I'm facing this opponent tomorrow
http://i.imgur.com/yH48jQz.png
We both have similar teams, mine is little better...
http://i.imgur.com/GLkhi5b.png
First match:
http://i.imgur.com/3hM72XU.png
His team is much better now :)
Any advice ?
Printable View
I'm facing this opponent tomorrow
http://i.imgur.com/yH48jQz.png
We both have similar teams, mine is little better...
http://i.imgur.com/GLkhi5b.png
First match:
http://i.imgur.com/3hM72XU.png
His team is much better now :)
Any advice ?
anyone ?
4-1-4-1? tricky..
yup, 4-1-4-1 motivated. wingers red arrows, DL/DR red arrows
attacking, mixed attack, zonal, normal tackle, mixed passing, no counter, no offsides.
I'd go 3n-1-4w-1-1, defensive, focus middle, zonal, mixed (or long), counter. Blue on MCs & DMC, red on MR, ML and AMCQuote:
Originally Posted by cracicot
Better yet, do some serious FA shopping tonight and upgrade that team. You should be able to find plenty of 1 or 2 token buys at this time of season.
I agree with you that 3N-1-4-1-1 is most likely a better option, but whatever formation it is, Betjulai needs to be the left DC to counter his scout ST, with Brunklik in the middle to help out.Quote:
Originally Posted by Razz
There is triple coverage no matter what you do so short passes up the middle to the AMC and ST would probably be best.
Attacking, not defensive, since he should be at home he will have more possession this way. No counter, no offsides. Red arrows on ML/MR.
Perhaps 3N-1-4-2 would be a better formation to use. I don't fancy the AMC vs 2 DMCs, rather have the 2 STs vs the wide defence.Quote:
Originally Posted by Razz
It is a tough call no matter what. I like the short passing on the 1-1 up the middle though.Quote:
Originally Posted by dv8r
I just played that formation vs a 4-4-2 classic and dominated possession, and this formation he is up against is a bit more defensive 3-5-2, and can be treated as a 3-4-1-2.
http://i41.tinypic.com/flys8n.png
Anyways, you cant miss with playing either. Well the NGE can have a say, but I think the formation should win.
Personally, I look at it like AMC vs DMC and ST vs defenders. If the opponent has a weakness in the defence i would avoid the AMC and have more strikers. But I think either formation could still work.Quote:
Originally Posted by cracicot
I'm not a fan of using players when they are not needed, example being when I'm up against a 4-1-2-1-2 narrow diamond, I tend not to use DL/DR since I'm playing against a narrow formation. 3 DCs is enough and you can use the extra player in midfield or as a striker.
Thank you guys, you helped me a little to change my formation...
This was my starting team, I took off my AMC and add one more MC instead...
http://img29.imageshack.us/img29/917/lgt1e6r.png
But unfortunately this is what happened in third minute...
http://i.imgur.com/uU3TyD7.png
I wasn't playing hard tackling style... I substitute Tancev (ST) with AMC, I didn't have another MC on the bench.
I thought that I'll lose this match, but surprisingly before the halftime break, my team was leading the match with 3-0
http://img59.imageshack.us/img59/6519/lgt1c2.png
http://img507.imageshack.us/img507/6324/lgt1c7.png
http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:A...TDCsL-6qlsPnhg
Bugger didnt go with our formations!!! THE HORROR! Now we will never know what might have happened. this thread...all this info...FOR NOTHING!
BTW, glad it worked out for you! ;)
It's not for nothing, as you can see, I modified my formation (AMC-out, MC-in (blue arrows on the MC, so he can act like DMC) ... I couldn't play as you said, I don't have the required players for that formation :PQuote:
Originally Posted by cracicot