CBP87 said: Ah shit, you're right. Apologies @A Smile you were right too. I'll upload the correct version when I'm able to. I don't think I can get this thread removed due to it being tested Expand
When we are constantly adjusting to a tactic, it is normal for such things to happen. To my surprise, the test results of 4800 or even 9600 matches still have a difference of 0.4 points. I think SI has adjusted something in the background, which leads to the instability of the test results. Although I don't have a relatively scientific and reasonable testing method like ARENA, I still feel this instability.
CBP87 said: It's not the same pal, albeit all I added was be more expressive. Just wanted to see if this had any impact on the end result plus I also wanted to see how it would test with run at defence Expand
I can't understand what the specific difference is through the translation software, I just can't find any difference through comparison.
It is the same as the top tactical EF 424 IF HP V2 P101 AC...... but the score has dropped from 63.2 to 62.8, it is not known whether this is due to random test results or SI tweaks to the match engine.
alex said: I'm curious to see it with the positions changed for the defensive mids. Volante on the right and dm on the left. I think it would do better Expand
Player positioning and space use are too important for this version of the tactical setup, so I think this may not be good.
It's not ideal, but what if you keep it full?
When we are constantly adjusting to a tactic, it is normal for such things to happen.
I can't understand what the specific difference is through the translation software, I just can't find any difference through comparison.
GD125
DMCR：add “hold position”.
DMCL: remove "take more risks"
overlaps.
Player positioning and space use are too important for this version of the tactical setup, so I think this may not be good.