Zippo
giannis the greek said: Sorry but...why my tactic looks 4-4-2 ? Maybe you did test another tactic?

Hi,

It should show a correct formation now.
Ferni said: test please test

Hi,

It looks like you uploaded a wrong tactic because the screenshot shows a different tactic.

The V2 you uploaded is the same as V1 which has been tested - https://fm-arena.com/tactic/906-4-4-1-1-dm-lwb-supportive/
@Dimartino, hi.

Please, add screenshots of the tactic.

Thank you.
Egraam said: Should I create a new thread for this tactic and delete it from here, or keep it here?

Sure, feel free to start a new thread for the tactic.
Egraam said: I don't know why but I'm not able to start a new thread, the website just refreshes when I try to make one.

Thanks for the notice.

The issue should be fixed now.
@Zomba, hi.

Please, add screenshots of the tactic.

Thank you.
@risky, hi.

Please, add some results with the tactic.

Thank you.
@Panneton0, hi.

Please, add screenshots of the tactic and some results with it.

Thank you.
Mark said: regardless of their role ratings

The role rating and the position rating are different things and they should not be mixed.

The role rating is a quite irrelevant thing and can be safely ignored.


Mark said: That means that if you have a player with much higher stats for those 4 attributes than the league average, you could play them anywhere in attack.

I don't know maybe you can play your players anywhere in attack only if you are Barca and only when you play vs amateurs otherwise I don't think it would be a smart thing to do. For example, when we test ZaZ - Blue 3.0 with 'Ineffectual' position rating instead 'Natural' position rating for all positions then the PPG drop from 2.1 to 1.2, which means the rating drops from 7.2 to 4.0.
Prutton said: In other words, faster is better.

ta2199 said: So to conclude: Attributes > Position familarity ?

A 1% increase in 'Acceleration' increases the effectiveness of a player by about 2.1%.

If the attributes of two players are the same, except the Acceleration attribute and the 'Acceleration' attribute of the first player is '16' and the have the Acceleration attribute of the second player is '12' then the first player should be about 25% more effective than the second player.

If the first player is a 'Competent' AMC and the second player is a 'Natural' AMC then the first player should be about 12% more effective AMC.

But if the first player is an 'Ineffectual' AMC then the second player should be about 15% more effective AMC.
@kkaidy, hi.

Please, give the tactic a more appropriate name.

Also, could you add screenshots of the tactic and some results with it.

Thank you.
Mark said: So a Striker who is unconvincing in the AM C position, but who is 20% better on their important attributes (Pace, Acc, Agility and Dribbling) will be as good if not better than a Natural AM C

According to this table - https://fm-arena.com/table/9-important-attributes/

If we reduce the 'Acceleration' attribute of a player by about 18.75% then it'll reduce his effectiveness by about 20%.

If we reduce the 'Acceleration' and 'Pace' attributes of a player by about 18.75% then it'll reduce his effectiveness by about 40%.

If we reduce the 'Acceleration', 'Pace' and 'Agility' attributes of a player by about 18.75% then it'll reduce his effectiveness by about 55%.

If we reduce the 'Acceleration', 'Pace', 'Agility' and 'Dribbling' attributes of a player by about 18.75% then it'll reduce his effectiveness by about 67%.

and so on...
Hey guys,

I'm sure many of you, including me, have wondered many times how much worse a player plays at a position if he doesn't have the highest( 'Natural' ) rating for it so to answer this question we've done some tests.

Please note, testing the position rating is a quite complicated task due to many factors so the numbers below aren't exact but quite accurate.



'Natural' rating is the highest position rating. If a player has 'Natural' rating for a position then he plays at full of his ability without any penalty.





'Accomplished' rating is about 7.5% less effective than 'Natural' rating.




'Competent' rating is about 12% less effective than 'Natural' rating.




'Unconvincing' rating is about 19% less effective than 'Natural' rating.




'Awkward' rating is about 35% less effective than 'Natural' rating.




'Ineffectual' rating is about 40% less effective than 'Natural' rating.

Prutton said: Is it possible to test another thing? I always wanted to know if it's better to have DCL with right or left foot, as well as DCR. Same for AMCL and AMCR. I mean, everyone only cares about feet from wingers, but what is better for those central positions with two players?

We've tested that and I can say that it's better to have a left footed player for DCL and a right footed player for DCR and the same for AMCL and AMCR but sadly, I can't give any numbers.
Prutton said: It would be nice to have "untrained", since we already have accomplished. I believe that's what people would like to know the most, what is the impact of directly lining up a ST as AMC.

If you're talking about the 'Ineffectual' rating then sure, we'll test it too.
Grimlock said: I don't know maybe FM-Arena will test more different position ratings at some point. For example, what's the difference between "Competent" position rating and "Natural" position rating.

That's a good idea. We're working on it.
A very good discussion here, guys. I'll pin this thread. :thup:
That's a very good post, @Lapidus. It deserves to be pinned. :thup:
@goodskillman, hi.

You forgot to upload the tactic.
@LSPlaysFM, hi.

I've fixed your post.

If you want to insert an attachment somewhere in your post then just click the 'Insert' button and that's all. :)