apple said: Anyone else having problems with a ridiculous amount of penalties? Expand

Get stuck in with high players Aggression adn Dirtiness wil llead to penalties and redcards
Just look scout reports about your defenders or use scouting tools

Gerrard said: This tactic uses a variety of roles. Expand

Oh thanks, didnt see that one
But cant find anywhere a link for this

ZaZ said: People are free to test what they want. You can filter tactics by four defenders if you do not like three at the back, and there is even a table for plug and play tactics. People test tactics with different shapes every day. What you will not see are tactics with all shapes in the top of the table, but you can find plenty with lower scores, and even a few with very good scores. Expand

Just open up tactics and theres 90% of em is absolutely same shapes and main team instructions
Only diff is PI but the result is almost same everywhere with 84.5 avg pts lmao

ZaZ said: With all due respect, people can only test two tactics per day, and it is only natural that they will focus in their main interests and what they find more promising. Gerrard has tested plenty of different shapes, roles and instructions. It is a bit rude to ask people to tailor their tests to your preferences. It is not hard to submit your own tactic for testing, it takes less than 30 minutes to run a season in holiday mode to collect the screenshots you need. Expand

Fair enough maybe
But whats the best settings for this fast tests if u dont mind?

Also aint asking for a test, but asked if its already tested and there's some advices on roles

Gerrard said: PILGRIMAGE HAS HIGH POSSESSION 60+% ELECTRIC FUNERAL 56% I have probably used MPM but usually AP Expand

Nevermind
My question about variety of roles

Tried to make something more possesion oriented from your FM26 HIGHWAY STAR 26.3 4231 LP P103 and without MPM in a middle even with a bit lower tempo and sligltly short passes cant hold the ball
Just curious if u made some roles investigation

Gerrard said: You can submit your own tactic with the roles you want to test. TBH I've probably tested all roles available, but not all do that well on my own tests, so not worth subitting. Expand

Im more a player than a tester, thats why i asked if you already did some tests

Gerrard said: This 3430 uses CM
https://fm-arena.com/thread/19969-argus-26-3-3430-cm-p107-ac/

or AP rather than AM
https://fm-arena.com/thread/19836-argus-26-3-ap-3430-p104-ec-fa/ Expand

Nice one, but have you tried MPM's or two AP's? Or WF's on flanks?
Somehow for me, but in more possesion based tactic CHM performs bad

GeorgeFloydOverdosed said: The reason I picked Le Fondre to include is because I saw him compared in a Youtube video, and even though he's a 36-year-old with 9 pace/acc, he managed the results you see here. A takeaway from this for me is that pace/acc isn't strictly necessary. Using the comparative deduction I mentioned before, I found that anticipation and composure are more critical than pace/acc.. as I said, these are strange conclusions, so rather than make the facts fit the theory, I'm going to be getting the facts straight first and then seeing what theory fits the data. Expand

Also, strange thing i've faced
Everyone here says about acc/pace, but for me rn the most scoring person in my team is 33 y.o. Florian Wirtz, with almost destroyed physical attributes
And he's not just scoring, he also nake key passes, assists and having the best average rating in a league
And yeah there's also Haaland in my team (even older, but Haaland is a Haaland right)
He's pacey then wirtz and physically better, have same dribbling, better finishing etc, but scores equal or less

GeorgeFloydOverdosed said: Although I don't agree with the reasoning given as critique of my weightings, I do believe the underlying idea that the precise rankings may be somewhat impaired.

I attempted to address this with weighting the weights, but it produced worse results, or at least no better.

I've tried comparative deduction by comparing several players match ratings & goal tallies with their attributes. Some key problems with this approach:

- Match ratings have been demonstrated to favor presence of technical/mental ability over actual wins
- Goals scored can simply reflect finishing, and poor finishing has minimal effect on the team win rate (it simply means someone else with higher finishing in the team scores the goals)
- I actually managed to get the players to 'line up' with the ratings/goals a lot better, but it took a very strange set of GS weightings to get there. Either I'm on the wrong track, or even if it's right, I would be building a house without being able to know the foundations.

I concluded that what's actually needed is more result-based data, but on individual players. It's more tedious, and will require a fair amount of samples for good accuracy, but I think it's the best approach.

Method

I use my meta team at Man City, but replace a position with duplicates of a particular player. If I'm testing ST, I remove proficiency in other positions so as not to mess up the results, as what I'm most interested in is deducing what constitutes the precise ranking of STs. Full detail is used for all first team competitions.

