Delicious said: Focus flanks+underlaps

Underlaps work on volante?
Only change was moving the striker?
DawidFM said: this test only shows that it is not worth throwing tactics on this site. this tactic was created as a copy-paste with two roles changed to convince yourself of the credibility of this site. the original tactic is in 1st place(@chef  and this one loses 15 points to it. Weird but this is my last tactic that i uploaded on this website. there's no point in spending time creating and testing tactics that are monsters in the game but have some weird results here on the forum.

Tbf you don't need an amazing tactic to get 95 points with Man City. What other teams did you test with?
Lapidus said: I guess the easiest and simplest way to find out it is watching few matches in 3D :)

I have watched a good part in 2D and can't see that it triggers very often or at all. Tactics with WCBs tend to have WBs, and the WBs never wait for the WCB to underlapp or overlapp, despite not being on attacking mentality. They WCBs still come more forward than a normal CB, but are rarely used to play One-Twos.
Have anyone done any testing or have valuable experience to how underlapping and overlapping on WCBs work? Their role description says the following:

What decides if they want to underlapp or overlapp, since the description says they can do both, and how frequent?
What a name lol
Droid said: Just to be clear here, if you read this -

then you learn that the decision about whether to test a tactic or not is based on the tactic representation which must consist of a description and screenshots to backup your tactic.

When you put "." or "description" or "oohhh there's nothing to say" as the description then it looks quite disrespectful and in this case don't be surprised to see your tactics being ignored.

Of course, it's up to you to decide what to do... I'm just saying...

Point taken.
Droid said: If follow your logic then there's also no point in testing a tactic until it offers something very different from whats already here.

If you don't believe your tactic brings anything new and you don't believe it's capable of moving the progress forward then what's the point in offering it for the testing? :blink:

You are not following my logic. I'm writing about reasons for writing a description, you are writing about reasons for testing. The two are different obviously, as small changes can have an impact on the results. I respect the rules so I've added what I wrote earlier to the description as you requested. Having tactics tested is a great service so I don't mean to be disrespectful.
Droid said: Then please put that in the description.

Or if there's nothing special in your tactic then what is the point in testing it? :)

Because tbf most of the tactics posted here are just the same tactic with a few tweaks so it just seems superfluous to write anything unless you create something very different from whats already here.
Droid said: I don't find any? :)

Not much to say, more or less the same instructions as everyone else has, just with attacking mentality double AP and WCB
3322 formation with double AP, double WCB and attacking mentality. Otherwise standard
Damn, surprised that made such a difference
Rrred said: When we upload a strikerless tactic with DWs, IWBs and variations of 3x SS, 3x AM and everything in between (SS,AM,SS etc.) to be tested, which players are selected for the "front 3" roles? The faster (15) or the slower (13) suitable players?

Wide players (15), striker (15), AM (13)
BulldozerJokic said: @TommyToxic Your tactic scored 55 points and +7 goal difference with just one player being 15/15 for pace/acceleration, I think it means something :D

Thanks, it workes well for me when I test it on holiday, but I don't think tactics with multiple AMs are gonna skyrocket if their attributes change. It might have a slight positive impact. The DM/CM/AM is still a solid player even if it's more well rounded than AMs people use in normal saves.
kjordafen said: I agree with you that this is how it normally is, but many people can develop and find fast attaching midfields for example. Then, tactics involving attaching midfields may actually perform better than these 3 striker formations.

What are the pace and accelation for attaching midfields in these tests? If these are below 15 I think the test is somewhat unrealistic. In most fm-saves you could easily buy/find/use players with  15 pace and accelaration. If you are in any top 5 league you can find it straight away, and in most second tier leagues you will easily be capable of that in a season or two.

Could someone upload pics of the attributes? :)

This is what a Striker/winger, and DM/CM/AM look like in the save. There are two striker only players in the save teams also but they have the same attributes as the wingers.
Zippo said: The Match Engine don't use CA to calculate the result of matches so CA is irrelevant in that terms.

The Match Engine uses the actual attributes to calculate the result of matches.

For example,

The striker above has 140CA

140CA Player

But if we give him additional playing positions such as AMCL/AMCR/AMC/ML/MR/MC then his CA will increase from 140CA to 164CA

164CA Player

As you can see the player still has the same attributes but his CA has significantly increased from 140CA to 164CA but in matches his efficiency hasn't changed because his attributes haven't changed. In other word, he won't play better having 164CA instead of 140CA when the actual attributes haven't changed.

So only by looking at the CA you can't say that one player is better than other, also, the attributes have a different CA cost for different positions. For example, in general the attributes cost much less CA for central defenders than for any other positions so you can't compare players only by looking at their CA. In other words, in the actual game in general Central Defenders tend to have lower CA comparing to Striker but it doesn't make them less efficient in matches than Strikers. it's just that for a Central Defender the attributes are "cheaper" in terms of CA than for any other position.

Our tactic testing leagues is designed to represent the actual game and not some "fantasy" custom football world.

Here're some facts from the actual game:

- in the actual game Central Defenders tend to have a very low "Finishing" attribute, it isn't higher than "6-7" so if in your tactic testing league you set the Finishing attribute of your Central Defenders higher than that, for example, you give them "16" Finishing then your tactic testing league will be represent the actual game very poorly.

- in the actual game Central Defenders tend to have a very low "Dribbling" attribute, it isn't higher than "8-9" so if in your tactic testing league you set the Dribbling attribute of your Central Defenders higher than that, for example, you give them "16" Dribbling attribute then your tactic testing league will be represent the actual game very poorly.

- Winger/Inside Forward/Full Backs/Strikers tend to be faster than other positions in the actual game so that's why in our tactic testing league Winger/Inside Forward/Strikers are faster than other positions.

and so on...

I hope this helps.


Well explained as always, brings a lot of clarity to the topic.

Do you think the CBs in the test save are suitable to play in a 3ATB system? I know CBs in general have low dribbling, but I think when FM players play 3ATB they prioritize attributes differently on wide CBs than in a traditional 4ATB tactic.

Wide center backs go more forward and also have to cover space out wide so having slightly higher dribbling and pace is normal, and maybe a bit less strength/jumping reach to compensate. Something like Ben White or Tomiyasu.

Is it sensible to include a second type of CB (wide CB) in the test save teams, or does that make testing more difficult without necessarily making it better for testing?

Same goes for AMs as they are very well rounded players in the test save, but in normal FM games they are usually much more attacking players similar to inside forwards or false nines.
Changes from previous submitted tactic with 55 rating:
- WB now on stay narrow
- Higher def line
- Step up added, Drop off removed.
- Volante from support to attack
Floppyaams said: how do people find suitable left and right midfielders for these formations? i  think really good players in these positions are very rare.

Also curious but how much does corners contribute to these tactics. I remember corner being broken in fm 20 and 21

I think you can just use any good winger/inverted winger.
Attack and pray to lord Zouma
Testing a new formation.