Season 124 - Are you ready?

[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]

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.

[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

[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.

[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

[Sillybq]

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.

The only thing I know about the orders are attacking goes well with offside trap and never with counter. Defence goes well with counter and never with offside trap. Also ST and MC in the game perform really badly. If I had a choice I rather not play these 2 positions. Play 4 AMs and 2 DMC instead. My Mc is always needing morale boosters as he ain’t assisting. He doesn’t do anything lol. My st does a little, like really very little.

[Tactician]

The only thing I know about the orders are attacking goes well with offside trap and never with counter. Defence goes well with counter and never with offside trap. Also ST and MC in the game perform really badly. If I had a choice I rather not play these 2 positions. Play 4 AMs and 2 DMC instead. My Mc is always needing morale boosters as he ain’t assisting. He doesn’t do anything lol. My st does a little, like really very little.

I have used offside trap with defensive styles and it worked. Some are just guidslines shared by users. They are not a must. In fact, based on experiences, I found some advices and guides shared by others like 'bull****' because the orders they adviced did not make any sense with what was working for me in the game. Briefly, good order combinations can be any in this game (even those that are against logic). It is all about what the game engine has selected to be right orders for you to use in that specific match (I do not know how, maybe some by logic and some random).

I know about the MC and ST problem; it is not something new, but I think there are good and bad players too. For sure, there are ST that performed very well; a big example is my ST itself (lots of goals and assists, more goals than the wingers, and is currently the player of the season so far).

[Max]

I have used offside trap with defensive styles and it worked. Some are just guidlines shared by users. They are not a must. In fact, based on experiences, I found some advices and guides like 'bull****' because the orders they adviced did not make any sense with what was working for me in the game. Briefly, good order combinations can be any in this game (even those that are against logic). It is all about what the game engine has selected to be right orders for you to use in that specific match (I do not know how, maybe some by logic and some random).

I know about the MC and ST problem; it is not something new, but I think there are good and bad players too. For sure, there are ST that performed very well; a big example is my ST itself (lots of goals and assists, more goals than the wingers, and is currently the player of the season so far).

Offside trap works for me too.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Sillybq]

Offside trap works for me too.

I have used offside trap with defensive styles and it worked. Some are just guidslines shared by users. They are not a must. In fact, based on experiences, I found some advices and guides shared by others like 'bull****' because the orders they adviced did not make any sense with what was working for me in the game. Briefly, good order combinations can be any in this game (even those that are against logic). It is all about what the game engine has selected to be right orders for you to use in that specific match (I do not know how, maybe some by logic and some random).

I know about the MC and ST problem; it is not something new, but I think there are good and bad players too. For sure, there are ST that performed very well; a big example is my ST itself (lots of goals and assists, more goals than the wingers, and is currently the player of the season so far).

Will try the offside with defensive next time. I actually asked someone who plays Soccer and he told me but yeah it’s a game so what’s normally done doesn’t always apply.

Am selling my ST again. The search continues for one that can perform without fk and pk duties.

[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