Results

Here's some data I've collected so far (ranked by team performance with player as ST):

Erling Haaland 👍 - 1st, 1st, 4th = 2nd position, 1.263 goals/match, 7.93 rating
Kylian Mbappe 💩 - 5th, 1st, 3rd = 3rd position, 0.708 goals/match, 7.54 rating
Daizen Maeda - 2nd, 3rd, 4th = 3rd position, 0.533 goals/match, 7.28 rating
Harry Kane - 5th, 2nd = 3.5th position, 0.429 goals/match, 7.25 rating
Victor Osimhen - 3rd, 3rd, 7th = 4.333th position, 0.699 goals/match, 7.27 rating
Adam Le Fondre - 8th, 11th (sacked), 5th = 8th position, 0.416 goals/match, 6.82 rating

The reason I picked Le Fondre to include is because I saw him compared in a Youtube video, and even though he's a 36-year-old with 9 pace/acc, he managed the results you see here. A takeaway from this for me is that pace/acc isn't strictly necessary. Using the comparative deduction I mentioned before, I found that anticipation and composure are more critical than pace/acc.. as I said, these are strange conclusions, so rather than make the facts fit the theory, I'm going to be getting the facts straight first and then seeing what theory fits the data.

I'll probably do about 5-6 samples each of ~10 players for ST and then see if I can deduce consistent patterns to create accurate weightings. Expand

Incredible how you keep trying to prove your point to someone who cant read lmao

Gerrard said: If you wish to try different tactics then these are aailable
RECOMMENDED STRIKER TACTICS BASED ON SCORE AND OPTIONS

