Jump to content

Counter formations


Hyina
 Share

Recommended Posts

Re: Riferimento: Counter formations

how to beat a 442 basic? (the team is managed but every setting is mixed or normal). some ideas are 4411 352 32221 343...other better ideas?how about settings?thanks

352, 4411, 442 diamond have all been successful for me

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Counter formations

I would like to also compliment you on taking the time to at least state a valid opinion and identify the weakness of the thread unlike a lot of other more seasoned players' date=' with a lot more info who choose not to help (by action or inaction) others or attempt to do so.:)[/quote']Ha-ha, I didn't expect to get a compliment at all for my comments, rather quite the opposite :o

Still, as you say,

Also this is a collaborative piecemeal attempt at understanding the game dynamics-and profiting from it :D as it considers formations only (while some players post more info like tactics etc that is their prerogative). Is it misleading -maybe- is it a nothing thread -unlikely as its one of the few threads that is trying to make an effort to accomplish what man's been doing for centuries -master his environment (ratings predictions have been another aspect of the same goal).
I actually don't think it's a nothing thread (or doesn't have to be' date=' though often it does degenerate into one :o). Personally I say hats off to Hyina for putting the idea out there. I'm a huge proponent of counter-formations myself (just not necessarily the ones here).

I think way too many people put too much emphasis on transfers & ratings and not enough on the other half of the game, the formational match-ups and tactics side. Like you and Hyina (I think?) I agree that it's best to concentrate on formations and allow for fine-tuning for tactics for elsewhere (another level of complexity).

I don't think this thread or any other would claim to have a lock on winning as you are right it's the players personal opinion and experience-the sort of data that you require as proof is virtually impossible to provide since only (maybe) SM has that large compilation of data -or a person who plays this game to collect stats over a long period in time since the sample size required would be huge.
Not true on the 'proof' side of things. Well, proof is too strong, but supporting evidence is not too hard to find. It's easy (if not timing consuming) to gather data across an entire season and use it to support (or disprove) many of the random and misleading claims here.

For example, according to www.football-lineups.com in one game a 5-4-1 beat a 4-4-1-1 by 1-0, but in reality Man Utd & Rooney just had an off day and Wigan outperformed themselves, eventually costing United the title. One game has no real baring on anything in terms of being able to give recommendations as to formations. What's needed is supporting evidence across a series of games, home & away, against a variety of opponents, unmanaged & managed, stronger and weaker, for the 'opinions' to have any weight. Otherwise you may as well ask the question, 'which is best, fried chicken or bacon?' The answer's merely subjective.

The real insight of this thread, albeit generally unstated, is that it has no meaning to speak of the strength of one formation without consideration of what the opponent's formation was. That's it. With that concept on board though the real question becomes which formations fare well against each of the others, and more importantly, how strong is the supporting evidence for the various claims given. A spirited effort has been given to to the first part of the question, but support for the 2nd part is sadly lacking.

Nail the 2nd part though and then you can start to throw in the more interesting questions of whether home or away makes a difference, does SM tweek the formational match-ups over time, and then even be able to look at the added layer of tactics (not to mention fitness, arrows, ratings, etc.) and how that changes things. Sadly, despite the best intentions, the thread's not even close to getting a meaningful or coherent data-set in support of the various claims so for now it's all just fried chicken or bacon...

Just trying to add some direction that's all, otherwise it's all just fluff.

(and yeah, I know, before someone says it I'll get in there first, blah, blah, blah...)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Counter formations

Ha-ha, I didn't expect to get a compliment at all for my comments, rather quite the opposite :o

Why? Your comments were well thought out and logical although disguised as a rant with a bit of fluff in there for good measure-and any healthy debate will hopefully give the thread a bit of focus, which has been lacking for a couple of reasons.

I think way too many people put too much emphasis on transfers & ratings and not enough on the other half of the game, the formational match-ups and tactics side. Like you and Hyina (I think?) I agree that it's best to concentrate on formations and allow for fine-tuning for tactics for elsewhere (another level of complexity).

Most people are proponents-and yeah Hyina has done a great job in highlighting that aspect of the game. have to agree-since many persons have taken the easier paths in using the financial aspect of the game to win at the management side of things.

