The 5 worst formation systems for FIFA 2019

         The problem of the perfect formation is important for both gamers and real-life coaches. But coaches like Guardiola and Klopp can improvise and use as leverage their players’ skills when the footSims are limited by the game mechanics.

The formation is essential for FIFA, as computer footballers strictly occupy their positions and never go further. In the real game, you will see “Napoli”, which plays 4-4-2 in defense and 3-2-3-2 in the attack, and in FIFA the defender and the central midfielder are two different things.

Let’s swing in and discover the worst formations

3-1-4-2

Attack – 4/5, defense – 2/5, counterattack – 1/5

Pros:  

·   Good at holding the ball and pushing through a harsh defense

·   Too many football players in the center of the field

Cons:

·   Flank defenseless as fuck

·   Laterals require careful selection

·   Problems against the fast wingers of the other team

         In fact, this formation is not so bad in terms of attack: when you possess the ball, 6 players are available, behind the ball line. And as practice shows, the three defenders are a good choice in the current FIFA.

However, the scheme loses to the dull as dishwater 3-5-2 in terms of defense: your ass will witness the situation when extreme midfielders do not have time to work out in defense, and the defender often loses the selection. The formation requires a very careful selection of the laterals: they must have strong attacking skills (speed, dribbling, pass), and you must have a high work rate in the defense. Although even in this case, fast wingers like Salah and Man will cause too many problems.

            You will have to be real fuckin’ precise with the choice of CDM (central defensive midfield): he must have a fatass pass, otherwise, the permanent trim will lead to a goal.  When choosing the level of long passes, use at least 80.

           Another problem is the exit to a counterattack. When you are done with defend, your flank players are too low. Only two forwards remain in the attack, which are easily beaten by a pair or three defenders. As a result, you have to wait for acceleration of the already tired laterals in order to stretch the defense.

Formations that will wipe your ars out: 4-3-3, 4-5-1.

4-1-3-2

Attack – 3/5, defense – 2/5, counterattack – 2/5

Pros:

·   Many options available to continue the attack

·   Easy to gain complete chemistry

Cons:

·   Forwards are cut off from midfield

·   Weak center field

·   All 4 midfielders must have a good long passes.

           On the one hand, the formation is quite balanced for defense and attack. On the other – the defense and attack are humdrum af. It is not surprising that in real football you will never see such an arrangement: it has nothing to do with the Ancelotti’s diamond, with rich center of the field. In fact, this is a standard 4-4-2, where one of the players for some reason is located above the other. Therefore, it is very easy for your opponent to pass your center field: a pair of Spartak walls – and off you go.

            Players are miles away from each other. Forwards must have a high workrate – otherwise they will just live their lives, away from the main team. Extreme midfielders constantly get a free zone, but don’t expect much support in the center. Better choose more standard analogs: 4-4-2, 4-2-2-2 or 4-3-1-2.

Formations that will wipe your ars out: 4-3-1-2, 4-4-2, 4-3-3.

3-4-1-2

Attack – 4/5, defense – 1/5, counterattack – 1/5

Pros:

·   A lot of people in the attack.

·   Fits best when you need to equalize  the score shortly before the end of the match

Cons:

·   Huge gap between midfield and defense

·   High requirements on the extreme midfielders

·   Fast defenders needed

            Excellent formation if your goal is missing 4-5 goals per game. It has absorbed all the disadvantages of 3-1-4-2, adding to them a large distance between the lines of defense and midfield: there is simply no defender who fills this position. You have nothing against any counterattack if your opponent has a fast forwards (and in 99% of cases they are). And even if you resist the first wave of attack, you’ll surely lose the second one.

            The formation is meaningful in only one case: you have a very expensive team. Fast defenders with high level of skills, tuff flank midfielders with high defensive workrate and a goalkeeper who will be saving all the goals. Otherwise, learn to roll out from the center of the field. It will be useful.

Formations that will wipe your ars out:  4-2-3-1, 4-3-3 (1,2,3), 4-3-1-2, 3-4-3

4-5-1 (2)

Attack – 1/5, defense – 3/5, counterattack – 1/5

Pros:

·   Good positional defense, which is difficult to open

Cons:

·   The lonely striker can’t answer the question “how to score more goals for the match”

·   Gaps between line of defense, midfield and forward

·   Unnecessary crowding in the midfield

            It’s a formation where the teams are more concerned about protecting their goals, and in the attack, they are putting all the faith on a high forward who is able to cling to the ball. But in FIFA, it has much more successful variations: with the advanced attacking midfielders, which will connect the midfield and the attack, or support, which will make the defense more reliable. There is not a single reason to use 4-5-1 (2) – it does not offer anything better, but it empowers the disadvantages. You can absolutely ignore this formation

Formations that will wipe your ars out:  4-3-1-2, 4-4-2, 4-3-3, 3-5-2, 4-2-2-2.

4-4-1-1

Attack – 1/5, defense – 2/5, counterattack – 1/5

Pros:

·   A feeling of incredible satisfaction from the fact that you beat at least someone with this scheme

Cons:

·   Gaps between lines

·   CF is constantly lost on the field

·   Weakness in defense

·   Flank midfielders are almost useless in attack.

         If the previous formations could be at least somehow used, then this is a complete clusterfuck. Let’s start with the most unusual position: CF. This example is very similar to the 4-1-3-2 formation when a pair of central midfielders become not in a line, but one after another. Here is the same story: CF does not connect the midfield and the attack in any way, but is located below the striker. In the end, if the forward gets the ball, he has no one to pass it to, and he is forced to shoot. If they played in a pair, the partner would open on the side. So it’s better to play 4-4-2, or 4-2-3-1 with the attacking midfielder.

         The gap between midfield and defense hasn’t vanished, because we don’t observe the reference. But the strangest thing is that with 4-5-1 (2) the extreme midfielders at least become wingers when the team attacks. Here they are located even lower, and the support from them is minimal. This arrangement will not save you, even if you have Messi for a CF, and at the edges of the midfield Azar and Salah. It will be almost impossible for you to crack the opponent’s defense, counterattacks will not be really sharp, and all these sacrifices will be made for a rather shitty defense.

Formations that will wipe your ass out:  literally any