Go to page 1
| Forum » Suggestions » Formations | Date | |
|---|---|---|
|
Username
221 msgs.
Substitute
|
I think there should be a more strict constraint for the possible formations. Now, team avg is calculated as a average of the 11 starting players. This means many play in a formation so all their best players start, resulting in the highest avg possible. So now you get teams who play in a 3-6-1 f.i., because they just have good midfielders (because those train a lot more efficient). So my suggestion: include a "team balance factor" to improve team-avg calculation. This factor will be based on 2 facts: 1. the Formation: let's say classic formations like 4-4-2, 4-3-3 get a "1" score and the most odd formations like 3-6-1, 2-6-2, 2-3-5,... get the lowest score. 2. Formation-experience: this will indicate how much your players are 'used to play' in a particular type of formation. |
24/06/2011 10:26 |
| Kings XI Punjab - Div1/Gr1 | ||
|
921 msgs.
MVP of the game
|
Uh, you can't have only 2 defenders, so no 2-3-5 or 2-6-2 anyway. I think only 3-6-1 is the unusual one. But you get strange formations anyway in real life. | 24/06/2011 12:00 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
Username
221 msgs.
Substitute
|
My juniors play in 2-5-3 so it is possible. | 24/06/2011 12:42 |
| Kings XI Punjab - Div1/Gr1 | ||
|
Username
471 msgs.
First-team player
|
I try placing my players out of the classic formation by makin em play positions that ain natural buh compatible e.g an RM for RIM n they dont last full time,they get carried off with an injury,how do other managers pull that yet i cant,cuz honestly i dont see those formations u sed like 3-6-1,2-3-3-2,3-2-3-2!!do u have them!! | 24/06/2011 17:08 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
283 msgs.
First-team player
|
Cultif said: I think there should be a more strict constraint for the possible formations. Now, team avg is calculated as a average of the 11 starting players. This means many play in a formation so all their best players start, resulting in the highest avg possible. So now you get teams who play in a 3-6-1 f.i., because they just have good midfielders (because those train a lot more efficient). So my suggestion: include a "team balance factor" to improve team-avg calculation. This factor will be based on 2 facts: 1. the Formation: let's say classic formations like 4-4-2, 4-3-3 get a "1" score and the most odd formations like 3-6-1, 2-6-2, 2-3-5,... get the lowest score. 2. Formation-experience: this will indicate how much your players are 'used to play' in a particular type of formation. Well mate, I agree that team avg is calculated as a average of the 11 starting players, but we are not sure if it (the average) really effect the match or not. You could see some midfield player with average 70 because he has Charisma 99, other skills are like Pass 11, Strength 12, Finish 13. We are not sure as well if that player could really effect the match. I still think no, top class player because of Charisma? That's so gay! But I'm pretty sure those slow-motion players (with 99 Charisma) will not effect the game with simulation next season, haha. About the formation, in real life we have crazier ones, I'm ok with that, though. I really hate to meet player with that unreal 3-6-1 formation. Last time I won though have only 30% possession but then I have to change my formation from 4-3-3 to 4-4-2 to have more possession, arrg. |
24/06/2011 19:06 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
Username
227 msgs.
Substitute
|
Cultif said: My juniors play in 2-5-3 so it is possible. This kind of formations are ok for junior traning 2 def, 6 med, 2 for |
24/06/2011 19:12 |
| ☢ Salvaterra - Div3/Gr5 | ||
|
425 msgs.
First-team player
|
ymcop said: Last time I won though have only 30% possession but then I have to change my formation from 4-3-3 to 4-4-2 to have more possession, arrg. You don't win the game with Time of Possession. You win by scoring more goals. If your current formation consistently gets you more goals than the other team, then why mess with success? |
25/06/2011 13:53 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
283 msgs.
First-team player
|
Mozleron said: ymcop said: Last time I won though have only 30% possession but then I have to change my formation from 4-3-3 to 4-4-2 to have more possession, arrg. You don't win the game with Time of Possession. You win by scoring more goals. If your current formation consistently gets you more goals than the other team, then why mess with success? If you don't have the ball how can you score? More possession then more chance to score. But you are right, you should get your formation consistently. |
25/06/2011 15:38 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
Go to page 1
1