Not true on the 'proof' side of things. Well, proof is too strong, but supporting evidence is not too hard to find. It's easy (if not timing consuming) to gather data across an entire season and use it to support (or disprove) many of the random and misleading claims here.

Otherwise you may as well ask the question, 'which is best, fried chicken or bacon?' The answer's merely subjective.

Actually even a season is not enough to flesh out the structure you were alluding too, simply as you pointed out the number of variables one has to take into account and the need to eliminate aberrations. After all you are looking at a maximum of 5% error to make it statistically significant.

Even over a couple seasons looking at a couple of the more popular formations -the data would not meet the standard of becomming a hard and fast rule-and it becomes a mathematical chore rather than enjoyment. If the effort however was spread across all forumers and results collated then maybe ..

A spirited effort has been given to to the first part of the question, but support for the 2nd part is sadly lacking.

Nail the 2nd part though and then you can start to throw the more interesting questions of whether home or away makes a difference, does SM tweek the formational match-ups over time, and then even be able to look at the added layer of tactics (not to mention fitness, arrows, ratings, etc.) and how that changes things. Sadly, despite the best intentions, the thread's not even close to getting a meaningful or coherent data-set in support of the various claims so for now it's all just fried chicken or bacon...

Just trying to add some direction that's all, otherwise it's all just fluff.

Agreed but it is a noble intention but ultimately futile. That's one of the reason I give credit for the Jansen's and relative newcomers who put their credibility on the line to help others from their experience, while others decide to sit on the sidelines.

But I may be paranoid and you are right Hyinas baby is growing up with ADD :(

(and yeah, I know, before someone says it I'll get in there first, blah, blah, blah...)

Darn it! Took the blahs right out of my mouth-lets call that the Jooles retort shall we?:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Counter formations

... identify the weakness of the thread...

Yup. There are too many variables to rely on the "info" offered in this thread. One can assume some formations have default strengths against other certain other formations. But without seeing (for BOTH teams, at each point in the game) team rating, condition, tactics, home/away, substitutes, etc, one can't be sure how much formations played a factor in the outcome.

For instance, I'm pretty sure that if you have a monster forward against an average defense, that alone might be the difference in a game. And home advantage seems to be good for a goal (or more likely, in terms of the SM engine, a boost to the teams overall rating).

What I'd like to see here in this thread are some in-depth postmortem game analyses, where ALL the info is posted, and we can analyze what factors most likely had significant impact on the outcome. Next time I have a good match with some interesting formation/tactic match-ups, I'll post it here for discussion. I currently participate in one league with only teams rated (at opening) no higher than 87 (and no transfers rated over 89), so it's a good baseline for taking team ratings out of the picture. After transfers, most teams have starters rated 88-89 in all positions, so no overwhelming advantage anywhere on the pitch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Counter formations

Good point -however sooner or later it has to be decided what direction the thread will take -are we just going to say 4411 beats 442 or are we gonna analyse a particular match as has been happening and drawing conclusions from them.

So might be best let the managers decide :)

Personally I don't like dealing with the entire thing (formations/tactics etc) as it takes away the mystery and challenges of SM. The game as it is has IMO a limited shelf life and after a bit it runs it's course.

That said when I come across interesting matches will post them :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Counter formations

But I may be paranoid and you are right Hyinas baby is growing up with ADD :(
Best line on the forum in a long time :P
Actually even a season is not enough to flesh out the structure you were alluding too...

And I totally agree, but best not try to run before we can walk! :)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Counter formations

As I promised an interesting match between two managed teams -fairly evenly match on stats. The team that lost (:o) scored first and second half goals by the other team secured a 2-1 win. The team that won also played at home.

2zq5uo8.jpg

Now was it the arrows/ tactics or home advantage?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Counter formations

Now was it the arrows/ tactics or home advantage?
Fried chicken or bacon?

It could also be ratings or fitness...

The real issue here is that looking at 1 game really shows nothing.

Way back when I played a number of friendlies with someone holding all parameters exactly the same. Well, we tried to, but it's kinda hard to remember to revert back to exactly what you had the last time in between the regular games. Generally speaking though the results were fairly consistent, even if the scores varied somewhat.

That's my take on looking at this stuff, 1 game really tells you little, you have to look at a greater number of games (probably across seasons and set-ups) to reach meaningful conclusions.

Thoughts anyone?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Counter formations

Fried chicken or bacon?

