Belmorn said: sad to see EOT being so much worse. Still could tweak it I suppose by enabling it on positions where conditions dont matter to much ( BPD / AF ) and leaving it off on the CMA who usually go red first for me. Would leave it on for DM as well - at least it makes sense from a logical pov
So
BPD - AF - DM -> Hard tackling ( AF has the energy to do it but could be on normal as well - from logical pov it doesnt make sense to have AF on hard and CMA on ease off - the press would fail there then ) WB -> Normal CMA -> Ease off or normal ? Expand
I think it should stay on everyone except probably full backs. Full backs usually are the most booked with it enabled anyway and are the most energy-intensive position. I think "tackle harder" should be removed, but without "ease off". You can afford to then sub out 1 or both CMs (who I think offer the most benefit out of aggressive tackling) and the most tired full back.
EDIT: The tactic does get a pretty high average energy level at the end of matches to begin with, and usually with 3 subs you rarely finish the game with people under the yellow level, most likely out of the CMA and full backs.
irapbot said: Could you please upload national league save at start 2nd season ? Expand
Oh, when I say simulate 2 seasons I just mean rerun the first season. Just save a game as "Start_Test.fm" or something and keep using that. I don't know how to start a second season with it, or if it starts automatically.
Sandro said: Actually, it can be measured and I've done such tests many times. The mentality makes no difference and the only what matters is the intensity. You can see it by yourself, just measure the conditions of your players before and after a match using tactics with different intensity/mentality values but only don't use "go on holiday" or "instant result" to play a match because in this case your assistant manager makes substitutions and the result won't be accurate. Expand
I just tested this, and I get marginally better results with positive mentality, I attached 2 tests where difference is obvious, I had closer calls though. I would say positive is ~5% better for conserving energy, as it does reduce the slider a little, although I'm not sure if that makes a lot of difference, as adding "Ease off Tackles" reduces the slider by a lot more, but also gives a max 5% increase. This all might just be RNG playing in, even though my league is similarly "equalized" like the FM-Arena testing league.
I have yet to fully test this, but I think position/role makes much more of a difference. In my tests, my F9 was always 200-300 condition more tired than the AF's. I'll give some averages as an example for my 3 attacking positions.
F9-Support + 2x IF-Attack = 6700 Avg. Condition after match, with F9 scoring around 7200 and IF around 6400-6500.
F9-Support + 2x AF-Attack = 7400 Avg. Condition after match, with F9 scoring around 7200 and AF around 7500-7600.
Positive
Very Attacking
EDIT: Conclusion is that some combinations are superior this year, at least from the perspective of Stamina, and because condition affects performance so much, I would say even overall, since strikers conserve Condition so much better than attacking wingers and wide positions in general suffer the most from stamina issues, followed closely by CM and DM/AM.
Mark said: That is my original favorite formation from when I played before FM14. I might now need to do a version based on Dragons Breath for old times sake. So many memories. I so hope we can get this working for FM22. Expand
I used to spam this every year on FIFA and FM as well, something about that diamond just looks so good haha. Hope this works well enough, also such an iconic formation through history.
ZaZ said: I'm pretty sure it's possible to have a good tactic with purple mentality. Cyan, for example, got 5.3 with a low intensity setting. I'm quite sure with a bit of tweaking, it could get to 5.5+. Expand
Yeah, if EOT actually doesn't impact performance, this is quite a lot less intense as well. I had no idea it makes SO much of a difference. Fingers crossed the test scores close with it, like yours with Cyan.
Changes - Eliminated a lot of the general instructions, simplified the tactic a little. - Changed some PI to fit with some of my newer, more succesful tactics. - Permanently changed to SS and 2 AF - Advanced Segundo Volantes to CM-Attack
Uploaded an even lower stamina version, with Ease Off Tackles on every single position. @Zippo could we test if this changes results heavily? I know @ZaZ did it for Cyan and it didn't change much so I would like to confirm if Positive tactics work the same with Ease Off Tackles, as the shapes are completely different in the 2 tactics, so we can settle this discussion, as there have been conflicting opinions on this.
Sandro said: I really don't want to be a party breaker but the intensity and not the mentality is what makes impact on the conditions and your latest tactics have the same intensity as any other top rated tactics.
There's only any meaningful is when the intensity bar is green/blue/red. I mean for the start you need to reduce the intensity to blue at least to see any difference. and if you can reduce to "green" then it will even better but there's no difference at all between red bars. Expand
There never will be any good tactic with purple or green intensity. This is still much less demanding than a Very Attacking tactic. I use this in my Athletic Club save and 10 stamina strikers can play 70-90min no prob with this tactic.
