

the better option is to set tactics for each individual player (much more realistic)and more fun

it should be a good implement in the game if it possible

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Buster Keaton

i think to solve the problem you need the option to set passing for each individual player also for the gk

instead whole team(short/ mixed/long)

it should be a good implement in the game if it possible

---

I did put that in the suggestion area; I asked for the ability to give specific orders to each player.

Crappy capture today but....FK SA showing again

http://i57.tinypic.com/f1wshk.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Buffs Mad

Crappy capture today but....FK SA showing again

http://i57.tinypic.com/f1wshk.jpg

---

nice, do you have a dribbler or corner thingy? or is it only FK shown?

By the way, how can 4-1-4-1 counter 4-3-3, when 4-1-2N-2W-1 is countered by 4-3-3? 4-1-2N-2W-1 is the same as 4-1-4-1 at the back but with more offensive players on the front sides. In fact, 4-1-2N-2W-1 should have caused more problems to 4-3-3, especially in the final third of the pitch.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gert Funck

nice, do you have a dribbler or corner thingy? or is it only FK shown?

---

I think I said before, its only for FKs where I've noticed this and I only have that one player with FK SA. Harper takes FK from the right, Gauld takes FK from the left. It only shows for Gauld. An SA has never shown in the vid caps for Gordon (1on1 stopper), Robertson (AD), Mulgrew (P-M), Baxter (SS) or Harper 1on1.

I have not seen a FK SA icon visible for an opposition player with FK SA when taking a FK.

So it remains the case that the only player that shows this effect is Gauld, which is why I can only say 'it happens" rather than "OMG, OMG, triggered SAs display".

Ofc anyone with access to the Beta app could share too. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tactician

By the way, how can 4-1-4-1 counter 4-3-3, when 4-1-2N-2W-1 is countered by 4-3-3? 4-1-2N-2W-1 is the same as 4-1-4-1 at the back but with more offensive players on the front sides. In fact, 4-1-2N-2W-1 should have caused more problems to 4-3-3, especially in the final third of the pitch.

---

In other words its not the 'same as'.:p You only focus on the offensive where the difference is less significant than the defensive. You also make the assumption that the only differences between formations are positional ones and seem to be ignoring the possibility of programmed playstyles (which we can then add 'more' or 'less' too).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tactician

By the way, how can 4-1-4-1 counter 4-3-3, when 4-1-2N-2W-1 is countered by 4-3-3? 4-1-2N-2W-1 is the same as 4-1-4-1 at the back but with more offensive players on the front sides. In fact, 4-1-2N-2W-1 should have caused more problems to 4-3-3, especially in the final third of the pitch.

---

Taking it only from a positional sense.........

You can look at 451v and think because it has advanced wingers that it will do a better job but numerically its still only 3 v 4 up front if you omit the mcs as the prime attacking threat.

http://i57.tinypic.com/2v86541.jpghttp://i58.tinypic.com/2mhixxi.jpg

But, if you consider 433 to be an aggressive formation then being able to nullify that threat more effectively from their midfield forward just might be the key. With the 2nd set up the 3n3 doesn't look so bad ;)

http://i57.tinypic.com/2qn5xjq.jpghttp://i61.tinypic.com/2wcm99i.jpg

But anyway, no matter the whys the hows or the wtfs.

I change from 451v to play 4141 v 433. Additionally if my squad can manage the change should there be a switch, I will start 433 against 451v. But ofc nothing is 100%.

A similar situation exists for what I choose when faced with 413n2, 413w2, 43n12 or 43w12. 451v is my preferred choice against 2 of those (1 with a dmc and 1 with amc) and 4141 the other 2 (again 1 with dmc and 1 with amc). (Although now I have a dmc/mc it adds another 'no sub switch' with 432w1 ;) ).