It could also be ratings or fitness...

The real issue here is that looking at 1 game really shows nothing.

Way back when I played a number of friendlies with someone holding all parameters exactly the same. Well' date=' we tried to, but it's kinda hard to remember to revert back to exactly what you had the last time in between the regular games. Generally speaking though the results were fairly consistent, even if the scores varied somewhat.

That's my take on looking at this stuff, [b']1 game really tells you little,[/b] you have to look at a greater number of games (probably across seasons and set-ups) to reach meaningful conclusions.

Thoughts anyone?

Blah blah blah..sorry had to get it out the way :P

That has been agreed at least by both of us, as you seemed to have scared off the rest. And yeah I am hoping to have a closer look over seasons if I can contain my enthusiasm (or lack thereof). Friendlies tend to be just that friendlies-data collection there tends to be flawed.

Pity though-I really don't inhabit many totally manager filled GW's (avoids the silliness and preserves sanity).

And Chicken-bacon can be very unhealthy :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Riferimento: Counter formations

That has been agreed at least by both of us' date=' as you seemed to have scared off the rest.[/quote']Never my intention, just trying to add some meat to the bones :o

So bringing it back to where things were at, but taking on board what we've been talking about:

how to beat a 442 basic? (the team is managed but every setting is mixed or normal). some ideas are 4411 352 32221 343...other better ideas?how about settings?thanks
352' date=' 4411, 442 diamond have all been successful for me[/quote']

Out of the 5440 formations used by all teams in season 1 of a certain favored set-up of mine, 4-4-2 was used by managers 657 times, some 12%. Every formation except 5-3-2(D) was used vs. 4-4-2 at least once (though just 302 of the possible 576 formation combinations were used, just going to show how we're likely only looking at the tip of the iceberg of possibilities).

Only taking the formations that were used 20 or more times against the 4-4-2 gives the following records (for home and away combined), with the %'s being wins for the other formation:

4-4-2 vs. 3-5-2: P158 W48 D30 L80 (51%)

4-4-2 vs. 4-2-3-1: P65 W17 D17 L31 (48%)

4-4-2 vs. 4-5-1: P33 W11 D11 L11 (33%)

4-4-2 vs. 4-3-2-1: P32 W24 D4 L10 (31%)

4-4-2 vs. 4-4-1-1: P31 W13 D9 L14 (45%)

4-4-2 vs. 5-4-1: P24 W7 D5 L12 (50%)

4-4-2 vs. 4-1-3-2: P21 W3 D12 L11 (52%)

4-4-2 vs. 4-3-3(W): P20 W5 D3 L12 (60%)

and 4-4-2 vs. 4-4-2: P77 (so 144) W27 D16 L34 (home stats).

4-4-2 vs. 4-4-2(D) was only P13 and came out W6 D1 L6 (46%), so rather inconclusive.

And of course there's all the usual qualifiers about how things could be skewed if certain teams were strong/weak and favoured a certain formation, but at least it starts to paint a picture.

It can also get interesting when you look at the breakdown between home and away matches. For instance,

4-4-2 (home) vs. 3-5-2 (away) = P81 W27 D13 L41, whereas 3-5-2 (home) vs. 4-4-2 (away) = P77 W21 D17 L39 (for 4-4-2), so not much difference at all. But then 4-4-2 (H) vs. 4-2-3-1 (A) = P23 W9 D5 L10, and 4-2-3-1 (H) vs. 4-4-2 (A) is P41 W8 D12 L21 (for 4-4-2).

Could this indicate that 4-2-3-1 works better at home vs. 4-4-2 than away, or is it just a statistical (or otherwise) blip? Personally I'd love to think that certain formations are better in home match-ups than away (and vice-versa), which would add an extra dimension to the game that I'm sure many don't consider.

And of course maybe some of the strongest formations against 4-4-2 could be those that have rarely been tried (at least in the games I looked at). 3-2-2-2-1, 3-3-4, 3-4-2-1, 3-4-3, 4-3-2-1, 5-2-3, and 5-3-2(D) were all used only 5 times or less, so who knows what really the best match up is until they've all been thoroughly tested?

Anyway vaivaipaolino, I hope that answers you question :P

And Chicken-bacon can be very unhealthy :D

But a handy substitute if you are Muslim or Jewish :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Counter formations

Will not interfere in your discussion, but I just want to say this I'm more or less a newcomer in sm soccer.

