Might be a good test to try now that we have some of these broken corner routines. Since it's scoring like 20+ goals per season we should be able to pick up the signal even in the raw goals per season data.
I like having a good set piece taker, but it's not something I'm focusing on. Usually one of the midfielders I pick up for other reasons has good enough attributes. I wouldn't sacrifice more than maybe half a star of ability to keep such a player on the field.
Especially for free kicks I'm not too sure how much it matters. You see some absolutely ridiculous goals from below average takers, and my 17 FK, 17 long shots, 15 technique guy hits only posts. For corners I do think it matters, but shouldn't really need 18+, depending on the level 13+ should be good, maybe above 15 for top clubs.
It's possible that a bit different type of striker is more effective than in other systems. From the limited time playing this tactic it feels aerial ability is quite important along with off the ball, anticipation with a touch of acceleration.
The "typical" 16 pace, 16 acc with 5 jumping reach AF is maybe not cutting it as there aren't as many situations where pure speed is the key factor. Such a player could actually be better off on the wing.
It's quite possible it doesn't make any difference how many players are in the wall. Not like there are a bunch of free kicks hitting or going through the wall, not on highlights at least.
Trying out this tactic a bit. Performs very well, plenty of goals, defensively solid.
One question. What's the idea with just 1 guy in the wall defending free kicks? Even direct ones. Conceded only 1 goal in a full season from it, but it kind of looks silly. Is it possible that it just works?
BWM is the new volante? In more seriousness, I haven't followed the testing all the time, have there been any tests with other DM roles, like anchor especially in 1 DM systems? Or is that just a strictly worse version of BWM.
Just play what you like. 4132 is fine even with underdogs. Obviously you'll get absolutely destroyed occasionally, but overall it does pretty well. I'd say it's far more important to grab some wins especially versus direct competitors rather than steal a draw against top half teams every now and then with more defensive play or lose only 2-0 instead of 5-0. I've done back to back promotions as the worst team in the league with one of the Poirer variations, which is about as attacking as you can get. You'd be surprised how often you catch better teams underestimating you or having a bad day.
In fact I'd even go a step further that the "safer" tactics are more important in cup competitions (including champions league) when you don't have multiple chances to fix things like in the league.
So I thought I'd ask you guys for some opinions or tips. The issue is basically how to develop decent enough club grown players.
Let me paint the typical picture. I bring a club from lower leagues into top division. Within a couple of years I start qualifying for european competitions which have quite strict registration rules, specifically 4 players grown at club. Usually I have no one of the required quality within the club at that point, youth intake is bad enough to produce nothing of sorts, so I have to "create" them.
I can buy a bunch of 18 year old prospects that will become club grown in time, but the issue is how can I aid their development. Can't buy a player younger than 18 generally which means they'll have to stay at the club the whole time.
So now I have a few lets say 2 star CA, 5 star potential players that I want to become club grown. But I also want them to develop. I can give them maybe 3 starts and 5 sub appearances per season, that's not enough. Loaning them out is not an option or they lose their chance to become club grown. Reserve team is either non existant or plays only friendlies and U19 can only cover for a year.
What do I do? Sacrifice their development and keep them at club, rotate them in when possible? Give up on their HG status and just register a couple of players less? Perhaps get some mid talent club grown and loan out the absolute top talents? I'm really interested how you guys tackle this problem.
Delicious said: So you getting hard life because of thrown-in? What kind of setup you using? BTW this can be fixed, that's a good feedback Ty! Expand
I can't remember exactly because I changed them when I conceded a few goals like that. A few of those routines with 2 CBs in opposition box and like 4 players near the throw in taker to supposedly cross. What happened was either the cross got headed away with a quick counter following or the crosser already lost the ball with same effect. Not that it happened every game, but chances given were very high quality and I felt using the routine was harmful overall.
Delicious said: i am testing those set pieces since like 10 test ago.. I don't think they make that huge difference in test, but we will see Expand
Most issues I generally have with imported set pieces are attacking throw ins. When you lose the ball and get hit by a counter attack because everyone is way out of position. Not sure how much that is tinkered with.
As far as corners go it made a huge difference for me when I added both near post and far post routines on both sides. Just near post scored maybe 5 per season, when I added far post the number went up to 15, most are still scored from near post like 10 vs 5 or so. It's as if variety is more effective than sticking to "the best" routine over and over. Could be just anecdotal, I've played quite a bit with both option but obviously nowhere near the testing levels.
Poacher said: Nahh, I don't think it's about the consistency roll.
I've seen many times how 2-3 players had 5.8-6.0 ratings in the 1st half and then 7.5-8.0 ratings in the 2nd half.
It's just players might have a very bad RNG for their actions in the 1st half but in the 2nd half they might a very good RNG for their actions.
We all know even with a very good tactic sometime you can hit a bad run ( few loses/draws in a row ) but we don't change our tactic after that because we know it's good and it was just bad luck that happens. The same goes for the players in a match, they might have periods when they have bad RNG for their action but it won't last forever and as I said if a player did poorly in 1st half then he might do great in the 2nd half and subbing him you just take away his opportunity for a good RNG.
