Y15ARG said: What's the thinking behind the different player instructions for each of the full backs please? Expand
I am not @A Smile , so I could only guess: This tactic (from my own test) relies heavily on FBs crossing to AF and VOL to score, and using these instructions would make left FB crossing more often to these two players instead of crossing randomly.
However I always struggle against good teams playing 4231 with Wing play style. It's quite easy to stop crosses from wingers using OI (press, hard tackle, inside foot) but they always find a way to score somehow finding blind spots in my tactics. Any advice? Expand
Try removing "Narrow" and "Invite crosses" from this tactic.
pnp said: Okay, so it doesn't really matter whether I follow DB 2.0 or DB 3.0? In this case I would prefer DB 2.0 as tactics there are better rated now. Expand
DB 2.0 tactics are better rated because 2.0 was an easier test league, not because the tactics are better
5th in PL as Luton.
I'll help you
I have tried but unfortunately they did not work from my own tests (some of them even got Luton relegated
Won FA Cup as Luton.
Based on v2.3 but +Close down more for IF.
+Mark Specific Position to IF
Won FA Cup as Luton
I am not @A Smile , so I could only guess:
This tactic (from my own test) relies heavily on FBs crossing to AF and VOL to score, and using these instructions would make left FB crossing more often to these two players instead of crossing randomly.
+cross more often for CM
SKs -> SKd
4th in PL as Luton.
5th in PL as Luton.
5th in PL as Luton (with 70+ xPts) and won Carabao Cup.
3rd in PL as Luton.
However I always struggle against good teams playing 4231 with Wing play style. It's quite easy to stop crosses from wingers using OI (press, hard tackle, inside foot) but they always find a way to score somehow finding blind spots in my tactics. Any advice?
Try removing "Narrow" and "Invite crosses" from this tactic.
DB 2.0 tactics are better rated because 2.0 was an easier test league, not because the tactics are better
He is Knap