I know the difference in the visual slider is minimal, but in game, positive vs very attacking difference in stamina is huge
ZaZ said: I agree, points per match is the most important stat, as it represents the win rate of the tactic. I only said goal difference is more important than goals scored or goals conceded. A tactic with 0.5 goals conceded per match can be awful, as well as a tactic that scores 5 goals per match, if the goal difference is still negative.
People need to keep in mind that any tactic from 6.0 to 5.7 or even 5.6 fall into the confidence level of FM-Arena tests, meaning any of them could actually be the best. I like to use GD as a tie breaker in those cases. Expand
Agreed. Tests can easily fluctuate 0.2-0.3 stars or specifically 0.05 points/game. You have to adapt to the tactic a little if you want to plug n play. Leaky tactics need top defenders to compensate, tactics that score less need good strikers etc. Imo any 5.5+ tactic can help you overperform with any team if u compensate for the tactic flaws through players
Belmorn said: Tests will tell but your experience then also is 2 x AF >> 2 x IW ?
My ocd can’t handle it but it seems a theme from what i see in the higher rated tactics Expand
I'm not sure, the IF in the tactic that was there previously was supposed to act kind of like a forward, not a winger. I just noticed they didn't stay forward enough, as the F9 had a more advanced average position, so I thought I should push them to AF so that the F9 plays behind them. I also tried the 2x F9 and an AF because I thought it might help possession a bit.
Kaczy said: Wonderfull job Zealot. But can someone tell me how to find Roaming PLaymaker in lower leagues? I am playing in 4th Polish league and all I can find they "score position" is 1-2 :O It is impossible to find someone better. In this case I should use players with score 2 on that possition? Regards and thx for help in advance. Once again great job. Expand
With positions like RPM, you're better off looking for someone who has good basic attributes for the position : Pace, Passing, Dribbling and then train them using individual training in that position. Young players <24yo will usually learn it in under half a season.
Changes: - Moved 2xIF + F9 combination into a 3 striker formation for more attacking power. I tested with 2 possible combinations, either 2 F9's or 2 AF's. Both seem very promising and this seems to have added quite a bit of attacking power without sacrificing defence, while also adding a 2-3% possession.
saitjerome said: i wonder is there any role for messi? who can score, dribble, everything. I think f9 and IF suits well but dunno what u think Expand
Yes, I use a Messi-like player in F9 role. Good dribbling, good passing, intelligent(good mentals). Finishing doesn't matter so much because all the goals he will score will be tap-ins from crosses.
I use my fastest attackers on the wings and the slower but more technical attackers as F9.
EDIT: You can also use MEZ-A without too much impact on the overall effectiveness of the tactic. They act very similarly to CM-A, they just tend to drift a little wider on the pitch.
Mark said: Good to hear. Maybe a chance to get above my 2 5.6 scores. Did you test as is or with the IWs? Expand
With IW-A's added, I can send u the save if u wanna use it as well. I have all players without traits, 15 on every attribute (was too lazy to do it like fm-arena), age, weight, height all the same, etc. Just add ur tactics on managers, freeze all players using FMRTE and simulate until 21 Nov for results. download
So
BPD - AF - DM -> Hard tackling ( AF has the energy to do it but could be on normal as well - from logical pov it doesnt make sense to have AF on hard and CMA on ease off - the press would fail there then )
WB -> Normal
CMA -> Ease off or normal ?
I think it should stay on everyone except probably full backs. Full backs usually are the most booked with it enabled anyway and are the most energy-intensive position. I think "tackle harder" should be removed, but without "ease off". You can afford to then sub out 1 or both CMs (who I think offer the most benefit out of aggressive tackling) and the most tired full back.
EDIT: The tactic does get a pretty high average energy level at the end of matches to begin with, and usually with 3 subs you rarely finish the game with people under the yellow level, most likely out of the CMA and full backs.
Oh, when I say simulate 2 seasons I just mean rerun the first season. Just save a game as "Start_Test.fm" or something and keep using that. I don't know how to start a second season with it, or if it starts automatically.
I just tested this, and I get marginally better results with positive mentality, I attached 2 tests where difference is obvious, I had closer calls though. I would say positive is ~5% better for conserving energy, as it does reduce the slider a little, although I'm not sure if that makes a lot of difference, as adding "Ease off Tackles" reduces the slider by a lot more, but also gives a max 5% increase. This all might just be RNG playing in, even though my league is similarly "equalized" like the FM-Arena testing league.