That's my philosophy. Expand
8 times out of 10 the player that had a bad 1st half won't be that much better in 2nd. Even though I agree ratings can be kind of a joke sometimes.
In general I sub 1-3 players around 60 mins and then all the rest until 70th minute. Players don't get rating if they are subbed on after 75th and I think it's the same for expected playing time.
I don't save any for cases of injuries unless it's an important cup game or last couple of league games. I've played at least 10 seasons so far, the number of times I lost a player due to injury is 2 or 3. I do have to mention though that I'm very aggressive in keeping the guys fit. Anyone carrying an orange injury isn't selected in the team or is subbed off as soon as I notice it. I also don't play anyone that is "tired" before the game even though it shows nearly full fitness. Plus most of the subs I make are for fitness reasons - whoever is red on fitness at 60th and then 70th minute.
Especially for free kicks I'm not too sure how much it matters. You see some absolutely ridiculous goals from below average takers, and my 17 FK, 17 long shots, 15 technique guy hits only posts. For corners I do think it matters, but shouldn't really need 18+, depending on the level 13+ should be good, maybe above 15 for top clubs.
The "typical" 16 pace, 16 acc with 5 jumping reach AF is maybe not cutting it as there aren't as many situations where pure speed is the key factor. Such a player could actually be better off on the wing.
One question. What's the idea with just 1 guy in the wall defending free kicks? Even direct ones. Conceded only 1 goal in a full season from it, but it kind of looks silly. Is it possible that it just works?
In more seriousness, I haven't followed the testing all the time, have there been any tests with other DM roles, like anchor especially in 1 DM systems? Or is that just a strictly worse version of BWM.
In fact I'd even go a step further that the "safer" tactics are more important in cup competitions (including champions league) when you don't have multiple chances to fix things like in the league.
Let me paint the typical picture. I bring a club from lower leagues into top division. Within a couple of years I start qualifying for european competitions which have quite strict registration rules, specifically 4 players grown at club. Usually I have no one of the required quality within the club at that point, youth intake is bad enough to produce nothing of sorts, so I have to "create" them.
I can buy a bunch of 18 year old prospects that will become club grown in time, but the issue is how can I aid their development. Can't buy a player younger than 18 generally which means they'll have to stay at the club the whole time.
So now I have a few lets say 2 star CA, 5 star potential players that I want to become club grown. But I also want them to develop. I can give them maybe 3 starts and 5 sub appearances per season, that's not enough. Loaning them out is not an option or they lose their chance to become club grown. Reserve team is either non existant or plays only friendlies and U19 can only cover for a year.
What do I do? Sacrifice their development and keep them at club, rotate them in when possible? Give up on their HG status and just register a couple of players less? Perhaps get some mid talent club grown and loan out the absolute top talents? I'm really interested how you guys tackle this problem.
I can't remember exactly because I changed them when I conceded a few goals like that. A few of those routines with 2 CBs in opposition box and like 4 players near the throw in taker to supposedly cross. What happened was either the cross got headed away with a quick counter following or the crosser already lost the ball with same effect. Not that it happened every game, but chances given were very high quality and I felt using the routine was harmful overall.
Most issues I generally have with imported set pieces are attacking throw ins. When you lose the ball and get hit by a counter attack because everyone is way out of position. Not sure how much that is tinkered with.
As far as corners go it made a huge difference for me when I added both near post and far post routines on both sides. Just near post scored maybe 5 per season, when I added far post the number went up to 15, most are still scored from near post like 10 vs 5 or so. It's as if variety is more effective than sticking to "the best" routine over and over. Could be just anecdotal, I've played quite a bit with both option but obviously nowhere near the testing levels.
I've seen many times how 2-3 players had 5.8-6.0 ratings in the 1st half and then 7.5-8.0 ratings in the 2nd half.
It's just players might have a very bad RNG for their actions in the 1st half but in the 2nd half they might a very good RNG for their actions.
We all know even with a very good tactic sometime you can hit a bad run ( few loses/draws in a row ) but we don't change our tactic after that because we know it's good and it was just bad luck that happens. The same goes for the players in a match, they might have periods when they have bad RNG for their action but it won't last forever and as I said if a player did poorly in 1st half then he might do great in the 2nd half and subbing him you just take away his opportunity for a good RNG.
That's my philosophy.
8 times out of 10 the player that had a bad 1st half won't be that much better in 2nd. Even though I agree ratings can be kind of a joke sometimes.
I don't save any for cases of injuries unless it's an important cup game or last couple of league games. I've played at least 10 seasons so far, the number of times I lost a player due to injury is 2 or 3. I do have to mention though that I'm very aggressive in keeping the guys fit. Anyone carrying an orange injury isn't selected in the team or is subbed off as soon as I notice it. I also don't play anyone that is "tired" before the game even though it shows nearly full fitness. Plus most of the subs I make are for fitness reasons - whoever is red on fitness at 60th and then 70th minute.