ZaZ's Log

by ZaZ, Oct 23, 2021

Sane said: So, in the end, what to choose for the greatest efficiency? With two If-At and two AF-At? And what are the roles of the central midfielders?
And are you sure that the very attacking mentality is much better than the positive one in this beta?


I'll post when beta is over, because I'm still checking what works and what doesn't. It can still change a lot in the next week. If you wanna check to play yourself, then my current best is attached to this post, but I'm still trying to fix the leaky defense.

Egraam said: I'm playing on balanced with my tactic, also had more success with Attacking and Cautious than with Positive. Positive just seems not be it on this engine, at least for me.

(results with balanced)



I didn't try cautious and balanced, gonna try later. Thanks for the tip!

ZaZ - IW-At.fmf
Downloaded : 336 times
Uploaded : Oct 27, 2021
4

ZaZ said: I'll post when beta is over, because I'm still checking what works and what doesn't. It can still change a lot in the next week. If you wanna check to play yourself, then my current best is attached to this post, but I'm still trying to fix the leaky defense.



I didn't try cautious and balanced, gonna try later. Thanks for the tip!



ZaZ said: I'll post when beta is over, because I'm still checking what works and what doesn't. It can still change a lot in the next week. If you wanna check to play yourself, then my current best is attached to this post, but I'm still trying to fix the leaky defense.



I didn't try cautious and balanced, gonna try later. Thanks for the tip!


https://prnt.sc/1xhjzea

Small sample size but first 2 games were the exact same tactic on very attacking, last 2 were on balanced. I think there's atleast something there.

1

Kyle said: https://prnt.sc/1xhjzea

Small sample size but first 2 games were the exact same tactic on very attacking, last 2 were on balanced. I think there's atleast something there.


Was it the tactic posted above? I'm running test with balanced now to see how it goes.

0

ZaZ said: Was it the tactic posted above? I'm running test with balanced now to see how it goes.

Na, was modified one of a tactic from reddit. Guy had some really nice results from it but just wasn't that strong for me so I used a lot of things you've put in this post.


https://prnt.sc/1xhmgdb

1

Just finished first test with balanced. For my setup, it got around the same number of points, but lower goal difference. Gonna run a couple more times to see how it goes.

0

ZaZ said: I'll post when beta is over, because I'm still checking what works and what doesn't. It can still change a lot in the next week. If you wanna check to play yourself, then my current best is attached to this post, but I'm still trying to fix the leaky defense.



I didn't try cautious and balanced, gonna try later. Thanks for the tip!


@Eric bro can u test with tottenham :)

0

ZaZ said: Just finished first test with balanced. For my setup, it got around the same number of points, but lower goal difference. Gonna run a couple more times to see how it goes.

@ZaZ I'm assuming you aren't tracking that closely, but maybe see amount of injuries Very Attacking v Balanced/Cautious as well? Wonder how the impact is on your actual players seeing as gegenpress is nerfed this year.

0

ZaZ said: I'll post when beta is over, because I'm still checking what works and what doesn't. It can still change a lot in the next week. If you wanna check to play yourself, then my current best is attached to this post, but I'm still trying to fix the leaky defense.



I didn't try cautious and balanced, gonna try later. Thanks for the tip!


I think you should try Half Back at DM position looks very good to defend, and i am playing with other positions that look very strong. At MC you should try Advanced playmaker-ATK and AML/AMR Raumdueter looks broken they always score gols or making very good crosses.

1

saycarramrod said: @ZaZ I'm assuming you aren't tracking that closely, but maybe see amount of injuries Very Attacking v Balanced/Cautious as well? Wonder how the impact is on your actual players seeing as gegenpress is nerfed this year.

No, I'm not tracking injuries. However, if Very Attacking can get the same amount of points even with injuries, that would mean it's actually better. Right now I'm testing all mentalities to see which are good.

Cagado said: I think you should try Half Back at DM position looks very good to defend, and i am playing with other positions that look very strong. At MC you should try Advanced playmaker-ATK and AML/AMR Raumdueter looks broken they always score gols or making very good crosses.

I will see if I can fit that after mentalities.