I have yet to fully test this, but I think position/role makes much more of a difference. In my tests, my F9 was always 200-300 condition more tired than the AF's. I'll give some averages as an example for my 3 attacking positions.
F9-Support + 2x IF-Attack = 6700 Avg. Condition after match, with F9 scoring around 7200 and IF around 6400-6500.
F9-Support + 2x AF-Attack = 7400 Avg. Condition after match, with F9 scoring around 7200 and AF around 7500-7600.
Positive
Very Attacking
EDIT: Conclusion is that some combinations are superior this year, at least from the perspective of Stamina, and because condition affects performance so much, I would say even overall, since strikers conserve Condition so much better than attacking wingers and wide positions in general suffer the most from stamina issues, followed closely by CM and DM/AM.
I used to spam this every year on FIFA and FM as well, something about that diamond just looks so good haha. Hope this works well enough, also such an iconic formation through history.
Yeah, if EOT actually doesn't impact performance, this is quite a lot less intense as well. I had no idea it makes SO much of a difference. Fingers crossed the test scores close with it, like yours with Cyan.
Changes
- Eliminated a lot of the general instructions, simplified the tactic a little.
- Changed some PI to fit with some of my newer, more succesful tactics.
- Permanently changed to SS and 2 AF
- Advanced Segundo Volantes to CM-Attack
No, the 2AF and 2F9 options have slightly better possession with 2F9 having the best.
It gets 47-49% usually. However, in game that usually translates to 50%+. Very Attacking tactics usually get 41-43%.
Revelation 1.0 possession to compare
There's only any meaningful is when the intensity bar is green/blue/red. I mean for the start you need to reduce the intensity to blue at least to see any difference.
There never will be any good tactic with purple or green intensity. This is still much less demanding than a Very Attacking tactic. I use this in my Athletic Club save and 10 stamina strikers can play 70-90min no prob with this tactic.
I know the difference in the visual slider is minimal, but in game, positive vs very attacking difference in stamina is huge
People need to keep in mind that any tactic from 6.0 to 5.7 or even 5.6 fall into the confidence level of FM-Arena tests, meaning any of them could actually be the best. I like to use GD as a tie breaker in those cases.
Agreed. Tests can easily fluctuate 0.2-0.3 stars or specifically 0.05 points/game. You have to adapt to the tactic a little if you want to plug n play. Leaky tactics need top defenders to compensate, tactics that score less need good strikers etc. Imo any 5.5+ tactic can help you overperform with any team if u compensate for the tactic flaws through players
My ocd can’t handle it but it seems a theme from what i see in the higher rated tactics
I'm not sure, the IF in the tactic that was there previously was supposed to act kind of like a forward, not a winger. I just noticed they didn't stay forward enough, as the F9 had a more advanced average position, so I thought I should push them to AF so that the F9 plays behind them. I also tried the 2x F9 and an AF because I thought it might help possession a bit.
It is impossible to find someone better. In this case I should use players with score 2 on that possition?
Regards and thx for help in advance.
Once again great job.
With positions like RPM, you're better off looking for someone who has good basic attributes for the position : Pace, Passing, Dribbling and then train them using individual training in that position. Young players <24yo will usually learn it in under half a season.
Changes: - Moved 2xIF + F9 combination into a 3 striker formation for more attacking power. I tested with 2 possible combinations, either 2 F9's or 2 AF's. Both seem very promising and this seems to have added quite a bit of attacking power without sacrificing defence, while also adding a 2-3% possession.
Yes, I use a Messi-like player in F9 role. Good dribbling, good passing, intelligent(good mentals). Finishing doesn't matter so much because all the goals he will score will be tap-ins from crosses.
I use my fastest attackers on the wings and the slower but more technical attackers as F9.
EDIT: You can also use MEZ-A without too much impact on the overall effectiveness of the tactic. They act very similarly to CM-A, they just tend to drift a little wider on the pitch.
edit: which position scores most?
Curiously, everyone. The 2 CM's and the front 3 share most of the goals with nobody in particular being the main goal scorer
Oh, ok, gotchu, I'll see if there are other meaningful tweaks I can add for a V2
With IW-A's added, I can send u the save if u wanna use it as well. I have all players without traits, 15 on every attribute (was too lazy to do it like fm-arena), age, weight, height all the same, etc. Just add ur tactics on managers, freeze all players using FMRTE and simulate until 21 Nov for results. download
Good results! 5.5+ tactics get ~130ish points