Crushed by an assymetric formation!

[ponzu]

I played another asymmetric formation (they are getting popular!) and crushed it 5-1 with a V and man-to-man. It come at a cost (condition loss), but is a godsend in some situations.

[ponzu]

...and we are back to the original subject.

Crushed (again) by an asymmetric formation, this time even stupider looking. Are you ready for this?

DL-DC-DC-DC-DR
----------DMC---------
-----MC----------------
-------------------AML
-----ST-------ST-----

Why would this even work? Okay, it's fairly solid at the back. He seems to be giving away the midfield. And throwing a few attackers our way. The challenge, it would seem, would be to score on him. Therefore, I switched from 4-5-1V I had been planning on to 3W-5-1V. Playing man-to-man with 4 men back should have taken care of his 3 attackers, right? Well, it did, sort of. His STs did nothing, low ratings. The AML scored one late in the game when my guys starting running around a bit too much. So how does his off-center MC come up with two goals? One of them in the first minute (before I got a chance to tune in). When that happens, there is a strong suspicion of a rigged (troll) game with predetermined outcome. But I don't want to make any excuses.

Lost 1:3 in a cup match, at home, with 15% possession bonus from fans plus full training bonus, which I used initially for possession and eventually for attack. Had a bit of Q advantage as well. 65-35 possession (actually, surprisingly small advantage considering), 86/84 completion. 23/19 tackles. 6/3 corners. The lads are gassed before the next game a few hours away. And nothing to show for it. It's almost like I didn't do anything wrong, just had "one of those games". But these losses sting when delivered by an off-kilter squad. That always introduced the nagging doubt: what if the other guy is a genius and I am missing something?

The only thing bothering me is my choice of the defensive line: In hindsight ---DC-DC----DR might have been a better idea. But I hate asymmetry.

And also in hindsight, couldn't the defenders, outnumbering the attackers, have sorted it out better with zonal? HoofDaddy once told me that off-kilter formations wreak havoc on zonal defence, and I have had success with man-to-man since then.

[HoofDaddy]

Ultra defensive formations like that you need to high press to keep the ball in their half. Or go hard defensive with low and put counters on to draw their defenders upfield, whichever your team can do best. I would have used a asymmetrical left flank overload to beat this team. That formation is barely asymmentrical, looks like your typical defensive, long passing counter attack middle formation, you screwed yourself with the 3w defenders.

[Awe Imoleayo Peter]

Ultra defensive formations like that you need to high press to keep the ball in their half. Or go hard defensive with low and put counters on to draw their defenders upfield, whichever your team can do best. I would have used a asymmetrical left flank overload to beat this team. That formation is barely asymmentrical, looks like your typical defensive, long passing counter attack middle formation, you screwed yourself with the 3w defenders.

Right on point hoof daddy, I don't seem to get why he chose 3 wide with 2 strikers and Aml.....what I have learnt this season is when you see aml and amr, don't think of 3defenders....it's like they are drawn out of position and a Ramsey kinda of movement from a midfield player overloads the only center back in position.

Sent from my Infinix-X551 using Tapatalk

[HoofDaddy]

Exactly, I tend to watch their footing as well, like an aml with right foot and AMR with left, they tend to cut inside more so I am less worried about the flanks than the middle. Only way you can get away with 3w man marking is with offside trap on and high pressing but that burns a sick amount of condition. I think ponzu is way overthinking things. As a rule i generally use defensive formations in home cup legs and attacking in away legs due to the power of away goals. Ive lost way too many first leg home legs trying to score early and often.

[ponzu]

I don't seem to get why he chose 3 wide with 2 strikers and Aml.....what I have learnt this season is when you see aml and amr, don't think of 3defenders....it's like they are drawn out of position and a Ramsey kinda of movement from a midfield player overloads the only center back in position.

So, 4D, no DMC? Or DC-DC-DR with DMC? It feels weird to field five defenders against three attackers (if you meant 4D+DMC). It is equally weird to not field a DM with AM present. I don't have a DMR. As far as I remember, never ever had one. Had ML/DML and DL/DML, but not anymore. My DMC play very well for me.

Did I lose because I don't have a DMR? Or could the DC-DC-DR with DMC or DC-DC-DC-DR have handled the challenge? Mind you, we have difference in opinion among the pros on defending AML/Rs. Nik and Arion feel a DR/L does the best job, and Nik adds what used to be known as "blue" arrow to make sure the lad stay put.

Mind you, two goals did not come from the forward line, but from the lonely off-center MC lost in no man's land. My guys must have taken one look at him and died laughing. Which is when he scored.

Incidentally. This "man-to-man" thing. I don't think it means what we think it means. I don't see the defenders act any differently on the field. I think it's just a setting that says the D will tackle this much harder (yet cleanly) and use this much more condition. Once again, I am thinking like a programmer, but HoofDaddy has a soccer explanation for everything.

Would either of you draw the actual formation you would have used as a counter? Because when HoofDaddy says he would overload left flank, I don't know what he means (ML? AML? MC?) or why left, for that matter. Yes, I am that slow. But I am not stubborn. I actually take advice to heart, maybe too willingly.

And no, I cannot work it out for myself from soccer theory. For one, because I don't know the first thing about soccer. And two, because even if I did, like Hoof does, who is to say that game designers think that way? I prefer to reverse engineer a game than to expect it to follow the logic of the real life soccer.

[ponzu]

As a rule i generally use defensive formations in home cup legs and attacking in away legs due to the power of away goals. Ive lost way too many first leg home legs trying to score early and often.

I started out from the same place. I consider 4-5-1V nicely defensive, and I did set the orders to defensive with counters. The goal in the 1st minute made me lose my cool. I tied, he immediately scored again. I threw caution to the wind and got another goal for good measure.

P.S. Well, ****, I wrote 4-5-1V, but that's not what I played, is it? I played 3W. That was a desperation move. The guy got into my head. All day he was sitting on a Narrow Diamond formation and I had 4-5-1V lined up. Then he changed it to this weird formation that you call not all that asymmetrical and I panicked. I don't know how I came up with 3W. I figured with man-to-man everyone will pick a man and stick to him like glue, 4 defender against 3 forwards. And the DL had an up arrow on him to be able to contribute to attack. Not the DR of course. I expected the challenge was going to be in scoring, not in holding the fort.

[HoofDaddy]

I don't think your formation let you down as much as your orders. But here's what I would have used or something similar.



basically a ND variant to control possession. Zonal marking whole game. Would have started low left flank mixed defensive with CA switching to middle short high trap in the 2nd half, subbing the dmc for another amc/st, but you only have one amc soooooo....

[ponzu]

Right.

Thanks all the same.

Playing a DR as a DMR with a yellow warning should not be the end of the world.

Still, your formation pits five defenders against three attackers. I don't think I would have come up with it on my own. What, for example, is the use of DMC (other than to cement the defence for a home game, which is a great concept in principle, just weird given the opponent's formation)?

P.S. I like your formation. Had I encountered it, I would have freaked out.

P.P.S. I now have two AMCs. I can't believe you remembered. The new guy is AMC/AML. Scores a lot. Scored in the 1:3 loss.

[HoofDaddy]

to stack defenders on either side of the forwards, preventing long ball counters. Every attacker has at least 2 defenders within one square of them. 5v3 is better odds than 4v3 (really 4v4, because you had man marking on) I wouldn't recommend starting with counter attacks on unless you use defensive or condition bonus for the first 20 minutes. Guaranteed your DMC didn't rate higher than 7.