26 replies to this topic

[Validicus]

Which formations have you hardly used on FM? It could be because you've never had a squad which suited the shape, maybe you don't like the way it plays, or perhaps you simply don't like it for whatever reason. State the formation and why you've not played with it much. i.e. For most or all of your games over the course of at least one season.



5-3-2 (DL and DR) - Just never had a squad where a system could be built around exceptional wingbacks.

5-4-1 - Too negative for my liking.

3-4-3 (STCL, STCR, STC) - While I happen to love 3-5-2 and 3-4-1-2, I firmly believe that the ME has severe issues with 3 strikers - that and there are ways of utilising 3 uptop which simply aren't realistic due to the fact that you never get 3 out-and-out strikers in the box in real life.

4-3-3 - (STCL, STCR, STC) - As above.

4-2-4 - I've only ever used it as a temporary formation. I can't say I've ever liked the idea of surrendering space down the flanks throughout an entire game.

"Wide" 4-4-2 diamond (ML & MR) - I would simply hate having to constantly be wary of the space in the middle.

4-2-2-2 box - Simply never had players that favoured this sort of system over other more familiar ones.

4-6-0 - Just never have had the urge to give it a twirl on FM.



How about you? Which formations have you barely used and why?

Edited by Validicus, 02 July 2011 - 11:48 AM.

[Crane]

4-5-1 (DMC, 2 MC, AMR & AML, ST). I don't know why not, I just don't look the like of it.

Wide 4-4-2 diamond, pretty much the same reason as you.

Box 4-2-2-2, again the same reasons as you.

[Nando]

Any five defender formations. Any three out and out striker formations. 4-2-2-2. 4-2-4.

[jones.]

4-4-2. I hate it. Can never get the centre mids and the strikers right.

[Game]

I've used 5-3-1 before (as Chelsea and England a few years ago) and it was a massive success, but that's the only time I've used it. I tend to go for 4-3-3, 4-5-1 or 4-4-2 (very, very rarely, tbh) and nothing else. I think they're the more solid formations in both attack and defence.

[Melmmer]

In my save now I am endeavouring to use 5 defender formations where ever possible, so my team sets up like this

DC-DC-DC
WBR WBL
MC-MC
AMC
ST-ST

[Validicus]

A setup like that should only really struggle against 4-3-3 and 4-5-1 variants.

Do you have excellent and/or quick wingbacks?

[Melmmer]

Validicus, on 02 July 2011 - 04:13 AM, said:

A setup like that should only really struggle against 4-3-3 and 4-5-1 variants.

Do you have excellent and/or quick wingbacks?

I was using Mikael Chretien and Giovannia Pasquale so I wouldn't say either are outstanding wingbacks.

At Genoa though I am more then likely going to use Criscito and Rafinha in those roles

[Amadou]

The only ones I'm yet to use are the 3 CBs tactics. I actually may I've used it a couple of times but nothing long term. Planning on trying them out very soon.

4-4-2 wide/narrow diamond worked brilliantly for me in FM08. The 4-6-0 is a genius tactic too.

Edited by Amadou, 02 July 2011 - 09:12 AM.

[CFCJames]

No 3 striker formations (same as OP)
Wide diamond
Any formation with a flat back 5.

[timmybendiš]

Never played a 4-4-2... except in a couple of my first (ever) games in FM in the pre-season friendlies, where it failed catastrophically. I'm a 3-4-1-2, 4-3-3, or 3-4-3 kind of guy. Sure, there are a couple tiny adjustments along the way, but that's about it.

[Funkenstein]

Never have and never will use the flat 4-4-2, it's far too boring for my liking and I like my teams to try and play attractive football. I generally don't use 5 defender lineups because I can never seem to score from them and often try to avoid 4-4-2 diamond variants as I feel it always leaves you with masses of space either in the center or on the wings.

[Trequartista]

Funkenstein, on 02 July 2011 - 11:56 AM, said:

Never have and never will use the flat 4-4-2, it's far too boring for my liking and I like my teams to try and play attractive football. I generally don't use 5 defender lineups because I can never seem to score from them and often try to avoid 4-4-2 diamond variants as I feel it always leaves you with masses of space either in the center or on the wings.

You can play brilliant football with a 4-4-2. What matters is how you implement the formation, not the formation itself.

[SyNdRoMe]

all configurations with 3 defender or 3 striker.

[oranje fan 4eva]

Allways been with 4-2-3-1 or 4-3-3 with my oranje team and will allways will as it really suit with the availabilty of type & flexibility of players in my national pool .............sometimes will go for flat 4-4-2 or 5-3-2 and that is really sometimes...and when I am bored.......


HUP HUP ORANJE !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Croy]

jones., on 01 July 2011 - 11:44 PM, said:

4-4-2. I hate it. Can never get the centre mids and the strikers right.

This. It is so flat it sickens me

[Michael]

Never play with 5 defenders, always strikes me as negative. I've also never played with WB's as I never know hot to utilise them. Other than that I'll give anything a whirl, my favourites being 4-5-1/4-3-3 (DM, 2 MC, AML, AMR) or a 4-3-1-2 (3MC, 1 AMC)/4-3-2-1(3MC, AMR, AML). Gone back to 4-4-2 recently though and it bores the fuck out of me.

[Corlett]

A hardly ever play with 2 or 3 strikers, always one. Mainly because I can never set them up right. I also always have to play with a defensive midfielder, sometimes 2 and always have 4 at the back. I usually set the midfield up like:

LAM - CAM - RAM
CM - CM

LAM - CAM - RAM
CDM - CDM

CAM - CAM
LM - CM - RM

CAM - CAM
CM
CDM - CDM

[marshall]

Any formation with 3 or 5 at the back. I normally play a 4-4-2 or 4-5-1 or a variation of them.

[Yellowforever]

I don't use 4-4-2 any more.

But I used to hate 4-2-3-1 as it was shit on previous years games, but I've worked on it this version and it's now my favourite tactic.