AI teams playing 4-2-4 all-out-attack!!!!

How many times have you seen this in real life even in the last minutes of a game? What's worse is when they do it in extra-time (ET) of a cup final for the whole duration of it!!! I cannot recall EVER seeing this in a cup final. In most cases, when teams go to ET they play very conservatively, trying as hard as possible not to concede.

I imagine that the reason why AI teams do it is because it is effective in the game, as playing defensively usually leads you to concede a lot. It's a very gamey "feature" and I wish it would be removed.

A team trying to chase a Cup or a title or even just a win, surely in the dying minutes if you thought you had a chance you would go all out attack.

If you keep getting beat by it, just try go defensive or counter it with a 4-2-4 of your own.

A team trying to chase a Cup or a title or even just a win, surely in the dying minutes if you thought you had a chance you would go all out attack.

If you keep getting beat by it, just try go defensive or counter it with a 4-2-4 of your own.

When last did you see a team play all-out-attack 4-2-4 in ET in a cup final? I've watched MANY finals and I have never seen that, even when one team is heavily favoured. It may be that playing all-out-attack is much more effective than conservative, defensive football (in FM), in which case the AI is right in its option. But this calls into question the ability of the match engine to replicate anything close to a real football match.

To be honest, what I've found is that playing an attacking style is usually the best option, even when you are the underdog. This goes against all common sense about football, where playing narrow, tight at the back is usually the way weaker teams deal with superior teams. And teams cannot easily break down at team that plays like that (contrary to what FM will make you think).

You see it quite often, but most of the time it would mean moving the two outer midfielders further up-field into very attacking Wingers... Which is a 4-2-4 really as side strikers hasn't been used in real life for something like 40-50 years.

Anyway it doesn't matter... In my experience the 4-2-4 was brutally effective in FM08, but in FM09 they've toned it down so it barely works

I see it quite a lot in real football. We may not actually call it a 4-2-4 but if you watch any team desperately chasing a lead they'll normally have two strikers on and the wingers pushed up so far they're operating more or less as extra forwards.

The problem I have with FM's 4-2-4 is how effective it is. It may not be an uncommon formation in real life but it's definitely not a particularly effective one. Yet unless you seriously alter your own team's tactics it seems the 4-2-4 is far too good against you.

Teams with the lead do drastically alter their tactics in real life during the end of the game only they would've agreed upon it earlier on so the manager doesn't have to really get that involved. They tend to go a lot more defensive less adventurous with their full backs. Generally sit back and hope to counter. That's even when they play against lower opposition.

I suggest saving a close the game tactic. It'll make life a lot easier for you.

Happens all the time in real life - it's a representation of a team chasing the game, pushing all appropriate players forward. If the defending team don't alter their tactics (and they always, always do) they WILL concede. Doesn't work every time because modern managers are not so stupid as to continue with the same tactic. A team chasing the game will have seen the other team's tactics and set out to exploit them. And attack, attack, attack.

In the game, if anything, it is a little bit TOO EASY to defend against. Unlike humans' attacking tactics (or "starting" tactics) once you have a good solid 4-5-1 defensive formation, it is very, very simple to defend against 4-2-4 in the last 10-12 minutes of a game. I actually score more times than I concede.

And before anyone harps on about "tactical genius" or "1000-page tactics bibles", I am not a particularly successful manager on the game, and I have never read the bible. Trial and error, watching a couple of 4-2-4 attacks on full detail, and it's relatively simple. Don't go "ultra" defensive, just "defensive", tick the counter-attack box, and off you go.

Sorry to sound all ranty, but this issue has been raised and debunked many, many times.

No problem backpackant . I welcome all opinions. People seem to have hooked on the "chasing a result" argument. But what I find most shocking is a team playing the whole extra-time with a 4-2-4 all-out-attack. That is seriously unlikely IRL. And yes, 4-2-4 seems to be far too effective in the game (attacking style in general). Defending for the whole 90 minutes is seriously discouraged even though we know how effective it is IRL.

Regarding changing the tactics to suit the 4-2-4, I also agree that teams will change their tactics. What it boils down to is how much control does a manager really have over a team's formation in the last 10 minutes of the game? If a team is 1-0 and the opposing team goes all-out-attack, the manager wouldn't need to say anything, as the players would naturally pull back (a) because there are many opposition players pushing forward and (b) because they are in the lead and they want to keep it.

But I understand that this is the way the game works, otherwise it would be far too frustrating to many human players not having their players do what they want.

Note: Has anyone tried doing a Chelsea-Barcelona CL semi-final replay, where Chelsea play super defensive, very deep DL, counter-attacking? Would like to see what the result is.

Man United played 4-2-4 against barca in this year's euro champions league final, did it not?

I think it was more a 4-3-3 with Anderson Carrick and was it Giggs in the middle.

I've managed to go to penalties against Leicester as Chesterfield manager my second game in with a very defensive formation.

The match ended 3-3 but they beat me in pens. My best pen taker and most experienced player missed. I shouldn't have allowed him to take it though. He missed one in extra time too. He had good composure and relished the big games so maybe it was an off day for him.

And about managers not having control. The match is usually planned out before hand. The manager tells the players before hand if we are 1-0 up with 10 mins to go I want you to fall back and hit them on the counter. I dont' want you to allow any crosses in and what not. In the game though you have to do it while the match is going on.

Regarding changing the tactics to suit the 4-2-4, I also agree that teams will change their tactics. What it boils down to is how much control does a manager really have over a team's formation in the last 10 minutes of the game? If a team is 1-0 and the opposing team goes all-out-attack, the manager wouldn't need to say anything, as the players would naturally pull back (a) because there are many opposition players pushing forward and (b) because they are in the lead and they want to keep it.

