A Smile
PF+DLP.
CF+A.
In my opinion, this can prove that the deviation of the test results is very large. Just because DMS chose to take more risks, it led to such two results with a big gap.SI may be tweaking something.
PFS: hold position
DMS: add "take more risks"
PFS: hold position.
overlap+underlap.
Full of freedom.
All players added "close down more" command.
It's not ideal, but what if you keep it full?
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

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

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.
PFS+IFA
GD125
PI interchange of STCL and STCR.
DMCR:add “hold position”.
AML: add "roam from position"
DMCL: remove "take more risks"
Adopt attacking mentality and adjust TI and PI accordingly.
VOLS+DMS
DMS:remove “hold position”.
AF→T
underlaps.
CMA+CMS+DMS.