Could you please test my tweak of the "Diaboliq" tactic. It employs a DLP and two BBM. The latter are encouraged to run often into channels. Thanks in advance.
Could you please test this mirrored version of my previous tactic (Righteous 523 V0.3). In my tests it was less effective and I would like to know, if it was just player selection or if the match engine has a bias to one flank. Thanks in advance.
The original test was done on young players with enough PA to develop. I was wondering, if a player is already fully developed, can I mould him into a faster player by quickness training and resting? Or in other words, does a fully developed player loose technical and mental attributes to free up CA points which then are redistributed into physical attributes by this type of training?
Thanks in advance for any answers. And if this was answered earlier and I overread it, then I apologize for it.
First of all, thanks for this valuable information.
I recently realized that inverted wingbacks also act as regular wing backs when they are lone wide players. At least this seems to be the case for the FM 21 Touch version which I am currently playing.
I used the VOID ~ ver. 2.0 ~ tactic and made small adjustments to prove the above statement. First I played the tactic with inverted wing backs only and then I played the tactic with inverted wing backs and wingers. You can see quite clearly that in the latter case the wing backs take a much narrower position when in possession of the ball than in the latter case.
If somebody would be willing to confirm my findings (e.g. for latter game versions), I would appreciate it.
I think this was partly discussed in this thread but I was wondering if there is any other role (Half backs, F9, wide playmakers) which have a similar hard coding regarding their field position. Does anybody have information on this?
First of all, I want to thank you for the extensive test results related to the attributes. That’s truly outstanding work.
As far as I understand, this is what we know so far: There are a few attributes (primarily speed) that are critical (1). Other attributes also have some influence (2), but it’s too minor to quantify with the current test setup. Additionally, it’s disappointing that the attributes recommended by SI for each role don’t align with reality (3). In other words, the key question at this point is: which of the less significant attributes are important for specific roles? This question is particularly intriguing because, as outlined here (1), differentiation through speed becomes increasingly difficult in top-tier football.
In my view, this question could be addressed by identifying which attributes affect specific individual actions (e.g., interceptions, pass accuracy, crosses) performed by players. Once we determine which attributes are decisive for individual actions, we can evaluate the importance of each attribute for a player role based on how frequently those actions are performed during a game.
The benefit of this approach lies in the robust statistical foundation and likely higher sensitivity of individual actions to the attributes.
Looking forward to your feedback
The original test was done on young players with enough PA to develop. I was wondering, if a player is already fully developed, can I mould him into a faster player by quickness training and resting? Or in other words, does a fully developed player loose technical and mental attributes to free up CA points which then are redistributed into physical attributes by this type of training?
Thanks in advance for any answers. And if this was answered earlier and I overread it, then I apologize for it.
I recently realized that inverted wingbacks also act as regular wing backs when they are lone wide players. At least this seems to be the case for the FM 21 Touch version which I am currently playing.
I used the VOID ~ ver. 2.0 ~ tactic and made small adjustments to prove the above statement. First I played the tactic with inverted wing backs only and then I played the tactic with inverted wing backs and wingers. You can see quite clearly that in the latter case the wing backs take a much narrower position when in possession of the ball than in the latter case.
If somebody would be willing to confirm my findings (e.g. for latter game versions), I would appreciate it.
I think this was partly discussed in this thread but I was wondering if there is any other role (Half backs, F9, wide playmakers) which have a similar hard coding regarding their field position. Does anybody have information on this?
As far as I understand, this is what we know so far: There are a few attributes (primarily speed) that are critical (1). Other attributes also have some influence (2), but it’s too minor to quantify with the current test setup. Additionally, it’s disappointing that the attributes recommended by SI for each role don’t align with reality (3). In other words, the key question at this point is: which of the less significant attributes are important for specific roles? This question is particularly intriguing because, as outlined here (1), differentiation through speed becomes increasingly difficult in top-tier football.
In my view, this question could be addressed by identifying which attributes affect specific individual actions (e.g., interceptions, pass accuracy, crosses) performed by players. Once we determine which attributes are decisive for individual actions, we can evaluate the importance of each attribute for a player role based on how frequently those actions are performed during a game.
The benefit of this approach lies in the robust statistical foundation and likely higher sensitivity of individual actions to the attributes.