Hmmm... it might be that it was a visual bug and under the hood it always worked as "slightly shorter passing" and "fairly narrow".
Anyway, based on our experience I can say that 1 notch difference in the passing and width settings make so small difference that it hardly can be seen after 6 tests ( 912 matches ). Expand
Zippo said: Could you elaborate a little bit on that? I don't get it. Expand
Yeah no worries mate, so if I may use Mongoose as an example, it uses very attacking mentality with standard passing and standard width but with the ME update, these options are no longer available for very attacking mentality and have defaulted to slightly shorter passing and fairly narrow width meaning its a different tactic so to speak
Wigo said: not shure about exact attacking mentality but after patch ME is changed drasticaly... one thing is shure that near post corners gonne for good played about 10 games - 0 corners scored Expand
I agree, in each of these tests, my CBs have scored considerably less than what they were scoring pre patch. In pretty much all my elite testing pre patch my CBs were double figures, no way near now
Metal said: So far using very attacking on the new M.E is russian rullette suicide. Scored 6 and conceded 6 in the same game Expand
I reckon its been nerfed!(is that the saying? if not then patched) I've tested about 6 of my tactics with PSG since the patch that use very attacking mentality and they have gone to crap (probably just my tactics haha)
ZaZ said: To be honest, with the new ME, most data they got to make the database might have become invalid, since they tried to get the most effective to previous patch. Let's just hope it stays the same so they don't need to update their test league again. Expand
But those tactics that use very attacking mentality will essentially be null and void because the instructions used will no longer be there
Zippo said: Honestly, everything is really simple.
Let's say, you're trying to create a good tactic and you're testing your ideas in English Premier League.
If we take the 1st season ( the default database ) in English Premier League then we see that the league is heavily dominated by 4-2-3-1 and 4-3-3 formations, also, the AI managers in EPL have some specific sets of tactical settings ( Mentality, D-Line, Roles and so on ):
Let's assume that you found a tactic that works very well in EPL ( the 1st season ) so you might think that the job is done but the next season a lot of different AI managers come to the EPL or you move to a different league and now you've got a league that is heavily dominated by 4-4-2, 5-2-1-2 or 5-3-2 formations and also, the tactical settings of the AI managers have changes significantly:
And your tactic that worked very well in EPL ( the 1st season ) might stopped working at all due to a very different environment. Just look at the results under the new database, obviously, the environment(AI formations/tactical settings) makes a huge difference.
Our new database has a better set of AI formations/tactical settings than the old database has, also, we left only the most successful AI tactical settings so we don't waste time on testing against weak AI tactical settings.
Please note, it might be that some of the top tactics from our testing work slight better against 4-2-3-1/4-3-3 formations and some work slight better against 4-4-2/5-3-2/5-2-1-2 formations but you can be sure that all the tactics from the top are well-rounded tactics and you can rely on them in any environment.
Alexis said: Thanks CBP87! So it's what I thought. They believe they have found a better way to test, but it hasn"t been proven yet? For example, we don't know for sure that the tactic that is currently top with a 5.8 rating will yield better results than the one that was top of the 'old' table with a 6.0 rating? Am I right? Expand
To be honest, I don't there is any point in comparing the new results with the old ones, Zippo and the team have refined the test so its a different environment for both tests, plus the old ones were tested twice whilst the new table is testing 3 times. It's a difficult one and I don't really fully understand it myself yet
End of season results, final table etc..
Hmmm... it might be that it was a visual bug and under the hood it always worked as "slightly shorter passing" and "fairly narrow".
Anyway, based on our experience I can say that 1 notch difference in the passing and width settings make so small difference that it hardly can be seen after 6 tests ( 912 matches ).
Thanks for explaining pal
Yeah no worries mate, so if I may use Mongoose as an example, it uses very attacking mentality with standard passing and standard width but with the ME update, these options are no longer available for very attacking mentality and have defaulted to slightly shorter passing and fairly narrow width meaning its a different tactic so to speak
How will you get around the difference the update has made to the TIs for very attacking mentalities?
I agree, in each of these tests, my CBs have scored considerably less than what they were scoring pre patch. In pretty much all my elite testing pre patch my CBs were double figures, no way near now
I reckon its been nerfed!(is that the saying? if not then patched) I've tested about 6 of my tactics with PSG since the patch that use very attacking mentality and they have gone to crap (probably just my tactics haha)
But those tactics that use very attacking mentality will essentially be null and void because the instructions used will no longer be there
Looks like they've removed the option for standard passing and width on very attacking
Let's say, you're trying to create a good tactic and you're testing your ideas in English Premier League.
If we take the 1st season ( the default database ) in English Premier League then we see that the league is heavily dominated by 4-2-3-1 and 4-3-3 formations, also, the AI managers in EPL have some specific sets of tactical settings ( Mentality, D-Line, Roles and so on ):
Let's assume that you found a tactic that works very well in EPL ( the 1st season ) so you might think that the job is done but the next season a lot of different AI managers come to the EPL or you move to a different league and now you've got a league that is heavily dominated by 4-4-2, 5-2-1-2 or 5-3-2 formations and also, the tactical settings of the AI managers have changes significantly:
And your tactic that worked very well in EPL ( the 1st season ) might stopped working at all due to a very different environment. Just look at the results under the new database, obviously, the environment(AI formations/tactical settings) makes a huge difference.
Our new database has a better set of AI formations/tactical settings than the old database has, also, we left only the most successful AI tactical settings so we don't waste time on testing against weak AI tactical settings.
Please note, it might be that some of the top tactics from our testing work slight better against 4-2-3-1/4-3-3 formations and some work slight better against 4-4-2/5-3-2/5-2-1-2 formations but you can be sure that all the tactics from the top are well-rounded tactics and you can rely on them in any environment.
I hope that helps.
Cheers.
Lovely stuff, thanks for the explanation
You're probably best deleting the other thread you've created pal, any chance you can share you end of season results when you've finished?
To be honest, I don't there is any point in comparing the new results with the old ones, Zippo and the team have refined the test so its a different environment for both tests, plus the old ones were tested twice whilst the new table is testing 3 times. It's a difficult one and I don't really fully understand it myself yet
They've done quite a bit of research and believe they've found a better way to test which will give the community more accurate results
Cheers pal
Cheers pal, try and provide as much info as I can from my own testing