I would call this guide is a good guide for newcomers and for other managers it gave you an idea of ​​what you can play against another formation.

The tactics for you to place is a good idea everyone with some logical thinking knows what he / she must do .

It is impossible to say that with this guide you now always wins, each team has other players who can play on different positions, etc.

Some managers who make it a sport to win, and there are others who play for fun ...;)

I play for my own pleasure to the time in between I have to thaw.

choose more or less always same category of players, I'm not see always to the ranking of the player but will buy the player that I like and that it has the most benefit to play in my team .

Since I have more or less the same players in my dif. worlds, I know damn well who can play where and who to turn against another player.

It is impossible for hyiani or others to say, you should be playing with these tactics,whit these arrow's,etc. what every player plays differently, every manager play dif. etc..then you must make a list of every player and every manager ,who plays where, who you should bring when you play against that player,or that manager etc.. where are we busy with?

and you should not say it's not clear where it makes a difference.

sometimes only by a player to change the arrow keys or add a slightly different tactics you can win or lose a match.

it is a good guide, first look at your team, teach your players know, look at your opponent thinks for a moment. lastly, who is the manager, you have a good base you can build one .these who are not may agree to remains outside is not personally meant to you but in general.

there are too many who go for the best senior players 90 + who have nothing to put right.

I choose my team which I am a supporter and play there thought buying the players that are useful in my team who can work on my method and not that of another.

when formation does not work in this guide ,it is mean for me that I look for a solution and usually I find therefore that while I still am playing the same formation.

if this guide should do all that, then the must people assume who than work day and night for another.

the base there is a formation you have anyone who thinks a bit, and knows how to play, now where to put his players in in the feld,what tactics, etc.die has already won 75%. and that is not so dif.when I can do it whay the not ?

personally I think they have delivered more than good work.

to do more , then you can just as well say buy al that player and take that team and play now al like this against that team when the play so and whit these players.

You also devised many different mathematical formation are possible, add now in with all the players and all the managers how they work, etc. .. and do it again........where do we ever stop.!

it is a good guide whit good formatie " to counter" play against the other formatie.

and finally who is the manager.stop than playing and play at home on your playstation, x-boy or whatever.

If everything should continue as they say ... how can you still have fun to play, yes I have won with my team that is not really my team, I did not choose the players and the formation and the tactics actually also not..... and the team really also not.......please stop than playing SOCCER on SM.

thanks and no thanks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Counter formations

Never my intention' date=' just trying to add some meat to the bones :o

But a handy substitute if you are Muslim or Jewish :)[/quote']

Blah blah blah..:P

:eek: Will rep after I spread ..for a number of reasons:

You my friend have too much time on your hands and that aside Brilliant work!

Pretty interesting stats -and again as you pointed out it requires a greater level of analysis that this thread provides.

At the most you have blazed a path that the thread should take -making it a repository and statistical anlysis centre for SM where factual conclusions can be drawn.

At the very least you have tried to shift it away from the "how do I beat this" to what are the factors that will cause..

Where it goes from here-it's up to the SM community-and I am not optimistic.

Chicken or bacon and now adding meat to the bones..you trying to tell us something mate?

Will not interfere in your discussion' date=' but I just want to say this I'm more or less a newcomer in sm soccer.

You also devised many different mathematical formation are possible, add now in with all the players and all the managers how they work, etc. .. and do it again........where do we ever stop.!

it is a good guide whit good formatie " to counter" play against the other formatie.

[/quote']

Interefering never!-thats the reason Jooles posted here-to get a discussion going and hopefully challenge managers like yourself and others to contibute or continue to do so in a structured way.

It is a great thread-but can be better but also it's dependent on how much Soccer managers are willing to put in.

His concerns are valid with regards to accuracy , as he wants to avoid the "from personal experience " to it has been proven".

what the gosh are are going on about :D

Oh lots of things-chicken, bacon, fluff, meat on bones, hard data to support advice given etc.

