I am a big fan of fm series and i've been using websites like fmarena/fmbase/knaps tactic tesing etc. a lot and i realized that most of the tactic testers are not accurate.
To give an example fmarena test their tactics based on 2 teams with 160 CA but Team A has higher reputation to imitate top team and Team B with lower reputation to imitate underdog side.
1* My opinions about that is I do think that team A can actually imitate top team because of having both good players and high reputation, but in the other hand I feel like Team B is taking advantage of the simulation by implementing underdog. I think that with lower reputation it makes opposition top team to play more aggresive and left spaces behind while actually defending almost perfect for having good players and also can take advantage of the spaces left behind the defenders.
But when you look at actual gameplay on fm this style only implements for underdog teams of the top 5 league where they have already good players.
2* There are also tacitcs like void v2 (https://fm-arena.com/tactic/959-void-ver-2-0/) with a great score but when you try this tactic with teams like az alkmar, Galatasaray, Olympiacos they never give results the same way because its a complicated tactic so even if you are a subtop team of your leage with worse players than premier league the tactic will not going to work out.
OTHER TACTIC TESTING LEAGUES.
The other 3 tactic testing leagues that i know are
and same for the underdog tactics where they are testing with underdog team of premier league. Thıs way you kinda bug the simulation because you already have good players.
When you check knaps tactic testing table the tactic with the highest top team tactic is a tactic that also requaring lots of good players so when you try that tactic out with teams like beşiktaş you will fail but it will work wonderfully with teams like leverkusen/wolfsburg because they have better players.
RESULTS AND POTENTIAL IMPROVEMENTS.
As result i came to the conclusion these types of test are not very accurate and my suggestions about creating more accurate test league are;
1* Keeping the fmarena testing league as it is but adding 4 other teams with both higher and lower CA/Reputation
To give an example is
TEAM A CA:190 REP: 10000 TEAM B CA:175 REP: 9000 TEAM C CA:150 REP: 7000 TEAM D CA:135 REP: 5000 TEAM E CA:110 REP: 3000 TEAM F CA:90 REP: 1000
and fill up the league with teams that has CA from 190 to 90 so we can see how can they do not only against elite teams but with the underdog teams too.
this way i feel like the underdog teams can show ingenuity of the tactics with bad players. And you can make a tactic testing results log as a results from team a-b-c-d-e-f so people can choose if they want a top team tactic or underdog tactic. (these numbers are totally random. I wrote them just to give an idea)
2* My second tought is to create 3 leagues with the CA's of
180-145 145-110 110-80
So after having 3 leagues in total we can choose 3 teams (top/mid/underdog) and we can be able to test the tactic both the good players and the bad players. Thıs will give us a more accurate results in tactic table. This way we can see that The top team tactics are only for elite teams or the top teams of the league in general.
If you made up this far thank you for reading it. These are all my ideas about the tactic testing systems. If there is anything you want to criticise or add to make the ideas better put your toughts in comments.
Kerem tp said: To give an example fmarena test their tactics based on 2 teams with 160 CA but Team A has higher reputation to imitate top team and Team B with lower reputation to imitate underdog side. Expand
I don't think that's correct, according to the post about the testing league:
Alexander said: - Underdog Team(low rep) and Favorite Team(high rep) are gone. Now all teams in the league have the same reputation, we find this would be more appropriate because all teams in the league are about the same in quality.
- There are 2 teams in the league under our control (Team A and Team B), there's no difference between them and we did that just to double the number of matches we test per one run. Expand
You can download the saves after testing as well - all the teams in the league have 4 star reputation. Also not all the players have 160CA, for example: Central Defenders have 160 CA, DMs/CMs have 169 CA while Wingers/AMCs/Strikers have 188CA (for the testing teams, from what I've checked AI teams don't have those types of players that can play all those positions at once so they have a little lower CA). That doesn't necessarily mean that the teams have better attacking players than defenders - just being able to play in more than position requires more CA as far as I'm aware.
That means that all the teams in the league are basically identical which allows to test only the quality of the tactic - not quality of the players.
You could say that it only tests tactics for elite teams but I don't think that's necessarily true - player attributes in FM are relative - player on a field that has 11 pace while opponents have 8 pace should behave the same on the pitch as a player that has 16 pace against opponents with 13 pace.
