veerus Posted February 2, 2016 Share Posted February 2, 2016 I can't find it now but I believe there was a thread on tactic familiarity recently where Marc said that prior formation training isn't required in the mobile version. So I was quite surprised to see the following comment at the end of a (very bad) match: "Players confused by unusual formation". For context, I switch between a standard 3-5-3 and 4-4-2. In the match in question, I used 3-5-3 with one new change- middle CM (striker by role, yellow circle by competence) was instructed to be an APM instead of a CM. What did I mix up? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
veerus Posted February 2, 2016 Author Share Posted February 2, 2016 To elaborate a little more, my midfield trio were BWM, DLP, APM. In the following match I made the BWM into CM and everything clicked. Both opponents were of similar strength, same formation, both away. I assume lack of a dedicated CM left a possible hole in the midfield but I'm still puzzled by my players being confused by a standard formation with a single change. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SI Staff Marc Vaughan Posted February 2, 2016 SI Staff Share Posted February 2, 2016 Thayers confused by unusual formation - this indicates you were using a formation which the game doesn't recognise as being a standard or well balanced one, its a warning that it might be prone to leaving an area of the pitch unusually weak. For instance if you've 3 at the back and all the midfielders are MC or above then you're asking a huge amount of the defense? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
veerus Posted February 4, 2016 Author Share Posted February 4, 2016 So I wanted to follow up on this. Playing a 3-5-2 versus predominantly 4-4-2s. CD, BPD, CD / W, BWM, MC, MC, W(or IF now that I know it's buggy and how to fix it) / AF, P. My theory behind this is that I outnumber midfield 3 to 2 and all position seem like they should link up nicely. But in reality, I'm constantly getting overrun and losing possession battle 45-55. What am I missing? For context, I'm playing a low league team and I couldn't get any decent fullbacks while having quite a few nice CDs thus the 3-5-2. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
daan27 Posted February 4, 2016 Share Posted February 4, 2016 I play a 3-4-1-2 and in my experience, both central midfielders have to be defensive. I currently play with a BWM and a DLP. When I was using it in the lower leagues, I used 2 BWMs and I got the impression that if they weren't very good, then the defense was all to easily overrun. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SI Staff Alari Naylor Posted February 5, 2016 SI Staff Share Posted February 5, 2016 Yeah, with that formation unless central midfielders are sitting pretty deep I can see them exploiting your flanks as soon as you push up at all. What are you seeing in the highlights? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
veerus Posted February 5, 2016 Author Share Posted February 5, 2016 Team constantly loses the ball in the midfield. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
veerus Posted February 5, 2016 Author Share Posted February 5, 2016 Opponent attacks do seem to come from the flanks a fair amount of time, but in thr highlights, most turnovers happen in the midfield. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SI Staff Jack Joyce Posted February 5, 2016 SI Staff Share Posted February 5, 2016 I noticed that you said sometimes IF for one of your wingers. Does this mean that your wingers are AML and AMR? If so then they really should stay at RM and LM since you have no fullbacks. Try changing the AF to target man and one/both of the CMs to box-to-box (they work really well for me in midfield-heavy formations). Also make sure that pressing is turned on in team instructions and try playing through the middle. Let me know how it goes! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
veerus Posted February 5, 2016 Author Share Posted February 5, 2016 My midfield formation changed yesterday as a result of the IF thread here and on vibe. It's more of a slanted 4-1 with the 4 being on the standard level just above the halfway line W, BWM, MC, MC. And the IF is on the next "level" alone (advanced position between midfield and striker levels). Before that, it was just a winger with 5 across the midfield with similar results. And I always play with pressing on. I will try BBM but I worry they're going to run out of gas!! Will report back. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
veerus Posted February 10, 2016 Author Share Posted February 10, 2016 Changed midfield 3 to DLP, BBM, MC and the strikers to P and DLF and it's been working a bit better. Still losing the midfield possession battle most of the time but only barely and it's usually more competitive. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.