The importance of WBA in the current tactical engine is almost irreplaceable, check the gap between WBS and it. Using the No. 1 Kane's 4231 as a template for the test. At the same time, check whether there is a difference in "Pass Into Space".
The importance of WBA in the current tactical engine is almost irreplaceable, check the gap between WBS and it. Using the No. 1 Kane's 4231 as a template for the test.
This combination of responsibilities is not in line with the characteristics of the engine, I try my best to do the best, but with the mainstream configuration is still a big gap, look at the result.
Chris said: What advice can you give me if I want to put the CF to AM? Should I change the Ap's? I'm struggling trying to get good tests with 4-3-1-2 without flanks Expand
I think this tactic relies too much on the parallel position of the three forwards, and it may collapse with a high probability to become 4312.
CSTG KANE said: One paradox I have, and this is my personal understanding, is that regarding the role of tactical settings, I personally believe that tactical board commands work ≥ character default commands > character optional commands, but of course this may have to do with tactical flexibility Expand
That's true. The current setup of this tactic has been almost developed to the extreme, more detailed, your difference is actually clean player personal instructions, so you this change is crucial, through the ceiling. As for the "Pass into space" command, based on the results of many people's tests, including my own, it should not be too important.
I have a question, is this tactical score increase from "Pass Into Space" or clean individual player instructions? I think it's the latter, but your other tactical post someone brought it up because of the former? What do you think?
TurtleKing said: Are you sure it's all about PI making this tactic getting 63 points compared to your 62 points? I feel like a team instruction like passing into space is super important, and can make a difference. It can alone be those 3-4 more goals scored. Your deformation tactic has that instruction and scored 71 goals, while the hegemony 4-2-3-1 scored 63 goals. I do like the wingers play more narrow and wingbacks play more wide ingame. It makes up so much space for the wingbacks, while the box is crowded with attackers. Expand
Yes, I think so. In fact, this current best duty combination of 4231 tactics, I have tested myself several times in version 24.1, and used in online matches. Including whether there is a "Pass Into Space" and whether the DMS has a forward press command. Although my personal test sample is certainly not enough, but based on the actual effect and the combination engine, I think the "Pass Into Space" command is really unnecessary in this tactic. It could be that I'm wrong, but at the moment I think so, and we'll need further tests to know for sure.
CSTG KANE said: Hi a smile, I heard about you a long time ago, thanks for the reply! I've been experimenting with duty pairings, but the current version of WBA duty is just a bit too strong for it to be a hundred percent. I have also played in an online league, but that was a couple years ago and I remember it being called ZQZ. I have been thinking about playing in a PGM league when I have time to look into it! Expand
This tactic may have reached the ceiling of the current engine, and your simplification of individual player instructions, especially by removing taking More Risks, has really raised the ceiling of this tactic, which is a great innovation!
At the same time, check whether there is a difference in "Pass Into Space".
DL：WBA→WBS
AMR:IFA→IWS
DR:WBA→WBS
Strengthen the defense and see what happens.
DLPS→CMS
DMS Add "Get Further Forward"
It doesn't seem satisfactory. Let's make a comparison.
I think this tactic relies too much on the parallel position of the three forwards, and it may collapse with a high probability to become 4312.
is the CF most likely to score or the AFs?
In this structure, I think all three are similar. AF needs to pull the side to attack, CFS will also fight for the center of the attack.
That's true. The current setup of this tactic has been almost developed to the extreme, more detailed, your difference is actually clean player personal instructions, so you this change is crucial, through the ceiling. As for the "Pass into space" command, based on the results of many people's tests, including my own, it should not be too important.
Yes, I think so. In fact, this current best duty combination of 4231 tactics, I have tested myself several times in version 24.1, and used in online matches. Including whether there is a "Pass Into Space" and whether the DMS has a forward press command. Although my personal test sample is certainly not enough, but based on the actual effect and the combination engine, I think the "Pass Into Space" command is really unnecessary in this tactic. It could be that I'm wrong, but at the moment I think so, and we'll need further tests to know for sure.
This tactic may have reached the ceiling of the current engine, and your simplification of individual player instructions, especially by removing taking More Risks, has really raised the ceiling of this tactic, which is a great innovation!