Hello,

I'd like to make a suggestion on how to strike while the iron is hot.

Would it be possible to field 5 strikers, in the same way that you can field 5 midfielders and 5 defenders? That would offer interesting tactical perspectives and greater diversity in the matches.

If the recent change preventing this possibility is a question of balance, I propose another, mentioned yesterday by a manager whose name I've lost: forcing teams to have at least one player per line. It may not be the ideal solution, but I think there are more managers interested in using 5 strikers from time to time than in 5-5-0 or 0-5-5.

Totally in favour!
Just yesterday, I was losing and I wanted to push for an equaliser with 5 strikers ... well I couldn't do it !
Playing with 1 - 2 -3 - 4 strikers yes but playing in a particular style and being blocked because of that ... well nothing more to do 😄 it was nice to feel powerless at my age ... long live retirement

#forum?topic=168511&date=1753467900

Start of answer on

Azby: Bonjour,

Petite proposition pour battre le fer tant qu'il est chaud.

Serait-il possible de pouvoir aligner 5 attaquants, comme l'on peut aligner 5 milieux et 5 défenseurs ? Cela offre des perspectives tactiques intéressantes et une plus grande diversité dans les matchs.

Si le changement récent empêchant cette possibilité est une question d'équilibrage, j'en propose un autre, évoqué hier par un manager dont j'ai perdu le nom : forcer les équipes à disposer d'au moins un joueur par ligne. Ce...

A good idea

You get the impression that playing with 5 strikers is restricted as if that would give you an unassailable advantage.
But playing with 5 strikers inevitably weakens you elsewhere, according to the principle of communicating vessels.
5 midfielders 90% of teams do it regularly
5 defenders 90% of teams do it when they need to build up space
But 5 strikers to try and reverse a result would be forbidden. I'd like to understand the logic.

UP 🤩

Why not field 4 strikers and attacking profiles in the other lines?
DFL "Take the lane
DFC "Go up from set-pieces
MDC "Attack
MOC "Take part in the attack".
MOL "Overrun" or "Centre" (maybe provoke, probably)
In the end, you can get a lot more attacking with these kinds of profiles?

Whoever played Short Passes against the Bourac club with 5 Attacking MDs positioned in AT should come forward. 😂

Magpie: Pourquoi ne pas aligner 4 attaquants et des profils offensifs dans les autres lignes ?
DFL "Prendre le couloir"
DFC "Monter sur phases arrêtées"
MDC "Attaquer"
MOC "Participer à l'attaque"
MOL "déborder" ou "centrer" (peut-être provoquer, probablement)
Au final, tu peux avoir bien plus d'attaque avec ce genre de profils ?

I played against a player with the first two instructions + 2atc and an asc last season...bah he came close to attacking 400 with a 79ng squad with no style...so yup Aymeric must have just thought we had enough tools to attack and not enough to defend

Sun's: J'ai joué contre un joueur avec les deux premières consignes+ 2atc et un asc la saison passée...bah il frôler le 400 d'attaque avec un effectif de 79ng sans style...donc yup Aymeric a du juste penser que l'on a assez d'outils pour attaquer et pas assez pour défendre

And that's exactly what I think.

In my opinion, the absolute objective is for there to be a balance between full-attack and full-defence.
And not to let either of these two 'attitudes' be superior to the other in terms of maximum stats.
Otherwise, it would be too 'simple'.

If the offensive attitude were stronger than the defensive one, then it would be impossible to defend your chances against a full attack opponent (apart from the sacrosanct probabilities).
I think that, having more offensive than defensive profiles on VF, the only thing to put the ball back in the centre is to remove an attacker, and leave a "+1 defender".

After that, it's just a theory. To each his own, and I may be totally wrong. But that's the only thing I can think of that would explain A45's intransigence, despite the arguments set out here.
What's more, it's clearly deliberate on his part, as we've seen

Magpie: Et c'est exactement ce que je pense.

A mon avis, l'objectif absolu est qu'il y'ait un équilibre entre la full-attaque, et le full-défense.
Et de ne laisser aucune de ces deux "attitudes" être supérieure à l'autre en terme de stats maximales.
Sinon, ce serait trop "simple"

Si l'attitude offensive était plus forte que la défensive, eh bien il serait impossible de pouvoir défendre ses chances face à un adversaire full attaque (hormis les sacro-saintes probabilités)
Je pense que, ayant plus de ...

Maybe we should ask Aymeric to add the instruction to defend the wingers a bit like in reality with the "pistons" so we could perhaps envisage a return of the 5 possible strikers.