Nyeriel said: Wow that looks quite interesting ! Finally a tactic without the 424 shape which is refreshing nice ! Any idea what team I could pick in serie A or la liga to play with your tactic without changing much in the squad? thanks Expand
Well I guess that the tests made throught the custom league are with teams like Roma/Leverkusen. Choose someone with this tier/media predction...
I made some slight twists but mainly with your ideas and its absolute beast, and definitely better than 4222 that's been the meta:
- On offense you are occupying channels with 7 players instead of 6 - nightmare for defense. - On defense you are tracking back with 7 players instead of 6. - Defensive wingers absolute key to the tactic - on offense they pinch back the opposition fullback and open up channels, while on defense provide immediate support to your DM. - A lot of verticality due to inverted wing backs allowing strikers/shadow striker position higher up the pitch.
Probably will need to fine tune the TI's and PI's but congrats on laying a very strong foundation. Expand
Where can indownlod this tactic because i cant find it?
@crizeKOS Have you tried to use DM(s) with PI "hold position" instead of DM(d)? The possession numbers are much better and no need to add "pass it shorter" to other players. Not sure how much loosing on defense...
kjarus said: @crizeKOS Have you tried to use DM(s) with PI "hold position" instead of DM(d)? The possession numbers are much better and no need to add "pass it shorter" to other players. Not sure how much loosing on defense... Expand
No but that's good idea man, u should put into test. As I said, im not expert on PIs. U gotta understand that my main intend here is to break opp defense through a diagonal pass by the DW. With the support role u may icrease the risk that dm is tanking and level up the system variability. Instead of a DLP this can be a better choice.
@kjarus I tried it on my local save by going on holiday, the defence was worse compared to the DM(d) but this could be due to my player's ability for the role. It needs further testing.
@Turocurvasud It's here mate - https://fm-arena.com/thread/3082-it-s-xmas-inspired-by-kjarus/@txkuiyo which mentality are you testing on? I think has to be balanced, positive is too aggressive for protecting properly DM area. I've been testing on my local save and DM(s) is consistently ranking up highest numbers of key passes even if he doesn't have a good game:
Seems to add more variability on offence as mentioned by @crizeKOS Maybe the key is to use DM(s) when you better or equal compared to opposition, but once you underdog go with DM(d).
@kjarus I tested it on balanced mentality. I believe changing DM(d) to DM(s) would benefit the offence since it adds an additional player to penetrate the opposition defence, but would weaken the defence on opposition counter-attacks and the overall defensive stability.
Just did a holiday test using Chelsea with some minor tweaks: - Changed the DM(d) to DM(s) with PI's in the second screenshot. - Changed the SK(s) to SK(d) in order to remove Take More Risks option from the GK. Forum tests showed that Take More Risks being OFF was more effective and I thought why not disable it for the GK although this might have affected the overall passing efficiency of the tactic.
txkuiyo said: Just did a holiday test using Chelsea with some minor tweaks: - Changed the DM(d) to DM(s) with PI's in the final screenshot. - Changed the SK(s) to SK(d) in order to remove Take More Risks option from the GK. Forum tests showed that Take More Risks being OFF was more effective and I thought why not disable it for the GK although this might have affected the overall passing efficiency of the tactic. Expand
So you enhanced DM mentality (playing risk as well) and reduced keeper mentality (to a shorter build up from the back). The main reason for a Support Keeper is to avoid pressure from the oposition of better teams. I guess ur tweaks are going to make this tactic more powerful against lower opposition. Anyway, you should put it on test ^^ I luved what u did, ty
crizeKOS said: So you enhanced DM mentality (playing risk as well) and reduced keeper mentality (to a shorter build up from the back). The main reason for a Support Keeper is to avoid pressure from the oposition of better teams. I guess ur tweaks are going to make this tactic more powerful against lower opposition. Anyway, you should put it on test ^^ I luved what u did, ty Expand
Thank you for your thoughts! As I said, changing the SK to Defend duty might have an effect on the distribution to flanks TI and it might bring more pressure from the stronger opponent's players.
Also thanks for making the current best tactic and your frequent feedbacks!