0

for beta.. best tac for me. i tried 10-15 tac. sorry for my bad english

3

erhanknk said: for beta.. best tac for me. i tried 10-15 tac. sorry for my bad english

Thank you for testing! Keep checking here and I will add improved versions as I do more testing. I feel like it can still improve a lot.

0

Are pace and acceleration still the main attributes?

0

what do you think about player height, heading and jumping reach ? seems broken with crosses being so good

0

Cagado said: I think you should try Half Back at DM position looks very good to defend, and i am playing with other positions that look very strong. At MC you should try Advanced playmaker-ATK and AML/AMR Raumdueter looks broken they always score gols or making very good crosses.

Half Back at DM works effectively in my save game, also! Especially at the mentality of 'attacking'. RMD is better than before also.

In additon, Poacher is better than Advanced Forward, i think:)

1

Tavares82 said: Are pace and acceleration still the main attributes?

Most likely.

BiTeL33T said: what do you think about player height, heading and jumping reach ? seems broken with crosses being so good

Hard to say without testing. FM-Arena will probably do at some point.

Gaksital said: Half Back at DM works effectively in my save game, also! Especially at the mentality of 'attacking'. RMD is better than before also.

In additon, Poacher is better than Advanced Forward, i think:)


I'll test other ST roles soon. Now I am testing DM roles.

3

Gaksital said: Half Back at DM works effectively in my save game, also! Especially at the mentality of 'attacking'. RMD is better than before also.

In additon, Poacher is better than Advanced Forward, i think:)


I'm also using a Poacher in my tactic 👍 But paired with Target Forward, I don't how effective is he on his own or together with another Poacher.

2

Egraam said: I'm also using a Poacher in my tactic 👍 But paired with Target Forward, I don't how effective is he on his own or together with another Poacher.

I'm still testing the best combination for Poacher.

Only one Poacher in the position of ST seems to be more effective than two or more poachers, i think.

It seems to be quite effective when paired with Shadow striker in the position of AMC at 4-2-3-1 and 3-4-2-1.

1

Sorry for not testing everything you guys ask, my time is limited so I can only run around eight to ten configurations a day. When some configuration is promising, I often run it three or five times to see if it becomes the current best, so testing can't progress as fast as I would like. I appreciate the input, though, and try to test most things you suggest.

4

I have a question regarding first team selection. What is your strategy generally regarding player selection of 'tired' players? When a player is tired, do you put him on the bench and start his substitute (who should be around the same quality as him, maybe just a bit worse) but if his replacement gets tired during the match, you make your tired player come on in the second half, do you start your tired player anyway (for example if he is tired but 'good' or 'excellent' condition), or do you not even put him on the bench, and let him rest completely until he is match fit for the following match?

0

Alexis said: I have a question regarding first team selection. What is your strategy generally regarding player selection of 'tired' players? When a player is tired, do you put him on the bench and start his substitute (who should be around the same quality as him, maybe just a bit worse) but if his replacement gets tired during the match, you make your tired player come on in the second half, do you start your tired player anyway (for example if he is tired but 'good' or 'excellent' condition), or do you not even put him on the bench, and let him rest completely until he is match fit for the following match?

That has nothing to do with the topic, but I'll answer anyway. I usually only use players in top condition and low fatigue. If a player gets tired during match or takes a knock that lowers his condition, then I substitute him. Most of the times I do one or two subs at half time, to rest players, and save at least one sub to the 70-75 minutes mark, to avoid having trouble with injuries and playing with ten. I always do all subs every match, unless I have another match within 48h (meaning I need to save energy from reserves too).

0

OK thanks. I chose to ask here because I prefer to receive an answer from someone experienced like you than any stranger who might give me bad advice.

But when you have a tired player before a match, do you put him on the bench and then maybe make him come on during the match, or do you not select him at all? I guess my question is, do you prefer to select a 17 year old from your junior squad even if he is far from first team level, if he is fresh, or you will put on the bench a tired but first team level player?

0

Alexis said: OK thanks. I chose to ask here because I prefer to receive an answer from someone experienced like you than any stranger who might give me bad advice.

