Sounds good. I don’t think it’s a good use of your resource to re-test the hundreds of minor tweaked variants of the same tactics
atomzero236 said: How much do you all think it really matters if the IWBs have the inverted preferred foot?  Would a right footed right IWB still work alright?  The success here in the tests makes it seem like it would work fine.

Yes it should be fine, preferred foot is not so important for IWB in my opinion. More important would be having a reasonable weaker foot as they are playing as central midfielders in possession and two footed players are strong here
good job
Update on my first 442 submission. I am trying to get a flat 442 that competes with the other top tactics. I notice there aren't many strong 442s (not including 2x DM variations).

Tested a few versions since 0.1 and currently favouring this one. Can't remember every change but main difference is 2x BWM(s) and Wingbacks now

Yeah definitely getting the impression the 60 point run was at the upper limit of the RNG band
Oh wow [60]--->[53] after removing overlaps and focus flanks. That's huge.
:D :D
Looking through the FM ARENA table I see a lack of high scoring flat 442s. This is my attempt.

Taken base from my PV415 v2.2
Removed overlaps and focus wide, as seems to be insignificant in some tactics and for mine doesn't quite fit the roles.
Last season I had a 4231 where I had a DM behind a CM like this (41131 I guess). But I used BWM(s) as the CM, and not the DM as I found BWM plays like a headless chicken, running around ballchasing; even with Defend duty. I preferred having the BWM further up pressing, and a DM that sat back behind him to protect the back 4 (I used DLP in that M.E.).

I wonder how this would do with a DM(D) behind and BWM(S) ahead
Pip said: Really liking this tactic. Never get on with SS or AMCs so like the 3 strikers. Have you tried it with Delicious's corner routine?

Thanks! Agreed, I’ve not had much fortune with attacking mids either.

No, I haven’t seen his routines. Are they better than the standard reliable set pieces?
Tweaks from v2.2:

Added "shoot less" to back 4 and to both wingers now
Added "take more risks" to the central of the 3 strikers
Ahh ok gotcha. Freezing can’t be done in FM’s editor, but there’s a third party tool called FMRTE that allows you to freeze player states (not free though)
92 pts with West Ham lol, that’s awesome.

When you holiday are you running fm editor changes like dynamics? Or freeze editor?
Nice to get a new shape into the 60+ club!
Delicious said: This test made me want to check again GKs roles, i did back then but maybe was really RNG gk on (su) seem the most logical gonna check even the mistake difference

I've always used sweeper keeper on support. I've actually just submitted a tactic where I've changed to defend duty and I think its the first time I've ever used it lol

My logic is, I would only prefer a defend duty if the goalkeeper kept making mistakes that led to big chances. But I almost never see this happen, so I prefer to leave it on support. On defend duty I expect to see losing possession more often when keeper kicks it out of play in a panic. Or kicking it long instead of trying a short pass to defenders
Changes from v2.1:
SK(S) --> SK(D)
FB(s) --> IWB(s)
Add TI: be more disciplined

I had best results when FB were cutting inside rather than staying wide (despite overlaps). So I've changed them to IWB. Gives a 3-man midfield in possession too.
Added: Be More Disciplined

Changed DM-->BWM
Changed IF-->IW

Full back PIs: Cut inside -->Run wide
Added Get further forward
The 4-1-5 with two tweaks

Added: Lower Defensive Line
Added: Get Stuck In
Is "be more disciplined" looking useful?