Player contribution changes

Do you think such a player would play mainly as winger offensive, normal, or towards middle? For last option, he should switch to full time playmaking now, for the other two, I think he could use at least one more level of winger.

I think that as WG-tm should play fourth the best inner, independently how good winger skill he has.

Look at today's match - 451 with one strong side attack.

If You use WG-o and/or F-tw and/or IM-tw and/or WB-n/o on one side then usually You have not enough slots to build second side attack. One winger with PM (and with worse winger skill wherefore) makes too weak attack so You should forget about second attack and use second winger only to increase midfield.

Question is how often will You build two strong side attacks? Of course, it's possible when You play CA, but in this case midfield is less important. In matches without CA it's possible if You use combined method (e.g. WG-off and IM-tw on one side and F-tw and WG-n/tm with PM on opposite side), but it's very risky if Your opponent will not tell You his lineup ;-)

berthli napisał:

Question is how often will You build two strong side attacks?

At club level - quite often. At U20 level - it will become much more viable, as the overpowered option of fielding 4th IM will disappear :)

The thing we have to count is what side attack can be made by WBn+WGm+IMw when this winger towards middle is some biskilled player.

Another question about wing+playmaking: should we train a winger in playmaking? Maybe training a playmaker in wing will be better?

So thinking as you said, and looking at the changes, maybe it's good to just train him in winger and he could a good wbo or even wo (sn winger, excellent pm, head)...

I agree, especially at the world cup, it is quite unlikely that we will play often with 2wo, and if we do that, then a solid pm and an excellent pm winger should do their job too.

Well, given the fact that they will increase the winger power, a wbo+wtm+ftw should give a pretty interesting and strong rating in a lot of games. Even now a magnif winger tm+wbo+ftw should give interesting wing attacks, especially against a team that is not packing everything in defence.

jacek_BTL napisał:

Another question about wing+playmaking: should we train a winger in playmaking? Maybe training a playmaker in wing will be better?

Yes, I agree with this idea, but we don't have any interesting prospects for this:(.

WBn+WGm+IMw

Hmm... I should make new formula for WG-m in brixs tool. But currently we have WG-n (2) - it's quite similar to WG-m and make even better side attack.

WB-n (2) -> def=9, maybe 9+
WG-n (2) -> PM=11, wing=13
WG-o (2) -> PM=8, wing=16
IM-tw (W) -> wing=7, PM=14+ (IM-tw with wing=7 shouldn't train winger skill before PM is at least =17)

We still have reserve because we don't have F-tw (W). If we forget about central attack then F-tw should be winger with scoring - not forward with wing F-tw (2).

Hmmm... perhaps I should make formula for double F-tw? In F-tw (W) model contribution to central and opposite side attack is ignored, but if we use 2x F-tw then opposite attack is important.

With the new game engine I'm seriously thinking about a potential very strong lineup we could use a lot of times:

wbn(passable wing) cd(sp) wbn(solid wing)

wo(solid pm) im im im wo(excellent pm)

fwdef fwdef

For technical def fw we could use depending on the opponent the captain(wc pm+solid passing) or other technical def fw's(wc passing+solid/excellent pm...brilliant pm+excellent passing+solid scoring...magnificent passing+excellent pm).

It would give us a surprisingly big midfield and two very strong side attacks thanks to the high bonus of the technical forwards.

What are your guys thoughts about this?

mastercyb napisał:

With the new game engine I'm seriously thinking about a potential very strong lineup we could use a lot of times:

wbn(passable wing) cd(sp) wbn(solid wing)

wo(solid pm) im im im wo(excellent pm)

fwdef fwdef

For technical def fw we could use depending on the opponent the captain(wc pm+solid passing) or other technical def fw's(wc passing+solid/excellent pm...brilliant pm+excellent passing+solid scoring...magnificent passing+excellent pm).

It would give us a surprisingly big midfield and two very strong side attacks thanks to the high bonus of the technical forwards.

What are your guys thoughts about this?

Aren't you afraid of CA? ;)

doman napisał:

Aren't you afraid of CA? ;)

Well, that will not be our only tactical option:). Against CA there will be better choices. And at the end of the day we will have to try and anticipate the opponent's moves and play accordingly.

mastercyb napisał:

doman napisał:

Aren't you afraid of CA? ;)

Well, that will not be our only tactical option:). Against CA there will be better choices. And at the end of the day we will have to try and anticipate the opponent's moves and play accordingly.

It can't be done in other way ;)

What level of AOW we will achieve with those lineup with strong wings?

First, I'm not sure I would use the aow, as the central defense would decrease seriously.

Secondly, if we use it we should get at least magnificent/world class, or even more if we play the passing guys...

mastercyb napisał:

First, I'm not sure I would use the aow, as the central defense would decrease seriously.

Secondly, if we use it we should get at least magnificent/world class, or even more if we play the passing guys...

Playing only with side attacks and without AOW is a risky thing, especially with a weak defence.

Yes, that is true...