Kerem tp said: To give an example fmarena test their tactics based on 2 teams with 160 CA but Team A has higher reputation to imitate top team and Team B with lower reputation to imitate underdog side Expand
That was changed long time ago. In the latest version of fm-arena.com there's no difference between Team A and Team B.
I would rather just remove the best and worst result for each team and compute data using the four middle results, to discard outliers. Other than that, the method seems fine in isolating the tactic effect on the result.
About adding teams, the more teams you add, the more meaningless the tests become, since you will have the tactic facing itself more often, which doesn't add much to the table.
Kerem tp said: 2* There are also tacitcs like void v2 (https://fm-arena.com/tactic/959-void-ver-2-0/) with a great score but when you try this tactic with teams like az alkmar, Galatasaray, Olympiacos they never give results the same way because its a complicated tactic so even if you are a subtop team of your leage with worse players than premier league the tactic will not going to work out. Expand
It isn't supposed to give the same result with different teams and expecting something like that would be quiet stupid.
A high score in the testing indicates a high efficiency which means you will do much better than your media prediction with any team.
Egraam said: You can download the saves after testing as well - all the teams in the league have 4 star reputation. Also not all the players have 160CA, for example: Central Defenders have 160 CA, DMs/CMs have 169 CA while Wingers/AMCs/Strikers have 188CA (for the testing teams, from what I've checked AI teams don't have those types of players that can play all those positions at once so they have a little lower CA). That doesn't necessarily mean that the teams have better attacking players than defenders - just being able to play in more than position requires more CA as far as I'm aware. Expand
Exactly, CA numbers is quite meaningless because the playing rating at the positions also costs CA and different attributes have different importance in the ME so two players might have the same CA but one of them can be much more efficient than other and this table proves that - https://fm-arena.com/table/9-important-attributes/
I am a big fan of fm series and i've been using websites like fmarena/fmbase/knaps tactic tesing etc. a lot and i realized that most of the tactic testers are not accurate.
To give an example fmarena test their tactics based on 2 teams with 160 CA but Team A has higher reputation to imitate top team and Team B with lower reputation to imitate underdog side.
1* My opinions about that is I do think that team A can actually imitate top team because of having both good players and high reputation, but in the other hand I feel like Team B is taking advantage of the simulation by implementing underdog. I think that with lower reputation it makes opposition top team to play more aggresive and left spaces behind while actually defending almost perfect for having good players and also can take advantage of the spaces left behind the defenders.
But when you look at actual gameplay on fm this style only implements for underdog teams of the top 5 league where they have already good players.
2* There are also tacitcs like void v2 (https://fm-arena.com/tactic/959-void-ver-2-0/) with a great score but when you try this tactic with teams like az alkmar, Galatasaray, Olympiacos they never give results the same way because its a complicated tactic so even if you are a subtop team of your leage with worse players than premier league the tactic will not going to work out.
OTHER TACTIC TESTING LEAGUES.
The other 3 tactic testing leagues that i know are
and same for the underdog tactics where they are testing with underdog team of premier league. Thıs way you kinda bug the simulation because you already have good players.
When you check knaps tactic testing table the tactic with the highest top team tactic is a tactic that also requaring lots of good players so when you try that tactic out with teams like beşiktaş you will fail but it will work wonderfully with teams like leverkusen/wolfsburg because they have better players.
RESULTS AND POTENTIAL IMPROVEMENTS.
As result i came to the conclusion these types of test are not very accurate and my suggestions about creating more accurate test league are;
1* Keeping the fmarena testing league as it is but adding 4 other teams with both higher and lower CA/Reputation
To give an example is
TEAM A CA:190 REP: 10000 TEAM B CA:175 REP: 9000 TEAM C CA:150 REP: 7000 TEAM D CA:135 REP: 5000 TEAM E CA:110 REP: 3000 TEAM F CA:90 REP: 1000
and fill up the league with teams that has CA from 190 to 90 so we can see how can they do not only against elite teams but with the underdog teams too.
this way i feel like the underdog teams can show ingenuity of the tactics with bad players. And you can make a tactic testing results log as a results from team a-b-c-d-e-f so people can choose if they want a top team tactic or underdog tactic. (these numbers are totally random. I wrote them just to give an idea)
2* My second tought is to create 3 leagues with the CA's of
180-145 145-110 110-80
So after having 3 leagues in total we can choose 3 teams (top/mid/underdog) and we can be able to test the tactic both the good players and the bad players. Thıs will give us a more accurate results in tactic table. This way we can see that The top team tactics are only for elite teams or the top teams of the league in general.
