mrdorf Posted June 12, 2012 Share Posted June 12, 2012 Does it favour attacking and control strategies rather than counter-attacking? Seem to be getting better results playing attacking football no matter who the opposition are rather than being sensible and playing defensive against much better opposition. I'm wondering if it's because I'm in my second season and tipped to be mid-table. So I could over-achieve playing more attacking football. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CityAndColour Posted June 12, 2012 Share Posted June 12, 2012 I find I get more out of the control strategy than any other, and by a fair bit too. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Falahk Posted June 12, 2012 Share Posted June 12, 2012 im doing perfectly fine playing both defensive and counter attacking Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ackter Posted June 12, 2012 Share Posted June 12, 2012 It's easier to make a successful attacking tactic as it puts the onus on your opposition to counteract you. However, if you're intending to sit back and control, you have to be so careful with how you set up that it becomes a much greater challenge. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
maverick_woo Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 either attacking or defending is okay with me. actually my problem with the match engine is that why my fullbacks always top the passing numbers in every match no matter how i tweak my tactics. And it is also impossible to achieve more than 100 passes a game for a single player. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
edgar555 Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 either attacking or defending is okay with me.actually my problem with the match engine is that why my fullbacks always top the passing numbers in every match no matter how i tweak my tactics. And it is also impossible to achieve more than 100 passes a game for a single player. It's not impossible to top a 100 passes for a single player. It's difficult but certainly not impossible. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Validicus Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 Short answer: It's easier to be successful with attacking tactics, particularly with fluid philosophies. It usually requires much more effort to be successful with systems that deviate from this, although it is arguably more rewarding. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wizbozz Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 i disagree with you guys. i think you should choose for defensive or counter attack a rigid philosophy and you will have success. for attacking tactics i also prefer fluid philosophy. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Validicus Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 It's very possible to have success playing like that, it's just that it is much easier to score more and concede less by not playing like that (which can make it too easy/less satisfying). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.