I still can't understand how does some things happens with the current engine in player performance stuff, but still... i have been trying many different combinations trying to get as better ratings as possible, finally found a few formations that seems to get better results, at least in premium reports:
If you need to defend, you should play one of these:
If you want to play something more offensive, this is probably the best formation you can use:
The reasons are pretty simple:
* FR and FL have a higher weight in UPM and USM tactics than AMR, AMC and AML, still, using players in the AM line isn't reccomended unless you place them in the F line (that also includes AMC as FC, but your pressing level might be reduced).
* DC and DMC are still key players to get high UZM rates, but using many balanced players in the M line grants you excelent results too, using an AMR, AMC or AML now drops your UZM and doesn't increase your OZM that much, in fact, placing an AMC as MC give you very similar results (if the player can play as both, things are even better).
Guys, feel free to try these combinations with your squads and then tell me if i'm wrong.
Well, tbh it depends on how you've trained your players. Unfortunately many of us have trained overly specialized AM players for attack at the expense of defense. The new engine has rendered these players weak. But
with more well-rounded players, there is still an advantage to be had from using formations with few (or none) players in the M line, but it is much much smaller than in the past. The large affect of forward wings on press tactics might be tough for many teams who, like me, have skimped on defensive training for more specialized attackers. Also using forward wings
instead of strikers seems to be risky unless you've got two with good finishing and aerial scores. Also the high weight on This could be accomplished by playing an FC on the wing but the player's skills will be reduced playing out of position and it will likely hurt your press tactics even more.
Now, what are the bigger losers with these changes? We used to think that AMCs were the main losers, but what about FCs??? Only few strikers aside, their OZM tactical rates are mostly low, placing an AMR or an AML as FR or FL is a lot better, their ability to break zonal marking is usually higher, their afs (action finding an oportunity to score) levels are usually similar, they influence in team tactics is higher they and can be used as target man too!
And yes, i know that FCs always had that problem, but there was 6 positions to compensate their low OZM rate, now there are only 2! What can be done to give them their role bsck? I know that there are many strikers with high OZM rates, but they are unbalanced players mostly (low aerial ability, low strenght, only speedy players without ability to hit float croses) i am sure that lots of strikers (90% of total as minimum) have to deal with that trouble now, playing with 2 strikers will surely cause a drastical drop in all team tactics unless you add some OZM only players to play. FR and FL will replace them soon, i am sure of it!
Again, it really depends. I use stick to position tactics so I use/train strikers with decent passing scores which might give me a bit of an advantage for OZM in the short term. With my existing players my strongest lineup (tactically) involves 3-4 in the midfield (M) line and 1-2 strikers and my superstar AMR.
Luckily I still have time to train my youth AMs in defending...how much training and money has been wasted on specialized players in this line, I wonder. I expect many of them will be on the transfer market soon.
