Zippo said: The purpose of fm-arena tactic testing is not to create competition between tactic creators, the purpose is to help people to find the most effective to play FM and try to reveal how FM work under the hood.
I also want to add that at the moment we find the accuracy of fm-arena tactics is already excessively high and something much more less accurate would work just fine to play FM.
I mean an accuracy of +/- 5 pts or even -/+ 10 pts would be enough already and gave people a massive edge over AI managers in the game. We really don't need an accuracy like +/- 1 or 2 pts or even 0.1, 0.2, 0.3 pts. Expand
I appreciate that and like I said it wasn't meant to come across as being disrespectful
At this moment the highest score is 63.2 pts(the 1st place) so to be tested for more than 4800 matches (up to 9600 matches) a tactic must score higher than 63.2 pts after 4800 matches and keep getting a score above 63.2 after every additional test until it reaches 9600 matches.
I hope it helps.
Cheers. Expand
I don't mean no disrespect to you or the creators of the tactics but I don't see how that is a fair comparison on the tactics around these 2. All other tactics around these have had 9600 matches and has more than likely had a drop in points over them additional 4800 matches but yet are showing further down the table against a tactic that has been tested for half of the games they have.
Have you submitted right screenshots? a mirrored version would see the PF and IFa on the left side but the screenshot is showing both IF's on support and both strikers as AF
Zorojuro said: Idk im not pro or anything but for me, it gets confused when there is no tactical style, its like they do wtv they want or its messy you know? Thats why i always put some tactical style or i feel that there is no meaning in what i do in terms of playstyle.
Thats why i asked what u used in 4-2-3-1
But i get that i shouldn t pay attention to it. Expand
This is a gegenpress tactic, if you put it this way, you could load in a preset park the bus then edit the crap out of it, adding and removing instructions then all of a sudden its no longer a park the bus tactic but a vertical tika taka but your tactical style still says park the bus but its clearly not that tactical style, the tactical style naming doesn't change unless you change it. Like I said I wouldn't focus any attention on that whatsoever
Zorojuro said: So to be clear, its just a custom no tactical style at all? Expand
There will be a tactical style but this is just what Gerrard has named his, a lot of the top tactics are gegenpress, I wouldn't pay any attention to the tactical style
Zorojuro said: Okay one question, you just use custom tactic without any tactical style? Like imagine, gerard used tiki taka, what u use? Nothing? dunno if im making myself clear tho. Expand
Yeah its clear, I wouldn't take much note of the tactical style on custom tactics. Its sort of a signature for some people. Gerrards tactics are more gegenpress than tiki taka
dzek said: This setup, featuring two PFs on support duty and two IFs on attack duty, seems effective. I've crafted a similar setup before, and it performed well. EF 424 IF P105 AC (Dzek Tweak 1)
Here are some insights from this year's FM with this specific arrangement: - The PFs drop back into the AM positions to play a more active role in the build up of attacks, drawing the opposing team's center-backs out of position. This movement creates opportunities for other players, particularly the IFs, to exploit spaces behind the defense. - The new "Positional Play" feature shows that if the wing players converge towards the centre with or without the ball and the central players shift to AM roles, the wing players become less effective due to the priority they give to central movements. This explains the discrepancy in scores with the previous VOL test and with this test.
Further analysis of this setup could yield interesting results. Expand
Interesting, I wonder how 2 DLFs on support would fare. Good insight there pal
Antal said: Bro, is your tactic effective only in an attacking mood? Will it work in a weak club in an amateur league with a reserved and defensive mood against stronger teams? Expand
I haven't tested it in another mentality, but what I would say is that I've often had success against stronger teams using an attacking mentality. Not saying you're guaranteed to win but worth a try
SK - Tackle Harder FB - Takes more risks, tackle harder, stay wider, cross from byline, cut inside BPD - Dribble more, tackle harder DM - Take more risks, tackle harder IF - Sit narrower, tackle harder, mark specific position **Right IF on LB and Left IF on RB** AM - Take more risks, hold up ball, move into channels, tackle harder AF - Take more risks, tackle harder
I also want to add that at the moment we find the accuracy of fm-arena tactics is already excessively high and something much more less accurate would work just fine to play FM.
I mean an accuracy of +/- 5 pts or even -/+ 10 pts would be enough already and gave people a massive edge over AI managers in the game. We really don't need an accuracy like +/- 1 or 2 pts or even 0.1, 0.2, 0.3 pts.
I appreciate that and like I said it wasn't meant to come across as being disrespectful
No, this tactic won't be tested further.
At this moment the highest score is 63.2 pts(the 1st place) so to be tested for more than 4800 matches (up to 9600 matches) a tactic must score higher than 63.2 pts after 4800 matches and keep getting a score above 63.2 after every additional test until it reaches 9600 matches.
I hope it helps.
Cheers.
I don't mean no disrespect to you or the creators of the tactics but I don't see how that is a fair comparison on the tactics around these 2. All other tactics around these have had 9600 matches and has more than likely had a drop in points over them additional 4800 matches but yet are showing further down the table against a tactic that has been tested for half of the games they have.
Thanks
and this https://fm-arena.com/thread/12681-zaz-sapphire-alternative/
and this https://fm-arena.com/thread/12475-424-classic-cbp87-x-ps-v1-5-bw/
Holiday tested, AM in charge of training, Set pieces left to SP coach
Changes -
PF changed to CF
Added close down more to CF
Changes-
Added hold position to DMs
Thats why i asked what u used in 4-2-3-1
But i get that i shouldn t pay attention to it.
This is a gegenpress tactic, if you put it this way, you could load in a preset park the bus then edit the crap out of it, adding and removing instructions then all of a sudden its no longer a park the bus tactic but a vertical tika taka but your tactical style still says park the bus but its clearly not that tactical style, the tactical style naming doesn't change unless you change it. Like I said I wouldn't focus any attention on that whatsoever
There will be a tactical style but this is just what Gerrard has named his, a lot of the top tactics are gegenpress, I wouldn't pay any attention to the tactical style
Yeah its clear, I wouldn't take much note of the tactical style on custom tactics. Its sort of a signature for some people. Gerrards tactics are more gegenpress than tiki taka
Here are some insights from this year's FM with this specific arrangement:
- The PFs drop back into the AM positions to play a more active role in the build up of attacks, drawing the opposing team's center-backs out of position. This movement creates opportunities for other players, particularly the IFs, to exploit spaces behind the defense.
- The new "Positional Play" feature shows that if the wing players converge towards the centre with or without the ball and the central players shift to AM roles, the wing players become less effective due to the priority they give to central movements. This explains the discrepancy in scores with the previous VOL test and with this test.
Further analysis of this setup could yield interesting results.
Interesting, I wonder how 2 DLFs on support would fare. Good insight there pal
I haven't tested it in another mentality, but what I would say is that I've often had success against stronger teams using an attacking mentality. Not saying you're guaranteed to win but worth a try
Hey mate,
SK - Tackle Harder
FB - Takes more risks, tackle harder, stay wider, cross from byline, cut inside
BPD - Dribble more, tackle harder
DM - Take more risks, tackle harder
IF - Sit narrower, tackle harder, mark specific position **Right IF on LB and Left IF on RB**
AM - Take more risks, hold up ball, move into channels, tackle harder
AF - Take more risks, tackle harder
Changes-
IF duty changed to Attack
AM in charge of training, best XI selected. Set Piece coach in charge of set pieces