This has been a common complaint for years and I completely agree. Players in real life WOULD know to defend, and often it would be the captain that orchestrates this with minimum input from the bench.

However, I don't think a computer game is EVER going to get this right for all people. You'll have some people asking why the players are not following the manager's instructions while others will say they are too stupid to play football. "Why ARE my full backs bombing up the pitch in the face of 4-2-4? Why do I have to TELL them not to?" and so on. This is one area where SI will never please everyone.

I think nni makes a very good point that covers a lot of minor issues I have with the tactics in FM. Players shouldn't have to be told certain obvious things, like timewasting might be a good idea when you're on the verge of a great result. Similarly, although you can obviously tweak to play against the 4-2-4, ir reality it's not a great formation because it leaves nobody in midfield and often leaves you exposed down the wings if the fullbacks push up too. Most intelligent players should react to that naturally.

There's a balance to be struck so the players don't just automatically counter the opposition's tactics but it's extremely jarring to see your players act like idiotic robots instead of doing the sensible thing.

Players listen to their manager it's that simple. Like I said earlier. IRL the manager talks to them about certain scenarios beforehand. In the game it's different in the sense that you have to do it during the game.

If the manager tells his players to attack they have to listen to him. They don't just take matters into their own hands otherwise they'll be disorganized. Everything has been generally worked on in training.

Aaaah the good old AI 4-2-4 all out attack OR the AI 'I-WIN' button as I like to call it

Players listen to their manager it's that simple. Like I said earlier. IRL the manager talks to them about certain scenarios beforehand. In the game it's different in the sense that you have to do it during the game.

If the manager tells his players to attack they have to listen to him. They don't just take matters into their own hands otherwise they'll be disorganized. Everything has been generally worked on in training.

Uhm, No. Players don't always do what their managers tell them. And if a team is under heavy pressure, the players will naturally play defensively. Very often you will see a manager tearing his hair out on the sidelines, telling his players to push up and they just won't do it.

who cares really? i mean 4-2-4 is the most worthless tac and im actually happy when AI does it,i ofter counter in a goal and kills the game,just counter,close down and tight mark the mc and u dominate

They main issue with this is that the game takes far to long to implement your counter, if teh AI goes 424 in the 85th minute by the time you've selected a preset counter & the game has made the changes it's the 91st minute & who've gone from having a 1-0 lead to being 2-1 down & you players ar in uber defence mode.

Another issue I've come across is how the wide attackers somehow get a popeye style boost of strength & can go from tracking back a tackling in defence to setting up a goal in a very short period of time.

9 times out of 10 if a team is in the lead and they sort of drop back it's because it's been talked about beforehand. You're right thought sometimes players don't listen and that's when a team tends to concede the most goals. When they don't stick to the plan.

The point is most of the times you see players going defensive is because the manager has talked to them about this the night before or whenever. Going defensive because of pressure has still been talked about the whole idea is to avoid the pressure in the first place by sticking to the plan.

Teams that deploy the 4-2-4 tend to hit you on a counter attack with a ball behind the full back. If that isn't the case then your biggest problem isn't the 4-2-4 it lies elsewhere. I find that I can easily counter that by not allow my full backs to push forward. I've almost never conceded a goal as a result of the 4-2-4 when I stop my full backs from attacking and giving them a defensive mentality on par or a little over my cbs.

Sigh...This isn't a thread about how to counter the 4-2-4. I'm arguing that it's unrealistic in real football terms, especially if a team is in a cup final to go gung-ho attack. It's unrealistic that playing very attacking football against a better team produces better results than being really tight at the back. My problem is that the game doesn't reward defensive strategies and in that sense the AI is right in going 4-2-4 because it is effective. The truth is it isn't effective IRL and thus shouldn't be effective in a game simulating real football.

I started a match recently and the AI STARTED with a 4-2-4, i still won though and its definately not as effective as it was on 08.

IMO, the AI going 4-2-4 is the games way of telling you they are going all out attack. Regardless of if it would work in real life, its the game telling you changes have been made. ow else would you know unless you watched every game on full match view.

Was it FC Sete in France by any chance? I know in FM08 they played 4-2-4 as the default formation, dunno if it's the case in FM09 but...

I started a match recently and the AI STARTED with a 4-2-4, i still won though and its definately not as effective as it was on 08.

Yeah, when i played pre-season friendlies with Boreham Wood, they always start with a 4-2-4. Which is stupid, or do they actually do that IRL? Especially as my team was Arsenal, reserve/youth players but still. They always conceed in the first few minutes and then go back to a 4-4-2.

As I understand the OP, he is saying that they are playing 4-2-4 in extra time in a cup final. Now that I cannot really belive would happen IRL. If they were chasing the game late on, sure I can get that. But the OP has never stated that the team was BEHIND, but rather they were doing this from the very first second of ET. I don't think any team would do such a thing in such a high risk situation. Even if they are putting plenty of pressure on with their 4-2-4 they would be leaving alot of ground for their opposition to use on counter attacks.

I remeber on FM08 when I played with Elfsborg in the UEFA Cup. We were a man down and was getting run over by the opposition. It was a nightmare seeing the opposition going 4-2-4 when leading 3-1! They won the game 5-1, a miracle we didn't conceed more as the players was so tired they were really crawling on the pitch. Thankfully I haven't seen this on FM09...

That extra time thing sounds weird, probably something SI hadn't thought of when they coded the AI's willingness to change to 4-2-4.

Stoke start with a 4-2-4 on my game. They're still not very good though.