Someone with a huge FM match engine knowledge wich I have alot of admiration and respect adviced me to make some of the following tweaks:
Base tactic: it's XMAS_twkd3
Changes made to the base tactic:
- lower tempo (I choosed to standard due the tests made on the Tactical Instructions Testing page) - tackle harder PI removed from DM, IWB, BPD and Keeper - ZAZ set pieces routine added due the advisement of some guys here on the forum
@crizeKOS isn't shorter passing with maxed out tempo the best according to the Tactical Instructions Testing results.
Out of the four 30 results, Standard&Standard has 68 AG and -30 GD which results in 38 "FOR" value; while shorter passing with maxed out tempo has 66 AG and -27 GD which results in 39 "FOR" value. Other two both have 37 "FOR" value.
txkuiyo said: @crizeKOS isn't shorter passing with maxed out tempo the best according to the Tactical Instructions Testing results.
Out of the four 30 results, Standard&Standard has 68 AG and -30 GD which results in 38 "FOR" value; while shorter passing with maxed out tempo has 66 AG and -27 GD which results in 39 "FOR" value. Other two both have 37 "FOR" value. Expand
atm I'm based on the amount of points made on the test table, wich is the same if u check it out again (I'm not worried about goals scored). About lower tempo as I said I was adviced mainly to allow time for we get numbers into the box during the offensive transition. I've not test Xmas_twkd3 with the tempo and pass directness u mentioned. I dont know if this may work. The reason I choosed standard pass is due the concept of letting players decide what is best according their CA.
txkuiyo said: @crizeKOS isn't shorter passing with maxed out tempo the best according to the Tactical Instructions Testing results.
Out of the four 30 results, Standard&Standard has 68 AG and -30 GD which results in 38 "FOR" value; while shorter passing with maxed out tempo has 66 AG and -27 GD which results in 39 "FOR" value. Other two both have 37 "FOR" value. Expand
The difference is too small, and falls within the margin of error of testing from FM-Arena.
Hi guys I would like to try to test the following concept: Tactic without pass into space + Pressing Forwards (A) with roaming
Base tactic: it's XMAS_twkd3
Changes made to the base tactic:
- PFs (A) instead AFs + roaming PI added - Pass into space team instruction removed - Tackle harder PI removed from DM, IWB, BPD and Keeper - ZaZ set pieces routine added
- Removed 2 PIs from the IW (risk taken and shorter pass) - Added da Half Back throug the middle - Added stay wider for the BPD - Removed the Cover role from one of the BPD - Removed tackle harder from GK + back four + HB - Removed low crosses Tactical Instruction
- Removed 2 PIs from the IW (risk taken and shorter pass) - Added da Half Back throug the middle - Added stay wider for the BPD - Removed the Cover role from one of the BPD - Removed tackle harder from GK + back four + HB - Removed low crosses Tactical Instruction
Ty once again Expand
Genuinely interested to see how this works out, some roles / PI I did was to address the 'Negative' feedback on the DataHub on things like 1) IWs were losing the ball very frequently 2) A lot of goals were conceded through the middle 3) I did try HB also, but the simulation results were bad (could be terrible RNG though)
Nyeriel said: Wow that looks quite interesting ! Finally a tactic without the 424 shape which is refreshing nice !
Any idea what team I could pick in serie A or la liga to play with your tactic without changing much in the squad? thanks
Well I guess that the tests made throught the custom league are with teams like Roma/Leverkusen. Choose someone with this tier/media predction...
best tactic!!! i hav fun thank u!!!
kjarus said:
I made some slight twists but mainly with your ideas and its absolute beast, and definitely better than 4222 that's been the meta:
- On offense you are occupying channels with 7 players instead of 6 - nightmare for defense.
- On defense you are tracking back with 7 players instead of 6.
- Defensive wingers absolute key to the tactic - on offense they pinch back the opposition fullback and open up channels, while on defense provide immediate support to your DM.
- A lot of verticality due to inverted wing backs allowing strikers/shadow striker position higher up the pitch.
Probably will need to fine tune the TI's and PI's but congrats on laying a very strong foundation.
Where can indownlod this tactic because i cant find it?
