worst AI default tactic

Hello,

I was wondering what is the worst AI default tactic which the AI uses....

which one you would have the most success against?

thanks

Forget it's default name, 4-2-2-2 deep or 4-4-2 deep i think. Back 4, 2 DM, 2 wide midfielders and 2 forwards. Terrible formation.

I always like playing against a narrow midfield diamond. The full backs get soooo much space and pretty much run the game.

I've seen one team consistently line up in a 4-1-4-1 formation. 4 backs, 1 DM, 4 Mids flat across the middle of the field, and the lone striker left all by himself...

4-1-2-1-2 offers basically zero advantages. Click "Exploit the Flanks" and you've won.

The weird 5-3-2

GK-SW-CB-CB-WBR-WBL-CM-CM-CM-STR-STL

4-2-3-1 (both wide and narrow) as players in AMC, AML/R and SC positions just don't take any part in defensive phase of play so they are four players down when defending!

Played against Aston Villa with their horrible 'dick and balls' formation of 5-1-1-1-2.

Thanks guys.. appreciate the replies:)

Played against Aston Villa with their horrible 'dick and balls' formation of 5-1-1-1-2.

Really, who's their manager?

Really, who's their manager?

Alan Shearer. Won the FA Cup with that formation. Fair play...

I always like playing against a narrow midfield diamond. The full backs get soooo much space and pretty much run the game.

4-1-2-1-2 offers basically zero advantages. Click "Exploit the Flanks" and you've won.

I use that formation to level the playing field vs Real Madrid, dispite them having much better players then I have at Athletic Club, even piped them to a couple of thropys (a CL and Copa del Ray)

I always play narrow formations (4-1-3-2, 4-3-1-2, 4-1-2-1-2 etc) and end up dominating most games. Hate wide men on FM.

I once saw Tranmere play a 3-3-4 (GK-CB-CB-CB-CDM-CDM-CM-RW-LW-ST-ST) against me. I won 6-2.

I played a 4-1-2-1-2 with great success with Standard Liege on FM2011. To say it has no advantages is wrong as it dominates the middle of the pitch, and it proved to be very good at overwhelming teams playing 4-4-2.

I did find that against teams stronger than mine I was vulnerable though, so I ended up developing a 4-3-3 for tough European games. It could also predictably come unstuck against 4-3-3.

On my current save I play 4-3-3 or 4-2-3-1 and I now love facing the narrow midfields. As someone else said, full backs dominate the game, even though mine aren't particularly great.

As for the worst AI formation, I recall Boca Juniors playing a rather bizarre looking 3 at the back system on FM2011, which led to them struggling a lot on my save game, although I can't recall exactly what it was. I don't think they helped themselves by playing Riquelme as a RM though. Sadly I never got to face it as they sacked the coach just before I played them, employed Maradona, and his team beat me.

There's also a team on my current save game who play a system which looks something like this:

-------O-------

-------O-------

----O--O--O---

-------O-------

-O---O--O---O-

It's more bizarre than bad though, although I do have a good record against them.

The weakest AI tactics are those which don't employ defensive midfielders. Especially 4-2-3-1 wide tactics are bad when they are chasing a goal, as there are oceans of space between the midfield and defense. The four guys up front will do nothing defensively and the midfielders are caught between any relevant phases of play. The narrow equivalents are much better, as the 3 AMC version will be midfielders in a 4-5-1 if the team is defending deep enough. I think the hardest tactic to encounter is the 3-4-3/5-2-3 tactic. Excellent both offensively and defensively. They must be considered variations of the same tactic as the full backs in the 5-2-3 and the wide midfielders in the 3-4-3 behave exactly the same, and the AI switches between them all the time anyway (usually once a goal is scored either way, even if this is in the 1st minute...).

4-2-3-1 wide is bad beyond belief, although narrow equivalent is only tiny bit better. This allowed me to dominate Primera as Levante even after my brother outlawed buying players as an exploit.

On my FM08 game, one manager plays a 3-5-2 with wing-backs and a sweeper, and a high defensive line... The net result is that my players are never caught offside if I win the ball quickly, and the amount of pressure it puts on them is hilarious.

I've just remembered the absolute worst formation I've seen the AI employ. On FM2006 I had a game in Russia and a couple of managers liked to employ a 4-4-2, but with 1 centre back and 1 sweeper. With most teams, including mine, playing 2 up front it was very easy to score against them as the strikers had too much space and weren't marked.

Most of these suggestions are formations rather than tactics, but that's just me being picky.

Teams with slow defenders playing a high defensive line are easy to beat.

It's funny that people think the 442 narrow diamond it's easy, i always seem to struggle against that formation.

It's funny that people think the 442 narrow diamond it's easy, i always seem to struggle against that formation.

The anchor man in a narrow formation "shuts out" the strikers. I have yet to find a remedy against it apart from applying Hard Tackling to the strikers. It is especially bad vs my 4-2-4 tactic as the strikers are supposed to drop deep to receive the ball. If their CD's are good at heading out crosses I can't see how wide play helps much, but my wingers often cut inside and when combining with the midfielders or full back, they can drag the defenders out of position creating space that way. On the other hand I have two defensive midfielders being aggressive and all, so they rarely create much against me either. Usually tight games.

Also, the narrow diamond variants provides MUCH better cover on the flanks than the 4-5-1/4-3-3 and 4-2-3-1 in this match engine. In contrast, the AML/AMR of the aforementioned formations only ever pick up the runs of opposition wingbacks. The opposition winger gets a free run at your wingback, something which usually isn't the case if you are instead playing with a narrow diamond. One of the central midfielders always goes across to help defend the flank where a move is being constructed, and it's rare that he doesn't do so soon enough. Also, since both flanks can't be attacked at the same time, and there's an extremely low instance of a crossball which would take advantage of 2v1 on the opposite flank, the narrow diamond variants are very solid indeed.

