5-2-3: Difference between revisions
m Reverted edit of RotarOdelt, changed back to last version by Aakholop |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
With this formation, the manager has good attack ratings in all 3 areas, as well as a strong [[defense]]. He or she will, however, probably lose [[midfield]] by a massive margin and suffer from [[confusion]]. | With this formation, the manager has good attack ratings in all 3 areas, as well as a strong [[defense]]. He or she will, however, probably lose [[midfield]] by a massive margin and suffer from [[confusion]]. | ||
While it is possible to play this formation using IMs, given that no more than two can be used and that [[confusion]] is almost certain to occur, it is likely that the team would still lose [[midfield]] by a large margin making this a pointless exercise. This formation can only be successful when the opponents [[attack]] is much lower than the counter-attacking teams [[defence]], as their opponents will inevitably recieve all 10 [[regular chances]] in the game and the counter-attacking team will have to rely entirely on 2-3 [[counter attack]] chances. | While it is possible to play this formation using IMs, given that no more than two can be used and that [[confusion]] is almost certain to occur, it is likely that the team would still lose [[midfield]] by a large margin making this a pointless exercise. This formation can only be successful when the opponents [[attack]] is much lower than the counter-attacking teams [[defence]], as their opponents will inevitably recieve all 10 [[regular chances]] in the game and the counter-attacking team will have to rely entirely on 2-3 [[counter attack]] chances. | ||
You should still be aware of the fact that it was stated in the Global conference that confusions would affect the scoring probability without affecting the ratings. Many managers believe in it even though some don't. Anyway it might be a good idea to try to use 5-3-2 instead. | |||
[[category:Formations]] | [[category:Formations]] | ||
Revision as of 19:25, 5 December 2007
One of the more eccentric Counter Attack formations, used mostly by defense trainers. Depending on the number of IM's, there can be three formations. Most usually, managers play it with none:
| 5-2-3, 0 IM | |||
| GK | |||
| WBD | CD | CD | WBD |
| WO | EF | E.CD | WO |
| FO | FO | ||
With this formation, the manager has good attack ratings in all 3 areas, as well as a strong defense. He or she will, however, probably lose midfield by a massive margin and suffer from confusion.
While it is possible to play this formation using IMs, given that no more than two can be used and that confusion is almost certain to occur, it is likely that the team would still lose midfield by a large margin making this a pointless exercise. This formation can only be successful when the opponents attack is much lower than the counter-attacking teams defence, as their opponents will inevitably recieve all 10 regular chances in the game and the counter-attacking team will have to rely entirely on 2-3 counter attack chances.
You should still be aware of the fact that it was stated in the Global conference that confusions would affect the scoring probability without affecting the ratings. Many managers believe in it even though some don't. Anyway it might be a good idea to try to use 5-3-2 instead.
