Can a 3-defender-formation be successful when op AML/AMR players exist?

[SHNM]

I think after all the experiments you will return to V style again. In the scheme of three defenders, DL-DC-DR-DMC-2MC-ML-MR-2ST shows itself very well. One change of DMC to AMC, if necessary, change the style of your team. and vice versa.

[stra]

I think after all the experiments you will return to V style again. In the scheme of three defenders, DL-DC-DR-DMC-2MC-ML-MR-2ST shows itself very well. One change of DMC to AMC, if necessary, change the style of your team. and vice versa.

I use this same style and usually switch to AMC and only go for DMC only when the opponent has an AMC, but when the AMC is weak of his DMC is weak I stick to having an AMC instead.

I also play a DC-DC-DC and almost never lose except for those troll results lol

[Der_Ryan_M]

I think after all the experiments you will return to V style again. In the scheme of three defenders, DL-DC-DR-DMC-2MC-ML-MR-2ST shows itself very well. One change of DMC to AMC, if necessary, change the style of your team. and vice versa.

Now that this thread is up again, I'm back to 4-5-1 V. Its just the best, there is nothing you can say against it. I played with a 3-2-3-1-1 for about 2 seasons and I did decent, than I also tried a 4-1-3-1-1, but with V style my wingers are scoring left and right and I win far more games than with the other formations.

[stra]

Now that this thread is up again, I'm back to 4-5-1 V. Its just the best, there is nothing you can say against it. I played with a 3-2-3-1-1 for about 2 seasons and I did decent, than I also tried a 4-1-3-1-1, but with V style my wingers are scoring left and right and I win far more games than with the other formations.

I almost always beat 4-5-1 V
hard attacking , short passes on the wings,pressing low using 3DC-2MC-ML-MR-AMC-2ST

my ML and MR usually just on the line to AMR AML or just simply AML AMR
still wins

I guess thats its achilles heel