But when you have a tired player before a match, do you put him on the bench and then maybe make him come on during the match, or do you not select him at all? I guess my question is, do you prefer to select a 17 year old from your junior squad even if he is far from first team level, if he is fresh, or you will put on the bench a tired but first team level player?


If you have to bring people from junior squad, it means you are probably not rotating well enough or you didn't build your squad right. You only need two players per position to do well the entire season with good rotation, with a third option in case of injuries. If all my options were injuried except a young kid and a tired player, I would use the kid. Just to be clear, I usually don't hire youth if they have terrible attributes, so they need at least some acceleration and pace.

P.S.: There are lots of people more experienced than me here, so it's good to open a thread asking everyone instead. I just happened to test enough variations of tactics and be lucky to get the most effective of FM21 in this page.

2

hey man, where u able to improve your best more? i've been doing some testing and half back seems pretty good

0

BiTeL33T said: hey man, where u able to improve your best more? i've been doing some testing and half back seems pretty good

Try this. TF-At is showing lots of potential, it seems better than AF-At. I have yet to test other attacking roles, then I will try mixing roles like TF-At + P-At.

P.S.: If anyone can test and post results, I would be grateful, specially if you can tell how it compares to other tactics you tested before.

ZaZ - Test.fmf
Downloaded : 397 times
Uploaded : Oct 29, 2021
3

My first suggestion for anyone doing tactics is to use TF-At, they seem to do better than any other role. I also tried most interesting combinations and none is better than two TF-At. I have yet to try three strikers or one striker, but I don't think it will be much different.

3

ZaZ said: My first suggestion for anyone doing tactics is to use TF-At, they seem to do better than any other role. I also tried most interesting combinations and none is better than two TF-At. I have yet to try three strikers or one striker, but I don't think it will be much different.

Thank you:) your suggestions may help many users to make great tactics, even though match-engines will change.

Plus, I felt that the influence of PIs is greater than before. so, "Shoot less often" to players in attacking area doesn't seem to be effective in this match-engine.

1

ZaZ said: My first suggestion for anyone doing tactics is to use TF-At, they seem to do better than any other role. I also tried most interesting combinations and none is better than two TF-At. I have yet to try three strikers or one striker, but I don't think it will be much different.

Thanks @ZaZ for all the testing and feedback!

As a fan of target man role I'm encouraged by your findings, have you tried a TF-Su + TF-At combo? Personally I've had decent success with various striker roles as long as the strikers were tall and good in the air - lots of goals from headers.

Would you suggest using big, tall strikers as TF-At or any type of striker should do?

Thanks

0

Target Person said: Thanks @ZaZ for all the testing and feedback!

As a fan of target man role I'm encouraged by your findings, have you tried a TF-Su + TF-At combo? Personally I've had decent success with various striker roles as long as the strikers were tall and good in the air - lots of goals from headers.

Would you suggest using big, tall strikers as TF-At or any type of striker should do?

Thanks


If the match engine follows the same thing as last year, which it does seem so, the taller and heavier a player is in each position is only a positive. Taller is always better than smaller, heavier is always better than lighter, faster is always better than slower. It doesn't matter whether the role highlights these, they'll perform better with them attributes higher.

0

Kyle said: If the match engine follows the same thing as last year, which it does seem so, the taller and heavier a player is in each position is only a positive. Taller is always better than smaller, heavier is always better than lighter, faster is always better than slower. It doesn't matter whether the role highlights these, they'll perform better with them attributes higher.

Yeah, what I meant is compared to previous versions I'm finding more success with tall, relatively slow strikers (Pace & Acc. 10-12) scoring from headers, which for example weren't particularly effective in FM 21 where pacey SS/AF types were kings.

As for TF role it has specific ball magnet effect and traditionally tends to attract more long balls so was wondering if height/jumping reach had any noticeable impact on their performances in ZaZ's tests.

0

So how should the ideal TF be?
170-180cm tall, bad jumping (7-11), amazing speed (+18)
+190cm tall, avg jumping & speed (15-16)

In year, when choosing a TF, should our main criterion be height or speed?

0
Create an account or log in to leave a comment