Oh and the Jooles retort blah blah blah :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Counter formations

I would wade in but I know I will probably get destroyed ;)

Never won against 4-2-3-1 :o

Any suggestions about formation's to use against 4-2-3-1..:confused:

From personal experience across different gameworlds (:rolleyes:), when I played 4231, frequently I lost to 433 wingers, so I would try that ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Counter formations

I would wade in but I know I will probably get destroyed ;)

From personal experience across different gameworlds (:rolleyes:)' date=' when I played 4231, frequently I lost to 433 wingers, so I would try that ;)[/quote']

Feel free..the waters pretty warm (except the piranha)

And hope you do-since this is all your fault :P

Anyway aint it time to get this stickied?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Counter formations

Thanks..will try!!

Hope 4-3-3 wingers work :)

Hope it works too! XD

Feel free..the waters pretty warm (except the piranha)

I can't swim anyway...;)

And hope you do-since this is all your fault :P

I have many faults' date=' some changeable, some not. This thread of mine was (and still is) designed to provide the bare minimum guidance to new managers and existing ones who are on a big losing streak and are clueless on how to revive their team form. And most of the time, it has done what it was intended to do - and that is to provide help. Some may criticize it, not enough evidence and etc...[i']blah, blah, blah[/i] :rolleyes:;):P, I have no problem with that, because:

The majority who come on here look for advice,

reads the last page,

post a reply asking for more opinions,

they receive some from my helpful forumers who looked after this thread while I was studying,

and most of the time after reading the replies they win.

So my time, the asker's time, arampage and others' time, has not been wasted and we as a team have achieved something.

Sometimes even I myself are a bit clueless and finding myself coming here and reading what I myself wrote and others' advices, lol, strange but most of the times they worked (for me at least)

Anyway aint it time to get this stickied?

I dunno how to do that, I think that is up to the mods.

And I love Chicken and bacon too... LAAVLY! XD

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Counter formations

http://www.flickr.com/photos/76422466@N08/7261462062

http://www.flickr.com/photos/76422466@N08/7261461902

Don't think I have the best team blah blah blah (;)) I actually got relegated this season and this is the one formation that got me back onto winning ways.

And what instructions should I use as I'm struggling vs 3-5-2. The 4-2-3-1 dom't seen effective any more. Also should I do some arrows on some players?

Tackling Style:

Mentality:

Passing Style:

Attacking Style:

Tempo:

Pressing:

Thanks in advance for your help

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Counter formations

And what instructions should I use as I'm struggling vs 3-5-2. The 4-2-3-1 dom't seen effective any more. Also should I do some arrows on some players?

Tackling Style:

Mentality:

Passing Style:

Attacking Style:

Tempo:

Pressing:

Thanks in advance for your help

Sorry, I have to make this clear, I am NOT doing people's tactics - this is a FORMATIONS thread. But if you want, I can help you out a bit, indirectly

High rated CBs and DM/CMs = tactling: STRONG

High rated AM/wing/FWDs = Mentality: ATTACKING

High rated CMs and low rated wingers = Passing style: SHORT

High rated wingers and low rated CMs = Attacking style: DOWN BOTH FLANKS

High rated Attackers in general = Tempo: Fast

High rated all round = Pressing: ALL OVER

Needless to say, if you have players opposite to what I described, you use the opposite tactics.

Oh yeah, if Jooles attacks me :rolleyes:, this is my PERSONAL OPINION, so unless you think I am a headless fool trying to misguide people blah blah blah (sorry, couldn't resist :P), there will be no need to attack my post ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Counter formations

Sorry' date=' I have to make this clear, [b']I am NOT doing people's tactics - this is a FORMATIONS thread. [/b]

Oh yeah, if Jooles attacks me :rolleyes:, this is my PERSONAL OPINION, so unless you think I am a headless fool trying to misguide people blah blah blah (sorry, couldn't resist :P), there will be no need to attack my post ;)

Lastest result against 442 using 4411' date=' PC average 87, mine average 88

[url'] 6-1[/url]

Good lad :D

yeah that blah blah blah seems to be catching isn't it :)

Oh Jooles isn't attacking you mate-he just expresses himself in a manner designed to attract the most attention in the most words :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Counter formations

As I promised an interesting match between two managed teams -fairly evenly match on stats. The team that lost (:o) scored first and second half goals by the other team secured a 2-1 win. The team that won also played at home.

2zq5uo8.jpg

Now was it the arrows/ tactics or home advantage?

From my experience playing short and slow tactics is suicidal if your opponent is pressing all over, I would have chosen a direct playing style.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...