SET PIECES MU 19

HIGHWAY STAR 26.3 4231 P112 ALL CUPS

HIGHWAY STAR 26.3 4231 P103

HIGHWAY STAR 26.3 FR 4231 P106 FA CC

HIGHWAY STAR 26.2 4231 P107 EC FA

HIGHWAY STAR 26.2.3 4231 P108 EC FA

RAMBLE ON 26.3 41131 P107 ALL CUPS

STORMBRINGER 26.3 424 P107 EC FA

STORMBRINGER 26.2 424 P106 CC

HOLY GHOST FIRE 26.3 4141 P108 EC

SNOWBLIND 26.3 433 N P104 ALL CUPS

SOLDIER OF FORTUNE 26.3 4141 P110 FA CC

ARGUS 26.3 343 P107 EC CC

ARGUS 26.3 3421 P102 ALL CUPS

SPEED KING 26.3 451 P104 EC FA

WARRIOR 26.3 442 P104 EC FA

WARPIGS 26.3 4312 N P104 ALL CUPS

PHOENIX 26.3 4213 N P104 EC CC

TEQUILA SUNRISE 26.3 4132 P103 ALL CUPS

ARGUS 26.3 352 P104 ALL CUPS

ARGUS 26.2.3 352 P110 EC CC CP78

ARGUS 26.2.3 352 P110 EC CC CP78

BATTLE OF EVERMORE 26.3 4222N P104 EC CC

TEN YEARS GONE 26.3 23221 P104 FA CC

ARGUS 26.3 FR 3421 N P103 ALL CUPS

TEN YEARS GONE 26.3 4231 P100 ALL CUPS

HIGHWAY STAR 26.3 BBP 4231 P105 C

HIGHWAY STAR 26.3 BBM 4231 P103 EC CC

ARGUS 26.2.3 3412 P103 EC FA

ELECTRIC FUNERAL 26.2.3 4231 P103 EC FA 56%

ELECTRIC FUNERAL FR 26.3 4231 P104 EC 56%

ARGUS 26.3 3331 P106 EC

ARGUS 26.2.3 3331 P102 EC CC

TEN YEARS GONE 26.3 41212 ND P104 EC CC

KASHMIR 26.3 4123 P105 FA

BATTLE OF EVERMORE 26.3 4222N P104 EC CC

MAD AS A HATTER 26.3 4132 P102 EC CC

SLOE GIN 26.3 442 DM P105 FA CC

SLOE GIN 26.2 442 DM P102 EC

GALLOWS POLE 26.3 4321 DLF P102 FA CC

MISTREATED 26.3 41131 WFD P107 FA

HEARTBREAKER 26.3 451 P103 EC

HEARTBREAKER 26.2 451 P105

ELECTRIC FUNERAL 26.3 4231 P103 FA 56%

ELECTRIC FUNERAL FR 26.3 4231 P104 EC 56%

ELECTRIC FUNERAL 26.2.3 4231 A P104 EC CC 56%

HIGHWAY STAR 26.2.3 4231N P101 ALL CUPS

PERFECT STRANGERS 26.3 42112 P100 ALL CUPS

BAD SPELL 26.3 41212 ND P102 FA CC

ELECTRIC FUNERAL 26.3 4231 P102 CC

STORMBRINGER Counter Attack 26.3 424 P101 EC

TEN YEARS GONE 26.3 4231 DM P99 FA

PILGRIMAGE 26.2.3 4231 P100 CC 62%
PILGRIMAGE 26.2.3 41212 ND P102 ALL CUPS 58% NO LOSS

PILGRIMAGE 26.3 3430 P100 EC CC 62%

ELECTRIC FUNERAL 26.2.3 451 A P99EC101 EC 56%

WARRIOR 26.2 442 TARGET FORWARD POACHER P97 FA

PILGRIMAGE 26.3 451 P95 EC 62% Expand

I know all of your tactics huh
I've just shared some ideas for future tests, cuz never seen a tactic with somewhat except CHM or AP from ypu in this 343 formation

ZaZ said: Not much point in changing anything now, since it would not be a surprise if tests halted when they announce FM27. It should be released in a couple of months from now, if they follow the pattern of previous years (except cancelled FM25). Expand

The point is to find something new and interesting which also works
There's no point to post same tatcis with 1-2 diff instruction which actually makes zero diff huh

Defo looks like formation and player roles more important then anything else, cuz basic tactic instructions with different shapes work not that great
So interesting if you can test with some other shapes and roles too
For example woth WF's on flanks
Or AM/MPM's in mid etc

Whats the actual point of sharing same 343 strikerless tactis lmao

Unusual one
Why dont show instructions and players tab?

keithb said: If you use the genie scout rating file I posted on the page before that will show you the top keepers and who will be the best in the future. Expand

I dont use Genie tho, i scout with ingame things and everything is fine at least for top club with good scouting
% of saves and good attributes is enough for me

GeorgeFloydOverdosed said: I may have a look into it later, but I suspect that it's fundamentally your tactic and overall level of quality of your players, not the attributes of your GK, that determine the number of goals he concedes.

We can influence who scores goals in a team, but that's because at the end of the day a goal is going to be scored. But you can't reduce the number of goals your GK concedes, because he's the only one who can concede them. Expand

The same tactic, only GK difference, but once i got 0.8 xga and 0.4 conceded and with other GK i got 0.8 conceded
And it looks like it matters
But idk, need a huge amount of tests to realise

Idea for a test case
High line and possesion based tactic with two different GK's
In my long term saves for example Couroutis always perform bad, and Costa perfroms well
So the idea is to look for xga / conceded and pts for a same team with diff GK for a few times

Anyways i yet look for main params as Aeiral Reach, Agility and Reaction for a GK
But with additional focus on Handling and One on ones

Also FM generates pretty stupid new GK's and Defenders 180 and below xD

GeorgeFloydOverdosed said: To clarify, my template, and therefore the weightings, are based on team position at end of season, not match ratings. Expand

So heres my question
If i still win, but i wanna find a keeper that actually saves, what i shall look for
Rn Chevalier looks good for me, best keeper for me yet, but he's old in my save, so i wanna find or make a good regen, waht to look for?

keithb said: Keepers wont get a high rating if they aren't doing much. And you will concede. Ratings in FM are based on goals, assists and keepers struggle to get 9-10 ratings. They can make ten saves and still only be in the 8's. Expand

I meant for example Courtouis always perfrom bad for me, Diogo Costa perfrom way better in same tactis, less concided, better rating etc and i can see that he actually make saves, while Courtouis wont save his only 1 1v1 in a match xd

GeorgeFloydOverdosed said: Both have downsides. For instance, if you filtered using my template, ter Stegen would be excluded due to his 13 Aerial Reach, and there's also the classic problem of if you filter for more than ~3 attributes no one would qualify.

Obviously the best solution would be some combination of both. A lenient set of filters combined with attribute weightings. But the practical reality I think for most of us is that we're rarely bothered to use filters at all. I think most of us just want a list sorted by rating % to look at. Expand

Is it all about team overall performance or not?
Cuz what i've seen on my long real save, as example, Courtouis were bad (with my high def line at least)
Yeah i won alot, and gd was insane, but he's avg rating was like  6.8 or something like that haha

Also rly interesting whats the diff between IW and IF
Or IF with stay wide and WF etc