Falbravv said:
With your tweaks, first match of the season
Some others matchs are delicious, you need to create a thread to test tweaks by fm A
Where can i download this tactic?
guys, I didnt tweak set pieces. U guys gotta fix that. Btw, any suggestion of meta set pieces? We gotta test that 😅
@crizeKOS Have you tried to use DM(s) with PI "hold position" instead of DM(d)? The possession numbers are much better and no need to add "pass it shorter" to other players. Not sure how much loosing on defense...
kjarus said: @crizeKOS Have you tried to use DM(s) with PI "hold position" instead of DM(d)? The possession numbers are much better and no need to add "pass it shorter" to other players. Not sure how much loosing on defense...
No but that's good idea man, u should put into test. As I said, im not expert on PIs. U gotta understand that my main intend here is to break opp defense through a diagonal pass by the DW. With the support role u may icrease the risk that dm is tanking and level up the system variability. Instead of a DLP this can be a better choice.
@kjarus I tried it on my local save by going on holiday, the defence was worse compared to the DM(d) but this could be due to my player's ability for the role. It needs further testing.
@kjarus can you post your tweaked tactic?
@Turocurvasud It's here mate - https://fm-arena.com/thread/3082-it-s-xmas-inspired-by-kjarus/ @txkuiyo which mentality are you testing on? I think has to be balanced, positive is too aggressive for protecting properly DM area. I've been testing on my local save and DM(s) is consistently ranking up highest numbers of key passes even if he doesn't have a good game:
Seems to add more variability on offence as mentioned by @crizeKOS Maybe the key is to use DM(s) when you better or equal compared to opposition, but once you underdog go with DM(d).
@kjarus I tested it on balanced mentality. I believe changing DM(d) to DM(s) would benefit the offence since it adds an additional player to penetrate the opposition defence, but would weaken the defence on opposition counter-attacks and the overall defensive stability.
Just did a holiday test using Chelsea with some minor tweaks:
- Changed the DM(d) to DM(s) with PI's in the second screenshot.
- Changed the SK(s) to SK(d) in order to remove Take More Risks option from the GK. Forum tests showed that Take More Risks being OFF was more effective and I thought why not disable it for the GK although this might have affected the overall passing efficiency of the tactic.
ManU game is interesting.
txkuiyo said: Just did a holiday test using Chelsea with some minor tweaks:
- Changed the DM(d) to DM(s) with PI's in the final screenshot.
- Changed the SK(s) to SK(d) in order to remove Take More Risks option from the GK. Forum tests showed that Take More Risks being OFF was more effective and I thought why not disable it for the GK although this might have affected the overall passing efficiency of the tactic.
So you enhanced DM mentality (playing risk as well) and reduced keeper mentality (to a shorter build up from the back).
The main reason for a Support Keeper is to avoid pressure from the oposition of better teams.
I guess ur tweaks are going to make this tactic more powerful against lower opposition.
Anyway, you should put it on test ^^
I luved what u did, ty
crizeKOS said: So you enhanced DM mentality (playing risk as well) and reduced keeper mentality (to a shorter build up from the back).
The main reason for a Support Keeper is to avoid pressure from the oposition of better teams.
I guess ur tweaks are going to make this tactic more powerful against lower opposition.
Anyway, you should put it on test ^^
I luved what u did, ty
Thank you for your thoughts! As I said, changing the SK to Defend duty might have an effect on the distribution to flanks TI and it might bring more pressure from the stronger opponent's players.
Also thanks for making the current best tactic and your frequent feedbacks!
Like all tactics i created up from scratch or downloaded, lasts for half a season and then goes off completely, but still it was a great one
crizeKOS said: guys, I didnt tweak set pieces. U guys gotta fix that. Btw, any suggestion of meta set pieces? We gotta test that 😅
You should also test the version with the set pieces. Maybe it's XMAS_twkd3.1
I recommend @ZaZ's set pieces.
edit: it's ready. look attachment
pixar said: You should also test the version with the set pieces. Maybe it's XMAS_twkd3.1
I recommend @ZaZ's set pieces.
edit: it's ready. look attachment
we should have a method to test set pieces
I'll test "it's XMAS_twkd3" with udinese !