The dynamic defensive behaviour of the midfield ensures numbers in the central zones, and intermittent cover on the flanks when needed. Meanwhile, there is a numbers advantage through the middle when attacking almost every other formation. It can beat the 4-5-1 at its own game at controlling the center and packing the midfield. It can completely dictate the pace via the midfield against the 4-4-2. It even has an unrealistic edge over 3/5 at the back variants due to the fact that the ML/MR and WBL/WBR of these formations are coded in the ME to always track back into DL and DR positions during the defensive phases - even though they have precious little defensive responsibilities and no marking duties to speak of when the 3-5-2 or 3-4-3 is playing against a narrow diamond variant.

In short, due to how it and other formations translate into the ME, it can be very easy to build a team which excels with a narrow diamond variant team shape.

Hello,

I was wondering what is the worst AI default tactic which the AI uses....

which one you would have the most success against?

thanks

In regards to formations, I would have to say 5-3-2/3-5-2 and 5-2-3/3-4-3 systems are arguably the "worst" due to their limitations. Despite the fact that their advantages over the 4-4-2 are accurately portrayed, there are problems with these formations. First and foremost, the AI doesn't recognise the fact that the 3/5 at the back struggles greatly when trying to attack a 4-5-1 variant, which can makes the formations easy to overlap and ultimately dominate down the flanks. Of course, if the 3/5 at the back team plays defensively and isn't showing much ambition going forward, it can have a good chance of playing for a 0-0 against a 4-5-1 - which is entirely realistic. The problem is only when an AI team thinks it can go for a win in this scenario. Another issue is, as referred to earlier, the fact that the wide-men are coded to track back into DL and DR positions no matter what, even when faced with team shapes where they have very little defending to do down the flanks. This limitations means that the narrow diamond variants, a narrow xmas tree, and a 4-2-2-2 can all be gifted with a disproportionate advantage when playing against 5-3-2/3-5-2 or 5-2-3/3-4-3. The one thing that can potentially make up for such flaws, of course, is how strong 3 uptop can be in this ME, thus giving the 3-4-3 a fighting chance even if it is being exposed throughout the course of a match in any of the scenarios discussed. Bluntly put, it becomes a case of which ME flaw prevails over the other.

The fact that a human player can get success with a 4-1-2-1-2 in certain situations is irrelevant in regards to the AI's use of a formation, particularly against a human player who knows how to counter it with a single touchline shout.

Granted, I rarely encounter it in FM12, but in FM11, a match against Ancelotti's Chelsea was not only close to a guaranteed win, I never saw them actually win the EPL.

The situation I described is the same though. The implications of defensive behaviour and advantages/disdvantages that I referred to in the scenarios of a narrow diamond variant vs 4-5-1, 3-5-2 or 4-4-2 are the same whether it's human or AI. Likewise, the MCl and MCr cover the flanks exactly the same way if it's an AI team using the formation. It really isn't countered by a single shout like you may think when looking at it on the line-up screen. Sure, there is initial space down the flanks, but nowhere near as much as can be found there when you are playing against 4-3-3, 4-5-1, 4-2-3-1, 5-3-2/3-5-2, and 5-2-3/3-4-3. Keep an eye on the MCl/MCr next time you play against an AI narrow diamond variant. You'll notice that they can and will hassle your wingers, unlike the opposition AMLs & AMRs of any formation which may accommodate them.

In theory, your single shout approach would also counter 4-3-3, 4-5-1 and 4-2-3-1 (and would also be even more effective in the process). For what it's worth, the only formations which defend the flanks better (for both human and AI) than a narrow diamond variant in this ME are those with a flat back four with an ML & MR. 4-5-1 and all of its variants shouldn't be inferior at covering flanks and denying space there, but they are, and that's just the way it is.

But it's not just a question of closing down wingers. Against 4-1-2-1-2, you not only get the advantage of the delay involved in central midfielders moving out wide to close down players, you don't have to worry about the AI's AML/AMR poised for the counter as the CM's are often trailing behind your wide players. The benefit of the added defensive cover is, at best, marginal given that any wide player with any kind of pace is going to be at the penalty box by the time the average central midfielder has moved out wide.

The other drawback is that leaving all that open space out wide encourages fullbacks/wingbacks to get forward to provide width on the attack, leaving the team even more vulnerable to a counterattack down the flanks.

faced a 3-5-3 man city formation, won 0-1 away from home, crazy fools lol

faced a 3-5-3 man city formation, won 0-1 away from home, crazy fools lol

3 - 5 - 2?

no 3-4-3

i was playing 4-3-2-1 (3 sitting in mid and 2 wingers) scored on the counter.

AML/Rs are absolutely useless in defensive phase but incredibly effective in attack as some of you have already noted above. The ideal solution is to play one winger as an AML/R and the other as ML/R. This will allow you to counter through offensive wing and his presence there in defensive phase will automatically stop AI GK/DCs distributing ball towards the nominally "marked" FB/WB on that side diverting all AI attacks towards your fully blocked side (by fullback and wide midfielder). If both wingers are positioned as AML/R described defensive benefit disappears as now AI sees both FBs/WBs as marked and changes distribution pattern. As a result you are left with two undefended flanks as AML/Rs will not track back and defend. This truly exposes big flaws is ME logic and player decision making.