Go to page 1, 2
| Forum » Foro Liga © The Olympus Circle™ C1 » Tactics | Date | |
|---|---|---|
|
Username
72 msgs.
Rookie
|
For end of season and next season I am looking for a half decent tactic that uses: GK, LDF, CDF, RDF, DFM, LF, CF, RF and then three of following to make 11: RIM, LIM, IM, OM, LF, CF (may be double of one kind) does anyone got one to share? |
14/11/2014 13:47 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
Username
1760 msgs.
International
|
Tyekanik said: For end of season and next season I am looking for a half decent tactic that uses: GK, LDF, CDF, RDF, DFM, LF, CF, RF and then three of following to make 11: RIM, LIM, IM, OM, LF, CF (may be double of one kind) does anyone got one to share? 3 man defense: Jurgen will be willing to help. |
14/11/2014 15:06 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
Fiscal
4046 msgs.
Best scorer
|
Tyekanik said: For end of season and next season I am looking for a half decent tactic that uses: GK, LDF, CDF, RDF, DFM, LF, CF, RF and then three of following to make 11: RIM, LIM, IM, OM, LF, CF (may be double of one kind) does anyone got one to share? I am not a big fan of the 3-man defense, but then others do quite nicely with it. I also train defenders, so there's an obvious motivation advantage for me by playing more defenders anyway. To answer your question, I would go with LIM, RIM and OM. You could also go for IM IM and OM. The second option will cost slightly more but be more flexible in the face of injuries (IMs being interchangeable, RIM/LIM not so). For the finer points between RIM/LIM and IM in terms of how each performs you'll have to ask someone with more experience than me in that area. For me, I would go for the slightly budget-friendly option of RIM and LIM. More experienced players are better if you aren't training them, and older players are cheaper. Obviously, these two go hand in hand, so you can kill 2 birds with one stone there. I use the RIM and LIM as kind of first defense as well as kind of quicksand for strikers. In the striker taking time to get around the RIM and LIM, the defense has a fraction longer to get into position, and the RIM and LIM often funnel the striker wide and more out of danger. To me, their passing attributes are obviously useful, but almost a secondary benefit! As for OMs, just ask most people in our forum how dangerous they are. They are flexible, can be subbed in for RIMs, LIMs, IMs, and CFs, and are very good against DFMs, although the 2 are like matter and antimatter, cancelling each other out on many occasions, but without one the DFM will have a field day. Unfortunately, the OM may be the most expensive position in the game right now. Certainly they are up there with CDFs, CFs and DFMs. Again, old boys are the best if you aren't training them. Tactics-wise, it very much depends. Consider the logical implications of how your opponent is expected to play against you. If you go man to man with a 3-man defense against a 4-man strike force you can imagine what the risk is. Even against a 3-man strike force (very common) you're hoping every one of your defenders gets it right every time. This may mean you need to make defensive subs even when you don't actually want to to combat your opponent dragging in fast forwards late in the game. Also, if you rely on a high offside trap you want your defense to stick to the plan, not go wandering and have your idiot LDF play their LF onside on the opposite side of the pitch. Offside trap, zonal marking. Deep defense, more man-to man. However, it also depends on the kind of attack threat your opponent offers. CFs are slow, therefore not so good versus an offside trap as they aren't able to exploit the gap between the defense and the goal. If your opponent's main threat is from faster wide positions, LF and RF, or even speedy LW and RW, playing an offside trap is asking for trouble unless you have faster defenders. Of course, a 90avg CF is likely faster than a 60avg RW, and how much stamina they have also comes into effect, but that's the general rule I apply. Finally, if your opponent is way better than you anyway, man to man, many defense may spare some blushes. You'll probably still lose, but if you want to piss off the manager with the 85avg side with a 75avg side, and are willing to accept that you probably won't score but may only concede a couple, that's what I'd go for. Hope this helps. Just my viewpoint, I'm prepared to be 'wrong' about it. Edited by sicox86 14-11-2014 16:48 |
14/11/2014 16:46 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
Username
9897 msgs.
Golden Ball
|
Si, i think i i will make a new formation after reading this! I play the three man defense. And it work pretty well. But in this case your DMF will probably act as a second CDF whiles opponent is attacking you and more like an IM supporter while you attack allowing your IM to move further up. About the other option in midfield, i will probably go in for a LIM/RIM (with good ball steal.) and an OM(that is IF i have the fund to purchase one.  )Defending man to man with a three man defense can turn out to be your nightmare. Especially if opponent is using merciless OMs. I tried that earlier this season and i hate it really well. Opponent ends up smashing me 6-3(relegation candidate for Christ sake) with his OM spearheading that with four goals i think. So i will say more zonal. I suck at formations but you can watch my games if you want to learn more. |
14/11/2014 19:11 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
Username
1760 msgs.
International
|
Whatamidoinghere said: Si, i think i i will make a new formation after reading this! I play the three man defense. And it work pretty well. But in this case your DMF will probably act as a second CDF whiles opponent is attacking you and more like an IM supporter while you attack allowing your IM to move further up. About the other option in midfield, i will probably go in for a LIM/RIM (with good ball steal.) and an OM(that is IF i have the fund to purchase one. )Defending man to man with a three man defense can turn out to be your nightmare. Especially if opponent is using merciless OMs. I tried that earlier this season and i hate it really well. Opponent ends up smashing me 6-3(relegation candidate for Christ sake) with his OM spearheading that with four goals i think. So i will say more zonal. I suck at formations but you can watch my games if you want to learn more. the formation you just described is perfectly akin to CHILE'S 3-man defense. A DFM of 'Gary Medel' is the best fit for the 2nd CDF role you pointed out. Chile do not make much use of wingbacks unlike Louis Van Gaal's (3 -5 -2 / 5 -3-2) in lieu that, (3 4 3 / 4 3 3) is what they adopt while attaking & defending respectively. *one of the important keys i deciphered is PASSING (short passes just like Chile's). * Zonal-Man Maring(the defs keep position & you see Sanchez tracking way back to the DFM's box. *Deep Defense line. & *others i couldn't figure out in SM like(Costa-Rica determination) |
14/11/2014 19:43 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
Fiscal
4046 msgs.
Best scorer
|
Hopefully Tyekanik found some of this useful. | 15/11/2014 13:04 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
Username
72 msgs.
Rookie
|
yep, thx a lot! It does! | 15/11/2014 13:22 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
Go to page 1, 2
2