I had really fun using this. 😀
it's XMAS_twkd5
Someone with a huge FM match engine knowledge wich I have alot of admiration and respect adviced me to make some of the following tweaks:
Base tactic: it's XMAS_twkd3
Changes made to the base tactic:
- lower tempo (I choosed to standard due the tests made on the Tactical Instructions Testing page)
- tackle harder PI removed from DM, IWB, BPD and Keeper
- ZAZ set pieces routine added due the advisement of some guys here on the forum
Ty in advance ^^
@crizeKOS isn't shorter passing with maxed out tempo the best according to the Tactical Instructions Testing results.
Out of the four 30 results, Standard&Standard has 68 AG and -30 GD which results in 38 "FOR" value; while shorter passing with maxed out tempo has 66 AG and -27 GD which results in 39 "FOR" value. Other two both have 37 "FOR" value.
txkuiyo said: @crizeKOS isn't shorter passing with maxed out tempo the best according to the Tactical Instructions Testing results.
Out of the four 30 results, Standard&Standard has 68 AG and -30 GD which results in 38 "FOR" value; while shorter passing with maxed out tempo has 66 AG and -27 GD which results in 39 "FOR" value. Other two both have 37 "FOR" value.
atm I'm based on the amount of points made on the test table, wich is the same if u check it out again (I'm not worried about goals scored).
About lower tempo as I said I was adviced mainly to allow time for we get numbers into the box during the offensive transition.
I've not test Xmas_twkd3 with the tempo and pass directness u mentioned. I dont know if this may work. The reason I choosed standard pass is due the concept of letting players decide what is best according their CA.
txkuiyo said: @crizeKOS isn't shorter passing with maxed out tempo the best according to the Tactical Instructions Testing results.
Out of the four 30 results, Standard&Standard has 68 AG and -30 GD which results in 38 "FOR" value; while shorter passing with maxed out tempo has 66 AG and -27 GD which results in 39 "FOR" value. Other two both have 37 "FOR" value.
The difference is too small, and falls within the margin of error of testing from FM-Arena.
it's XMAS_twkd6
Hi guys I would like to try to test the following concept: Tactic without pass into space + Pressing Forwards (A) with roaming
Base tactic: it's XMAS_twkd3
Changes made to the base tactic:
- PFs (A) instead AFs + roaming PI added
- Pass into space team instruction removed
- Tackle harder PI removed from DM, IWB, BPD and Keeper
- ZaZ set pieces routine added
Ty once again
@crizeKOS, you really should mention the tactics names in the post because it's hard to tell what tactic is that
Droid said: @crizeKOS, you really should mention the tactics names in the post because it's hard to tell what tactic is that
Sorry, its Xmas_twked6
crizeKOS said: Sorry, its Xmas_twked6
I suggest editing the posts and add the names of tactics to them.
Droid said: I suggest editing the posts and add the names of tactics to them.
ok
Useless_4-4-2_twkd
Base Tactic: Useless_4-4-2 - https://fm-arena.com/find-comment/17023/
I made some tweaks on Useless_4-4-2 built by @MemorizableUsername:
Changes made to the base tactic:
- Removed 2 PIs from the IW (risk taken and shorter pass)
- Added da Half Back throug the middle
- Added stay wider for the BPD
- Removed the Cover role from one of the BPD
- Removed tackle harder from GK + back four + HB
- Removed low crosses Tactical Instruction
Ty once again
crizeKOS said: Useless_4-4-2_twkd
I made some changes on Useless_4-4-2 built by @MemorizableUsername:
- Removed 2 PIs from the IW (risk taken and shorter pass)
- Added da Half Back throug the middle
- Added stay wider for the BPD
- Removed the Cover role from one of the BPD
- Removed tackle harder from GK + back four + HB
- Removed low crosses Tactical Instruction
Ty once again
Genuinely interested to see how this works out, some roles / PI I did was to address the 'Negative' feedback on the DataHub on things like
1) IWs were losing the ball very frequently
2) A lot of goals were conceded through the middle
3) I did try HB also, but the simulation results were bad (could be terrible RNG though)