If you made up this far thank you for reading it. These are all my ideas about the tactic testing systems. If there is anything you want to criticise or add to make the ideas better put your toughts in comments.
Thanks Expand
That's a good idea I use Zaz blue3.0 , my kids dominate in league but can't get a win in Europa. I want to see fm-arena test with team low rep low ca like you said. but im not sure i cant get a good tactic from knap/fmbase test league but i can get the best tactic like zazblue/phoenix at fm-arena. lol
Egraam said: You could say that it only tests tactics for elite teams but I don't think that's necessarily true - player attributes in FM are relative - player on a field that has 11 pace while opponents have 8 pace should behave the same on the pitch as a player that has 16 pace against opponents with 13 pace. Expand
Thank you for the CA-REP information.
yes indeed but i think there is a difference between being an underdog team in prem where you have average passing of 12-14 and being an underdog team of polish league where average passng is 7-10. I feel like its pushing players to play more direct since you have less talendted team.
Same thing for some tactics too. These tactics are played in perfect conditions where you have both good players and good repuatiton. But if you start a career in non top5 league team it will take around 5-7 seasons to build that type of team. So if you want to be competitive in UCL it will need lots of work. What i am trying to achieve with this topic is to see what these tactics are capable of in different situations and to have more detailed information about if the tactics are designed to fight as an underdog. Because if you look at knaps tactic result both the highest rated and the lowest rated tactic finished top of the table since its an elite team.
irapbot said: That's a good idea I use Zaz blue3.0 , my kids dominate in league but can't get a win in Europa. I want to see fm-arena test with team low rep low ca like you said. but im not sure i cant get a good tactic from knap/fmbase test league but i can get the best tactic like zazblue/phoenix at fm-arena. lol
Expand
Yess. I was thinking the same. Most of these high rated tactics good if you are mid/subtop/top team in your league. But when you join international competitions the tactics are not underdog favoruted. The only way to get good results with these tactics in europe is to build your team. What i am trying to achieve with this topic is to see how the tactics will handle different situations.So we can have a more detailed information for different types of teams
irapbot said: That's a good idea I use Zaz blue3.0 , my kids dominate in league but can't get a win in Europa. I want to see fm-arena test with team low rep low ca like you said. but im not sure i cant get a good tactic from knap/fmbase test league but i can get the best tactic like zazblue/phoenix at fm-arena. lol
Expand
Unrelated to testing but here's a tip when playing in Europe - start games with Cautious mentality when playing vs bigger teams and when playing away (unless you are a favorite).
Here is my season with Zenit in my journeyman save, so it's not like I had time to build up the club, I was working with what I was given - Real and PSG in the group, yet I finished first and have not lost a single game (and to be honest I should have won both the home games against them, I just went a bit too defensive in the last minutes of the game and conceded late goals). Then I've eliminated City in the 1/8, and unfortunately lost to Chelsea in 1/4 but only 1-2 on aggregate. This is all using ZaZ Blue 3.0, just starting the games on Cautious when I'm the underdog.
THEORY TO MAKE TACTIC TESTING MORE ACCURATE
I am a big fan of fm series and i've been using websites like fmarena/fmbase/knaps tactic tesing etc. a lot and i realized that most of the tactic testers are not accurate.
To give an example fmarena test their tactics based on 2 teams with 160 CA but Team A has higher reputation to imitate top team and Team B with lower reputation to imitate underdog side.
1* My opinions about that is I do think that team A can actually imitate top team because of having both good players and high reputation, but in the other hand I feel like Team B is taking advantage of the simulation by implementing underdog. I think that with lower reputation it makes opposition top team to play more aggresive and left spaces behind while actually defending almost perfect for having good players and also can take advantage of the spaces left behind the defenders.
But when you look at actual gameplay on fm this style only implements for underdog teams of the top 5 league where they have already good players.
