Season 124 - Are you ready?

[Tactician]

There are basic rules that we older users got used to. An example is the minimum in any formation is to have 3 defenders, 1 MC in the middle, 1 player on each side and 1 ST. Way back if you went against this rule, you would have suffered significant penalties by the game engine. Nowadays, it seems that the penalties have been 'relaxed'.

[Sillybq]

How to counter this formation? I was thinking of playing 4-5-1 flat or V style. Do you have any suggestions?

Sent from my MI 8 Lite using Tapatalk

I usually play the same formation against all opponents as I do not have enough to buy or train a team of good players. I did recently check for this formation as it is very popular. It was 5-3N-2.

[Tactician]

Max, a better explaination for your case could be because of you using odd formations and orders. When you were not present, the bot manager trolled the opponent with your odd settings or the settings were changed, but when you are present you are bound to get penalised. Like I said, in more active and competitive competitions, it is expected that you will not win as much as you already did with those odd ways. Lower levels you can get away with this though still might have it hard in later stages of competitions like semi final and finals where the opponent will likely be active, but at higher levels you will be maybe more like a mid-table team.

[Tactician]

I usually play the same formation against all opponents as I do not have enough to buy or train a team of good players. I did recently check for this formation as it is very popular. It was 5-3N-2.

You can beat this with a lot of formations as long as it covers the basics to defend and to attack versus this formation. Orders play significant role these days. The game has changed. Way back I used to use defensive 3-5-2 with defensive wingers (3-2W-3MC-2) and attacking 4-3-3, but last season I used 3-2W-2MC-2W-1 (wing attacks). 451 Flat has also beaten this formation way back (Nik's 451V was beaten), and 3W-2DMC-2-2W-1 also beaten this. One key in beating this in the past was evident - it is 3MCs with cover in the other areas as appropriate according to the approach used for defence and attack. If the approach was attack middle, then needed 3 attackers in front (AMC, ST or 3ST) but if the approach was defensive and counter-attacking, wingbacks and 2ST (still with the 3MC) was needed. Other possible formations are 4-3N-2W-1 and 3-6-1 wide diamond.

[Max]

Max, a better explaination for your case could be because of you using odd formations and orders. When you were not present, the bot manager trolled the opponent with your odd settings or the settings were changed, but when you are present you are bound to get penalised. Like I said, in more active and competitive competitions, it is expected that you will not win as much as you already did with those odd ways. Lower levels you can get away with this though still might have it hard in later stages of competitions like semi final and finals where the opponent will likely be active, but at higher levels you will be maybe more like a mid-table team.

I know, I do not spend anything so I definitely will be.

I will do my best to change this in the future.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Sillybq]

You can beat this with a lot of formations as long as it covers the basics to defend and to attack versus this formation. Orders play significant role these days. The game has changed. Way back I used to use defensive 3-5-2 with defensive wingers (3-2W-3MC-2) and attacking 4-3-3, but last season I used 3-2W-2MC-2W-1 (wing attacks). 451 Flat has also beaten this formation way back (Nik's 451V was beaten), and 3W-2DMC-2-2W-1 also beaten this. One key in beating this in the past was evident - it is 3MCs with cover in the other areas as appropriate according to the approach used for defence and attack. If the approach was attack middle, then needed 3 attackers in front (AMC, ST or 3ST) but if the approach was defensive and counter-attacking, wingbacks and 2ST (still with the 3MC) was needed. Other possible formations are 4-3N-2W-1 and 3-6-1 wide diamond.

I definitely need to read up more on all this. Very technical to me. Lol but good to see my formation in that mix. Good stuff, fmfm has a lot of options

[Max]

You can beat this with a lot of formations as long as it covers the basics to defend and to attack versus this formation. Orders play significant role these days. The game has changed. Way back I used to use defensive 3-5-2 with defensive wingers (3-2W-3MC-2) and attacking 4-3-3, but last season I used 3-2W-2MC-2W-1 (wing attacks). 451 Flat has also beaten this formation way back (Nik's 451V was beaten), and 3W-2DMC-2-2W-1 also beaten this. One key in beating this in the past was evident - it is 3MCs with cover in the other areas as appropriate according to the approach used for defence and attack. If the approach was attack middle, then needed 3 attackers in front (AMC, ST or 3ST) but if the approach was defensive and counter-attacking, wingbacks and 2ST (still with the 3MC) was needed. Other possible formations are 4-3N-2W-1 and 3-6-1 wide diamond.

Does 3-6-1 do well? I have never seen it been played, does it win stuff.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Tactician]

I definitely need to read up more on all this. Very technical to me. Lol but good to see my formation in that mix. Good stuff, fmfm has a lot of options

Even 4-1-2-1-2 Narrow Diamond has beaten this (I seen it live at least twice many years ago). But, the key in there can be seen again, it is still like 3 in the middle and 3 attackers just in front. But those were old days. Right now, I do not know what the game engine will significantly prefer to be used, but one thing for sure is that orders matter a lot. On paper, all those formations I listed above look good, but wrong orders can be costly.

[Tactician]

Does 3-6-1 do well? I have never seen it been played, does it win stuff.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

3-6-1 Wide Diamond (3W-1DMC-2MC-3WAM-1) not 3-6-1 plain. I personally do not use this, but on paper it is a hard formation to defend against but also to break down. 3-6-1 Narrow Diamond is another hard one (currently used by some top teams in top associations, and also most of the members in my current association used this and some still using it).

The narrow one (atleast) might be overpowered (and misleading to the opponent) just like how certain narrow formations were overpowered way back in this game, and some users could be winning so much just because they using this formation rather than due to their management and tactical skills

[Max]

Even 4-1-2-1-2 Narrow Diamond has beaten this (I seen it live at least twice many years ago). But, the key in there can be seen again, it is still like 3 in the middle and 3 attackers just in front. But those were old days. Right now, I do not know what the game engine will significantly prefer to be used, but one for sure is that orders matter a lot. On paper, all those formations I listed above look good, but wrong orders can be costly.

I use 1-4-1-1-3

What a unique formation, does that have any name for it, this is what it looks like.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk