Yes they nerfed it somewhat. Although if you have a dominant player in the air (CB or ST) it's still pretty good, just not broken ... until someone finds a new broken routine
Honestly mine is still scoring, probably same or even more than before. Capitalising on every mistake the defenders make.
The type of goals he scores have changed, more low to midheight crosses that end with a successful shot on target, more scrappy balls inside the area that he can pounce on, deflections etc.
CMs tend to get in better positions now and are more effective. Their build up play also looks better.
Overall still an exciting as effective tactic to use, but I would like it a bit closer to some other formations. Perhaps with some tweaks it can get there.
I'm more placing this idea out there than actually testing
As far as specifically individual role attributes go I don't notice much change, however the progress graphs look good and I get more inbox messages of good training progress than I used to. For whatever that counts. Like I said could be only dumb luck.
I've been experimenting with taking your base training and rest settings and changing attacking sessions into chance creation and conversion, and defensive into aerial and ground defence. Main idea was basically to have every session (other than physical) work on individual roles, just to see if it actually does anything.
Only done like 1 season with the new schedule, results seem quite decent. Hard to evaluate without more rigorous testing, but lets say I'll be sticking to it for now. It's equally possible something just clicked, or I have players that progress better and the original training would have worked just as well if not better.
I think you guys are getting confused. There are personal instructions and there are positional instructions. You aren't implementing anything by changing that, you are merely swapping views between personal and positional instructions. Both still apply.
"There's a lot of factors that come in to play e.g. movement speed of players, bravery, strength, body position. It's rare that two players with the same jumping reach will be differentiated by their height since its extremely unlikely that these other factors are also going to all be the same. Personally I just look at jumping reach when judging players, never really check the height since it's factored in."
That's the only post I've found from an actual SI guy
Height doesn't matter in terms of aerial ability. 170 cm with 15 jumping reach is just as good as 190 cm with 15. However obviously taller players will tend to have those attributes higher.
It might influence player development slightly, taller getting slightly more progress into aerial ability and smaller into speed. But I've not seen definitive tests.
I just do it every sunday when I get training for next 2 weeks in the inbox, can fix everything there in a few seconds.
Only thing that really annoys me (and this has nothing to do with the schedule) is that if the match is played on sunday the game will override whatever training is planned for monday with recovery, so I have to manually fix that.
Been using your training schedule for pretty much whole FM23 cycle. It's so easy to use no matter what the match schedule is and results are good both in terms of progression and match results, helps when players are well rested for matches. The most "1 click per week and forget about it" schedule I've seen
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.
Have we even see much testing on strikerless since update? Some people say it's much stronger now.
The type of goals he scores have changed, more low to midheight crosses that end with a successful shot on target, more scrappy balls inside the area that he can pounce on, deflections etc.
CMs tend to get in better positions now and are more effective. Their build up play also looks better.
Overall still an exciting as effective tactic to use, but I would like it a bit closer to some other formations. Perhaps with some tweaks it can get there.
As far as specifically individual role attributes go I don't notice much change, however the progress graphs look good and I get more inbox messages of good training progress than I used to. For whatever that counts. Like I said could be only dumb luck.
Only done like 1 season with the new schedule, results seem quite decent. Hard to evaluate without more rigorous testing, but lets say I'll be sticking to it for now. It's equally possible something just clicked, or I have players that progress better and the original training would have worked just as well if not better.
That's the only post I've found from an actual SI guy
It might influence player development slightly, taller getting slightly more progress into aerial ability and smaller into speed. But I've not seen definitive tests.
Only thing that really annoys me (and this has nothing to do with the schedule) is that if the match is played on sunday the game will override whatever training is planned for monday with recovery, so I have to manually fix that.
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.