2* There are also tacitcs like void v2 (https://fm-arena.com/tactic/959-void-ver-2-0/) with a great score but when you try this tactic with teams like az alkmar, Galatasaray, Olympiacos they never give results the same way because its a complicated tactic so even if you are a subtop team of your leage with worse players than premier league the tactic will not going to work out.
OTHER TACTIC TESTING LEAGUES.
The other 3 tactic testing leagues that i know are
fmbase (https://fm-base.co.uk/)
knap (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1hGvdjZyrowqiMrDh9_GjVxEOpQ1AsuUk-LvwdrAIJX4/edit#gid=1791530191)
Tactic Testing Hub (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1BNGRUGi-I2ZYlwYbTl148UwDAGlH__a5QGlEYjKlENU/edit#gid=1745184850)
they test the tactics almost the same way where they usually pick top/mid/underdog teams from the premier league.
To give an example (https://beta.fm-base.co.uk/fm2021_40/tactic/4114-mornon-strikerless-528447-3142)
this tactic from fmbase has the highest score for a top team. But when i plug this tactic to top teams of non top5 league its most likely to fail the test.
and same for the underdog tactics where they are testing with underdog team of premier league. Thıs way you kinda bug the simulation because you already have good players.
When you check knaps tactic testing table the tactic with the highest top team tactic is a tactic that also requaring lots of good players so when you try that tactic out with teams like beşiktaş you will fail but it will work wonderfully with teams like leverkusen/wolfsburg because they have better players.
RESULTS AND POTENTIAL IMPROVEMENTS.
As result i came to the conclusion these types of test are not very accurate and my suggestions about creating more accurate test league are;
1* Keeping the fmarena testing league as it is but adding 4 other teams with both higher and lower CA/Reputation
To give an example is
TEAM A CA:190 REP: 10000
TEAM B CA:175 REP: 9000
TEAM C CA:150 REP: 7000
TEAM D CA:135 REP: 5000
TEAM E CA:110 REP: 3000
TEAM F CA:90 REP: 1000
and fill up the league with teams that has CA from 190 to 90 so we can see how can they do not only against elite teams but with the underdog teams too.
this way i feel like the underdog teams can show ingenuity of the tactics with bad players. And you can make a tactic testing results log as a results from team a-b-c-d-e-f so people can choose if they want a top team tactic or underdog tactic.
(these numbers are totally random. I wrote them just to give an idea)
2* My second tought is to create 3 leagues with the CA's of
180-145
145-110
110-80
So after having 3 leagues in total we can choose 3 teams (top/mid/underdog) and we can be able to test the tactic both the good players and the bad players. Thıs will give us a more accurate results in tactic table. This way we can see that The top team tactics are only for elite teams or the top teams of the league in general.
If you made up this far thank you for reading it. These are all my ideas about the tactic testing systems. If there is anything you want to criticise or add to make the ideas better put your toughts in comments.
Thanks
Kerem tp said: To give an example fmarena test their tactics based on 2 teams with 160 CA but Team A has higher reputation to imitate top team and Team B with lower reputation to imitate underdog side.
I don't think that's correct, according to the post about the testing league:
Alexander said: - Underdog Team(low rep) and Favorite Team(high rep) are gone. Now all teams in the league have the same reputation, we find this would be more appropriate because all teams in the league are about the same in quality.
- There are 2 teams in the league under our control (Team A and Team B), there's no difference between them and we did that just to double the number of matches we test per one run.
You can download the saves after testing as well - all the teams in the league have 4 star reputation. Also not all the players have 160CA, for example: Central Defenders have 160 CA, DMs/CMs have 169 CA while Wingers/AMCs/Strikers have 188CA (for the testing teams, from what I've checked AI teams don't have those types of players that can play all those positions at once so they have a little lower CA). That doesn't necessarily mean that the teams have better attacking players than defenders - just being able to play in more than position requires more CA as far as I'm aware.
That means that all the teams in the league are basically identical which allows to test only the quality of the tactic - not quality of the players.
You could say that it only tests tactics for elite teams but I don't think that's necessarily true - player attributes in FM are relative - player on a field that has 11 pace while opponents have 8 pace should behave the same on the pitch as a player that has 16 pace against opponents with 13 pace.
Kerem tp said: To give an example fmarena test their tactics based on 2 teams with 160 CA but Team A has higher reputation to imitate top team and Team B with lower reputation to imitate underdog side
That was changed long time ago. In the latest version of fm-arena.com there's no difference between Team A and Team B.
I would rather just remove the best and worst result for each team and compute data using the four middle results, to discard outliers. Other than that, the method seems fine in isolating the tactic effect on the result.
About adding teams, the more teams you add, the more meaningless the tests become, since you will have the tactic facing itself more often, which doesn't add much to the table.
Kerem tp said: 2* There are also tacitcs like void v2 (https://fm-arena.com/tactic/959-void-ver-2-0/) with a great score but when you try this tactic with teams like az alkmar, Galatasaray, Olympiacos they never give results the same way because its a complicated tactic so even if you are a subtop team of your leage with worse players than premier league the tactic will not going to work out.
It isn't supposed to give the same result with different teams and expecting something like that would be quiet stupid.
A high score in the testing indicates a high efficiency which means you will do much better than your media prediction with any team.
You really should read this - https://fm-arena.com/thread/1076-my-tactic-doesn-t-work-help-me-please/
Egraam said: You can download the saves after testing as well - all the teams in the league have 4 star reputation. Also not all the players have 160CA, for example: Central Defenders have 160 CA, DMs/CMs have 169 CA while Wingers/AMCs/Strikers have 188CA (for the testing teams, from what I've checked AI teams don't have those types of players that can play all those positions at once so they have a little lower CA). That doesn't necessarily mean that the teams have better attacking players than defenders - just being able to play in more than position requires more CA as far as I'm aware.
Exactly, CA numbers is quite meaningless because the playing rating at the positions also costs CA and different attributes have different importance in the ME so two players might have the same CA but one of them can be much more efficient than other and this table proves that - https://fm-arena.com/table/9-important-attributes/
Kerem tp said: THEORY TO MAKE TACTIC TESTING MORE ACCURATE
I am a big fan of fm series and i've been using websites like fmarena/fmbase/knaps tactic tesing etc. a lot and i realized that most of the tactic testers are not accurate.
To give an example fmarena test their tactics based on 2 teams with 160 CA but Team A has higher reputation to imitate top team and Team B with lower reputation to imitate underdog side.
1* My opinions about that is I do think that team A can actually imitate top team because of having both good players and high reputation, but in the other hand I feel like Team B is taking advantage of the simulation by implementing underdog. I think that with lower reputation it makes opposition top team to play more aggresive and left spaces behind while actually defending almost perfect for having good players and also can take advantage of the spaces left behind the defenders.
But when you look at actual gameplay on fm this style only implements for underdog teams of the top 5 league where they have already good players.
2* There are also tacitcs like void v2 (https://fm-arena.com/tactic/959-void-ver-2-0/) with a great score but when you try this tactic with teams like az alkmar, Galatasaray, Olympiacos they never give results the same way because its a complicated tactic so even if you are a subtop team of your leage with worse players than premier league the tactic will not going to work out.
OTHER TACTIC TESTING LEAGUES.
The other 3 tactic testing leagues that i know are
fmbase (https://fm-base.co.uk/)
knap (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1hGvdjZyrowqiMrDh9_GjVxEOpQ1AsuUk-LvwdrAIJX4/edit#gid=1791530191)
Tactic Testing Hub (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1BNGRUGi-I2ZYlwYbTl148UwDAGlH__a5QGlEYjKlENU/edit#gid=1745184850)
they test the tactics almost the same way where they usually pick top/mid/underdog teams from the premier league.
To give an example (https://beta.fm-base.co.uk/fm2021_40/tactic/4114-mornon-strikerless-528447-3142)
this tactic from fmbase has the highest score for a top team. But when i plug this tactic to top teams of non top5 league its most likely to fail the test.
and same for the underdog tactics where they are testing with underdog team of premier league. Thıs way you kinda bug the simulation because you already have good players.
When you check knaps tactic testing table the tactic with the highest top team tactic is a tactic that also requaring lots of good players so when you try that tactic out with teams like beşiktaş you will fail but it will work wonderfully with teams like leverkusen/wolfsburg because they have better players.
RESULTS AND POTENTIAL IMPROVEMENTS.
As result i came to the conclusion these types of test are not very accurate and my suggestions about creating more accurate test league are;
1* Keeping the fmarena testing league as it is but adding 4 other teams with both higher and lower CA/Reputation
To give an example is
TEAM A CA:190 REP: 10000
TEAM B CA:175 REP: 9000
TEAM C CA:150 REP: 7000
TEAM D CA:135 REP: 5000
TEAM E CA:110 REP: 3000
TEAM F CA:90 REP: 1000
and fill up the league with teams that has CA from 190 to 90 so we can see how can they do not only against elite teams but with the underdog teams too.
this way i feel like the underdog teams can show ingenuity of the tactics with bad players. And you can make a tactic testing results log as a results from team a-b-c-d-e-f so people can choose if they want a top team tactic or underdog tactic.
(these numbers are totally random. I wrote them just to give an idea)
2* My second tought is to create 3 leagues with the CA's of
180-145
145-110
110-80
So after having 3 leagues in total we can choose 3 teams (top/mid/underdog) and we can be able to test the tactic both the good players and the bad players. Thıs will give us a more accurate results in tactic table. This way we can see that The top team tactics are only for elite teams or the top teams of the league in general.
If you made up this far thank you for reading it. These are all my ideas about the tactic testing systems. If there is anything you want to criticise or add to make the ideas better put your toughts in comments.
Thanks
That's a good idea
I use Zaz blue3.0 , my kids dominate in league but can't get a win in Europa.
I want to see fm-arena test with team low rep low ca like you said.
but im not sure i cant get a good tactic from knap/fmbase test league but i can get the best tactic
like zazblue/phoenix at fm-arena. lol
Egraam said: You could say that it only tests tactics for elite teams but I don't think that's necessarily true - player attributes in FM are relative - player on a field that has 11 pace while opponents have 8 pace should behave the same on the pitch as a player that has 16 pace against opponents with 13 pace.
Thank you for the CA-REP information.
yes indeed but i think there is a difference between being an underdog team in prem where you have average passing of 12-14 and being an underdog team of polish league where average passng is 7-10.
I feel like its pushing players to play more direct since you have less talendted team.
Same thing for some tactics too. These tactics are played in perfect conditions where you have both good players and good repuatiton. But if you start a career in non top5 league team it will take around 5-7 seasons to build that type of team. So if you want to be competitive in UCL it will need lots of work. What i am trying to achieve with this topic is to see what these tactics are capable of in different situations and to have more detailed information about if the tactics are designed to fight as an underdog. Because if you look at knaps tactic result both the highest rated and the lowest rated tactic finished top of the table since its an elite team.
irapbot said: That's a good idea
I use Zaz blue3.0 , my kids dominate in league but can't get a win in Europa.
I want to see fm-arena test with team low rep low ca like you said.
but im not sure i cant get a good tactic from knap/fmbase test league but i can get the best tactic
like zazblue/phoenix at fm-arena. lol
Yess. I was thinking the same. Most of these high rated tactics good if you are mid/subtop/top team in your league. But when you join international competitions the tactics are not underdog favoruted. The only way to get good results with these tactics in europe is to build your team. What i am trying to achieve with this topic is to see how the tactics will handle different situations.So we can have a more detailed information for different types of teams
irapbot said: That's a good idea
I use Zaz blue3.0 , my kids dominate in league but can't get a win in Europa.
I want to see fm-arena test with team low rep low ca like you said.
but im not sure i cant get a good tactic from knap/fmbase test league but i can get the best tactic
like zazblue/phoenix at fm-arena. lol
Unrelated to testing but here's a tip when playing in Europe - start games with Cautious mentality when playing vs bigger teams and when playing away (unless you are a favorite).
Here is my season with Zenit in my journeyman save, so it's not like I had time to build up the club, I was working with what I was given - Real and PSG in the group, yet I finished first and have not lost a single game (and to be honest I should have won both the home games against them, I just went a bit too defensive in the last minutes of the game and conceded late goals). Then I've eliminated City in the 1/8, and unfortunately lost to Chelsea in 1/4 but only 1-2 on aggregate. This is all using ZaZ Blue 3.0, just starting the games on Cautious when I'm the underdog.