Which is the best formation?

[RickyKaka22]

Let's say you have a team that can play any type of formations, which one would you choose and why you would choose that?

[JD nawrat]

433 because it's the most versatile shape of all

[Cider Ed]

For me it depends on which league im in. But I always like to try and play 2 up front as I love creating strike partnerships. 433 just doesnt do it for me because ive never been able to master it.

[CamillePunk]

I've had the most success with 4-1-3-2 and 4-2-3-1. Lately I'm preferring the latter as I tend to get more out of attacking midfielders than striker partnerships, although definitely not as solid defensively.

[alinp]

At the moment I'm going through a stage of playing whatever gives me the best chance of gaining an advantage over the oppositions set up. Because most teams set up 433, 4231 or 442, my main 3 are 424 (or if u like 4222), 41212 (aka narrow diamond) & 32212 respectively

[Cleon]

There is no best formation and every single shape can potentially be the best if you set it up correctly.

[vitri0l]

4-1-2-3 no strikers..

[Norfair]

I'll play any formation, but I must have 2 strikers, no more, no less. Don't know why, I just want it that way.

In FM14 I had all sorts of trouble before I noticed the top teams were all playing a 4-2-2-2 formation with no wingers. So I switched to that and have not regretted it.

[lewis999]

I'll play any formation, but I must have 2 strikers, no more, no less. Don't know why, I just want it that way.

In FM14 I had all sorts of trouble before I noticed the top teams were all playing a 4-2-2-2 formation with no wingers. So I switched to that and have not regretted it.

4-2-2-2 without wingers? As in 2 DM's and LM and an RM or 2 CM's and 2 CAM's and which big teams play that?

[Marabak]

Interesting thread here about the usefulness of a formation...

http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php/387570-How-important-is-a-quot-formation-quot-A-community-tactical-experiment

[Norfair]

4-2-2-2 without wingers? As in 2 DM's and LM and an RM or 2 CM's and 2 CAM's and which big teams play that?

-------ST---ST-------

----------------------

-------MCL-MCR------

-------DMC-DMC-----

DL----DC----DC---DR

Looks weird, but in my save I noticed Man City, Chelsea and Southampton (always good on my save) were always playing this formation, so I switched to it and BAM! Success.

[Domus Clamantium]

Yep, 4-2-2-2, especially in the last patch, was v. successful. Still is in this patch. Main reason: crosses didn't work very well, and heading also did not work very well. They fixed it, but not enough for me to change my tactic. Instead, for width, you have the full backs or if you prefer, MCL and MCR as CM/Attack which makes them run wide with the ball but not too often, particularly effectively as well with PPMs. CM/Attack is basically AP/A with a bit more width. They overlap the forwards and make runs into the box, been very useful for me.

Also effective has been 4231 with 2 DM's and 3 CM's. Found this effective because of the space between the striker and midfielders. With good dribblers either side of the 3 CM's on CM/Attack you will do very well!

[Norfair]

Yep, 4-2-2-2, especially in the last patch, was v. successful. Still is in this patch. Main reason: crosses didn't work very well, and heading also did not work very well. They fixed it, but not enough for me to change my tactic. Instead, for width, you have the full backs or if you prefer, MCL and MCR as CM/Attack which makes them run wide with the ball but not too often, particularly effectively as well with PPMs. CM/Attack is basically AP/A with a bit more width. They overlap the forwards and make runs into the box, been very useful for me.

Also effective has been 4231 with 2 DM's and 3 CM's. Found this effective because of the space between the striker and midfielders. With good dribblers either side of the 3 CM's on CM/Attack you will do very well!

My DL and DR keep getting very high match ratings. But my two DMC's are just always some way behind the rest of the team, often sitting at 7.00 or 6.90 or thereabouts, do you have the same problem? I'm thinking I should remove one of the DMC guys and get an AMC instead but I'm afraid to break up a winning formation.

[Domus Clamantium]

My DL and DR keep getting very high match ratings. But my two DMC's are just always some way behind the rest of the team, often sitting at 7.00 or 6.90 or thereabouts, do you have the same problem? I'm thinking I should remove one of the DMC guys and get an AMC instead but I'm afraid to break up a winning formation.

In my experience playing 2 up front doesn't work well with an AMC because usually one of the two strikers is a support striker and the AMC gets in his way. For example, target man support and advanced forward (my particular favourite even at top level unless the target striker is very talented then I go with complete forward support). Target striker will receive ball to feet, dropping off, bringing defender with him, then play in the faster parter in the space created by dropping off. With AMC there's less space. Better to use CM's who move into the space but not enough to smother your target striker.

In the 2 DMs I play Anchor Man and DLP/s or Regista if they are very good like Lucas Leiva. And yes I am experiencing relatively low ratings. So far I have played Cheikhou Koyate (good player btw), Robert Huth (good player btw), Stefan Strandberg and Jeremy Toulalan (very good player btw) as Anchor Man, and Andre Gomes and Lucas Leiva (absolute quality!) as DLP/Regista alongside. The game does not seem to recognise interceptions, tackles. blocks and headers for the DMs like it does for defenders, and their settings for movement for forward movement and creative freedom are very conservative, especially the anchor man, so you don't get a lot of assists or key passes. I think the best thing to do is to analyse their performance rather than look at the numbers to get a feel for how well they are really doing. For example I want to look for high interceptions for my Anchor Man.

I suppose you could try 4-1-3-2. I used that in my first premiership season because of how the patch affected crosses and headers so badly. Got a 10th place finish with Gillingham. I went with box to box mids and advanced playmaker but looking back it would've been better to go with CM/A either side, DLP/support in the middle, central Anchor Man in DM. The AP support in the middle of a mid 3 using 2 CM/As either side doesnt seem to be effective (so far using Leandro Paredes) but it could be the player. My guess is using the AP support messes too much with playing 2 strikers. I guess you could also try BWM/support or defend so you have 1 anchor man screening defense and the BWM closing down everyone like a mad man. Maybe even CM/support will do the job, just sitting in central midfield where you need him, linking the two CM/A's.

[PhroX]

My DL and DR keep getting very high match ratings. But my two DMC's are just always some way behind the rest of the team, often sitting at 7.00 or 6.90 or thereabouts, do you have the same problem? I'm thinking I should remove one of the DMC guys and get an AMC instead but I'm afraid to break up a winning formation.

While I haven't tried the box midfiled in '14, I do tend to find in general that DMCs don't get great ratings. As such, I'd say that if the team as a whole is performing the way it should, and you're getting the results you want, I wouldn't change things just in the hope of pushing the ratings of those players up.

[Norfair]

In my experience playing 2 up front doesn't work well with an AMC because usually one of the two strikers is a support striker and the AMC gets in his way. For example, target man support and advanced forward (my particular favourite even at top level unless the target striker is very talented then I go with complete forward support).

I thought exactly this as I went to bed this morning and pondered the situation some more. There's not room for all 3 in a ST-ST-AMC relationship. But I somehow feel I don't need 2 DMC. I'm most often playing the BWM/Anchor man double, and the anchor man role so far is suffering the most in terms of match rating. But it's ok, their value doesnt diminish horribly, nor does their morale drop even with the fact that theyre so far off the rest of the team in ratings.

I only play on key highlights but it seems most of what the DMCs do is to shortpass around the middle. The killer pass is often delivered by one of the MCs. It also doesnt help my cause that my MCs are two of the best in the game while the DMCs arent I guess!